I've made probably as many posts criticizing religion as you have. There is, for example, a difference in saying that LDS beliefs are weird and non-sensical (which I think many of them are), and saying that LDS people are dupes, fools, uncritical sheep, dishonest, or go on down the line until it gets very nasty and personal. In the same way, criticizing Muslim beliefs is one thing (and I think many of them are stupid and/or dangerous), but essentially impugning the character of hundreds of million of people and attributing to them ill-intentioned stereotypes is another thing.
I'm just wondering out loud what the policy is here about where the line is and when/if this line gets crossed, what is done about it.
There have been many Muslims who have helped America, they work as translator and have fought with American soldiers.
Chill out Jimmy, he was listing other sources. Did he personally offend you? If so go to the source.
Thanks for clarifying your view.
That's one hella paragraph.
Help me out here! Where should I have broken it up? 2 paragraphs or 3?
First of all, let me point out that my original post to start this thread...were all QUOTES from outside agencies and sources in connection with Obama's visit to the Mosque in Baltimore! Since it was a "hot" topic in the news, I thought I'd bring it up in connection as a news worthy idem!...
So there's a policy?
If something clearly doesn't cross a line (and I conceded that it's hard to draw lines here (like the one Supreme Court Justice said about ponography, "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it, although I suspect that plenty would disagree that he can identify it so well), then I agree, better to err on the side of free and open language.