The New Mosque

[Ed W]

WTH are you talking about?My whole point is that people that lost loved ones at Ground Zero have a right to be heard and, perhaps, not have their objections called "crap" by the likes of you. How many of your loved ones were murdered on 9/11? Me, none, but I can certainly empathize with their pain which is more than I can say about you.

And back off the 1st Amendment crap because its not about whether there is a right to build the mosque. Its like what your dear leader, Obama, says...it's about the "wisdom" to put it there.

You danced around in nicely, but you didn't answer the question.  Which is superior, the First Amendment or the right not to be offended?  And the "crap" is in using issues like this for political purposes, something you're more than willing to do apparently.  

[guido911]

You danced around in nicely, but you didn't answer the question.  Which is superior, the First Amendment or the right not to be offended?  And the "crap" is in using issues like this for political purposes, something you're more than willing to do apparently.  

I did answer your question. Since it is my opinion this is not a 1st Amendment issue, your question is absolutely irrelevant. Better now?  And please do not lecture me on the import of any of the Bill of Rights. As I see it, people opposing the mosque are exercising their 1st amendment rights. But when they do that, people like you crap all over that speech, calling it bigotry, discriminatory, and politically driven.

In your eyes, I guess it is completely impossible that some people that lost loved ones on 9/11 could be sincere and honestly base their opposition on the lack of sensitivity displayed by those pushing the mosque.

As to you last point, I have already stated I do not care one way or the other on the location of the mosque, just that if people are upset, they have a right to speak out. Do you disagree with that?

[heironymouspasparagus]

Guido said;
"So now those grieving the loss of their loved one are using their losses. Just wow."

Yeah... just like Ann Coulter said the 9/11 widows were bimbos and gold diggers just trying to make a buck out of the death of their loved ones!  And according to Ann, they couldn't possibly be sincere and honest - just out to make a buck!  But then she has always been of the "forces of light and good", huh?  How about that wow?

The whole discussion is definitely a political BS game.  Newt has his spew all over it, too.  This is just stirred up crap from you know who.  It truly is as simple as radicals versus mainstream.  And if that standard applies, then there are 3 churches literally within 25 feet of the Murrah location on two sides that should be taken by eminent domain and converted to something more secular.  Maybe a bar/pool hall?  Could start an annex of the Blue Dome district in Oklahoma City!

Where is the umbrage and offense at the exact same situation, shown by this mosque proposal, toward the radical Christian extremist's actions and mainstream Christianity??

The two nearby mosques are apparently overloaded.  Part of this is room for people to worship.  And the site has already been used, according to reports, for a while as a place for Muslims to come to worship (since sometime in 2009 - I'm guessing right after they bought the place?)

Here is a site that shows the locations of mosques in Manhattan.  Two are less than 2000 feet from the site already.  One about 3,000 feet.  And have been there a long time.  (This one will be 600 feet closer, at about 1400 ft.  How close is too close?  A number, please.)

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=106520383149777542574.00048d68139eb6072d4c2&ll=40.765722,-73.964081&spn=0.202302,0.445976&z=12

Personally, I wonder why we need a church every 64 feet in northeast Oklahoma when so many of them are so greatly under-utilized?  Is it really necessary to have 15 or 20 people go off and start a new church??  Personally, I like the small churches and mostly attend one in BA with under 100 people average - and have attended big ones like Asbury and Rhema with thousands.  Still a lot of wasted resources having a church for every 42 people in the county.  I submit if you cannot find a church home/family that already exists, you haven't attended enough.  And you shouldn't start your own.  Just a thought.

[nathanm]

In your eyes, I guess it is completely impossible that some people that lost loved ones on 9/11 could be sincere and honestly base their opposition on the lack of sensitivity displayed by those pushing the mosque.

Here I go speaking for someone else again, but I think you've misinterpreted Ed's position (and mine). They can be honestly offended. They can also fail to understand that the people who crashed airplanes into the WTC buildings were no more representative of Muslims than Eric Rudolph or Tim McVeigh.

Of course, talking about the 9/11 families is a complete straw man, given that there has been opposition to mosques and Muslim community centers being built in other cities, including those 3,000 miles away.

Personally, I'm offended by the Catholic Church, but I don't think that gives me the right to tell them where they may or may not build a church.

[nathanm]

So now those grieving the loss of their loved one are using their losses. Just wow.

It's been nearly 10 years. If they're still grieving, they need psychological help. Yes, that's insensitive, but it's also the truth.

[guido911]

Guido said;
"So now those grieving the loss of their loved one are using their losses. Just wow."

Yeah... just like Ann Coulter said the 9/11 widows were bimbos and gold diggers just trying to make a buck out of the death of their loved ones!  And according to Ann, they couldn't possibly be sincere and honest - just out to make a buck!  But then she has always been of the "forces of light and good", huh?  How about that wow?

So you are likening those in this forum that accuse those grieving family members that are voicing opposition to the mosque to Ann Coulter?  

[guido911]

Here I go speaking for someone else again, but I think you've misinterpreted Ed's position (and mine). They can be honestly offended. They can also fail to understand that the people who crashed airplanes into the WTC buildings were no more representative of Muslims than Eric Rudolph or Tim McVeigh.

I do not recall this sort of celebration by Christians after the Murrah bombing?

Perhaps you could get me a link.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Nathan, for the most part, you have the RWRE pegged right on, but with this comment, you just showed how young you are.  And that you have not yet lost a close family member.  1 year.  10 years. 40 years.  For some things, those are just numbers and the grief never strays far away.  (Like losing a kid - not me, but several close friends/family.)  And "psychological help" isn't a "solution".

The only real consolation is the acceptance of the realization that no matter how long one lives on after the event, it is still just a temporary separation, until you will get to see them again.

[heironymouspasparagus]

No.  Not at all.
It's English and that meaning is nowhere near what was written.

[nathanm]

I do not recall this sort of celebration by Christians after the Murrah bombing?

There you go again, ascribing the reactions of a few to the whole. By that standard, all Catholics are pedophiles.

[nathanm]

Nathan, for the most part, you have the RWRE pegged right on, but with this comment, you just showed how young you are.  And that you have not yet lost a close family member.

Actually, I have. Nearly all of them, in fact. Bad stock, I guess. But yes, I am only 30.

There's a difference between being sad for one's loss and actively grieving and attempting to use that grief to block people from exercising their rights.

I say again, it's been nine years, so they should be perfectly capable of keeping their grief from overwhelming their intellect.

That said, they at least have a good excuse. The wingers who are using this for political gain have no such excuse, and make me want to puke.

[heironymouspasparagus]

And there were plenty of "Christians"  (Christianists??  Radical extremists with no clue about Jesus, or true Christianity) celebrating the Murrah bombing.  (Think Elohim City...)
And plenty going after Muslims after 9/11 as well as Siks (California beating to death.)

I bet most here have seen the t-shirt that says;  "Kill 'em All.  Let God sort 'em out!!" 
Yeah, that's the kind.


Nathan, I agree greatly with your revised comment - spot on.

[guido911]

There you go again, ascribing the reactions of a few to the whole. By that standard, all Catholics are pedophiles.

First, you brought up the weak Murrah analogy in an effort to argue the existence of extremists on all sides. What happens when you get called on it, why, change the subject of course.

[nathanm]

First, you brought up the weak Murrah analogy in an effort to argue the existence of extremists on all sides. What happens when you get called on it, why, change the subject of course.

It's not changing the subject at all. It's pointing out that your standard is so low that it's meaningless.

There were a lot of militia nutters in Fort Smith around the time of the Murrah bombing. While they weren't openly celebrating in the streets, they were pretty happy with the "success."

Pat Robertson and James Dobson have spoken in favor of bombing abortion clinics.

The nutters are nutters and will be nutters. You can't paint an entire religion with the actions of a few. You can't call Muslims as a whole violent without confronting Christianity's history of violence and misdeeds. Remember the Spanish Inquisition? How about the Troubles, if you'd like a more recent example?

[guido911]

Here is an interesting article (imho) on the subject. Obama weighing in on this issue is when it became really politicized.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/08/16/2010-08-16_families_not_mike__bam_should_have_the_final_say.html