The New Mosque

[cannon_fodder]

A ton of wasted effort, space, and air time on this issue.

1) some people want to block all things islamic.

2) many other people think the mosque is offensive in the proposed location.

3) still others fear it will be used to promote violence.

The first group generally lack tolerence or the ability to differentiate radicals from the rest of the 1+ billion muslims.  the second groups objections are noted, but there is no right not to be offended so it doesn't trump religious freedom. The third group has theories, but you can't stop people from building a temple, church or mosque because you fear it might someday conspire to break a law.

You can hate islam if you want.  You can be offended.  And you can live in fear.  But those are not valid reason to legally prevent this place of worship.  Objections noted, let's move on.

[guido911]

A ton of wasted effort, space, and air time on this issue.

1) some people want to block all things islamic.

2) many other people think the mosque is offensive in the proposed location.

3) still others fear it will be used to promote violence.

The first group generally lack tolerence or the ability to differentiate radicals from the rest of the 1+ billion muslims.  the second groups objections are noted, but there is no right not to be offended so it doesn't trump religious freedom. The third group has theories, but you can't stop people from building a temple, church or mosque because you fear it might someday conspire to break a law.

You can hate islam if you want.  You can be offended.  And you can live in fear.  But those are not valid reason to legally prevent this place of worship.  Objections noted, let's move on.

Translation:  Those that lost loved ones 2 blocks from the proposed location, and those who sympathize with them, screw that whole "free speech" rights contained in the very amendment as the "religious freedom" provision. Seriously CF, never thought you would run to the straw man on this.

[Hoss]

Translation:  Those that lost loved ones 2 blocks from the proposed location, and those who sympathize with them, screw that whole "free speech" rights contained in the very amendment as the "religious freedom" provision. Seriously CF, never thought you would run to the straw man on this.

Never thought so many of you intelligent right-wingers would be led to the trough on this one by Newt...this should really be a non-issue, but for the religious right, who essentially would LOVE to see the US turned into a Christian theocracy, they love leading their sheep to the pasture.



Praise the Lord.

PS:  Doesn't mean I don't sympathize with those that lost loved ones or friends on 9/11.  I do absolutely.  It means that no matter what happens, we shouldn't be using 9/11 to trample on other people's freedoms.

[heironymouspasparagus]

The ideals are not important in this discussion.  It is more about the ideology.

Kind of like American life has always been.


Couldn't get the Indian video to play, but I bet the Murdochians would dismiss out of hand regardless.

[cannon_fodder]

Who is my strawman?  The 1st amendment?  You, and everyone else that wants to, can exercise your freedom of speech to stop construction of a house of worship.  I don't think anyone has argued that you can't bluster about it all you want, merely that you shouldn't and/or that it just doesn't really matter.

Guido, it isn't hard:  there is no legal standing to stop construction of the mosque.  Period.  Done. Q.E.D.

Be as angry as you want.  The widows and orphans of 911 can be as offended a they want.  None of it matters.  Religious freedom trumps all the anger and offended people in the world.

Isn't that great?

/edit
It occurs to be you didn't address any merits of my argument and I was forced to repeat myself.  The argument is:  I'm offended by their place of worship so they shouldn't build it.  Very simple answer.

[nathanm]

What I find most amusing is that the folks who go on about those who aren't supporters of our various foreign wars causing harm to our war efforts are doing more with this one issue to harm our war efforts than any of the anti-war lefties. They're giving aid and comfort to those who are attempting to turn the entire Muslim world against us.

In no way am I saying people shouldn't have the right to be against this community center, I'm just saying the inflamed rhetoric can be twisted to show that we're all anti-Muslim bigots. Especially the BS about how the community center might provide a terrorist safe haven and all the other crap the xenophobic originators of this controversy have been saying.

You have to remember that this all started with two right wing nutjobs who really do hate Muslims and think they're trying to take over the world. That spilled over into the crap Joe Scarborough was condemning this morning.

[heironymouspasparagus]

It isn't about freedom of religion, either.  Just ask any Native American or a Mormon - see if they are free to worship the way they choose.

What we started as was an attempt to escape religious persecution of a particular group in the old countries and then bring that group here and establish their version of religious persecution - and persecute anyone who didn't agree with them.  Still goes to a lack of knowing the history....

Never about freedom of religion, until the "reactionary" courts decided to rule that the glowing words actually should mean what they say...what a novel idea!!  Realization of the ideal!!

[guido911]

Who is my strawman?  The 1st amendment?  You, and everyone else that wants to, can exercise your freedom of speech to stop construction of a house of worship.  I don't think anyone has argued that you can't bluster about it all you want, merely that you shouldn't and/or that it just doesn't really matter.

Guido, it isn't hard:  there is no legal standing to stop construction of the mosque.  Period.  Done. Q.E.D.

Be as angry as you want.  The widows and orphans of 911 can be as offended a they want.  None of it matters.  Religious freedom trumps all the anger and offended people in the world.

Isn't that great?

/edit
It occurs to be you didn't address any merits of my argument and I was forced to repeat myself.  The argument is:  I'm offended by their place of worship so they shouldn't build it.  Very simple answer.

Merits of what argument?  Oh, the same stuff repeated over and over by others in this thread or the talking points by left talking heads? Sorry CF, that's not argument. That's laziness. As for "legal standing"? Please. You forgot I guess that I am also a lawyer and I will not be lectured by you about the "standing" of people speaking out and who simply want the mosque moved a bit away from ground zero.

As for the straw man, if you cannot see that this issue is not about freedom of religion but rather that the mosque supporters showing a tiny bit of respect for the sensitivity of the 9/11 victims, I feel for you. Quite frankly, just as you can say that some want to "block all things islamic" or that that doofus nate can call those wanting the mosque moved (which is what they want by the way) "xenophobic", I guess I can call you and he "anti 9/11 victim".

[nathanm]

guido, perhaps you should stop attributing bad motives to people when you don't know what's actually going through their head...

http://nymag.com/news/features/67635/

[heironymouspasparagus]

I guess I am wondering how that strip joint one block over shows its respect to the sensitivity of 9/11 victims.  Red, white and blue pasties, maybe??

[guido911]

guido, perhaps you should stop attributing bad motives to people when you don't know what's actually going through their head...

http://nymag.com/news/features/67635/

Are you still talking? Man you are a glutton.

[we vs us]

Are you still talking? Man you are a glutton.

Chill out, dude. 

[Townsend]

who simply want the mosque moved a bit away from ground zero.

How far is "a bit"?

another block?  block and a half?  Two blocks?  A mile?  across the river in New Jersey?

How far?

[nathanm]

Are you still talking? Man you are a glutton.

Interesting you would ask that question when you are doing the same. I didn't realize you were the only one allowed to participate in the conversation.

[Conan71]

Even Muslims are saying Islam demands sensitivity (Oh and I get that these are OKC Muslims so Nathan, et al's arguments still trump this groups  ):

http://www.news9.com/global/story.asp?s=13032103

" An Oklahoma City Muslim group said the religious freedom issue has already been settled, but said sensitivity is needed over whether to build a Mosque near Ground Zero.

The American Muslim Association of Oklahoma took out a full page ad in Monday's "Oklahoman." It's a call to move the project to a mutually agreeable site. Spokesman Saleem Nizami said it's time for moderate Muslims to speak out. He said the teachings of Islam demand sensitivity.

"It has become an iconic date 9/11 and the twin towers, so there is something related to that and people are becoming emotional. It is our duty to make sure we pacify and move away," said Nizami.

Despite good intentions and the legal right to build on that spot, the sensitivity teachings of Islam demand a new location.

"We've got to take into consideration the sentiments of the people. What difference does it make if it is there or five miles from there? It's not going to make any difference," Nizami said. "If the purpose was to get Islam and the West relations going together, this has brought more division actually."

And Nizami said the reason for that division is extremism on both sides.

"It's time that people who are practical stood up. It was due a long time ago," the American Muslim Association of Oklahoma spokesman said.

"With this ad I hope people realize that yes, there are people, who are Muslim, and who are just like anybody else. And who are solid 100 percent U.S. citizens, defending the Constitution, living by the rule of law. They want to make their lives here, they want to be part of this whole country," Nizami said"