Plan to Build Mosque Near Ground Zero Riles Families of 9/11 Victims
- Thread starter IRHari
- Start date
[quote name='Msut77']Knoell,
Since you have appointed yourself Sensitivity Czar, what is an acceptable amount of blocks for this building to be from Ground Zero?[/QUOTE]
Would like to know this myself. I think it's hilarious that Knoell is trying to school us on sensitivity.
Since you have appointed yourself Sensitivity Czar, what is an acceptable amount of blocks for this building to be from Ground Zero?[/QUOTE]
Would like to know this myself. I think it's hilarious that Knoell is trying to school us on sensitivity.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='mykevermin']This is so insensitive I can't believe it.[/QUOTE]
those were all there before, so its ok. its only if they build a new church.
those were all there before, so its ok. its only if they build a new church.
[quote name='Knoell']The terrorists declared that they did it in the name of Islam. Alot of moderate Americans saw that. Would you agree that their opinion of muslims was not as bad before 9/11? If so then obviously there is a need repair relations with Americans, building a mosque right next to the spot of a terrorist attack that was declared in the name of Islam would not be a good start to getting on good terms. It is just douchy to do, but it is a free country and the Government should not interfere, but that does not mean people cannot be sensitive to it, and that does not mean I cannot call it a douchy move by that faith.
It would be similiar to a crazed member of the catholic faith blowing up a mosque in Iraq or Afghanistan. Would you guys understand the members of that city or country were to be outraged if the Catholic Church decided to upgrade the current church and build a megachurch a block from the site? Wouldn't it be a bit douchy?[/QUOTE]
Others have already thoroughly refuted your comments, so there's not much for me to add. It's a mosque and COMMUNITY CENTER. And in terms of the image of Islam in the US post 9/11, I'd argue it's much better, because far more people have elected to research the religion and come to their own conclusions on what the faith actually stands for. In fact, the number of converts to Islam rose significantly after 9/11.
I actually remember the first Friday prayer at my local mosque after 9/11. The Imam of our mosque asked several of us to just be outside and be alert in case anyone with bad intentions arrived. Our city is exceptional, and we didn't receive a single bad comment, instead had lots of neighbors and community members pledge to stand up for us if any bigots tried to interfere. Letters from local synagogues and churches reflected the same sentiments. Apparently the "American Moderates" in my town didn't have an undesirable image of muslims after the attacks, it brought us together. You know, kind of like a COMMUNITY CENTER would.
I think the moderate Americans are exactly the ones who have educated themselves on Islam and came to the conclusion that 9/11 wasn't representative of the faith. It's the politicians who pander, and the uninformed public who probably had a bad image of Islam prior to the attacks who are the loudest in all these protests.
I'm still curious why IRHari and others have asked you what distance from Ground Zero makes mosque and COMMUNITY CENTER construction acceptable. Do you have a distance, or are you just opposed to buildings that provide services for the COMMUNITY...oh, and muslims.
It would be similiar to a crazed member of the catholic faith blowing up a mosque in Iraq or Afghanistan. Would you guys understand the members of that city or country were to be outraged if the Catholic Church decided to upgrade the current church and build a megachurch a block from the site? Wouldn't it be a bit douchy?[/QUOTE]
Others have already thoroughly refuted your comments, so there's not much for me to add. It's a mosque and COMMUNITY CENTER. And in terms of the image of Islam in the US post 9/11, I'd argue it's much better, because far more people have elected to research the religion and come to their own conclusions on what the faith actually stands for. In fact, the number of converts to Islam rose significantly after 9/11.
I actually remember the first Friday prayer at my local mosque after 9/11. The Imam of our mosque asked several of us to just be outside and be alert in case anyone with bad intentions arrived. Our city is exceptional, and we didn't receive a single bad comment, instead had lots of neighbors and community members pledge to stand up for us if any bigots tried to interfere. Letters from local synagogues and churches reflected the same sentiments. Apparently the "American Moderates" in my town didn't have an undesirable image of muslims after the attacks, it brought us together. You know, kind of like a COMMUNITY CENTER would.
I think the moderate Americans are exactly the ones who have educated themselves on Islam and came to the conclusion that 9/11 wasn't representative of the faith. It's the politicians who pander, and the uninformed public who probably had a bad image of Islam prior to the attacks who are the loudest in all these protests.
I'm still curious why IRHari and others have asked you what distance from Ground Zero makes mosque and COMMUNITY CENTER construction acceptable. Do you have a distance, or are you just opposed to buildings that provide services for the COMMUNITY...oh, and muslims.
depascal22
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 92 (100%)
He's not opposed to it. He just understands why people are opposed to it. It's opposition in the third person.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='depascal22']Again, who gives a 
what religion a bunch of crazy people shouted out before they did something tragic and crazy. They're crazy.[/QUOTE]
Don't you ever think that there might be something about fundie Abrahamic religions that encourages this behavior? You almost never hear about people of non-Abrahamic religion acting this way (unless they're athiest, but let's not open that can of worms...)
I know there's a ton of people of Abrahamic religion that live in peace. At the same time I really think there's something about these religions that lends itself to toning up the rhetoric on the susceptible members of the public.
what religion a bunch of crazy people shouted out before they did something tragic and crazy. They're crazy.[/QUOTE]Don't you ever think that there might be something about fundie Abrahamic religions that encourages this behavior? You almost never hear about people of non-Abrahamic religion acting this way (unless they're athiest, but let's not open that can of worms...)
I know there's a ton of people of Abrahamic religion that live in peace. At the same time I really think there's something about these religions that lends itself to toning up the rhetoric on the susceptible members of the public.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/us/politics/15mosque.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Obama says his remarks were not an endorsement.
Bah, I'm not commending the Prez anymore. He took the Weiner approach. The whole 1st-y amendment-y thing. I probably should have read more into what he said which was, they have the right to build. That's really not the contentious part of this whole controversy.
He should have taken the Bloomberg approach of defending the mosque unequivocally.
[quote name='Glenn Greenwald']On the whole, it's still preferable for Obama to say what he said rather than say nothing. The notion that Muslims enjoy the same religious freedom as everyone else and are not to blame for Terrorism are always nice to hear. But by parsing his remarks to be as inoffensive as possible, and retreating from what was the totally predictable way his speech would be understood, he has reduced his own commendable act into something which is, at best, rather pedestrian and even slightly irritating. [/QUOTE]
Obama says his remarks were not an endorsement.
Bah, I'm not commending the Prez anymore. He took the Weiner approach. The whole 1st-y amendment-y thing. I probably should have read more into what he said which was, they have the right to build. That's really not the contentious part of this whole controversy.
He should have taken the Bloomberg approach of defending the mosque unequivocally.
[quote name='Glenn Greenwald']On the whole, it's still preferable for Obama to say what he said rather than say nothing. The notion that Muslims enjoy the same religious freedom as everyone else and are not to blame for Terrorism are always nice to hear. But by parsing his remarks to be as inoffensive as possible, and retreating from what was the totally predictable way his speech would be understood, he has reduced his own commendable act into something which is, at best, rather pedestrian and even slightly irritating. [/QUOTE]
[quote name='IRHari']http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/us/politics/15mosque.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Obama says his remarks were not an endorsement.
Bah, I'm not commending the Prez anymore. He took the Weiner approach. The whole 1st-y amendment-y thing. I probably should have read more into what he said which was, they have the right to build. That's really not the contentious part of this whole controversy.
He should have taken the Bloomberg approach of defending the mosque unequivocally.[/QUOTE]
I think he did just fine. It's not the president's place to be endorsing specific religious buildings' construction.
Obama says his remarks were not an endorsement.
Bah, I'm not commending the Prez anymore. He took the Weiner approach. The whole 1st-y amendment-y thing. I probably should have read more into what he said which was, they have the right to build. That's really not the contentious part of this whole controversy.
He should have taken the Bloomberg approach of defending the mosque unequivocally.[/QUOTE]
I think he did just fine. It's not the president's place to be endorsing specific religious buildings' construction.
He hasn't had a problem weighing in on local issues (Henry Louis Gates.) It'd be interesting if he addressed & defended the mosque. I doubt he will, since that's the more controversial part.
Most people support the right of the mosque to build there, they just don't want it built there in the 1st place.
Most people support the right of the mosque to build there, they just don't want it built there in the 1st place.
[quote name='life.exe']My thoughts:
[/QUOTE]
Although the mosque will not look like that I doubt the 100 million dollar investment will look like the burlington coat factory.
But you know theres already mosques in the area so I don't see why people are getting upset over a 13 story 100 million dollar one that is being rebuilt in a part that was destroyed by the attack. Or that it was or still is going to be named something controversial...eh screw it. You Americans don't have a right to be upset about anything anymore. But freedom of religion FTW. /end sarcasm
Although the mosque will not look like that I doubt the 100 million dollar investment will look like the burlington coat factory.
But you know theres already mosques in the area so I don't see why people are getting upset over a 13 story 100 million dollar one that is being rebuilt in a part that was destroyed by the attack. Or that it was or still is going to be named something controversial...eh screw it. You Americans don't have a right to be upset about anything anymore. But freedom of religion FTW. /end sarcasm
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Knoell']Although the mosque will not look like that I doubt the 100 million dollar investment will look like the burlington coat factory.
But you know theres already mosques in the area so I don't see why people are getting upset over a 13 story 100 million dollar one that is being rebuilt in a part that was destroyed by the attack. Or that it was or still is going to be named something controversial...eh screw it. You Americans don't have a right to be upset about anything anymore. But freedom of religion FTW.[/QUOTE]
I haven't really seen too many comments from people that are New Yorkers, who were in the city when 9/11 happened. I was asleep that day, skipping school and I woke up to a phone call of my mom screaming that they brought the towers down. She had to walk through the area because the towers coming down took out the trains below it to try to get to the ferry which service was stopped and buses were the only way to get off the island. NYC turned into it's own state that day. Bombarded 24/7 for I want to say a week straight of just news, no tv programs, just news and people crying, looking for loved ones, holding up posters "Have you seen this person?" and people waiting on line for their chance to hold up a picture of their loved ones so they can put their face on TV in hopes of finding them.
A whole city of people, the most lively people in the world, utterly silenced for at least a week. Humvees rolling through our streets, National Guardsmen everywhere, the debris clouds coming off of Ground Zero, the skyline completely changed as two of NYCs most recognizable buildings are now gone.
I personally think you're a complete scumbag for saying Americans don't have the right to be upset. You don't live in NYC, you don't live with our history, pride and heart. When 9/11 happened, it changed NYC from the cold, hard place that it was and gave the city something soulful that every true New Yorker shares to this day. You can go up to any New Yorker and ask them where they were on 9/11, you can't go anywhere else in the world and find a whole city of people who knew where they were on that day.
Is a Mosque 2 blocks away from Ground Zero a bad idea? If it's done before the memorial is fully built, yeah. It'd help if people stopped dragging their feet and get something built on Ground Zero so people have a chance to feel less raw about it.
But you know theres already mosques in the area so I don't see why people are getting upset over a 13 story 100 million dollar one that is being rebuilt in a part that was destroyed by the attack. Or that it was or still is going to be named something controversial...eh screw it. You Americans don't have a right to be upset about anything anymore. But freedom of religion FTW.[/QUOTE]
I haven't really seen too many comments from people that are New Yorkers, who were in the city when 9/11 happened. I was asleep that day, skipping school and I woke up to a phone call of my mom screaming that they brought the towers down. She had to walk through the area because the towers coming down took out the trains below it to try to get to the ferry which service was stopped and buses were the only way to get off the island. NYC turned into it's own state that day. Bombarded 24/7 for I want to say a week straight of just news, no tv programs, just news and people crying, looking for loved ones, holding up posters "Have you seen this person?" and people waiting on line for their chance to hold up a picture of their loved ones so they can put their face on TV in hopes of finding them.
A whole city of people, the most lively people in the world, utterly silenced for at least a week. Humvees rolling through our streets, National Guardsmen everywhere, the debris clouds coming off of Ground Zero, the skyline completely changed as two of NYCs most recognizable buildings are now gone.
I personally think you're a complete scumbag for saying Americans don't have the right to be upset. You don't live in NYC, you don't live with our history, pride and heart. When 9/11 happened, it changed NYC from the cold, hard place that it was and gave the city something soulful that every true New Yorker shares to this day. You can go up to any New Yorker and ask them where they were on 9/11, you can't go anywhere else in the world and find a whole city of people who knew where they were on that day.
Is a Mosque 2 blocks away from Ground Zero a bad idea? If it's done before the memorial is fully built, yeah. It'd help if people stopped dragging their feet and get something built on Ground Zero so people have a chance to feel less raw about it.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
Nobody's denying anyone the right to be upset. We're just saying that it's contrary to our laws and ideals to try to turn that upset - that irrational, foolish, incorrect upset - and to try to stop other people from executing their freedoms as American citizens.
[quote name='Mad39er']I haven't really seen too many comments from people that are New Yorkers, who were in the city when 9/11 happened. I was asleep that day, skipping school and I woke up to a phone call of my mom screaming that they brought the towers down. She had to walk through the area because the towers coming down took out the trains below it to try to get to the ferry which service was stopped and buses were the only way to get off the island. NYC turned into it's own state that day. Bombarded 24/7 for I want to say a week straight of just news, no tv programs, just news and people crying, looking for loved ones, holding up posters "Have you seen this person?" and people waiting on line for their chance to hold up a picture of their loved ones so they can put their face on TV in hopes of finding them.
A whole city of people, the most lively people in the world, utterly silenced for at least a week. Humvees rolling through our streets, National Guardsmen everywhere, the debris clouds coming off of Ground Zero, the skyline completely changed as two of NYCs most recognizable buildings are now gone.
I personally think you're a complete scumbag for saying Americans don't have the right to be upset. You don't live in NYC, you don't live with our history, pride and heart. When 9/11 happened, it changed NYC from the cold, hard place that it was and gave the city something soulful that every true New Yorker shares to this day. You can go up to any New Yorker and ask them where they were on 9/11, you can't go anywhere else in the world and find a whole city of people who knew where they were on that day.
Is a Mosque 2 blocks away from Ground Zero a bad idea? If it's done before the memorial is fully built, yeah. It'd help if people stopped dragging their feet and get something built on Ground Zero so people have a chance to feel less raw about it.[/QUOTE]
I hope you come back and realize my post made in sarcasm mocking everyone else in this thread who are attacking these people for being upset.
I really don't believe the things I put in that post, I thought the sarcasm was enough.
A whole city of people, the most lively people in the world, utterly silenced for at least a week. Humvees rolling through our streets, National Guardsmen everywhere, the debris clouds coming off of Ground Zero, the skyline completely changed as two of NYCs most recognizable buildings are now gone.
I personally think you're a complete scumbag for saying Americans don't have the right to be upset. You don't live in NYC, you don't live with our history, pride and heart. When 9/11 happened, it changed NYC from the cold, hard place that it was and gave the city something soulful that every true New Yorker shares to this day. You can go up to any New Yorker and ask them where they were on 9/11, you can't go anywhere else in the world and find a whole city of people who knew where they were on that day.
Is a Mosque 2 blocks away from Ground Zero a bad idea? If it's done before the memorial is fully built, yeah. It'd help if people stopped dragging their feet and get something built on Ground Zero so people have a chance to feel less raw about it.[/QUOTE]
I hope you come back and realize my post made in sarcasm mocking everyone else in this thread who are attacking these people for being upset.
I really don't believe the things I put in that post, I thought the sarcasm was enough.
panzerfaust
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
If New York had any American "pride and heart" they would grow a pair and let the values that built this country continue to do so.
[quote name='mykevermin']Nobody's denying anyone the right to be upset. We're just saying that it's contrary to our laws and ideals to try to turn that upset - that irrational, foolish, incorrect upset - and to try to stop other people from executing their freedoms as American citizens.[/QUOTE]
What would be ideal for you? Maybe if they all just kept their mouths shut?
The man who is building this thing will not turn away from what he wants here, so people are getting desperate. It is not against our laws and ideals for our laws and ideals to be tested by bogus attempts to circumvent our laws and ideals. The real injustice would occur if the justice department folded on this.
Again the federal government should not step in on this, but I wish the man building it would reconsider. He must see the reaction he is getting from placing this here, solely because of 9/11. If he moved the location 14 blocks away do you think that people would be as upset? I am sure there are mosques all over the US that aren't getting a smidget of attention, and I realize he is standing on principles of religious freedom, but (this is where he is douchy) he doesn't care that it is upsetting people, or that he is building his mosque right on top of a very sore spot, probably the only place he could have built it to get this much opposition. He claims he is a peace builder and that he does not want to be seen as a friend or enemy to anyone, but yet he does something as controversial as this. He should have a little more direction and weigh the gains and losses of his decision, what does he gain by placing the mosque here? what does he lose? He should also weigh the unintended results of his actions that are beyond his control, and realize that the towers falling and a mosque rising from the ashes will only motivate islamic extremists into thinking that it works. Again the fault can go around the table for that one, since we havent deemed it important enough to rebuild it.
What would be ideal for you? Maybe if they all just kept their mouths shut?
The man who is building this thing will not turn away from what he wants here, so people are getting desperate. It is not against our laws and ideals for our laws and ideals to be tested by bogus attempts to circumvent our laws and ideals. The real injustice would occur if the justice department folded on this.
Again the federal government should not step in on this, but I wish the man building it would reconsider. He must see the reaction he is getting from placing this here, solely because of 9/11. If he moved the location 14 blocks away do you think that people would be as upset? I am sure there are mosques all over the US that aren't getting a smidget of attention, and I realize he is standing on principles of religious freedom, but (this is where he is douchy) he doesn't care that it is upsetting people, or that he is building his mosque right on top of a very sore spot, probably the only place he could have built it to get this much opposition. He claims he is a peace builder and that he does not want to be seen as a friend or enemy to anyone, but yet he does something as controversial as this. He should have a little more direction and weigh the gains and losses of his decision, what does he gain by placing the mosque here? what does he lose? He should also weigh the unintended results of his actions that are beyond his control, and realize that the towers falling and a mosque rising from the ashes will only motivate islamic extremists into thinking that it works. Again the fault can go around the table for that one, since we havent deemed it important enough to rebuild it.
panzerfaust
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
Mosques in several other states and in inconspicuous locations are also being protested. It's not just a New York thing.
[quote name='panzerfaust']Mosques in several other states and in inconspicuous locations are also being protested. It's not just a New York thing.[/QUOTE]
and what do the polls say about those ones? I bet half the country doesn't side with religious intolerance with those cases.
Also you may want to throw in a link or two.
I guess America is just completely religiously intolerant. We hate the jews too. /sarcasm
http://www.vosizneias.com/49794/201...-resolution-to-build-synagogue-in-short-hills
and what do the polls say about those ones? I bet half the country doesn't side with religious intolerance with those cases.
Also you may want to throw in a link or two.
I guess America is just completely religiously intolerant. We hate the jews too. /sarcasm
http://www.vosizneias.com/49794/201...-resolution-to-build-synagogue-in-short-hills
panzerfaust
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/3/mosque-riles-politicians-in-tennessee/print/
pics and video:
http://www.realcourage.org/2010/07/ramsey-says-islam-not-a-religion/
And apparently Tennessee has already successfully shut down a mosque plan in the past.
National polls are always impressive, I wouldn't be surprised to see a close one on this case (I don't know if there's one out there). This particular situation obviously isn't a big deal and I'm not trying to say all Americans are intolerant of Islam, I'm just showing you that other communities are out and actively against the building of mosques because they don't agree with Muslim values.
Anyways, I just think that allowing to build the New York mosque would send a wonderful message about this country. But unfortunately the whole issue is already so "controversial," it's kind of embarrassing either way.
pics and video:
http://www.realcourage.org/2010/07/ramsey-says-islam-not-a-religion/
And apparently Tennessee has already successfully shut down a mosque plan in the past.
National polls are always impressive, I wouldn't be surprised to see a close one on this case (I don't know if there's one out there). This particular situation obviously isn't a big deal and I'm not trying to say all Americans are intolerant of Islam, I'm just showing you that other communities are out and actively against the building of mosques because they don't agree with Muslim values.
Anyways, I just think that allowing to build the New York mosque would send a wonderful message about this country. But unfortunately the whole issue is already so "controversial," it's kind of embarrassing either way.
The folks protesting the building of the mosque here in Murfreesboro trying to claim that their problem isn't with the fact that it's a mosque, but that procedure wasn't followed. I can guarantee however, that if this were a church, nobody would even give a damn about procedures.
[quote name='panzerfaust']http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/3/mosque-riles-politicians-in-tennessee/print/
pics and video:
http://www.realcourage.org/2010/07/ramsey-says-islam-not-a-religion/
And apparently Tennessee has already successfully shut down a mosque plan in the past.
National polls are always impressive, I wouldn't be surprised to see a close one on this case (I don't know if there's one out there). This particular situation obviously isn't a big deal and I'm not trying to say all Americans are intolerant of Islam, I'm just showing you that other communities are out and actively against the building of mosques because they don't agree with Muslim values.
Anyways, I just think that allowing to build the New York mosque would send a wonderful message about this country. But unfortunately the whole issue is already so "controversial," it's kind of embarrassing either way.[/QUOTE]
I am just finding it hard to group this and attribute it completely to religious intolerance. I think that in this NYC case people have a reasonable reason to be upset. In those other cases probably not. Regardless freedom of religion should prevail, but that doesn't excuse the guy who wants to put up a mosque in that tragic area specifically for the reason that it is that area. It isn't a coincidence that he wants to build it there. He is building it there for a reason, a good reason, but a reason nonetheless.
Lets look at it this way. Hypothetically say some crazy catholic fanatic bombs a muslim neighborhood in America. It was a disaster, everyone is upset, the catholic church declares that it was in no way done in their name, but then in the ashes of the bombing the catholic church decides to put up a 100 million dollar 13 story church in the direct vicinity of the the bombing. Would you say that it's their right to do this? Is it a bit insensitive of them?
Also as you guys love to point out that there are mosques all over NYC, so where was our vicious religious intolerance when they were being built? I think it is silly to say that 9/11 isn't a key factor in peoples reactions to this.
pics and video:
http://www.realcourage.org/2010/07/ramsey-says-islam-not-a-religion/
And apparently Tennessee has already successfully shut down a mosque plan in the past.
National polls are always impressive, I wouldn't be surprised to see a close one on this case (I don't know if there's one out there). This particular situation obviously isn't a big deal and I'm not trying to say all Americans are intolerant of Islam, I'm just showing you that other communities are out and actively against the building of mosques because they don't agree with Muslim values.
Anyways, I just think that allowing to build the New York mosque would send a wonderful message about this country. But unfortunately the whole issue is already so "controversial," it's kind of embarrassing either way.[/QUOTE]
I am just finding it hard to group this and attribute it completely to religious intolerance. I think that in this NYC case people have a reasonable reason to be upset. In those other cases probably not. Regardless freedom of religion should prevail, but that doesn't excuse the guy who wants to put up a mosque in that tragic area specifically for the reason that it is that area. It isn't a coincidence that he wants to build it there. He is building it there for a reason, a good reason, but a reason nonetheless.
Lets look at it this way. Hypothetically say some crazy catholic fanatic bombs a muslim neighborhood in America. It was a disaster, everyone is upset, the catholic church declares that it was in no way done in their name, but then in the ashes of the bombing the catholic church decides to put up a 100 million dollar 13 story church in the direct vicinity of the the bombing. Would you say that it's their right to do this? Is it a bit insensitive of them?
Also as you guys love to point out that there are mosques all over NYC, so where was our vicious religious intolerance when they were being built? I think it is silly to say that 9/11 isn't a key factor in peoples reactions to this.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
I imagine the builder doesnt see the thing as insensitive because he sees it as it helping/doing good. Some people are upset, and they have a reason to do so insofar as things happen for reasons. However, the reasons being reasonable appears to be relative here.
panzerfaust
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
[quote name='Knoell']I am just finding it hard to group this and attribute it completely to religious intolerance. I think that in this NYC case people have a reasonable reason to be upset. In those other cases probably not. Regardless freedom of religion should prevail, but that doesn't excuse the guy who wants to put up a mosque in that tragic area specifically for the reason that it is that area. It isn't a coincidence that he wants to build it there. He is building it there for a reason, a good reason, but a reason nonetheless.
Lets look at it this way. Hypothetically say some crazy catholic fanatic bombs a muslim neighborhood in America. It was a disaster, everyone is upset, the catholic church declares that it was in no way done in their name, but then in the ashes of the bombing the catholic church decides to put up a 100 million dollar 13 story church in the direct vicinity of the the bombing. Would you say that it's their right to do this? Is it a bit insensitive of them?
Also as you guys love to point out that there are mosques all over NYC, so where was our vicious religious intolerance when they were being built? I think it is silly to say that 9/11 isn't a key factor in peoples reactions to this.[/QUOTE]
Well they have the right, there's no arguing that.
On the case of hurting people's feelings, I agree this is a bit more complex. New York is home to a diversity of ethnic groups and religions so the analogy you used isn't entirely similar but I get the point nonetheless. You could of just flipped the current situation and asked, "what if a fanatical Christian group was behind 9/11, would it be appropriate to build a magnificent church 2 blocks away from the site?"
Insensitive? I guess it depends on the motive. We are all familiar with Christianity, our country was built upon many of its values. We know the Bible says some nasty things but 99% of us interpret it peacefully. A church is merely a place to practice this peaceful religion and reach out to the community around it in positive ways. If only 0.005% of Christians are sociopaths, why would this church near the 9/11 site represent something insensitive as opposed to something to help heal the whole situation? Especially when the church condemns those atrocities and expresses remorse for all the victims, and at the same time proclaiming to be a center for the entire community.
I would hardly call the U.S. religiously intolerant, and I hope that's not what you've gotten from me. I do think however, this issue is about much more than the block radius that the mosque is being built within. I think many Americans have skewed feelings towards Islam, not because they are bigots, but simply out of the lack of knowing anything about the culture. The church analogy just used would never cause this kind of uproar because America is quite comfortable with Christianity.
Unless you want to argue that a church would also be protested. I know we can't prove a hypothetical situation but it sounds a bit fantastical to me.
Lets look at it this way. Hypothetically say some crazy catholic fanatic bombs a muslim neighborhood in America. It was a disaster, everyone is upset, the catholic church declares that it was in no way done in their name, but then in the ashes of the bombing the catholic church decides to put up a 100 million dollar 13 story church in the direct vicinity of the the bombing. Would you say that it's their right to do this? Is it a bit insensitive of them?
Also as you guys love to point out that there are mosques all over NYC, so where was our vicious religious intolerance when they were being built? I think it is silly to say that 9/11 isn't a key factor in peoples reactions to this.[/QUOTE]
Well they have the right, there's no arguing that.
On the case of hurting people's feelings, I agree this is a bit more complex. New York is home to a diversity of ethnic groups and religions so the analogy you used isn't entirely similar but I get the point nonetheless. You could of just flipped the current situation and asked, "what if a fanatical Christian group was behind 9/11, would it be appropriate to build a magnificent church 2 blocks away from the site?"
Insensitive? I guess it depends on the motive. We are all familiar with Christianity, our country was built upon many of its values. We know the Bible says some nasty things but 99% of us interpret it peacefully. A church is merely a place to practice this peaceful religion and reach out to the community around it in positive ways. If only 0.005% of Christians are sociopaths, why would this church near the 9/11 site represent something insensitive as opposed to something to help heal the whole situation? Especially when the church condemns those atrocities and expresses remorse for all the victims, and at the same time proclaiming to be a center for the entire community.
I would hardly call the U.S. religiously intolerant, and I hope that's not what you've gotten from me. I do think however, this issue is about much more than the block radius that the mosque is being built within. I think many Americans have skewed feelings towards Islam, not because they are bigots, but simply out of the lack of knowing anything about the culture. The church analogy just used would never cause this kind of uproar because America is quite comfortable with Christianity.
Unless you want to argue that a church would also be protested. I know we can't prove a hypothetical situation but it sounds a bit fantastical to me.
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
If I make a gesture of good will, and some subset of people interpret it as the exact opposite of a gesture of good will, thats basically their problem. One cant help that some people are going to be wrong.
[quote name='panzerfaust']Well they have the right, there's no arguing that.
On the case of hurting people's feelings, I agree this is a bit more complex. New York is home to a diversity of ethnic groups and religions so the analogy you used isn't entirely similar but I get the point nonetheless. You could of just flipped the current situation and asked, "what if a fanatical Christian group was behind 9/11, would it be appropriate to build a magnificent church 2 blocks away from the site?"
Insensitive? I guess it depends on the motive. We are all familiar with Christianity, our country was built upon many of its values. We know the Bible says some nasty things but 99% of us interpret it peacefully. A church is merely a place to practice this peaceful religion and reach out to the community around it in positive ways. If only 0.005% of Christians are sociopaths, why would this church near the 9/11 site represent something insensitive as opposed to something to help heal the whole situation? Especially when the church condemns those atrocities and expresses remorse for all the victims, and at the same time proclaiming to be a center for the entire community.
I would hardly call the U.S. religiously intolerant, and I hope that's not what you've gotten from me. I do think however, this issue is about much more than the block radius that the mosque is being built within. I think many Americans have skewed feelings towards Islam, not because they are bigots, but simply out of the lack of knowing anything about the culture. The church analogy just used would never cause this kind of uproar because America is quite comfortable with Christianity.
Unless you want to argue that a church would also be protested. I know we can't prove a hypothetical situation but it sounds a bit fantastical to me.[/QUOTE]
I understand that a mosque would be there in peace and so on, but how does placing the mosque there heal the situation?
My point is that it is insensitive and the people upset, are not upset simply because someone wants to build a mosque. Some people are making fools of themselves, and some are going farther than others via petitions, or even threats, but that does not discount the fact that someone is choosing that site to raise a mosque because it is near the 9/11 site. More than half of Americans think the mosque should not be built, that is an amazing number, and I am willing to bet that all those people aren't just grumbling about Islam.
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/New-Yorkers-Oppose-Ground-Zero-Mosque-Poll-97602569.html
Not to mention the unintended consequence that Islamic extremists will hail this mosque as a symbol that their methods work on and off the air. Do you think they won't use this as a recruitment tool? I would hope only the people who think extremists are imaginary would believe that. Again the guy who is building this must realize the consequences of his actions and weigh the good and the bad. This time I think the bad outweighs the good but noone should force him to not build it there. Would he not achieve the same peaceful agenda if he built it in an area of NYC that is not so close to ground zero? Again there is no reason he is building it there other than 9/11, its not like there is nowhere else in the city to build it.
If he wants to be a douche let him, but I am not going to condemn the people that are upset that he is being a douche.
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']If I make a gesture of good will, and some subset of people interpret it as the exact opposite of a gesture of good will, thats basically their problem. One cant help that some people are going to be wrong.[/QUOTE]
You are right it isnt his fault that those people will take his actions and twist them into their own motives, but he should know that they will, what sacrifice would he be making if he built this thing 5 blocks away in a building unaffected by 9/11?
On the case of hurting people's feelings, I agree this is a bit more complex. New York is home to a diversity of ethnic groups and religions so the analogy you used isn't entirely similar but I get the point nonetheless. You could of just flipped the current situation and asked, "what if a fanatical Christian group was behind 9/11, would it be appropriate to build a magnificent church 2 blocks away from the site?"
Insensitive? I guess it depends on the motive. We are all familiar with Christianity, our country was built upon many of its values. We know the Bible says some nasty things but 99% of us interpret it peacefully. A church is merely a place to practice this peaceful religion and reach out to the community around it in positive ways. If only 0.005% of Christians are sociopaths, why would this church near the 9/11 site represent something insensitive as opposed to something to help heal the whole situation? Especially when the church condemns those atrocities and expresses remorse for all the victims, and at the same time proclaiming to be a center for the entire community.
I would hardly call the U.S. religiously intolerant, and I hope that's not what you've gotten from me. I do think however, this issue is about much more than the block radius that the mosque is being built within. I think many Americans have skewed feelings towards Islam, not because they are bigots, but simply out of the lack of knowing anything about the culture. The church analogy just used would never cause this kind of uproar because America is quite comfortable with Christianity.
Unless you want to argue that a church would also be protested. I know we can't prove a hypothetical situation but it sounds a bit fantastical to me.[/QUOTE]
I understand that a mosque would be there in peace and so on, but how does placing the mosque there heal the situation?
My point is that it is insensitive and the people upset, are not upset simply because someone wants to build a mosque. Some people are making fools of themselves, and some are going farther than others via petitions, or even threats, but that does not discount the fact that someone is choosing that site to raise a mosque because it is near the 9/11 site. More than half of Americans think the mosque should not be built, that is an amazing number, and I am willing to bet that all those people aren't just grumbling about Islam.
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/New-Yorkers-Oppose-Ground-Zero-Mosque-Poll-97602569.html
Not to mention the unintended consequence that Islamic extremists will hail this mosque as a symbol that their methods work on and off the air. Do you think they won't use this as a recruitment tool? I would hope only the people who think extremists are imaginary would believe that. Again the guy who is building this must realize the consequences of his actions and weigh the good and the bad. This time I think the bad outweighs the good but noone should force him to not build it there. Would he not achieve the same peaceful agenda if he built it in an area of NYC that is not so close to ground zero? Again there is no reason he is building it there other than 9/11, its not like there is nowhere else in the city to build it.
If he wants to be a douche let him, but I am not going to condemn the people that are upset that he is being a douche.
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']If I make a gesture of good will, and some subset of people interpret it as the exact opposite of a gesture of good will, thats basically their problem. One cant help that some people are going to be wrong.[/QUOTE]
You are right it isnt his fault that those people will take his actions and twist them into their own motives, but he should know that they will, what sacrifice would he be making if he built this thing 5 blocks away in a building unaffected by 9/11?
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
At this juncture several things are potentially lost.
1) time and money has already been spent planning this thing (I assume).
2) the current setting may be somewhat optimal on several factors.
2a) Location planning can get real crazy in depth, with analysis of what other buildings are in the area, all sorts of population demographics, traffic flow, parking, etc. If you were starting a business and looking for a location, even being next door is going to matter.
2b) Something about the physical layout of the building or the price of the building may be optimal.
I think point #1 is a given. Anything in #2 is speculative.
1) time and money has already been spent planning this thing (I assume).
2) the current setting may be somewhat optimal on several factors.
2a) Location planning can get real crazy in depth, with analysis of what other buildings are in the area, all sorts of population demographics, traffic flow, parking, etc. If you were starting a business and looking for a location, even being next door is going to matter.
2b) Something about the physical layout of the building or the price of the building may be optimal.
I think point #1 is a given. Anything in #2 is speculative.
I live in nyc, I lost an extended family member in the terrorist bombing, though i was away in college the day of.
This issue is incredibly saddening. Or rather, it is incredibly saddening that this is an issue. And that such a large percentage of people are against a place of worship being built in America. I hesitate to assume such people are Americans, because such misguided, hateful beliefs don't belong in this country. And those people who are blinded by hate should move. Germany, circa 1936 would be the perfect place.
That building a religious structure is somehow insensitive to victims and the family of survivors is such a pathetic and flimsy excuse for the evil of bigotry to hide behind.
This issue is incredibly saddening. Or rather, it is incredibly saddening that this is an issue. And that such a large percentage of people are against a place of worship being built in America. I hesitate to assume such people are Americans, because such misguided, hateful beliefs don't belong in this country. And those people who are blinded by hate should move. Germany, circa 1936 would be the perfect place.
That building a religious structure is somehow insensitive to victims and the family of survivors is such a pathetic and flimsy excuse for the evil of bigotry to hide behind.
[quote name='Knoell']He should also weigh the unintended results of his actions that are beyond his control, and realize that the towers falling and a mosque rising from the ashes will only motivate islamic extremists into thinking that it works. Again the fault can go around the table for that one, since we havent deemed it important enough to rebuild it.[/QUOTE]
Your rhetoric makes it sound like the mosque is a triumph of Islam over America. You also make it sound like the mosque is actually at Ground Zero. It's 2 blocks away.
Y'know what's risen from the ashes of Ground Zero? A Subway. Aing Subway sandwich shop.
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/12/24/2009-12-24_a_tall_order_for_big_subs.html
Yeah, sacred ground for Subway shops? What kind of crap is this? How do people defend the Subway but attack a mosque?
Your rhetoric makes it sound like the mosque is a triumph of Islam over America. You also make it sound like the mosque is actually at Ground Zero. It's 2 blocks away.
Y'know what's risen from the ashes of Ground Zero? A Subway. A
ing Subway sandwich shop.http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/12/24/2009-12-24_a_tall_order_for_big_subs.html
Yeah, sacred ground for Subway shops? What kind of crap is this? How do people defend the Subway but attack a mosque?
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='Knoell']My point is that it is insensitive and the people upset, are not upset simply because someone wants to build a mosque.[/QUOTE]
This is your double standard. People who represent Islam:
- must capitulate to your demands instead of doing their faith freely
- must move where you want them to instead of having the right to property where they want it
- must denounce 9/11 and extremist Islam, instead of you assuming that the most populated religion in the world doesn't support al qaeda
- must continue to denounce 9/11 and extremist Islam because you weren't paying attention when they actually have in the past (on multiple occasions)
- quietly accept and concede to the desire of you and other Americans to suppress their rights, question their faith, criticize and label them as terrorists, terrorist enablers and terrorist sympathizers
- have their faith relegated to a subhuman status such that the president is accused - by otherwise presumably reasonable people - as being a member of it, as if it (1) is our business, (2) is relevant, (3) makes him less "American" because he's not Christian.
You know, I think it's time YOU apologize to Islam. I think it's time YOU thought about how you're labeling nearly a third of the worlds' population based on what a couple dozen people did. I think it's time YOU think about how you denigrate the rights of such a large group of human beings, denying them the same rights, privileges, and respect you grant everyone else who is not in that category.
I think it's time, in short, you begin to recognize what aing bigot you are.
This is your double standard. People who represent Islam:
- must capitulate to your demands instead of doing their faith freely
- must move where you want them to instead of having the right to property where they want it
- must denounce 9/11 and extremist Islam, instead of you assuming that the most populated religion in the world doesn't support al qaeda
- must continue to denounce 9/11 and extremist Islam because you weren't paying attention when they actually have in the past (on multiple occasions)
- quietly accept and concede to the desire of you and other Americans to suppress their rights, question their faith, criticize and label them as terrorists, terrorist enablers and terrorist sympathizers
- have their faith relegated to a subhuman status such that the president is accused - by otherwise presumably reasonable people - as being a member of it, as if it (1) is our business, (2) is relevant, (3) makes him less "American" because he's not Christian.
You know, I think it's time YOU apologize to Islam. I think it's time YOU thought about how you're labeling nearly a third of the worlds' population based on what a couple dozen people did. I think it's time YOU think about how you denigrate the rights of such a large group of human beings, denying them the same rights, privileges, and respect you grant everyone else who is not in that category.
I think it's time, in short, you begin to recognize what a
ing bigot you are.
Kirin Lemon
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 2 (100%)
[quote name='mykevermin']I think it's time, in short, you begin to recognize what a ing bigot you are.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much. It's remarkable the crazy mental gymnastics these people perform in an attempt to justify their bigotry as something other than what it so obviously is. The mosque is too close. The name is controversial. The proper procedures weren't followed. Give me aing break, you're not fooling anyone.
ing bigot you are.[/QUOTE]Pretty much. It's remarkable the crazy mental gymnastics these people perform in an attempt to justify their bigotry as something other than what it so obviously is. The mosque is too close. The name is controversial. The proper procedures weren't followed. Give me a
ing break, you're not fooling anyone.[quote name='camoor']Don't you ever think that there might be something about fundie Abrahamic religions that encourages this behavior? You almost never hear about people of non-Abrahamic religion acting this way (unless they're athiest, but let's not open that can of worms...)
I know there's a ton of people of Abrahamic religion that live in peace. At the same time I really think there's something about these religions that lends itself to toning up the rhetoric on the susceptible members of the public.[/QUOTE]
...uh...Hindus? Generations of animalistic religious battles over who's ancestor's god wronged another. Nice try in trying to single it down to Abrahamic only, but the history of the world says otherwise.
I know there's a ton of people of Abrahamic religion that live in peace. At the same time I really think there's something about these religions that lends itself to toning up the rhetoric on the susceptible members of the public.[/QUOTE]
...uh...Hindus? Generations of animalistic religious battles over who's ancestor's god wronged another. Nice try in trying to single it down to Abrahamic only, but the history of the world says otherwise.
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
He said you almost never hear about it. He also asked it as a question rather than a statement. From person to person, that may be correct. I dont often hear about it. 2 of the 3 Abrahamic faiths make up a majority of faith in the world. Hindu is certainly no slouch on population. One of them is more likely to have an absolute higher number of indicidents, and accordingly the possibility that you would hear about a high profile one, moreso since our foreign policy leaves us in some places we shouldnt be.
Now who has the highest per capita, this is an interesting question.
Now who has the highest per capita, this is an interesting question.
depascal22
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 92 (100%)
[quote name='camoor']Don't you ever think that there might be something about fundie Abrahamic religions that encourages this behavior? You almost never hear about people of non-Abrahamic religion acting this way (unless they're athiest, but let's not open that can of worms...)
I know there's a ton of people of Abrahamic religion that live in peace. At the same time I really think there's something about these religions that lends itself to toning up the rhetoric on the susceptible members of the public.[/QUOTE]
Mankind in general is susceptible to tyrants. Religion is just one way to force people into group think.
I know there's a ton of people of Abrahamic religion that live in peace. At the same time I really think there's something about these religions that lends itself to toning up the rhetoric on the susceptible members of the public.[/QUOTE]
Mankind in general is susceptible to tyrants. Religion is just one way to force people into group think.
[quote name='mykevermin']This is your double standard. People who represent Islam:
- must capitulate to your demands instead of doing their faith freely
Demands huh? Thought I said he can do whatever he wants.
- must move where you want them to instead of having the right to property where they want it
Again, I said it was up to the guy building the building to weigh the effects of his decision. Regardless of his decision, the government should not get involved.
- must denounce 9/11 and extremist Islam, instead of you assuming that the most populated religion in the world doesn't support al qaeda
Don't think I ever asked him to denounce 9/11....
- must continue to denounce 9/11 and extremist Islam because you weren't paying attention when they actually have in the past (on multiple occasions)
Don't think I ever asked him to denounce 9/11....
- quietly accept and concede to the desire of you and other Americans to suppress their rights, question their faith, criticize and label them as terrorists, terrorist enablers and terrorist sympathizers
See my second response....
- have their faith relegated to a subhuman status such that the president is accused - by otherwise presumably reasonable people - as being a member of it, as if it (1) is our business, (2) is relevant, (3) makes him less "American" because he's not Christian.
When have I done this?
You know, I think it's time YOU apologize to Islam. I think it's time YOU thought about how you're labeling nearly a third of the worlds' population based on what a couple dozen people did. I think it's time YOU think about how you denigrate the rights of such a large group of human beings, denying them the same rights, privileges, and respect you grant everyone else who is not in that category.
I think its time you apologize to me, maybe next time you can quote me saying one of the things you claim I say. Show me where I am denying anyone their right...
I think it's time, in short, you begin to recognize what aing bigot you are.
Sure in your fantasy world I guess I am, you seem to make things up as you go along with your little rants anyways. I think it's time, in short, you begin to recognize what aing hack you are.
[/QUOTE]
Gotta love this forum.
- must capitulate to your demands instead of doing their faith freely
Demands huh? Thought I said he can do whatever he wants.
- must move where you want them to instead of having the right to property where they want it
Again, I said it was up to the guy building the building to weigh the effects of his decision. Regardless of his decision, the government should not get involved.
- must denounce 9/11 and extremist Islam, instead of you assuming that the most populated religion in the world doesn't support al qaeda
Don't think I ever asked him to denounce 9/11....
- must continue to denounce 9/11 and extremist Islam because you weren't paying attention when they actually have in the past (on multiple occasions)
Don't think I ever asked him to denounce 9/11....
- quietly accept and concede to the desire of you and other Americans to suppress their rights, question their faith, criticize and label them as terrorists, terrorist enablers and terrorist sympathizers
See my second response....
- have their faith relegated to a subhuman status such that the president is accused - by otherwise presumably reasonable people - as being a member of it, as if it (1) is our business, (2) is relevant, (3) makes him less "American" because he's not Christian.
When have I done this?
You know, I think it's time YOU apologize to Islam. I think it's time YOU thought about how you're labeling nearly a third of the worlds' population based on what a couple dozen people did. I think it's time YOU think about how you denigrate the rights of such a large group of human beings, denying them the same rights, privileges, and respect you grant everyone else who is not in that category.
I think its time you apologize to me, maybe next time you can quote me saying one of the things you claim I say. Show me where I am denying anyone their right...
I think it's time, in short, you begin to recognize what a
ing bigot you are.Sure in your fantasy world I guess I am, you seem to make things up as you go along with your little rants anyways. I think it's time, in short, you begin to recognize what a
ing hack you are.[/QUOTE]
Gotta love this forum.
[quote name='IRHari']Your rhetoric makes it sound like the mosque is a triumph of Islam over America. You also make it sound like the mosque is actually at Ground Zero. It's 2 blocks away.
Y'know what's risen from the ashes of Ground Zero? A Subway. Aing Subway sandwich shop.
http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/12/24/2009-12-24_a_tall_order_for_big_subs.html
Yeah, sacred ground for Subway shops? What kind of crap is this? How do people defend the Subway but attack a mosque?[/QUOTE]
So you argue that Islamic extremists would not cheer for the rise of a $100,000,000 dollar mosque practically on top of one of their successful attacks?
Their goal (the extremists) is the expansion and domination of their religion, and all who do not support their one god (Allah) are considered infidels. Explain to me how they would not see this as a victory for their cause.
The peaceful people of Islam obviously have no control over this, and they shouldn't have to hide from building a mosque in our country because of this. However it is still an unintended, and uncontrolled result of the guys actions, again I will say he has to weigh the consequences of his decision but the decision is his alone as long as he has the property and zoning rights to it. If he decides it is still a good idea (which he obviously has) then all the power to him, but I'm not going to condemn people for being upset because they have a logical reason to be upset.
And again, shame on us for not considering rebuilding the towers a priority, who is holding up the process anyway?
Y'know what's risen from the ashes of Ground Zero? A Subway. A
ing Subway sandwich shop.http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/12/24/2009-12-24_a_tall_order_for_big_subs.html
Yeah, sacred ground for Subway shops? What kind of crap is this? How do people defend the Subway but attack a mosque?[/QUOTE]
So you argue that Islamic extremists would not cheer for the rise of a $100,000,000 dollar mosque practically on top of one of their successful attacks?
Their goal (the extremists) is the expansion and domination of their religion, and all who do not support their one god (Allah) are considered infidels. Explain to me how they would not see this as a victory for their cause.
The peaceful people of Islam obviously have no control over this, and they shouldn't have to hide from building a mosque in our country because of this. However it is still an unintended, and uncontrolled result of the guys actions, again I will say he has to weigh the consequences of his decision but the decision is his alone as long as he has the property and zoning rights to it. If he decides it is still a good idea (which he obviously has) then all the power to him, but I'm not going to condemn people for being upset because they have a logical reason to be upset.
And again, shame on us for not considering rebuilding the towers a priority, who is holding up the process anyway?
[quote name='Knoell']So you argue that Islamic extremists would not cheer for the rise of a $100,000,000 dollar mosque practically on top of one of their successful attacks?
Their goal (the extremists) is the expansion and domination of their religion, and all who do not support their one god (Allah) are considered infidels. Explain to me how they would not see this as a victory for their cause.[/QUOTE]
All Muslims want to spread their religion, just like all Christians do, and members of any other religion that believe themselves to have the one true religion. If terrorists believed their cause was furthered by building a mosque, then they would be building mosques and not flying planes into buildings, no?
Their goal (the extremists) is the expansion and domination of their religion, and all who do not support their one god (Allah) are considered infidels. Explain to me how they would not see this as a victory for their cause.[/QUOTE]
All Muslims want to spread their religion, just like all Christians do, and members of any other religion that believe themselves to have the one true religion. If terrorists believed their cause was furthered by building a mosque, then they would be building mosques and not flying planes into buildings, no?
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='panzerfaust']If New York had any American "pride and heart" they would grow a pair and let the values that built this country continue to do so.[/QUOTE]If you had a pair you'd certainly march right down here and defend the Mosque, so lets not be an internet tough guy. We know where this one is going.
[quote name='vherub']I live in nyc, I lost an extended family member in the terrorist bombing, though i was away in college the day of.
This issue is incredibly saddening. Or rather, it is incredibly saddening that this is an issue. And that such a large percentage of people are against a place of worship being built in America. I hesitate to assume such people are Americans, because such misguided, hateful beliefs don't belong in this country. And those people who are blinded by hate should move. Germany, circa 1936 would be the perfect place.
That building a religious structure is somehow insensitive to victims and the family of survivors is such a pathetic and flimsy excuse for the evil of bigotry to hide behind.[/QUOTE]
If you want to compare this to fascism then you really need to stay in school. This is part and parcel of what happens in New York on a day to day basis. The fact that you're saddened by it means you're the target audience for all the bleeding hearts who don't think there are enough soap boxes to jump on. This is literally something that is business as usual in the City yet lets jump on the bandwagon to start calling people bigots, because making people feel worse about themselves makes you feel better about you(general you, not you you, just directed at people who toss the word bigot around in this thread).
[quote name='SpazX']All Muslims want to spread their religion, just like all Christians do, and members of any other religion that believe themselves to have the one true religion. If they believed their cause was furthered by building a mosque, then they would be building mosques and not flying planes into buildings, no?[/QUOTE] The problem with that train of thought is that you're assuming spreading religion is the only thing of importance to extremists. People who fly planes into buildings, strap bombs to the chests and blow up buses are not even remotely connected to peaceful Muslims.
[quote name='vherub']I live in nyc, I lost an extended family member in the terrorist bombing, though i was away in college the day of.
This issue is incredibly saddening. Or rather, it is incredibly saddening that this is an issue. And that such a large percentage of people are against a place of worship being built in America. I hesitate to assume such people are Americans, because such misguided, hateful beliefs don't belong in this country. And those people who are blinded by hate should move. Germany, circa 1936 would be the perfect place.
That building a religious structure is somehow insensitive to victims and the family of survivors is such a pathetic and flimsy excuse for the evil of bigotry to hide behind.[/QUOTE]
If you want to compare this to fascism then you really need to stay in school. This is part and parcel of what happens in New York on a day to day basis. The fact that you're saddened by it means you're the target audience for all the bleeding hearts who don't think there are enough soap boxes to jump on. This is literally something that is business as usual in the City yet lets jump on the bandwagon to start calling people bigots, because making people feel worse about themselves makes you feel better about you(general you, not you you, just directed at people who toss the word bigot around in this thread).
[quote name='SpazX']All Muslims want to spread their religion, just like all Christians do, and members of any other religion that believe themselves to have the one true religion. If they believed their cause was furthered by building a mosque, then they would be building mosques and not flying planes into buildings, no?[/QUOTE] The problem with that train of thought is that you're assuming spreading religion is the only thing of importance to extremists. People who fly planes into buildings, strap bombs to the chests and blow up buses are not even remotely connected to peaceful Muslims.
depascal22
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 92 (100%)
[quote name='Mad39er']The problem with that train of thought is that you're assuming spreading religion is the only thing of importance to extremists. People who fly planes into buildings, strap bombs to the chests and blow up buses are not even remotely connected to peaceful Muslims.[/QUOTE]
But that's exactly what everyone (that wants to stop the mosque from being built) is saying.
But that's exactly what everyone (that wants to stop the mosque from being built) is saying.
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='berzirk']...uh...Hindus? Generations of animalistic religious battles over who's ancestor's god wronged another. Nice try in trying to single it down to Abrahamic only, but the history of the world says otherwise.[/QUOTE]
Admittedly I don't know much about Hinduism but the people seem to live pretty peaceably. They may have class and gender issues, but historically speaking Indian Hindus have been comparatively tolerant of different religions. There are issues in Kashmir sure but both Indians and Pakistanis will affirm that it's the English who made a right mess of the situation before their colonial departure.
Even the radicals who happen to be Hindus acknowledge that their acts of violence are not done in the name of Hinduism. This is something you hear again and again with non-Abrahamic paths.
Admittedly I don't know much about Hinduism but the people seem to live pretty peaceably. They may have class and gender issues, but historically speaking Indian Hindus have been comparatively tolerant of different religions. There are issues in Kashmir sure but both Indians and Pakistanis will affirm that it's the English who made a right mess of the situation before their colonial departure.
Even the radicals who happen to be Hindus acknowledge that their acts of violence are not done in the name of Hinduism. This is something you hear again and again with non-Abrahamic paths.
So you argue that Islamic extremists would not cheer for the rise of a $100,000,000 dollar mosque practically on top of one of their successful attacks?
-Question wasn't directed to me, but yes, I would say the "extremists" would not cheer for the rise of a $100M mosque near Ground Zero. Especially from a group that has been so outspoken against extremism. But then again, who gives a damn what a few whackjobs say? I usually filter out idiotic opinions by groups I don't value. Most of us do, I'd wager. Why can't we do that in this instance?
Their goal (the extremists) is the expansion and domination of their religion, and all who do not support their one god (Allah) are considered infidels. Explain to me how they would not see this as a victory for their cause.
-It's clear you've watched TV, but if you were to actually research the topic, you would realize that the extremists, at least as headed by Osama, say their real goal is for the western military to get out of "Muslim lands", specifically Saudi Arabia. Additionally, where have Muslims tried to expand into and take over in the last 50 years? If they were so keen on expansion, wouldn't they have something to show for it? Also, infidel is such a great buzzword. It's a shame it's not really used at all by most muslims. Jews and Christians are actually called "Ahl al-kitab" -People of the Book. Muslims can marry from these people, eat their food, etc. Why would a religion call you an infidel, then allow its son to marry from your group? "Kafr" (Kafiroon in the plural) is the much more oft used term, meaning disbeliever(s).
Since we're playing theoretical games and analyzing people's thought process that we don't know, how bout this for an insane "yah, but!" You know, that huge mosque will mean that in the future the extremists won't attack there, so city of New York, embrace the mosque, you are going to safe from future attacks! Thank you Cordoba!
The peaceful people of Islam obviously have no control over this, and they shouldn't have to hide from building a mosque in our country because of this.
-Agreed, there must be a "but" coming...
However
-I knew it!
it is still an unintended, and uncontrolled result of the guys actions, again I will say he has to weigh the consequences of his decision but the decision is his alone as long as he has the property and zoning rights to it. If he decides it is still a good idea (which he obviously has) then all the power to him, but I'm not going to condemn people for being upset because they have a logical reason to be upset.
-Nobody asked you to. You've called it "douchy" multiple times though. Is that not the same as condemning him, infid...friend?
And again, shame on us for not considering rebuilding the towers a priority, who is holding up the process anyway?
-Don't know, don't really care. Maybe I'm old school, but to me a building is a building. Doesn't hold sentimental value, doesn't provide imagery for me.
-Question wasn't directed to me, but yes, I would say the "extremists" would not cheer for the rise of a $100M mosque near Ground Zero. Especially from a group that has been so outspoken against extremism. But then again, who gives a damn what a few whackjobs say? I usually filter out idiotic opinions by groups I don't value. Most of us do, I'd wager. Why can't we do that in this instance?
Their goal (the extremists) is the expansion and domination of their religion, and all who do not support their one god (Allah) are considered infidels. Explain to me how they would not see this as a victory for their cause.
-It's clear you've watched TV, but if you were to actually research the topic, you would realize that the extremists, at least as headed by Osama, say their real goal is for the western military to get out of "Muslim lands", specifically Saudi Arabia. Additionally, where have Muslims tried to expand into and take over in the last 50 years? If they were so keen on expansion, wouldn't they have something to show for it? Also, infidel is such a great buzzword. It's a shame it's not really used at all by most muslims. Jews and Christians are actually called "Ahl al-kitab" -People of the Book. Muslims can marry from these people, eat their food, etc. Why would a religion call you an infidel, then allow its son to marry from your group? "Kafr" (Kafiroon in the plural) is the much more oft used term, meaning disbeliever(s).
Since we're playing theoretical games and analyzing people's thought process that we don't know, how bout this for an insane "yah, but!" You know, that huge mosque will mean that in the future the extremists won't attack there, so city of New York, embrace the mosque, you are going to safe from future attacks! Thank you Cordoba!
The peaceful people of Islam obviously have no control over this, and they shouldn't have to hide from building a mosque in our country because of this.
-Agreed, there must be a "but" coming...
However
-I knew it!
it is still an unintended, and uncontrolled result of the guys actions, again I will say he has to weigh the consequences of his decision but the decision is his alone as long as he has the property and zoning rights to it. If he decides it is still a good idea (which he obviously has) then all the power to him, but I'm not going to condemn people for being upset because they have a logical reason to be upset.
-Nobody asked you to. You've called it "douchy" multiple times though. Is that not the same as condemning him, infid...friend?
And again, shame on us for not considering rebuilding the towers a priority, who is holding up the process anyway?
-Don't know, don't really care. Maybe I'm old school, but to me a building is a building. Doesn't hold sentimental value, doesn't provide imagery for me.
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
Bin Laden's stated goal in attacking us was to provoke us into fighting a Christian vs Islam war and to break America because it would never end.
You could say that to this end, the mosque is potentially being built to provoke the American right to play right into their stated goal. This is very unlikely. However, it doesnt excuse that the right is in fact playing right into their hands.
You could say that to this end, the mosque is potentially being built to provoke the American right to play right into their stated goal. This is very unlikely. However, it doesnt excuse that the right is in fact playing right into their hands.
[quote name='Knoell']If he decides it is still a good idea (which he obviously has) then all the power to him, but I'm not going to condemn people for being upset because they have a logical reason to be upset.[/QUOTE]
People don't have a logical reason to be upset.
People don't have a logical reason to be upset.
Not to reaffirm anything or sway people one way or another but HAMAS really doesn't help the case for this mosque being built. It didn't take long for this to happen, I wonder if there is enough crow to go around.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/hamas_nod_for_gz_mosque_cSohH9eha8sNZMTDz0VVPI
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/hamas_nod_for_gz_mosque_cSohH9eha8sNZMTDz0VVPI
[quote name='berzirk']
-Question wasn't directed to me, but yes, I would say the "extremists" would not cheer for the rise of a $100M mosque near Ground Zero. Especially from a group that has been so outspoken against extremism. But then again, who gives a damn what a few whackjobs say? I usually filter out idiotic opinions by groups I don't value. Most of us do, I'd wager. Why can't we do that in this instance?
Because those whackjobs have proven to be dangerous, and you fail to realize the power of the symbolism that they could pull from this. Granted that is not this guys problem, but he should weigh the consequences of his actions, and figure out if building the mosque a few blocks away to an area not hindered by 9/11 would really hinder the peace and community support brought by it.
-It's clear you've watched TV, but if you were to actually research the topic, you would realize that the extremists, at least as headed by Osama, say their real goal is for the western military to get out of "Muslim lands", specifically Saudi Arabia. Additionally, where have Muslims tried to expand into and take over in the last 50 years? If they were so keen on expansion, wouldn't they have something to show for it? Also, infidel is such a great buzzword. It's a shame it's not really used at all by most muslims. Jews and Christians are actually called "Ahl al-kitab" -People of the Book. Muslims can marry from these people, eat their food, etc. Why would a religion call you an infidel, then allow its son to marry from your group? "Kafr" (Kafiroon in the plural) is the much more oft used term, meaning disbeliever(s).
Since we're playing theoretical games and analyzing people's thought process that we don't know, how bout this for an insane "yah, but!" You know, that huge mosque will mean that in the future the extremists won't attack there, so city of New York, embrace the mosque, you are going to safe from future attacks! Thank you Cordoba!
Sigh, I knew you were going to try correcting my on the infidel term, oh well.
Your simplistic view of what islamic extremists fight for is, well, simplistic. They fight for many reasons, not just getting our military out of their holy land.
-Nobody asked you to. You've called it "douchy" multiple times though. Is that not the same as condemning him, infid...friend?
That's funny I thought I was just called a bigot for not condemning these peoples actions....
It is a douchy move, what part of his mosque would he have lost had he placed it somewhere less controversial? What part of the peacefulness of it be lost? Could it serve the community better if it was in a different area, but won't simply because he wants it to symbolize something? I also love how people claim that it is 2 blocks away from 9/11 how could it possibly be related to it, and yet the guy is building it there BECAUSE it is so close to ground zero and it is in an area destroyed by the attack. Again it is his decision, but he also has to weigh the effects of his actions.
-Don't know, don't really care. Maybe I'm old school, but to me a building is a building. Doesn't hold sentimental value, doesn't provide imagery for me.
If you believe this then you have no right to judge the effects a symbol will have.
[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Clak']Harry Reid you SOB.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/w...-rss&FEEDNAME=[/QUOTE]
Yeah I agree, he just wants to get reelected, there is no way he would swing this way otherwise.
-Question wasn't directed to me, but yes, I would say the "extremists" would not cheer for the rise of a $100M mosque near Ground Zero. Especially from a group that has been so outspoken against extremism. But then again, who gives a damn what a few whackjobs say? I usually filter out idiotic opinions by groups I don't value. Most of us do, I'd wager. Why can't we do that in this instance?
Because those whackjobs have proven to be dangerous, and you fail to realize the power of the symbolism that they could pull from this. Granted that is not this guys problem, but he should weigh the consequences of his actions, and figure out if building the mosque a few blocks away to an area not hindered by 9/11 would really hinder the peace and community support brought by it.
-It's clear you've watched TV, but if you were to actually research the topic, you would realize that the extremists, at least as headed by Osama, say their real goal is for the western military to get out of "Muslim lands", specifically Saudi Arabia. Additionally, where have Muslims tried to expand into and take over in the last 50 years? If they were so keen on expansion, wouldn't they have something to show for it? Also, infidel is such a great buzzword. It's a shame it's not really used at all by most muslims. Jews and Christians are actually called "Ahl al-kitab" -People of the Book. Muslims can marry from these people, eat their food, etc. Why would a religion call you an infidel, then allow its son to marry from your group? "Kafr" (Kafiroon in the plural) is the much more oft used term, meaning disbeliever(s).
Since we're playing theoretical games and analyzing people's thought process that we don't know, how bout this for an insane "yah, but!" You know, that huge mosque will mean that in the future the extremists won't attack there, so city of New York, embrace the mosque, you are going to safe from future attacks! Thank you Cordoba!
Sigh, I knew you were going to try correcting my on the infidel term, oh well.
Your simplistic view of what islamic extremists fight for is, well, simplistic. They fight for many reasons, not just getting our military out of their holy land.
-Nobody asked you to. You've called it "douchy" multiple times though. Is that not the same as condemning him, infid...friend?
That's funny I thought I was just called a bigot for not condemning these peoples actions....
It is a douchy move, what part of his mosque would he have lost had he placed it somewhere less controversial? What part of the peacefulness of it be lost? Could it serve the community better if it was in a different area, but won't simply because he wants it to symbolize something? I also love how people claim that it is 2 blocks away from 9/11 how could it possibly be related to it, and yet the guy is building it there BECAUSE it is so close to ground zero and it is in an area destroyed by the attack. Again it is his decision, but he also has to weigh the effects of his actions.
-Don't know, don't really care. Maybe I'm old school, but to me a building is a building. Doesn't hold sentimental value, doesn't provide imagery for me.
If you believe this then you have no right to judge the effects a symbol will have.
[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Clak']Harry Reid you SOB.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/w...-rss&FEEDNAME=[/QUOTE]
Yeah I agree, he just wants to get reelected, there is no way he would swing this way otherwise.
bread's done