sharia is but one part of ISlam, or muslim life, just like old testament is but one part of christian teaching


Farrakhan does not preach any of the violence of sharia law, anymore than any american pastor preaches any of the violence of the old testament

(not to say that christian pastors dont INCLUDE the old testament in their teachings or that islamic leaders dont include their 'violent' text within their teachings)

there are extremists in christianity that hold fast to old testament and extremists in islam that hold fast to sharia

but there is no absolute or all encompassing element of muslim that adheres to or preaches the violence associated with 'sharia'

how can a social construct be 'evil'

is designating some as poor and some as wealthy ,,inherently 'evil'

or is the evil in how that designation is used, toward what end...

is it 'evil' to designate some as citizens and some as immigrant?

or is that just how the english language works to group together like things, like peoples, like groups,,,etc,,,?

there is nothing, to me, inherently evil about the classifications of ancestral lineage,,,,, whats 'evil' is the accompanying justifications for dehumanizing and belittling BASED upon those classifications


there is also nothing evil about seeing a need that is associated with RACE, and focusing on it, even though doing such a thing would be by defition 'racist'

nothing evil about seeing a need associated with GENDER, and focusing on it,, even though doing such a thing would be by definition 'sexist'

nothing evil about seeing a need associated with your nation, and focusing on it, even though doing such a thing would be by definition,, 'nationalist'


all 'isms' are not automatically 'evil',,,all that is 'evil' is intent,,,,

The only inherently evil thing is seeing another human being as anything but another human being who is your equal under the law. We commit a thought crime against all humanity the minute we think we are "special"...no individual and no group is any more "special" than any other.

I agree, we are all many things, thats what contributes to our 'uniqueness' (our differences)

but we are all, whether boy/girl , black/white, rich/poor,child/adult,

human


and should be equal under the law,, with rare exceptions,,(ie, child/adult)

Topic has gone from guns and cultures to religions and cults to racism.

Those "SPECIAL" groups that holler racism the loudest won't give up their freebies and special rights to become equal with the rest of us.

They can score lower and get admitted ahead of a more qualified applicant in schools and jobs.

Yada, yada, yada.

The "SPECIALS" want equal rights? They need to demand they be treated equally.

The Nation of Islam and Eugene are the same scourge as any Middle East radical islam group.

Eugene is an extremist and his pal, (skin white babies), Shabitch is one of his proteges.

Must be proud of him, no?

If I remember correctly it wasn't just financial reasons that put many mentally ill out on the streets. It was the push for rights for the mentally ill. They were given the right to live wherever they wanted unless they were a danger to themselves or others. And, proving they were a danger before they committed a violent act was and is impossible. Now the mentally ill are a law enforcement problem and law enforcement does not have the training or resources to adequately deal with them.

It's a very tough situation.

A major part of the problem stems from the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill with the advent of "miracle" tranquilizer drugs like chlorpromazine and Haldol in the fifties. Schizophrenics & psychotic people who once had to be kept in mental institutions were found to be "cured" with regular doses of the drugs. This proved to be not only very profitable for the drug companies, but a great cost-cutting measure for the state as well, as mentally ill people could now be discharged onto the street and many facilities closed at a great "saving" to the state.

The problem this created was twofold. On the one hand, the side effects of the drugs resulted in permanent involuntary "tics", which progressively got worse over time, to the point that the people who stayed on the drugs, while sane, became unemployable social pariahs because people in general could not understand or accept the apparently "insane" expressions & movements (Tardive dyskinesia). These people wound up on the welfare line thru no fault of their own.

On the other hand, the people who stopped taking the drugs, whether because of the side effects or abandonment of care by the medical system (couldn't afford the prescriptions?) usually wound up homeless and once again, insane. These people often wound up in jails or hospitals, as their petty crimes committed for whatever reason (survival?), or bizarre behaviour would usually find them being arrested. The "lucky" ones slipped thru all the cracks and generally remained homeless and totally abandoned by society.

Obviously, it would have been wiser and cheaper to keep the mental health facilities open, to serve as "halfway houses", for the semi-successfully treated mentally ill. Day passes might have been the best thing all around, but as usual, the state was penny-wise & pound foolish, and only too eager to offload the expensive burden.

Outrageously speaking here of course or maybe not.

The mental health issue is of course a part of the gun culture but in a more insidious way then just those who we accept are mentally unwell..

The idea that a gun makes one more powerful is in and of itself a mental unwellness that should automatically deny a person the right of a weapon. It is the root of all the gun craziness in this country.

You (dukky) are blaming it entirely on money and that's not the solution to the problem. Because even if we had unlimited funds to house the mentally ill, many would refuse treatment if they had to follow any particular set of rules they didn't want to follow. And the ACLU and other such groups would argue they have the right to refuse care and housing. The mentally ill cannot be forced to live in an institution unless they are deemed a danger to themselves or others.

Thanks for reminding me why I don't frequent these threads.

Absurdities.

Denial?

I didn't blame anything on anything. I was merely making an explanatory aside comment to clear up some misapprehensions regarding many of the mentally ill and to point out their plight. (I feel they've been stuffed down society's "memory hole".) Of course, I couldn't resist making a comment or two about the shortsightedness of "saving" money, only to have it cost more in the end, both monetarily and socially. My comments were not specific to the "gun culture."



I think we've been here before and addressed that exact comment on another thread. The idea that a gun does NOT imbue the reasonable holder with a strong sense of the power & responsibility is irrational and therefore in itself a form of mental unwellness.

lol and the mentally unwell who think a gun gives them power do not know they are not well....

Most of it is indoctrination from those before them and the rest is ignorance and denial.

Wow, now, that is something. Do you speak from experience? Where do you get your information?

It is obvious if you don't have the taught mental unwellness.

How do you know if you have the taught mental unwellness and others do?.

God bless the NRA, the GOA and all the sane folks that support our freedom to own and bear arms.

May those who are out to enslave us, well, ya' have a pretty good idea.

PS. Alleyoops. I'd like seeing some of that evidence as well, mon ami.
What you bet none exists?

It is obvious if you don't have the taught mental unwellness.

And now we are back on subject.

The gun culture in this country is a taught inherited mental unwell state of mind that is a detriment to this country.

And I am not anti gun. I am anti gun crazy.

"The gun culture in this country is a taught inherited mental unwell state of mind that is a detriment to this country".

And the source of this statement is...?