Islam religion should be banned in the U.S.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tax+money+to+resettle+muslims&t=fpas&ia=web

Pick one.

 

You don't have a clue, but you do have truck loads of bigotry. That much is painfully obvious. Now, point me to the law or statute which explicitly bans Islam. Careful now, people are watching you...

 

Every single interpreter is their own expert, without a single tyrant interpreter or Ayatollah or Pope, whose interpretation is 100% in compliance with our laws, for all intents and purposes the religion is banned.

See all our zoning laws…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain

“Ownership of land

In Islam there are three kinds of land from the stand‑point of ownership:

(1) Lands owned by society

(2) Lands owned by State

(3) Lands owned by private individuals

Lands owned by society

This kind of lands is not salable. Even the State has no right to sell them. Lands developed and tilled by human hands and those which come under Muslim control consequent on jihad are considered to be the property of the Muslim society and none can purchase or sell even one metre thereof.“
http://www.al-islam.org/philosophyofislam/17.htm


The only thing obvious is your ignorance of religion. {period}

 

A screed of extremist alt right disinformation sources like WND!



How about we just go DIRECTLY to the only CREDIBLE source instead?

https://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/factsheets/2017/266447.htm

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/30/key-facts-about-refugees-to-the-u-s/

So now let's do the math!

$545 million divided by 84,995 = $6,412 per refugee!

Where do your extremist alt right disinformation sources pull their bogus numbers from?

And note that the funding comes from CONGRESS which has been in the hands of the Republicans since 2010!

So much for the bogus allegations about the "left"!

 

Along with bigotry I smell delusion and incipient insanity. Isn't it interesting that those who are most opposed to Islam are (apparently), the most intimately versed in Koranic law? They are also the most dangerous in their cherry-picking.
So, shall we return to these imaginary laws banning Islam, and your 'interesting' interpretation of the US Constitution? What are these laws? Be specific.

 

A law or statute does not have to explicitly name a religion to ban any part of it; if any part of it is prohibited especially by legal means, then the religion (that which was whole and now is banned from being so) is banned.

Your ignorance of religion in general is not my problem.

A specific law, which violates a religion and therefore bans it, would be any number of laws related to usury especially with regard to marriage:

“Amendment Allows Consumers Who Are 21 or Older to Rely on Accessible Income for Credit Card Applications

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) updated existing regulations to make it easier for spouses or partners who do not work outside of the home to qualify for credit cards. Today’s amendment, first proposed by the Bureau in October 2012, allows credit card issuers to consider income that a stay-at-home applicant, who is 21 or older, shares with a spouse or partner when evaluating the applicant for a new account or increased credit limit.

“Stay-at-home spouses or partners who have access to resources that allow them to make payments on a credit card can now get their own cards,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “Today’s final rule is an example of the Bureau’s commitment to working with consumers and financial institutions in order to ensure responsible access to credit for American families.”

The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act (CARD Act) became law in 2009. The CARD Act requires that card issuers evaluate a consumer’s ability to pay before opening a new credit card account or increasing a credit limit. Under current CARD Act regulations, a card issuer generally may only consider the individual card applicant’s independent income or assets.” http://www.consumerfinance.gov/news...ome-spouses-and-partners-to-get-credit-cards/

See the FED ruling:

“The Federal Reserve's rule told credit card companies that they no longer can consider household income when assessing the creditworthiness of an individual who applies for his or her own card. Under the rule, only an individual's own salary or other income -- rather than combined household income -- can be considered.”

Read more: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-c...cards-household-income-1282.php#ixzz3WiwAm9JK

See the reason to oppose it:

“Opposition from CARD Act authors

U.S. Reps. Carolyn Maloney, D-NY, and Louise Slaughter, D-NY, both among the principal authors of the CARD Act, said the rule "goes beyond the intent" of the law and "represents a serious risk for women in abusive domestic partnerships."

"Women trapped in abusive marriages may be unable to work due to a controlling spouse, a hallmark of relationships characterized by domestic violence," Maloney and Slaughter told the Federal Reserve in a letter as it was considering the rule. "The availability of an independent credit card may represent her best chance at establishing independence and a path out of a dangerous relationship."

After the rule was announced, Maloney and Slaughter said they would be studying its implementation and would report any problems to the new federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which could write its own rules beginning in July.”

Read more: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/stay-at-home-parent-credit-cards-household-income-1282.php#ixzz3Wivmh5r8

 

Right, so there is, in fact, no law specifically banning Islam, your interesting interpretations notwithstanding.

 

Our Constitution as worded does not ban Islam's future, because the Constitution can be amended, but it would have to be amended to fit any number of interpretations of the individual adherent or Ayatollah…and without the “purity” of the Obamanation, purifying the community possibly through the use of German ovens, the outcome would be banning someone’s interpretation of Islam:

“The President’s strategy is absolutely clear about the threat we face. Our enemy is not ‘terrorism’ because terrorism is but a tactic. Our enemy is not ‘terror’ because terror is a state of mind and as Americans we refuse to live in fear. Nor do we describe our enemy as ‘jihadists’ or ‘Islamists’ because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenant of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community, and there is nothing holy or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children.” (Remarks by Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism John Brennan at CSIS)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-assistant-president-homeland-security-and-counterterrorism-john-brennan-csi

"Medina is like a pair of bellows (furnace): It expels its impurities and brightens and clears its good"

 

It's funny that you would use incomplete, therefore misleading, information to discredit all those sources.

"In FY 2016, the U.S. Department of State spent nearly $545 million on the USRAP"

That is the amount spent on one program by one department.

 

Yes, the agency that actually resettles refugees!

That is what your extremist alt right disinformation sites were disingenuously quoting bogus amounts of spending on.

 

“Abu 'Abdillah ash-Shafi'i says that the verse ‘To you your religion and to me mine’ shows that the disbelievers are one people ... because disbelief in all its many manifestations has one thing in common – that is, falsity.” http://sunnahonline.com/library/the-majestic-quran/434-tasfir-of-chapter-109-surah-al-kafirun-the-disbelievers


You and the extremist alt right religious zealot Trumpets are “one people.”


Trumpet!

 

Non sequitur!

 

Uh...

My point was that the costs, as detailed in my first post, don't end with the mere resettlememt. You are being disingenuous.

P.S. I neglected to include medical/health care costs in that post.

 

"Non sequitur. Your facts are uncoordinated."

You said, “Your extremist alt right disinformation sites,” and Islam says you are “one people.”

How dare you disagree and ban the Islam of Abu 'Abdillah ash-Shafi'i'.

You are Trumpet people, Omar Sharif says, “It is written.”

 

The ENTIRE budget is only $3,443,062,176. Divide that by the total number of refugees and it only comes to a paltry $40k each.

https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/265231.pdf

That is it because they are expected to be gainfully employed within 12 months of arriving here.

How much did the BLOTUS waste on those missiles he illegally fired into Syria?

 

Why change the subject to missiles fired into Syria? Are you admitting your mistake?

 

Funny! If the Obamanation has stuck to his “Red Line,” and didn’t use the lame excuse that the War Powers Act couldn’t be used without Congress giving authorization to enforce his mouth, there wouldn’t be any refugee costs.

 

Obama respected the Constitutional separation of powers.

The BLOTUS wipes his fat ass with the Constitution.

FTR there are refugees from other nations besides just Syria so those costs would still have been incurred.

 

This is just silly. How do you know that you will go to a "good place" ?

Answer: You don't

 

Both the left and the right political establishment and the mainstream media not only support Islam - They support Islamist's and radical Islamist Jihadists.

 

According to the bible I will.

 

Which part - The OT does not have a hell like the NT and it says not a word about heaven.

Regardless - you do not know if you will make it into the NT heaven - supposing it exists. To which of the Christian salvation formulations do you subscribe ?

 

That is beyond funny, it is like saying Islamic texts clearly call upon believers to submit to non-Muslim government.

 

Believing in Jesus Christ is the only requirement to get into heaven. Whether or not you believe heaven exist is not important because I do and when I die I will enter, if it doesn't then my belief does not matter after I die anyway and I am probably much closer to death than you.

 

Belief in Jesus or belief in the Word of God?

Who believes in Jesus:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam

Isn’t being righteous more important than belief in the Son of Man?