On August 31 2010 03:53 DamnCats wrote:For a bunch of retards so obsessed with the constitution you'd think all these folks who are against it would be the first ones to say that is their RIGHT to build it there. But hey, hypocrisy isn't really anything new to them, so why start caring about it now.
Out of all the people against this mosque, I haven't seen a single one saying they don't have the RIGHT to build it there. They're merely saying it's in extremely poor taste and that they shouldn't do it.
Just like the Phelps people have the RIGHT to picket soldiers' funerals with signs saying "thank god for dead soldiers". And I have the right to think they're assholes for it and wish they wouldn't do it.
That's all people are saying.
That's reasonable. However, when you ask these same people how far away is good enough, the vast majority have no idea.
You can't compare all Muslims to the members of Fred Phelps' church though.
Building an Al Qaeda center would be offensive. Building a mosque is only offensive of you equate all of Islam with the actions of 19 Islamic extremists.
All 19 hijackers were also men. Is it offensive to allow men to build something within 2 blocks of ground zero?
Thinking they are assholes and discriminating against them because of enormous generalizations are completely different things, though.
I mean I wish Islam and Christianity would just go away forever, but while they are here and they're protected by our sweet freedom we have in America, you cannot argue against building this mosque without looking like a total hypocritical asshole too.
From a CNN interview by Don Lemon with Eboo Patel, Executive Director of the Interfaith Youth Corps.
Lemon: Don't you think it's a bit different considering what happened on 9/11? And the people have said there's a need for it in Lower Manhattan, so that's why it's being built there. What about 10, 20 blocks . . . Midtown Manhattan, considering the circumstances behind this? That's not understandable?
Patel: In America, we don't tell people based on their race or religion or ethnicity that they are free in this place, but not in that place --
Lemon: [interrupting] I understand that, but there's always context, Mr. Patel . . . this is an extraordinary circumstance. You understand that this is very heated. Many people lost their loved ones on 9/11 --
Patel: Including Muslim Americans who lost their loved ones. . . .
Lemon: Consider the context here. That's what I'm talking about.
Patel: I have to tell you that this seems a little like telling black people 50 years ago: you can sit anywhere on the bus you like - just not in the front.
Lemon: I think that's apples and oranges - I don't think that black people were behind a Terrorist plot to kill people and drive planes into a building. That's a completely different circumstance.
Patel: And American Muslims were not behind the terrorist plot either.
So explain why it's assholish to build a mosque 2 blocks from ground zero, but not assholish to build a men's center/club 2 blocks from ground zero, or to build a restaurant that serves Saudi food 2 blocks from GZ. (hypothetically)
Or for that matter, why is it not assholish to build a church in towns where the KKK was active?
On August 31 2010 06:26 Signet wrote: So explain why it's assholish to build a mosque 2 blocks from ground zero, but not assholish to build a men's center/club 2 blocks from ground zero, or to build a restaurant that serves Saudi food 2 blocks from GZ. (hypothetically)
Or for that matter, why is it not assholish to build a church in towns where the KKK was active?
Anyone who thinks its offensive, for lack of a better term is an idiot,It's private property there is nothing you can do about it, also that means you blame every muslim for the acts of a small group. So your saying you hate very muslim? What if they built a YMCA there would that be offensive. Probablly not, even though it was all men that did it. Does that mean we should hate all men.
Lemon: Don't you think it's a bit different considering what happened on 9/11? And the people have said there's a need for it in Lower Manhattan, so that's why it's being built there. What about 10, 20 blocks . . . Midtown Manhattan, considering the circumstances behind this? That's not understandable?
Patel: In America, we don't tell people based on their race or religion or ethnicity that they are free in this place, but not in that place --
Lemon: [interrupting] I understand that, but there's always context, Mr. Patel . . . this is an extraordinary circumstance. You understand that this is very heated. Many people lost their loved ones on 9/11 --
Patel: Including Muslim Americans who lost their loved ones. . . .
Lemon: Consider the context here. That's what I'm talking about.
Patel: I have to tell you that this seems a little like telling black people 50 years ago: you can sit anywhere on the bus you like - just not in the front.
Lemon: I think that's apples and oranges - I don't think that black people were behind a Terrorist plot to kill people and drive planes into a building. That's a completely different circumstance.
Patel: And American Muslims were not behind the terrorist plot either.
On August 31 2010 03:53 DamnCats wrote:For a bunch of retards so obsessed with the constitution you'd think all these folks who are against it would be the first ones to say that is their RIGHT to build it there. But hey, hypocrisy isn't really anything new to them, so why start caring about it now.
Out of all the people against this mosque, I haven't seen a single one saying they don't have the RIGHT to build it there. They're merely saying it's in extremely poor taste and that they shouldn't do it.
Just like the Phelps people have the RIGHT to picket soldiers' funerals with signs saying "thank god for dead soldiers". And I have the right to think they're assholes for it and wish they wouldn't do it.
That's all people are saying.
Fred Phelps is an entirely different situation - it's really just a scam to bait attacks and make profits off lawsuits.
Also, it's especially different because they aren't acting in accordance to the spirit of the law along with the literal text of it. The goals of freedom of religion are pretty apparent in that of the islamic community center. Freedom of speech is meant to facilitate the autonomy of political perspectives and discourse in a democratic society. Signs with "God hates fags" is not at all meeting this vision of the spirit of the law.
Also, @ the post saying the Taliban quotation doesn't mean that terrorists view prevention of construction as a victory - um, it's a basic connection of dots. They're gaining recruits, funding, and further legitimizing their radicalism. Sounds like a victory for them to me.
On August 29 2010 10:59 SweetNJoshSauce wrote: Obviously they have a right to build there. But why there? I mean, really? This is obviously not going to increase tolerance or "build bridges." Anyone that says it will is completely clueless and has no sense of reality.
It is obviously a slap in the face move but this is America so what do you expect?
And for all those about to flame me: If I had it my way there would be no Churches or Mosques period.
It never really started off as offensive though. As several posts earlier pointed out, people on the right were initially fine with the mosque until just recently when it suddenly became insensitive and provocative for no real reason.
And to be honest, a lot of the issue is heavily blown out of proportion. Even though I say mosque, in reality it's just a community center that contains a mosque that's built several blocks away from the towers. It's really no different from many other public buildings that contain rooms dedicated to prayer for people from other cultures. The only reason it became an issue now is because people on the far right needed something to complain about. And let's be honest, the only people who are really pissed off are those that already hate muslims anyway. They'll hate muslims no matter what, so there's really no point in worrying about appeasing them because they'll never be satisfied.
You're right that the media didn't portray it as offensive to begin, but I found it offensive to begin with. And yes, its a "community center", but it has a mosque in it, so to me its just a mosque. Same goes for Christian community centers and their "youth groups": Just another name for a Church.
I stand by my point though: Why there? How would you not see this hatred coming? I have no sympathy for the Muslims leading this project because all of this hatred and protest would be avoided if they used even the slightest bit of common sense and built it further from ground zero. Not everyone in America has forgotten about 9/11(although most have...) so this rage is justified.
For the people that reply:You cant just group all of of Islam into the radical Islam category, your right. Just like you cant group every gun owner into a serial killing maniac. But it would still be incredibly distasteful and rude to build a 13 story Gun community center right next to Columbine would it not?
Why not there?
It's their right to do so. A mosque doesnt symbolize Terrorism unless you believe islam = terrorism. Nevermind the fact that it isn't being built by Ground Zero...more along the lines of A couple blocks away. What's "far enough" for you exactly? Hell it won't even look like a mosque. Just a regular building in the swarm of other buildings in New York
This sort of ridiculous intolerance just gives the Taliban more support. If you're offended, that's frankly your problem. Luckily most of our laws in the US aren't built around what offends people.
Why not there? Are you kidding me? You're literally proving my point about most Americans already forgetting about 9/11 if I have to remind you that two blocks away 2000 Americans died because some Muslims killed in the name of Islam.
I know what your argument to this is: But those Muslims were radical Al Queada members!(I would agree btw). The problem is, who are we to call Al Queada radical? Have you read the verses they cite from the Koran to justify their actions? Those versus exist believe it or not.
You and I would consider most of the Muslims that live in America to be moderate: They live by our laws, are contributing members of our society, and are generally good people. They cite their own verses to justify their way of life, and those verse are also in the Koran. Guess what? Al Queada considers these Muslims to be radical, and wrong.
My point: Islam is a religion that, like Christianity, is very broad and open to massive amounts of interpretation. I don't think Islam=terrorism. But I do think Islam=threat. And yes, i believe Christianity=threat as well. The only reason I take a more militant stance towards Islam is because whats the worst group of Christians going to do to me in this modern age? Annoy me with their stupidity probably. When it comes to Islam its obviously a whole lot worse(See: NICHOLAS BERG).
I'll be the first to admit it: I am intolerant of religion. But you, and so many other Americans are ignorant to reality.
Instead of using the smallest amount of common sense to realize that building a Muslim community center as close as possible to ground zero is a dick move you throw around the word "right"(as in right to build it there) like its the only thing that matters. It reminds me of George Carlin's greatest piece: .
I am raging so hard right now all these fucking idiots (sorry mods temp ban me if you want but I can't handle it) have no idea about anything there blaming all muslims for the acts of a few, are you fucking kidding me, really? you blame all muslims for 9/11 give your fucking head a shake. Ever realize muslims were killed in 9/11 aswell have you no concept of reality to be so ignorant to blame an entire religion for the acts of a few. Is everyone that fucking ignorant or just stupid? It makes me so sad that humanity stil puts up dividers on people based on race and religion, you can deny it all you want but if youre against the mosque essentially you blame all muslims for 9/11. an entire culture based on a few extremist, tell me do you think all catholics are pedofiles? no. Do you blame all catholics for the acts of a corrupted catholics that raped little boys? no you don't. So do not ever blame a religion for the acts of PEOPLE thats what they are people not just "MUSLIMS" you go up to any muslim you know and ask them what they thought of 9/11 I gaurantee you that absolutely none will say "fuck yeah, death to america" do you people have any idea the absolute ignorance you put out.
Sorry mods for the language but please understand that this is a very passionate issue for me and I can't deal with the absolute ignorance people display.
My point: Islam is a religion that, like Christianity, is very broad and open to massive amounts of interpretation. I don't think Islam=terrorism. But I do think Islam=threat. And yes, i believe Christianity=threat as well.
In other words you view people with differences then your own as a threat.
lool.
It always amuses me to no end when Atheists (talking as an Atheist) basically become a mirror of those they hate, parroting demagogues and using their viewpoints to justify marginalizing another human being.
The exact statement can be said, and has been said, about Atheism itself when Atheism has been a distabalizing force in the world. Ministers in the US parroted your exact same argument through the Bolshevik Revolution, Throughout the ensuing Red Scare, and well up into the 80s.
The violence and conflict in the Middle East is not about Islam. It is about Power and Money, and the beliefs cherished by the people are just another tool used to achieve that mean. "Atheism" isn't intrinsically less susceptible to intolerance or stupidity, as you are currently demonstrating, or less susceptible to manipulation by those whom have an agenda, as has been demonstrated -repeatedly- throughout history.
On August 29 2010 10:59 SweetNJoshSauce wrote: Obviously they have a right to build there. But why there? I mean, really? This is obviously not going to increase tolerance or "build bridges." Anyone that says it will is completely clueless and has no sense of reality.
It is obviously a slap in the face move but this is America so what do you expect?
And for all those about to flame me: If I had it my way there would be no Churches or Mosques period.
It never really started off as offensive though. As several posts earlier pointed out, people on the right were initially fine with the mosque until just recently when it suddenly became insensitive and provocative for no real reason.
And to be honest, a lot of the issue is heavily blown out of proportion. Even though I say mosque, in reality it's just a community center that contains a mosque that's built several blocks away from the towers. It's really no different from many other public buildings that contain rooms dedicated to prayer for people from other cultures. The only reason it became an issue now is because people on the far right needed something to complain about. And let's be honest, the only people who are really pissed off are those that already hate muslims anyway. They'll hate muslims no matter what, so there's really no point in worrying about appeasing them because they'll never be satisfied.
You're right that the media didn't portray it as offensive to begin, but I found it offensive to begin with. And yes, its a "community center", but it has a mosque in it, so to me its just a mosque. Same goes for Christian community centers and their "youth groups": Just another name for a Church.
I stand by my point though: Why there? How would you not see this hatred coming? I have no sympathy for the Muslims leading this project because all of this hatred and protest would be avoided if they used even the slightest bit of common sense and built it further from ground zero. Not everyone in America has forgotten about 9/11(although most have...) so this rage is justified.
For the people that reply:You cant just group all of of Islam into the radical Islam category, your right. Just like you cant group every gun owner into a serial killing maniac. But it would still be incredibly distasteful and rude to build a 13 story Gun community center right next to Columbine would it not?
Why not there?
It's their right to do so. A mosque doesnt symbolize Terrorism unless you believe islam = terrorism. Nevermind the fact that it isn't being built by Ground Zero...more along the lines of A couple blocks away. What's "far enough" for you exactly? Hell it won't even look like a mosque. Just a regular building in the swarm of other buildings in New York
This sort of ridiculous intolerance just gives the Taliban more support. If you're offended, that's frankly your problem. Luckily most of our laws in the US aren't built around what offends people.
Why not there? Are you kidding me? You're literally proving my point about most Americans already forgetting about 9/11 if I have to remind you that two blocks away 2000 Americans died because some Muslims killed in the name of Islam.
I know what your argument to this is: But those Muslims were radical Al Queada members!(I would agree btw). The problem is, who are we to call Al Queada radical? Have you read the verses they cite from the Koran to justify their actions? Those versus exist believe it or not.
You and I would consider most of the Muslims that live in America to be moderate: They live by our laws, are contributing members of our society, and are generally good people. They cite their own verses to justify their way of life, and those verse are also in the Koran. Guess what? Al Queada considers these Muslims to be radical, and wrong.
My point: Islam is a religion that, like Christianity, is very broad and open to massive amounts of interpretation. I don't think Islam=terrorism. But I do think Islam=threat. And yes, i believe Christianity=threat as well. The only reason I take a more militant stance towards Islam is because whats the worst group of Christians going to do to me in this modern age? Annoy me with their stupidity probably. When it comes to Islam its obviously a whole lot worse(See: NICHOLAS BERG).
I'll be the first to admit it: I am intolerant of religion. But you, and so many other Americans are ignorant to reality.
Instead of using the smallest amount of common sense to realize that building a Muslim community center as close as possible to ground zero is a dick move you throw around the word "right"(as in right to build it there) like its the only thing that matters. It reminds me of George Carlin's greatest piece: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4F1Lq1uFcAE .
Umm, we call Al Queada radical because they fucking BLOW THINGS UP. Normal people do not do this.
By the way, do you know how huge two city blocks is in new york? Apparently you don't, or you'd realize all these complaints are completely silly.
Also, to you saying everyone forgot about 9/11 because they disagree with you, be quiet, thats a ridiculous statement and you know it. We didn't forget about it, we remember it very well. We also know we as americans shouldn't punish a religion because there are some idiots that exist that happen to follow it as well.
On August 31 2010 15:57 Half wrote: It always amuses me to no end when Atheists (talking as an Atheist) basically become a mirror of those they hate, parroting demagogues and using their viewpoints to justify marginalizing another human being.
Atheistic intolerance is still intolerance. International communism is dogmatically atheistic and look those countries turned out. Atheism doesn't necessary make the world better place. Often they just find a secular dogma to take the place of religion, and those secular dogmas justify mass murder just as well if not more effectively than religion.
My point: Islam is a religion that, like Christianity, is very broad and open to massive amounts of interpretation. I don't think Islam=terrorism. But I do think Islam=threat. And yes, i believe Christianity=threat as well.
In other words you view people with differences then your own as a threat.
lool.
It always amuses me to no end when Atheists (talking as an Atheist) basically become a mirror of those they hate, parroting demagogues and using their viewpoints to justify marginalizing another human being.
The exact statement can be said, and has been said, about Atheism itself when Atheism has been a distabalizing force in the world. Ministers in the US parroted your exact same argument through the Bolshevik Revolution, Throughout the ensuing Red Scare, and well up into the 80s.
The violence and conflict in the Middle East is not about Islam. It is about Power and Money, and the beliefs cherished by the people are just another tool used to achieve that mean. "Atheism" isn't intrinsically less susceptible to intolerance or stupidity, as you are currently demonstrating, or less susceptible to manipulation by those whom have an agenda, as has been demonstrated -repeatedly- throughout history.
Of course Atheists can be as much of a threat as anyone else, I never denied that. But right now, how many violent atheist movements are there? I'm not saying we take away the Muslims right to build there, I'm just saying its an asshole move to build there, and the fact that they say its to "build bridges and promote tolerance" is bullshit because that's obviously not going to happen.
Slago: Is there scripture in the Bible that endorses pedophiles? I haven't checked to be honest but I don't remember the priests backing up their actions with any scripture. You obviously did not read my post because I state that there are perfectly fine Muslims in this country. I'm not calling every Muslim a terrorist I'm calling Islam a threat. I could give the nicest man in the world a nuclear bomb, but he would still be a threat. Does the Koran not endorse the killing of infidels? Obviously its open to interpretation which is why we have radical groups but the fact remains that its still in their holy scripture. And obviously most Muslims in this country do not interpret the Koran literally and kill every non believer.
Pann: You and I consider them radical because they blow things up, but that's just one way of eliminating the infidel, which their holy scripture entitles them to do. In other words, its not radical for them.
I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just saying that its rude of them to build that close(yes I know the distance between blocks in New York) because that's as close as they COULD build it. Their trying to get a reaction and its working. And if their goal is to really build bridges then they are going to totally fail. If they want to build it there, fine.
My point: Islam is a religion that, like Christianity, is very broad and open to massive amounts of interpretation. I don't think Islam=terrorism. But I do think Islam=threat. And yes, i believe Christianity=threat as well.
In other words you view people with differences then your own as a threat.
lool.
It always amuses me to no end when Atheists (talking as an Atheist) basically become a mirror of those they hate, parroting demagogues and using their viewpoints to justify marginalizing another human being.
The exact statement can be said, and has been said, about Atheism itself when Atheism has been a distabalizing force in the world. Ministers in the US parroted your exact same argument through the Bolshevik Revolution, Throughout the ensuing Red Scare, and well up into the 80s.
The violence and conflict in the Middle East is not about Islam. It is about Power and Money, and the beliefs cherished by the people are just another tool used to achieve that mean. "Atheism" isn't intrinsically less susceptible to intolerance or stupidity, as you are currently demonstrating, or less susceptible to manipulation by those whom have an agenda, as has been demonstrated -repeatedly- throughout history.
Pann: You and I consider them radical because they blow things up, but that's just one way of eliminating the infidel, which their holy scripture entitles them to do. In other words, its not radical for them.
Yes, it is radical for them. The average Muslim I know does not blow things up. Muslims who blow things up are still radical for other Muslims.
My point: Islam is a religion that, like Christianity, is very broad and open to massive amounts of interpretation. I don't think Islam=terrorism. But I do think Islam=threat. And yes, i believe Christianity=threat as well.
In other words you view people with differences then your own as a threat.
lool.
It always amuses me to no end when Atheists (talking as an Atheist) basically become a mirror of those they hate, parroting demagogues and using their viewpoints to justify marginalizing another human being.
The exact statement can be said, and has been said, about Atheism itself when Atheism has been a distabalizing force in the world. Ministers in the US parroted your exact same argument through the Bolshevik Revolution, Throughout the ensuing Red Scare, and well up into the 80s.
The violence and conflict in the Middle East is not about Islam. It is about Power and Money, and the beliefs cherished by the people are just another tool used to achieve that mean. "Atheism" isn't intrinsically less susceptible to intolerance or stupidity, as you are currently demonstrating, or less susceptible to manipulation by those whom have an agenda, as has been demonstrated -repeatedly- throughout history.
Pann: You and I consider them radical because they blow things up, but that's just one way of eliminating the infidel, which their holy scripture entitles them to do. In other words, its not radical for them.
Yes, it is radical for them. The average Muslim I know does not blow things up. Muslims who blow things up are still radical for other Muslims.
I completely agree, I think your missing my point though: Its still in the scripture. All I'm saying is that since it's in the scripture, for them(aka, their point of view) its not radical. I'm assuming you read of Mohammad's conquests? Although some of his conquered lands were able to practice their religion in peace(for a tax of course), many pagan religions in the middle east were slaughtered outright for their beliefs. Are you calling Muhammad a radical? Because he is the Islamic prophet after all.
if you want to criticize Islam on the basis of Mohammad's conquest, what about the bible? does the bible not give reference to what happens to the non-believers? or what about the Crusades? those were in fact authorized by the pope!
if you want to criticize Islam on the basis of Mohammad's conquest, what about the bible? does the bible not give reference to what happens to the non-believers? or what about the Crusades? those were in fact authorized by the pope!
Your 100% right dybydx.
I'm a little confused as to why you brought this up though. If I came off as someone trying to endorse Christianity at the expense of Islam then I'm sorry, because that was not my point at all. Maybe you only read my last post?
EPT![[image loading]](http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/6671/29865.jpg)
