America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 39,082 comments
  • 1,725,871 views
I didn't find anything that looked like a "duty to retreat" anywhere in the cited statute. Could you point it out for us?

There are references to the duty (aka Castle Doctrine) in the Wiki article including citations for 4 upheld cases in Minnesota. Link. The sources go back to the cited statute, the relevance is in the permission for force inside the home. As the permissions outside the home are more limited there is an arguable requirement to retreat inside the castle.
 
Probably not a surprise to many of you but the FBI now says:

The fatal shootings at a Navy reserve facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee, in July were "motivated by foreign terrorist organization propaganda," FBI Director James Comey told reporters Wednesday in New York.

Mohammad Abdulazeez opened fire on a military recruiting center, then drove seven miles away to a Navy reserve facility, where he shot and killed four U.S. Marines and a sailor.
"There is no doubt that the Chattanooga killer was inspired, motivated by foreign terrorist organization propaganda," Comey said, adding it's difficult to determine which terrorist group may have inspired Abdulazeez.

The FBI has been investigating the shootings as a terrorism case from the outset, Comey said.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/16/us/chattanooga-shooting-terrorist-inspiration/index.html
 
Ethan Couch, the man who got probation for killing four people has a warrant issued for his arrest after losing contact with his probation officer and playing beer pong. His mother, Tonya Couch is also missing.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...after-killing-four-in-drunk-driving-accident/
I don't wish ill will on anyone, but Karma can be a you know what. It's amazing what good money can get you out of. The DWI system is a joke. I know of people personally that have had 4+, and the only reason they aren't in jail is because they've spent God knows how much on lawyers. People less fortunate financially would be in prison.
 
I don't understand people who attack family planning clinics. Whether this one is yet to be proven or not, it's certainly something which happens in North America for.. some reason.

"I value life so much that I'm going to take lives."

Wut?
He believes himself to be morally justified; in playing a role in family planning, he believes that his victims have given up what makes them human, and that killing them is neither sin nor crime. He doesn't consider it to be murder any more than you would consider squashing an insect to be murder.
 
School asks pupils to trace a sacred piece of Arabic calligraphy... complaints of "indoctrination" go through the roof.
Was the lesson on Islamic culture or calligraphy? I had a lesson on calligraphy too, but we used family emblems and tried to create one from our family's history. If this is a calligraphy lesson I could predict this kind of reaction in Virginia. If it is an Islamic culture lesson I don't know how this could be considered inappropriate by parents, but I still would have worried about parental reaction in the current political climate.

That's despite Virginia legally requiring a christian "pledge of allegiance" to be read in their schools every day.
I'm unaware of this "Christian Pledge of Allegiance" you speak of. I don't know of any that mention Jesus Christ.
 
Was the lesson on Islamic culture or calligraphy? I had a lesson on calligraphy too, but we used family emblems and tried to create one from our family's history. If this is a calligraphy lesson I could predict this kind of reaction in Virginia. If it is an Islamic culture lesson I don't know how this could be considered inappropriate by parents, but I still would have worried about parental reaction in the current political climate.

It was indeed a calligraphy lesson (in itself) although the school points out that the subject matter was nothing that isn't covered elsewhere in their syllabus.

I'm unaware of this "Christian Pledge of Allegiance" you speak of. I don't know of any that mention Jesus Christ.

"One nation under god". If you asked the school, the authority or the pupils who that god was I'm sure they'd say it was the christian god. Between ourselves we know enough to be able to argue that the lack of a specific reference to the christian god doesn't make that a christian pledge but circumstantially it clearly is.
 
The ever sensitive and in touch President Obama says he underestimated the anxiety amongst the citizenry after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino because "he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate [it]" Source

I guess all of his advisors are on holiday:irked::irked:
 
Given the political climate in the U.S. currently and in the last decade and a half, you would think they might choose a phrase other than, "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah", for their calligraphy lesson.
 
Given the political climate in the U.S. currently and in the last decade and a half, you would think they might choose a phrase other than, "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah", for their calligraphy lesson.
It's interesting. I have suspicions that the kind of person that idiotically construed the use of the word blackboard as too sensitive, would also be the person that would argue that people should not take offense to the use of a text directly related to Islam - an organisation that people have recently killed Americans in the name of.

At the same time, if your kids are too dumb to be able comprehend that Islam does not equal terrorist, and certainly that Arabic does not equal Islam, I think there's more to worry about than tracing a few "evil" squiggles.

Anyway, get any not purely academic religiousness the hell out of public schools already!! Christian, Islamic, other.
 
At the same time, if your kids are too dumb to be able comprehend that Islam does not equal terrorist, and certainly that Arabic does not equal Islam, I think there's more to worry about than tracing a few "evil" squiggles.
You're off target here. The point wasn't to teach that Islam =/= terrorism, but rather that one religion is superior than another, which flies in the face of our First Amendment. What would you think would happen if a cursive writing class had an assignment to write Genesis 1:1? Can you imagine the blow back that the school would suffer from the Left if that happened?
 
This seemed like some weird cultural lesson.
I suppose you're right. I mean, it's not like art has ever been used to express religious beliefs and values.

The point wasn't to teach that Islam =/= terrorism, but rather that one religion is superior than another
Show me the lesson plan, scope and sequence and the programming to back that up. Otherwise, this claim amounts to complete and utter BS.

which flies in the face of our First Amendment.
That's a catch-22. You're arguing that Muslims cannot express that phrase because it denies other people the right to practice their own religion and/or freedom of speech. However, in saying "Muslims canjot express that phrase", you are denying Muslims the right to practice their own religion and freedom of speech. So which is it going to be?

Maybe a better question to ask is this: what does the phrase actually mean? Is it meant to be taken as "my religion is better than your religion"? Or does it amount to "this is what I believe and these words are proof of my commitment to that belief"?
 
I suppose you're right. I mean, it's not like art has ever been used to express religious beliefs and values.
When I learned it I did learn that, but it wasn't 100% focused on one specific group. Calligraphy is not unique to Islam. In fact, a quick image search of calligraphy takes quite a lot of scrolling to find Islamic Calligraphy, and that was an image of this assignment.

If you are teaching an art form and describing its use in cultures around the world then it shouldn't be focused on a specific culture unless the lesson is on that culture, in which case the answer to the original question on why they were learning calligraphy is that it was part of a larger cultural lesson, but it was already said that it wasn't.

The true question here is if this was one part of a much larger assignment on calligraphy that described its many uses around the world throughout history.
 
The point wasn't to teach that Islam =/= terrorism, but rather that one religion is superior than another, which flies in the face of our First Amendment.
I was referring to the reaction, not the lesson. The lesson was calligraphy, ideally the meaning of the text should be a mere technicality, with a solely visual emphasis remaining. That doesn't mean that certain ideally only technical images, words, whatever, are not sometimes in poor taste mind you.

I'm probably not going out on a limb too much by presuming that the (over)reaction was based on people associating garden variety Islam and terrorism.
 
That's a catch-22. You're arguing that Muslims cannot express that phrase because it denies other people the right to practice their own religion and/or freedom of speech. However, in saying "Muslims canjot express that phrase", you are denying Muslims the right to practice their own religion and freedom of speech. So which is it going to be?

Maybe a better question to ask is this: what does the phrase actually mean? Is it meant to be taken as "my religion is better than your religion"? Or does it amount to "this is what I believe and these words are proof of my commitment to that belief"?

Bolded statement first. I didn't say that. I'm saying that if there is an expectation of keeping Christianity out of our public schools, the same expectation can be and should be extended to all religions. The fact that the mantra in question is a commonly recited mantra in Islam is perfectly relevant here in the purposes of discussion of what the assignment covers. I mean read the rest of the assignment:

Caligraphy.jpg

The paragraph and change above it was basically indoctrination to read the Koran. Also, female students at that school were encouraged to wear some form of Muslim clothing.


I was referring to the reaction, not the lesson. The lesson was calligraphy, ideally the meaning of the text should be a mere technicality, with a solely visual emphasis remaining. That doesn't mean that certain ideally only technical images, words, whatever, are not sometimes in poor taste mind you.

I'm probably not going out on a limb too much by presuming that the (over)reaction was based on people associating garden variety Islam and terrorism.
If that were the case, then any particular statement from Confucius would have done nicely in its place.
 
I'll wager that none of the kids were taught how to say it, made to recite it or even informed what the translation of it was.


Until the complaints that is. Now everyone knows what it means.
 
Back