The Instigator
NerdyySnipz
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Gileandos
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

American Muslims and politics

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/7/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,273 times Debate No: 15848
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

NerdyySnipz

Pro

I feel that the interests of American Muslims are better and more immediately served by American Muslim participation in grassroots movements and local politics rather than politics on the state or national level.
Gileandos

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate.
Definitions: -
Natural Rights and Natural Law = These rights and this law is established in clearity in the American constitution and Bill of Rights. It is the unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. This Law is established by our creator. This Law is reflected from the Christian Religion.
Statements that have bearing =
Constitution – The constitution directly forbids the use of our Civil authority to enforce an action that is outside of the Natural Law as governed by the same “self evident” Law.
Contention 1)
In the same way that Criminals should not be involved in Politics and they are indeed restricted in America, Criminal ideology should also be restricted from participating in legitimate politics of any sort.
North American Man/Boy Love Association – is a political special interest group that has purely a criminal intent and desires to legitmize those criminal actions. They desire to have the government “enforce” their desires to rape children.
This is an anethema.
In the same way, any criminal organization that defends and supports the destruction of the Natural Rights of every single person, should indeed NOT be allowed in politics at any level as my opponent contends.
Contention 2)
The muslim religion indeed supports and even promotes criminal activities that undermine, destroy and remove the natural rights of individuals.
(A muslim may not agree with the tenants of his/her religion but that is irrelevant to the resolution as the religion is at issue not the person involved in the religion)
Now I do recognize that there will be facist elements that hijack any religion and use it as the predominant faith in the region. They do this to promote more oppressive regimes and more criminal concepts. Every religion has fallen to this “unbeliever take over” problem.
I am not talking about those “regimes” of evil that have indeed made the Islamic Cause far worse.
I am directly addressing the Muslim system of Law and Governing called Sharia.
Laws that Undermine the Natural Rights of Man in Islam:
Religious Law 1-It is determined within Sharia Law that to leave Islam is punishable by death. This is held by the vast majority of Muslims, even if you can show that one or two sub-sects do not hold this, allowing the majority of Muslims to involve their criminal WILL into our political system would be to the oppression of the rights of Muslims that leave the Muslim faith.
Any law restricting religious conversion perpetrated on any person by the American Civil Authority would indeed be criminal and unconstitutional.
Religious Law 2-
“Under sharia law, non-payment of debt is considered a crime, and sufficient reason for imprisonment; imprisonment does not discharge the debt.”
This is an extreme consequence even held by moderate Saudi Arabia. To imprison a person under such a concept is against the Civil powers of our government and would be criminal should any law enforcement do so within this country.
This is clearly a criminal mentality we would not want to see within our country.
Religious Law 3
Under Sharia fornicating will be harse punitive repercussions.
This should scare every teenager! This is directly against our constitution and would criminally incarcerate the offenders.
Here is a general listing that should greatly concern you if even the moderates get to influence our politics. This is the warning for travelers and workers to Saudi Arabia a very moderate Sharia country [Source IBID]
It’s vital that foreigners make themselves aware of the conduct required while living in Saudi Arabia, and particularly the following offences:
· Men being in the company of women who aren’t close relatives.
· Women being with men other than close relatives, who are treated as prostitutes and can be deported with a ‘persona non grata’ endorsement in their passports, forbidding them from returning to any Gulf state.
· Women driving cars.
· ‘Indiscreet’ dress (e.g. shorts or short-sleeved shirts for men, and uncovered hair, short dresses, exposed arms and shoulders for women).
· Practising a religion other than Islam, carrying a Bible, wearing a cross.
· Blasphemy, particularly if you swear at a Muslim, making derogatory remarks about Islam, taking the name of Allah or the Prophet Mohammed in vain, and any form of behaviour that’s deemed to be ‘immoral’.
· Homosexual acts, which are illegal throughout the region, but for which punishments in Saudi Arabia range from imprisonment to flogging to deportation; there have even been instances of capital punishment.
· Drug dealing and possession. (Note that, although most Gulf states decree capital punishment for those caught dealing in drugs, in Saudi Arabia this is invariably carried out.)
Conclusion:
Clearly we should not allow criminal entities to decide our policies on what and who are criminals.
This is all governed as such criminal entites are defined as criminal as they violate the Natural Law of Man that was self evident to our founders and is still self evident to us today.
This is laid out in our constitution.
Debate Round No. 1
NerdyySnipz

Pro

NerdyySnipz forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
NerdyySnipz

Pro

NerdyySnipz forfeited this round.
Gileandos

Con

Sadly, I was offered no rebuttal.
I would have loved to debate this particular topic. I am incredibly dissapointed.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
NerdyySnipzGileandosTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by GMDebater 6 years ago
GMDebater
NerdyySnipzGileandosTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by ReformedArsenal 6 years ago
ReformedArsenal
NerdyySnipzGileandosTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: FF