The New Mosque

[nathanm]

So a majority of people oppose the location for this mosque (in re: wevus' CNN poll) and they are all nutters?

No, the nutters who made it an issue by lying about the location and nature of the community center has made it difficult or impossible for people who don't know the details to have an informed opinion on the subject.

People who buy into the BS peddled by the nutjobs aren't nutjobs themselves. They're victims.

And this wins the thread:

But in this case, the majority opinion doesn't -- or shouldn't -- matter.  It's precisely why we have things such things enshrined in the constitution, to protect the minority from the whims of the majority.

[dbacks fan]

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=45-47+Park+Place+Manhattan,+NY&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.861942,56.337891&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=47+Park+Pl,+New+York,+10007&ll=40.718607,-74.01118&spn=0,0.013754&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.713605,-74.009989&panoid=5cdEHBQxsIWw2Xv3B1wl1A&cbp=12,333.99,,0,-11.71

[guido911]

No, the nutters who made it an issue by lying about the location and nature of the community center has made it difficult or impossible for people who don't know the details to have an informed opinion on the subject.

People who buy into the BS peddled by the nutjobs aren't nutjobs themselves. They're victims.

And this wins the thread:

Obama is guess is a "nutter" because he called it a mosque as well.

"I was not commenting, and I will not comment, on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there," Mr. Obama said. "I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about."

He!!, even Obama raises the issue of the "wisdom" of mosque's location.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/us/politics/15mosque.html?src=mv

[nathanm]

It just goes to show the effectiveness of the disinformation campaign. The Petronas Towers in Malaysia have some prayer rooms, but that doesn't make the whole thing a mosque any more than a hospital having a chapel makes it a church.

[Gaspar]

You gotta love Gov. Chris Christie's stance on the subject.  I wish President Obama had just 1/10 the cajonies Christie has.

"Given my last position, that I was the first U.S attorney post 9/11 in New Jersey, I understand acutely the pain and sorrow and upset of the family members who lost loved ones that day at the hands of radical Muslim extremists," said Christie at a bill-signing ceremony. "And their sensitivities and concerns have to be taken into account. Just because it's nearly nine years later, those sensitivities cannot and should not be ignored."

"We cannot paint all of Islam with that brush. ...We have to bring people together. And what offends me the most about all this is that it's being used as a political football by both parties. And what disturbs me about the president's remarks is that he is now using it as a political football as well. I think the president of the United States should rise above that."

[swake]

You gotta love Gov. Chris Christie's stance on the subject.  I wish President Obama had just 1/10 the cajonies Christie has.

"Given my last position, that I was the first U.S attorney post 9/11 in New Jersey, I understand acutely the pain and sorrow and upset of the family members who lost loved ones that day at the hands of radical Muslim extremists," said Christie at a bill-signing ceremony. "And their sensitivities and concerns have to be taken into account. Just because it's nearly nine years later, those sensitivities cannot and should not be ignored."

"We cannot paint all of Islam with that brush. ...We have to bring people together. And what offends me the most about all this is that it's being used as a political football by both parties. And what disturbs me about the president's remarks is that he is now using it as a political football as well. I think the president of the United States should rise above that."

Yes, it certainly does take cajonies to attack Obama's stand while not taking one of your own.

[Gaspar]

Yes, it certainly does take cajonies to attack Obama's stand while not taking one of your own.

LOL, someone asked him that very question.  His response:

"I don't believe that it would be responsible of me to get involved and comment on this any further because it just put me in the same political arena as all of them."

He should have then said "Christie out!" and walked off.

[nathanm]

Obama's statement wasn't in the least bit political. He correctly stated that they have the right to build there and said he would not speak on the subject of whether or not it was a good idea. How more apolitical could he have been?

[Gaspar]

Looks like they may move it now.  NY is offering state land in exchange.

[Gaspar]

Somthing of an issue has emerged from this "non-issue" that everyone has gotten in a huff about.

Mr. Rauf is scheduled to go to Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Qatar, the State Department is paying for his trip and they clasify it as "Muslem Outreach."

Mr. Rauf will be attending a series of fundraisers to raise money for the construction of this Mosque and the renovation of other Mosques.  The State Department defends the five-country tour saying that Mr. Rauf is "a distinguished Muslim cleric."  So what?

If the state department were to send Billy Grahm Jr. on a tour of Europe and Rome on the tax payer's dime to raise money to build a new church in LA, I have a feeling some people would protest.  I think the State financing of fundraising efforts for religious organizations clearly violates the separation of Church and State.  Am I wrong?

Apparently this is standard operating procedure.  The Kizimkazi Mosque in Tanzinia was renovated with the aid of US taxpayer money, as was the Amr Ebn El Aas Mosque in Cairo.  They classified it as "historic preservation" even though these are active religious structures. Don't we have some domestic historic preservation that we could better spend MY money on?

Why are we involving ourselves in the finance of religious organizations?  If these were Christian or Jewish religious structures financed by tax dollars I think there would be some outrage. 

How about sending missionaries overseas on the government dime and calling it "Christian Outreach?"  Anyone object?

I have no problem with Mr. Rauf fundraising for his Mosque.  I however do not wish to pay for it.

[nathanm]

Honestly, I'm not quite sure how I feel about that. On the one hand, we have a dire need to build bridges (figuratively) to the Muslim world. On the other hand, financing a fundraising trip may be going too far.

I still don't have a problem helping religious institutions preserve their places of worship when there is historical interest involved. I would be surprised if we've never done something similar for historically significant houses of worship of other faiths.

Both of those things are far less shady than the pastor who took CDBG funds to build a youth center in North Tulsa, then borrowed against the youth center to build himself a new church, leaving the city to repay the misused grant funds.

[nathanm]

Oh, and just for a little lolglennbeck action:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-16-2010/mosque-erade

[Conan71]

Don't know how you feel about that? If it were a "nutter" preacher I doubt your response would be so flaccid.

[Townsend]

If the state department were to send Billy Grahm Jr. on a tour of Europe and Rome on the tax payer's dime to raise money to build a new church in LA, I have a feeling some people would protest.  


Why are we involving ourselves in the finance of religious organizations?  If these were Christian or Jewish religious structures financed by tax dollars I think there would be some outrage.  

How about sending missionaries overseas on the government dime and calling it "Christian Outreach?"  Anyone object?

Don't know how you feel about that? If it were a "nutter" preacher I doubt your response would be so flaccid

You and Conan have a point.

There would be outrage...it'd be the groups of other people that would object.  "What?  It's not for my religion?  I object."

[nathanm]

Don't know how you feel about that? If it were a "nutter" preacher I doubt your response would be so flaccid.

I think I explained the reasoning behind my statement. We aren't in what half our country thinks of as a holy war with Christianity or Buddhism or whatever. I think there's an argument that could be made that there are legitimate secular foreign policy objectives involved in sending him around the world. I haven't been able to find a clear account of what is actually happening.

Excuse me if I have a hard time swallowing the nutosphere's (oh portmanteau, I how I love thee) take without some corroborating evidence other than the media's reports on the nutosphere's claims, given that they so recently succeeded in completely obfuscating the truth on the community center/mosque issue.

Edited to add: And now I find claims that Rauf was sent overseas on the State Department dime twice in the Bush Administration. And reading further..it's all a pack of lies about the fundraising..to wit:

The department is sponsoring Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's visit to Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, where he will discuss Muslim life in America and promote religious tolerance, spokesman P.J. Crowley said. He said the imam had been on two similar trips and that plans for the upcoming tour predated the mosque controversy.

"We have a long-term relationship with him," Crowley told reporters, noting that Rauf had visited Bahrain, Morocco, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar in 2007 and went to Egypt last January as part of an exchange program run by the State Department's Office of International Information Programs.

"His work on tolerance and religious diversity is well-known and he brings a moderate perspective to foreign audiences on what it's like to be a practicing Muslim in the United States," Crowley said.

Rauf will not be allowed to raise funds for the proposed center during the trip, Crowley said.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ijPxKmwGVxOVZvDFCYSiBLyPIaJAD9HGVFS81

Ahh, manufactured controversy in the morning. I love it! (not really, I'm tired of the lying)