Islam is THE main threat to liberty and life and Judeo-Christianity is key to PRESERVING BOTH: Rnd 2

Ok Solarman, I asked you to debate me using facts and peer-reviewed sources, but apparently you couldn't find any that supported your arguments. Here's a quote from you in another debate: "Bottom line: a TRUE debate is WON by FACTS, not feelings". Here are a few examples of your "facts" thus far: "and you are WRONG- the Germans did NOT use Christianity, but rather NATIONALISM and RACISM as their HIDEOUS rallying cries- learn from history" Here's my fact to counter yours: "Only when the entire German people become a single community of sacrifice can we expect and hope that Almighty God will help us. The Almighty has never helped a lazy man. He does not help the coward. He does not help a people that cannot help itself. The principle applies here, help yourselves and Almighty God will not deny you his assistance." -Adolf Hitler, in a radio broadcast from Berlin on October 3, 1941 "I, for my part, acknowledge another precept which says that man must deal the final blow to those whose downfall is destined by God." -Adolf Hitler, in an address to the Reichstag, on April 6, 1942. Next: "once again, have the GUTS to read www.prophetofdoom.net- READ the terrorism timeline" Here are some interesting, or rather insulting, quotes from prophet of doom and its terrorism timeline. In 1995, it links the Oklahoma City bombing to Islamic terrorists, with no mention of Timothy McVeigh: "The principle instigators were the Abu Sayyaf Group in the Philippines and Egypt's Islamic Group led by the bind Islamic cleric Sheikh Abdul Rahman and his Pakistani disciple, Ramzi Yousef." This is absolutely ridiculous. Here is Abu Sayyaf's evaluation on the Council on Foregin Relations website. Notice that there is no mention of the Oklahoma City bombing whatsoever (http://www.cfr.org...). The timeline attributes "over 95%" of all terrorist attacks in the last 50 years to Muslims, choosing to ignore the secular Tamil Tigers, the worldwide leader in terrorist attacks as well as the inventors of the suicide bomber vest, the leftist FARC in Colombia, as well as the IRA. Try and defend this quote on the main page of prophet of doom, regarding Virginia Tech shooter Cho Seung Hui: "If any of these things is true, and they all appear to be, the killer was a modern-day incarnation of Muhammad, perpetrating mass murder in the name of Satan and Islam." There you have it, folks. Indisputable evidence that Muhammad himself was the Virginia Tech killer. Never mind the fact that the shooter compares himself to Jesus Christ in the video he sent out (http://edition.cnn.com...). How do you have the balls to use this website as a source? I'm sure you'll just dismiss me as a "kid", even though I'm only two semesters away from completing my degree in International Politics, while you hold two science degrees that have no relevance in this argument. I'd really like to hear you respond, though. When I ask you to back up your claims about Muhammad with some sort of evidence you fire back with this gem: "YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOURE TALKING ABOUT". Nice. So much for facts over feelings. "Please respond to MY argument that the gay activists just want to STICK IT to the church" Sure, why not. Even though you have yet to respond to any of my arguments. Here is a quote from Christopher Ott, writing in The Progressive, which summarizes the liberal argument for gay marriage: "...you also have to wonder if he and other opponents to equal rights really understand the consequences of the amendments they support. Do they really want gay and lesbian couples separated at the emergency room door in the event of an accident or illness? Do they really think long-term couples should be denied the right to make medical or end-of-life decisions, which married couples take for granted? Do they really think that kids should be denied health coverage by one parent's health insurance because the law treats them as strangers? Do they really think it's fair for gay and lesbian people to pay the same taxes as everyone else, but to be denied the hundreds of rights, benefits and protections of marriage? Do they really think that a gay and lesbian couple that has been together for 50 years does not deserve the protections that non-gay newlyweds enjoy from day one?" Now here is a list of every single group in America which openly opposes the giving of LEGAL STATUS to same-sex relationships (http://en.wikipedia.org...). Note that every single one of them, with the exception of one Jewish group, is Christian. After I give multiple facts and sources supporting my statement that homosexual discrimination does in fact exist, you reply "Oh Please! Come to San Francisco, honey! tell me gays are biased against here" That's great. I have no idea whether or not gays are discriminated against in SF, and if they're not that would explain why so many of them live there. Once again it supports my point about the tyranny of the majority. But my argument was that it exists and it is relatively widespread, and my facts backed that up. Your argument is apparently that gays aren't discriminated against in San Francisco, and therefore they aren't discriminated against anywhere. Nice fact. "most muzzies BACK OUT when challenged" "the rest of your points are NONSENSE" Nice. Once again, feelings trump facts. Apparently, you and the "muzzies" have more in common than you think. I challenged you to a debate and instead you have thrown out a bunch of propaganda, some right wing talking points, a few opinions, and absolutely no evidence or facts that are backed up by any type of acceptable sources. But I digress. "Here is your latest from the religionofpeace.com The Religion of Peace at work in Kenya? Last week, supporters of a pro-Sharia candidate burned down a church with fifty people inside." I'm glad you posted this. Here is another example of why you should stop citing these propaganda sites. Both candidates in the Kenyan election are CHRISTIAN! Is Sharia law a tenent of Anglicanism? If not, then your little news update here doesn't hold water. The reason that church was burned down was because all the worshippers inside were Kikuyu. This is reminiscent of the ethnic tensions ongoing in Sudan, and the genocide that occurred in Rwanda. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com...) I don't really see much of a need for me to make any more points, as you have yet to respond to any of my main points from previous arguments. Instead of personal attacks, opinions, feelings, unsourced statements, and facts from websites which offer the unqualified creator's personal beliefs, why don't you try responding to my main points with facts from legitimate sources, and arguments which don't lump 1.6 billion people into one or two groups?