"I see, it's perfectly fine to marginalize the other point of view."
http://www.freedompolitics.com/news/isl ... e-new.html
I'm referring to this mess in TN, which literally is about a mosque moving from building A to B. It is unnecessary fuss, and it's completely contrary to our Constitution's guarantees. So if you think it is "marginalizing" for me to worry about these overreactionary feelings
, bummer. Regardless, this is noise raised by the right, which was my point. The whole mosque thing in NYC is another example. NYC decided things were cool; there's already a mosque nearby that was older than the twin towers. The spot wasn't hallowed ground, it was a Burlington Coat Factory outlet or something. Things were ok until the right blew it up for political hay. Not as bad as with a cartoon of Muhammed, at least.
"I just read an article detailing how a girl who burned a koran in England got arrested for it."
She got arrested to fomenting religious hatred, which was the part where she posted it online. First, I totally agree with you this is unacceptable and she should be able to speak freely on this and any other issue. Luckily, this is not in TN or OK and we have a Constitution granting freedom of speech. So maybe the English should pass anti-Sharia, and pro-free speach laws, but where again is our need?
I'm sorry you lost your sister to the left. My little brother was raised an NPR nerd by a gun fearing soccer mom and turned into an Army captain who drives a pickup and listens to country music. Was it school? In any case, whether we want to be Constitutional literalists or not, stranger rights have been found in the document by the SCOTUS members themselves.
"This is what happens when the Left adopts an all-or-nothing attitude for decades, that science is hostile towards religion. Religion strikes back. I'm not saying I agree with it, but for every action there is a reaction."
Um, not really a fair comparison. Science class didn't come into church, but church is coming into science class. You want your kids fed religion? Take em to church. The "left" didn't write books saying science was hostile to religion (quote one!) but rather factualists noted there was no scientific reason to include creation in science books.
Well, seems you admit they wrote reality out of sex ed. I propose it IS a big deal if someone gets pregnant as a result. Results in those abortions they, and I, despise. NB: I don't advocate we tell our kids it's wise to have casual sex; I tell ADULTS not to do it but fill them in on safety information for if they do. I would tell them it's better to wait, give them facts, and arm them for harm reduction if they choose sooner over later. I have mixed feelings over parental issues here. I don't want to usurp their teachings, on the other hand, I doubt kids raised in strict Christian environments are in Girls Gone Wild because of a well-done health class that covers perhaps the most relevant health issue for adolescents with the same gravity it gives to the rest of health. I'm opposed to ostrich mode here. Can me a marxist if you like.
Point is, there's a debate on, Jason. It's not just you and your correct friends having to put up with phoney Americans who don't get it. Others who disagree have just as much sense, right, and patriotism as you.