Women in Combat

This is a reply I took from a Yahoo! user about women in combat and the effects it could have. I think this is an important issue because the motive behind such debates is often not for the better of humanity, but based off political leverage and clout. The user replied to women in combat this way:

"The issue of women in combat is not a question of national security or drawing from an untapped resource. It's a question of politics... a vote getter. The administration wants to be seen as pro-woman and most women who read this will say that I, the writer is a sexist. Not so. The best boss I ever worked for was a women. As a former U.S. Army Drill Sergeant (Class 4-83 Ft. Leonard Wood, MO.) I/we were taught the differences (beside the obvious) between male and female recruits and how to adjust their training based on these differences. Then the Army experimented with integrated basic training and it didn't fail. It failed miserably. Males were under trained and females were well, burned out, or injured. Males are inherently stronger, period. There's a reason why there are no females playing in the NFL or other pro male teams. You cynics are now saying: "well that's different". And you're right. When playing a game, you're not fighting for your life.

Let's be honest. Females in our society are treated differently than males from day one. They're daddy's little girl, They're coddle to. They're talked to differently. They're punished differently and so-on. Years ago, I asked my sister, who I love dearly, to wash my car for $10. She said "no". Why, I asked. She said: "Because, If I ask mom, she'll GIVE me $20." Mom wouldn't do that for me.

What I'm driving at is not the physical differences between males and females.
More importantly, it's the societal and emotional differences. Females are motherly. They nurture. They love differently. They have different feelings. They see things differently. That's not a knock on females. Females are females and I thank God they are!

The mission of ground combat troops is to: Close with and kill the enemy. They are killers. That's right, KILLERS. They kill other human beings. Men and women. Whether it's from 300 meters away or standing toe to toe, they kill. "Mom, what did you do in the war"? "Well Janie, I killed people". And what's going to happen to these women when Uncle Sam's done with them? When their 4 year hitch is done, they have to look forward to the rest of their lives. Will it be ruined at age 22 or so? We've all seen the TV commercial where the female soldier is saying: "I had so much rage in me, I couldn't cope". And that's now. Yes, male soldiers suffer from PTSD too, but what's going to happen when more and more women come home with their special problems. The VA can't handle what's going on now.

I hope Leon Penetta and his advisors proceed very slowly and with extreme caution before "pulling the trigger" on this issue. And now Obama has recently said he wouldn't hesitate sending women into combat, but would be reluctant to allow his hypothetical son to play football. And let's see what tune they whistle when those gray steel boxes covered by flags contain young American girls."

The Maze Of Islam

Of the many belief systems in the world in which we find people utterly dedicated, Islam is perhaps the one in which its followers carry the greatest zeal to God. Here is a group of people who devote their lives, their very being to their faith in Allah; a term they use because they feel “God” is too weak, that is does not do justice in ultimately glorifying Him. I am certain much of what you the reader have heard being portrayed in the news, media and even school is that Islam is not only extremely peaceful, but quite tolerant of other beliefs, including Jews and Christians alike.

My goal here is not to diminish the character of person of the Muslim people, nor is it my goal to offend the Muslim reader of this topic. Much of my argument and material is that of the book “Kingdom Of The Cults”, written by Walter Martin and edited by Ravi Zacharias. My goal is to express my deepest desire in exposing the flaws, and mazes associated with Islam and offer to the reader the view of Christ in the Bible and His love and mercy for all; a stark contrast to the “mercy” of God in the Qur’an.

Background and Quick Facts Concerning Islam:

1. The Sovereignty of Allah is paramount: He is the one, true God. Mohammed is his chief prophet

2. There is no original sin. Humans are not predisposed toward sin, but they commit sins.

3. Jesus was not the Son of God. He is revered as a spiritual guide.

4. Salvation is by the will of God through human obedience to God’s law.

5. The Qur’an is the perfect Word of Allah.

“Islam is the second largest religion in the world, next to Christianity.” (KOTC) However, Christianity is probably considered the largest religion in the world because of the religions and cults who identify themselves with Christianity. For example, Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Catholics, and them those denominations of Christianity that exist in scores. “Islam in America is growing rapidly despite concerns created by the infamous attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.” (KOTC)

Islamic Beliefs:

This is a direct quote from KOTC – “At first glance, Islamic belief appears to be almost compatible with Christianity and/or Judaism. Often people claim that the Muslims believe in the same God as Christians: ‘They just don’t accept Jesus Christ.’ However, as we shall see, the Muslim God is not like the Christian God. Islam rejects the biblical doctrines of the Trinity and the deity of Christ.

Unlike Christians, Muslims do not emphasize a personal relationship with God. Scripture tells us that those who trust in Christ and do the Father’s will have been redeemed and have been adopted as sons (Romans 8:14-15; Galatians 3:26) we are heirs of God (Galatians 4:7), and the Father deals with us as His children (Matthew 12:47; Mark 3:35; Hebrews 12:5, 7). We can even be called friends of God (John 15:13-15; James 2:23). In contrast, Muslims believe God has no likeness (Sura 42:11), is transcendent (Sura 4:171), is unknowable (apart from revelation of course), and is wholly other and totally different. He is neither physical nor spirit. The Bible on the other hand, contradicting the Qur’an, tell us that we have been created in God’s image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-27), and that we have knowledge of God in our hearts (Romans 1:19-20). Moreover, Scripture tells us that God is spirit (John 4:24).

The Maze:

One of the prerogatives of the Qur’an is abrogation, a legal term referring to the ‘destruction or annulling of a former law by an act of legislative power, by constitutional authority, or by usage.’ This is taught in three separate places in the Qur’an. Sura 2:100/106 says, ‘And for whatever verse we abrogate or cast it into oblivion, we bring one better like it.’; Sura 13:39 says, ‘Every term has a book. God blots out, and he establishes whatsoever he will; and with him is the Mother of all Books.’; and Sura 16:101 says, “And when we exchange a verse in place of another verse – And God knows very well what He is sending down – they say, ‘Thou art mere forger!’ Nay, but the most of them have no knowledge. Say, The Holy Spirit [in Islam the angel Gabriel is the Holy Spirit] sent it down from the Lord is truth, and to confirm those who believe, and to be a guidance and good tidings to those who surrender’. “On pages 89 and 90 Rahman argues that abrogation in the Qur’an does not have legal meaning but should be understood as substitution necessary for progressive revelation.” We all know very well that substitution is the act of replacing one thing with another. Knowing this, why is it necessary if the Qur’an is the eternal speech of God?

This seems to indicate that God can change his mind, something vastly different from the God of the Bible who is unchangeable in his mind and ways. If God is All-knowing, on what basis is there a need for substitution? Jesus said He did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. (Matthew 5:17). Scripture is never abrogated, because God does not change (Malachi 3:6). So despite all arguments to the contrary, if the Qur’an is abrogated, there are literally scores of theological problems. According to KOTC, these are the top six.

1. The Qur’an cannot be trusted because it contains “divinely inspired” contradictions. If God has a history of abrogating his own revelation, the “eternal speech of God”, how can one be certain that he will not abrogate it again in the future?

2. It may be argued that it cannot be abrogated again in the future, since Muhammad was “the last prophet.” But how do we know that God will not abrogate that and send us more prophets?

3. If God can abrogate his eternal speech, how can we trust him with our eternal soul? Shall we depend on his mercy and compassion? How do we know that he will continue to be as merciful in the future as he has been in the past? How do we even know that he has been merciful in the past since the mercy sections of the Qur’an may themselves actually be substitutions?

4. If God has done any abrogating, as the Qur’an indicates, it does not indicate progressive revelation, which is additive. It indicates a contradiction and annulment, which subtracts from revelation, since at least some portion of past revelation has been canceled. This would mean that God either did not know how future contingent events would turn out, or that he did but purposefully changed his mind. So the God of Islam is either not All-knowing or is a liar. A third possibility would be that God can have the attribute of omniscience and not have it at the same time (thereby actualizing a contradiction) by not having a physical or spiritual nature – or any kind of nature. This makes no sense, but it seems to follow the Qur’anic view of God.

5. If God can abrogate past divine revelation, it seems to indicate intellectual weakness at the very least. It not only causes problems for omniscience, since he did not have sufficient foreknowledge to avoid the need for abrogation, but also for omnipotence (because if he did have sufficient foreknowledge he apparently did not have the power to carry out effective preventive measures) as well as other attributes.

6. If the Muslim God is not consistent, then his creatures have no foundation for morality and ethics. Morality and ethics must either be absolute, invariant, and universal or not absolute invariant and universal. There is no third option. If God is not invariant, then the moral/ethical system derived from him would necessarily be inconsistent, and we would essentially be on our own. We would be autonomous (a law unto ourselves), because we lacked that divine absolute standard that exists only in Christianity. If each person had their own moral standard, there could be no legal basis for a society of any kind. This would make it not only inherently contradictory, but impossible.

Jesus in Islam:

“To the Muslim, Jesus Christ is merely one of the many prophets of Allah (Sura 4:171; 5:74). According to Islam, the prophet Muhammad supersedes Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is not the Son of God or a part of any Trinity (Sura 5:17; 5:116; 19:35). We are told that He was nothing but a slave on whom God showed favor (Sura 43:59); yet elsewhere we are told the Messiah is not a slave (Sura 4:172).” KOTC.

The Qur’an continually disagrees with the Bible on the deity and life of Christ, thus forfeiting His ability to deliver us and save us from our sins through His Grace. “Jesus Christ did not atone for anyone’s sins, although He Himself was sinless (Sura 3:46) and is one of those who are near to God (Sura 3:45). The Qur’an goes on to verify what we as Christian not to be true of Christ Jesus. It says Jesus performed miracles (Sura 3:49; 5:110) and was the Messiah (Sura 3:45; 4:157, 171). One central belief, and cornerstone that MUST BE TRUE of the Christian faith is Christ hanging on the cross, dying on the cross and rising, being resurrected by the Father, after His death. These things MUST HAVE HAPPENED or the Christian faith cannot stand. There is no foundation for it. In Islam, Christ did not hang on the cross, and was rescued from the persecuting Romans and Jews before He could be crucified. Most Muslims believe Jesus was taken to Heaven bodily without having died (Sura 4:157). However, Sura 199:33 says He died and would be resurrected.

One thing the Muslim and confused Christian might find very interesting is the comparison of Jesus and Muhammad in the Qur’an.

1. Jesus did Miracles (Sura 3:49, 5:110), but Muhammad did not (Sura 13:8; 6:37; 6:109; 17:59 and 17:90-93)

2. Jesus was sinless (Sura 3:46), but Muhammad sinned and needed forgiveness (Sura 40:55; 42:5; 47:19; 48:2).

3. Jesus was called “The Messiah” and was even born of a virgin (Sura 3:45-57). However, given the comparisons of these verses, Muhammad is supposed to be the greatest of the prophets? This is a contradiction in and of itself!

The Five Pillars of the Faith:

The Qur’an, like the Bible, teaches all have sinned and are in need of forgiveness from the Most High. We are told that this indeed includes Muhammad (Sura 40:55; 47:19; 48:2). Every Muslims who hopes to escape the judgment of Allah, However, must fulfill the work of the Five Pillars of the Faith.

1. Recitation of the Shahada (“There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the prophet of Allah).

2. Five daily prescribed prayers (Salat or Namaz) in Arabic. These prayers include genuflection and prostration in the direction of the holy city, Mecca.

3. Almsgiving (Zakat), which involves the duty to give a certain percentage of one’s total income to help others. Generally speaking, this it to be done privately unless there is good reason for it to have publicity.

4. Fasting (Saum or Ruzeh), during the entire month of Ramadan, when Muslims are supposed to fast from all food and drink from sunrise to sunset in atonement for their sins over the previous year. Muslims are allowed to eat and drink after sunset; however some get up early to eat before sunrise as to eat before the fast begins again.

5. A pilgrimage (Hajj) to Mecca, the holy city, at least once in a Muslim’s lifetime. The hajj takes place after Ramadan. The Muslim pilgrims engage in elaborate rituals both at the famous mosque in Mecca that holds the Kaba and in the areas surrounding their most sacred city.

The five pillars of faith were included so that the reader may understand the definite zeal, and devotion to faith each Muslim possesses. It is easy to watch those who follow the faith radically and associate every Muslim with this, group, however it is simply not so. Any student of Islam, or reader of the Qur’an can easily see, that Islam itself is not peaceful. It often charges our Muslim brothers and sisters with task that are violent and to be carried out against others who are deemed enemies of the faith of Islam. It should be noted that Islam literally means submission, and Muslims are those who submit. The confused Christian should be able to see from this reading that Islam and Christianity, though on the surface seemed to be quite compatible, but in reality are not alike. The Muslim seeking the truth should read this testimony, and realize that their very faith and eternity of their souls are being placed in a god who abrogates, and is uncertain of his own future, and thus uncertain of your own. I tell you Jesus is waiting for you. He yearns for that closeness to His children, those He loves. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten son, that whosoever should believe on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life (John 3:16). You can be certain that faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of your life, will guarantee eternity with Him forever, as He has never changed His mind nor has he changed His ways (Hebrews 13:8).

Gay Marriage? The Real Issue

One of the most heated and important debates which continues at a furious pace is this talk of Gay marriage, and what really defines marriage. Marriage is defined in Webster’s Dictionary as "The state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage." Notice two definitions are given: one for heterosexual relationships, and one for homosexual relationships. This was just recently added after former President Bush stated that "Marriage is between one man and one woman.." Well… who is right? The definition of marriage is found in the Bible – the Book of Genesis – the very place it was created in the Garden of Eden. "When God first created man and woman, He also established marriage and the family relationship on which every society is built through the ages. Genesis 2:18-25 provides the blueprint for a biblical marriage relationship. It gives us clear guidelines to have fulfilling marriage relationships as God originally intended."http://www.foundationsforfreedom.net/References/OT/Pentateuch/Genesis/03Man_Woman/Genesis02_L04_Marriage.html

So, if this is in fact the case, and marriage is designed by God and is intended for one man and one woman, I ask, where then does the debate really lie? Some would argue it’s about equality and the right for one man to wed another, or vice versa with women. Others would say marriage ought to be defined by the people who are involved in it. But neither of these so-called points seriously tackle the issue. The real issue is homosexuality itself. Many are afraid to address it out of political correctness, others are afraid of losing votes, while still some are not sure about what to do concerning homosexuality. Any homosexual would turn their nose up at the mention of the Bible and what it says concerning the issue. And rightfully so. As a Christian man, one who lives to serve Jesus, I bear witness to the fact that many so-called "Christians" have taken the Bible out of context and misquoted and misrepresented what the Lord Jesus was trying to accomplish. While in the Bible, and according the Lord, homosexuality is indeed wrong, how we go about explaining that to people absolutely matters. When people hold up signs that say "God hates fags" or "You queers will have your place in the lake of fire" what kind of message does that send? What about those people who are curious about pursuing a relationship with Christ? What do they think when they see people representing a belief system that teaches love, while practicing hate?

Having addressed Christianity and homosexuality, let me close with this quote and statement. "Consider the obvious problem of survival for individuals who allegedly possess a gay gene:individuals who have partners of the same sex are biologically unable to reproduce (without resorting to artificial means).  Therefore, if an alleged “gay gene” did exist, the homosexual population eventually would disappear altogether.  We now know that it is not scientifically accurate to refer to a “gay gene” as the causative agent in homosexuality.  The available evidence clearly establishes that no such gene has been identified.  Additionally, evidence exists which documents that homosexuals can change their sexual orientation.  Future decisions regarding policies about, and/or treatment of, homosexuals should reflect this knowledge."  http://www.trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp

With the above information, and extensive research it is easy to see that those who favor homosexuality, and homosexuals themselves, have only two options to explain homosexuality. Since science has extensively proved it is NOT genetically linked, the only other option is that it is a behavior. If it is in fact a behavior, then it has no basis of becoming a law, or a foundation of respectable value. While I do believe two men and two women can have a very strong love for one another, I do not believe the way they choose to sexually identify and fulfill themselves is a basis for protected rights. If homosexuality is not genetic, but rather a behavior, then there cannot be a law to protect it, and thus, gay marriage cannot exist. Yet, who will stand up and address this issue?

Abortion

Abortion

I have been thinking a lot about the issue of abortion - both the natural and scientific approaches. So I've decided to use sound reasoning and science to explain why I personally feel there is no true just cause for abortion under general circumstances. Because this is a highly volatile issue, I've decided to find the top reasons favoring abortion, and explain the flaws and my disagreements.

1. Statement: Nearly all abortions take place in the first trimester, when a fetus cannot exist independent of the mother. As it is attached by the placenta and umbilical cord, its health is dependent on her health, and cannot be regarded as a separate entity as it cannot exist outside her womb.

Rebuttal: Since life begins at conception, abortion is akin to murder as it is the act of taking human life. Abortion is in direct defiance of the commonly accepted idea of the sanctity of human life. When the egg is fertilized by the sperm, they cease to be an egg and sperm, but have given way to a living human being.

2. Statement: The concept of personhood is different from the concept of human life. Human life occurs at conception, but fertilized eggs used for in vitro fertilization are also human lives and those not implanted are routinely thrown away. Is this murder, and if not, then how is abortion murder?

Rebuttal: I feel this statement is pretty self explanatory. Not only does it state that human life begins at conception, but the fact that conception is indeed a fertilized egg would clearly agree that this is also a form of abortion. The fact that more are being created than used and then discarded is a case of ethics.

3. Statement: Adoption is not an alternative to abortion, because it remains the woman's choice whether or not to give her child up for adoption. Statistics show that very few women who give birth choose to give up their babies - less than 3% of white unmarried women and less than 2% of black unmarried women.

Rebuttal: This case of the “woman’s” choice is a tough one. The reality is, both men and women share equal parts in creating a child. It takes both to make that happen. It’s strange how if she chooses to keep the child the man has to pay, but if she wants to abort the child, it’s her choice and the man doesn’t get a say so simply because he isn’t carrying the child. Adoption is VERY MUCH THE alternative to abortion if the woman and man don’t want to provide care for that child, I can guarantee someone is always willing and wanting to.

4. Statement: Abortion is a safe medical procedure. The vast majority of women - 88% - who have an abortion do so in their first trimester. Medical abortions have less than 0.5% risk of serious complications and do not affect a woman's health or future ability to become pregnant or give birth.

Rebuttal: The vast majority of doctors who specialize in abortion will almost always persuade and ease the woman into deciding for abortion. While they generally do not affect future pregnancies, there is no way for that doctor to help that woman with the mental trauma that follows a decision of exterminating a part of her. About 88% of women on the other spectrum who are deciding to get an abortion, who first get an ultrasound and see the living child inside of them, choose NOT to follow through with the procedure

5. Statement: In the case of rape or incest, forcing a woman made pregnant by this violent act would cause further psychological harm to the victim. Often a woman is too afraid to speak up or is unaware she is pregnant, thus the morning after pill is ineffective in these situations.

Rebuttal: Less than 5 percent of all pregnancies are due to rape and/or incest. Additionally a poll taken of women who have had abortions in the past have all stated that NONE of them have forgotten the choice they made and still today live with guilt as a result, some 40 years later.

6. Statement: Abortion is not used as a form of contraception. Pregnancy can occur even with responsible contraceptive use. Only 8% of women who have abortions do not use any form of birth control, and that is due more to individual carelessness than to the availability of abortion.

Rebuttal: The reality is abortion is NOT a contraceptive. However, it is a way out of responsibility - and the wrong way at that. If abortion is OK, and reinforced, that is reinforcing promiscuity, and thus there is no real consequence for the actions of careless sex, with the exception of STDs. Ultimately the human life becomes worthless.

7. Statement: The ability of a woman to have control of her body is critical to civil rights. Take away her reproductive choice and you step onto a slippery slope. If the government can force a woman to continue a pregnancy, what about forcing a woman to use contraception or undergo sterilization?

Rebuttal: Abortion, though I am very much against it, is NOT a government issue, neither at the federal or state level. The decision ought to be up to the mother and father of that child. If the father is not present, I believe everything should be done to weigh in on the benefits of giving life and hope to that child, as opposed to never giving it a chance through termination. Ultimately, the government should not have a say so, nor should federal funding be used for abortions.

8. Statement: Taxpayer dollars are used to enable poor women to access the same medical services as rich women, and abortion is one of these services. Funding abortion is no different than funding a war in the Mideast. For those who are opposed, the place to express outrage is in the voting booth.

Rebuttal: This is a gross overstatement. Rich women do not have federal assistance because they can afford health coverage from insurance companies, the vast majority of which do NOT cover abortions. Secondly, the rates in which to funds these types of operations will continually increase. Funding abortion is very different from funding a war, primarily because they are two different sides of the spectrum. The vast majority of this funding doesn’t go towards abortion, it goes toward other social programs for those who have lost jobs, and is essentially spent however politicians choose.

9. Statement: Teenagers who become mothers have grim prospects for the future. They are much more likely to leave school, receive inadequate prenatal care, rely on public assistance to raise a child, develop health problems, or end up divorced.

Rebuttal: This statement is flat-out false. The vast majority of unwed teenage mothers who become pregnant often were depressed or have had disadvantaged lives and negative mindsets PRIOR to becoming pregnant. Many are already NOT enrolled in school, and the amount of state funded social programs that will provide the correct health procedures for the women and unborn children are what a good portion of your tax dollars go to pay for. To say in the statement that all these stem from unwanted pregnancy is false.

10. Statement: Like any other difficult situation, abortion creates stress. Yet the American Psychological Association found that stress was greatest prior to an abortion, and that there was no evidence of post-abortion syndrome.

Rebuttal: There was no evidence of post abortion syndrome because guilt is not registered as a syndrome under the APA. Abortion creates stress just as well as pregnancy does. It is a normal human reaction to the fact that a being totally dependant upon you is growing inside of you!

From about the mid 1940’s to present day, there have been about 10 million abortions in the United States. The glaring problem is, an entire generation has been wiped out as a result. This is a working class that would stimulate the economy, take on the deficit burden, create new ideas and a promising future, and pay into social security, which we are very much hurting on currently. The true reality of abortion is, it is NOT necessary. Many will use rape and drugs, and say these children will come out disabled. And that is a sad fact of the choices people make. Fortunately there are people with big hearts and dedicated spirits to help those who are disabled and in need. It is their jobs and more importantly, their desiress. When we tolerate and reinforce abortion, we are losing jobs, our morals, and above all, we place a price tag on the worth of a human being.

Bible Burning?

Bible Burning?

Have you ever noticed how the media frowns and jumps back in gasps of horror when a pastor, group leader of some kind, or even an ordinary person decides they will burn a Qur'an? There's almost a national outcry, and immediately, the person is called intolerant, they are a hater. However, why isn’t the same reaction given when people decide to burn Bibles? Why is it that the liberal media criminalizes Qur'an burning and turns their head when someone decides to burn the Holy Bible? Do they not know that this nation was founded and has its base on biblical principles? There are literally hundreds of videos on YouTube displaying people burning Bibles and in doing so, they verbally speak hatred of God and Christians.

Quite honestly, I think the liberal media is so bent on being accommodating and politically correct, they are willing to sacrifice some of our freedoms and liberties all for the sake of comfort. Appeasement, if you will. I will say this: appeasement has never worked and never will, in any case. If you give a mouse a cookie, he'll come back for milk. Giving in to appeasement is giving in to a type of terrorism. It won't work in the Middle East, it didn't work in Europe, and it will not work in America.

There cannot be a double standard! It’s either all okay to burn, or none of it is. You cannot preach hatred to the man who burns the Qur'an, and preach heroics to the man who burns the Bible through silence. Do the two men not have the same right in destroying the texts because of their beliefs? Why then is one viewed negatively and the other neutral? I condone neither act, and firmly believe Jesus is Lord and His Word is the Holy Bible. However, that doesn't give me the right of way or fuel to burn a Qur'an. You don't bring people in or win them over that way. You drive them out. Open your eyes and stand up for America. Pray for this great and mighty nation and its leaders. America.

Islamic Place of Worship or Trophy?

Islamic Place of Worship or Trophy?

It appears to me that many people all over the United States are still in awe over New York's leaders’ decision to go ahead and allow the building of the Islamic place of worship. President Obama made it very clear in his speech that it is the job of America to uphold the freedoms and liberties our nation has struggled day in and day out to maintain. The very blood of our service men and women spilled upon the altar of freedom so that we might have an abundant life, and a land of opportunity. I couldn't agree with the president more on that statement, but hardly the issue. The issue here is not whether Americans want to allow the Muslims to worship freely as they please wherever they please. After all, many of them are American citizens born right here in America.

The real issue here is the LOCATION of the building. I suppose there are literally hundreds, maybe thousands of reasons Americans could deny and withhold the Muslims the right to build in that area. However, not without the cost of being portrayed as a racist, or even prejudice by the liberal media. What our well meaning liberal friends fail to see is that these Islamic radicals and those pushing for the mosque to be built next to the WTC memorial, are using our own constitution against us! Don't believe me? Consider this, General Petraeus said that any burning of the Qur'an would endanger US troops because it would be viewed as an act of hostility from America. In this case, he is absolutely right. Our men and women are in hostile land. It is a natural response. However, the Imam who is heading the New York Mosque said these same exact words, but he changed it a bit. He said that our actions would bring about violence in and to America.

While I DO NOT condone the act of Qur'an burning, it is easy to see that this is not a warning but rather a threat. He went on to say any act to halt or stop the building may result in violence. So my question then is, what value is the voice of the people? Yes America was built on the idea that all men and women were created equal with equal rights and opportunities under the law. However, as Reagan said, "We are a nation with a government, not the other way around." We own the government. We tell IT what to do. Or that is how it should be. Regardless Islamic radicals in America hide behind the very laws and liberties we put in place to protect our citizens. It doesn't help that our liberal counterparts reinforce this notion all on the feeling of being politically correct. The whole purpose to this argument is America is not racist or intolerant of others beliefs or practices. While we as a nation might not agree with it, we harbor an environment where people are essentially free to do as they please in many respects. So America's cry is not, "Do not worship Allah in New York." America's cry is "Worship as you please, but build the mosque elsewhere."

If The Muslim citizens here in the United States, born foreign or domestic, cannot see the significance of the 9/11 attacks and the location of the mosque, then I suppose they have not earned the right to build there in the first place. It is not that Americans have grown prejudice of Islamic radicals through passing time, rather when Islamic radicals stand up against and threaten America politically and physically with acts of violence, these so-called fundamental Muslims do nothing about it. When was the last time you saw a group of Muslims opposing a radical group for terrorist attacks? When has there ever been a public gathering or demonstration? The most they say is "This is not Islam. Islam is peaceful". Anyone who has ever read and studied the Qur'an will see that, even in context, the text is violent and aggressive naturally. Like Newt Gingrich said, the Nazi groups would NEVER have been allowed to build a place of gathering and fellowship at a holocaust memorial site. Why then do our nation’s leaders think it’s OK to build a mosque there in light of the attack on America? I tell you the truth, if we allow this building, and this kind of guilt trip behavior to continue here in the last greatest country on Earth, we are in trouble. We might as well call that mosque a middle finger to America and a trophy to radical Islam.