Obama backs mosque near ground zero

[JReducation]

The issue here is that the government is not being fully sincere with these folks. It is failing its moral duty. The government has a duty to remind the people that while they have the legal right to build a place of worship in zones that are designated for such constructions; it may not be a good idea to build this one at this location. The reason is simple. As has been pointed out, all it takes is one loose canon to decide to bomb the place killing innocent people, again. The government cannot pretend that it has the power or the means to protect them 24/7. It should be honest and admit this to the public.

It’s easy to say that people have religious freedom. The truth must be complete. People have religious freedom. Unfortunately, not everyone shares that view and people can be hurt. Therefore, this project should be seriously reconsidered. This discussion may be taking place behind closed doors. I have no way of knowing this. But if I were in the position of the Mayor or the Governor, that would be a conversation that I would want to have with the Muslim leadership behind the project. I believe that we Catholics should also send our message of concern for safety to the Muslim leadership. They are our brothers and sisters and their safety is important to us. The truth is that we cannot guarantee it.

I do not support changing the zoning laws just to obstruct the construction of a mosque. That would be an injustice. It is an injustice that can set a precedent. What’s to stop civil authorities from taking the same measures against the construction of a synagogue, a cathedral or Protestant church, just because of religion? The approach has to be a legitimate concern for the safety of innocent people, not because of prejudice.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

Let’s learn something about the Mohammadans, shall we?

Your rant has done nothing to disprove my claim that you oppose the mosque because you are equating mainstream Islam with that of the terrorists. In fact you seem to be suggesting that not only are Muslims terrorists, they are also spiteful and intolerant. If I understand you, I think you want to be placed in the “prejudiced” camp. Please correct me if I’ve misinterpreted your statements.

 

[ChristopherJB5]

Why don’t you just agree that the center is fine and remove all allegations if insensitivity?
Because its not simply a value-neutral ‘center’, and the people who are responsible for erecting it–despite knowing the contention its causing all across America–still have the gall to call it a matter of peaceful understanding and reconciliation.

There are two opinions on the matter, are there not? One side holds the Islamic center is insensitive, and the other contends it is sensitive.

I hold that the center is sensitive, therefore people who disagree must fall into the “insensitive” camp.

I have then proposed that the “insensitive” camp has formed this conclusion due to the following though process:
Muslims attacked us on 9/11.
Muslims want to build a mosque near the site of this attack.
It is insensitive for Muslims to attack us and then subsequently build a mosque near the site.

You’ve proposed this, but you’re too dense to realize that this amounts to a strawman. A stawman is where a belligerent jerk advances a grossly simplified, impotent version of their opponent’s argument and then ineptly argues against it, like a child playing with his ghost cowboy and astronaut action figures, making them fight. Naturally, the LGBTA S+M Biker action figure wins.

I have then pointed out that this line of reasoning wrongly associates the radical Islam taught by terrorists and the moderate Islam practiced by the vast majority of Muslims. I have lastly pointed out that one could only make this mistake if one was ignorant or prejudiced.

**You’re assuming that the vast majority of Muslims support the peculiar agenda of the Islamic center, and making various other assumptions for them. There’s actually been quite a few who are skeptical of the particular Muslims who are building a center there and others who are vocal in opposing the center.

When you are able to cite a patently ‘moderate’ Muslim who is so offended by the obviously valid emotional argument… definitely the simplest advanced on this board alone, by far… you use in your strawman, then maybe we’ll be more likely to accept your conclusion. **

I can’t spell it out any clearer, so why not rebut me instead of merely gripe because you don’t like my conclusions?

**I have, but you’re a troll who doesn’t know when he has been bested. The great irony is that you’re wasting your time, and cannot realize your own ineptitude. Nice try playing the devil’s advocate, little did you know we Catholics invented it. **

 

[bbarrick8383]

Haven’t heard anything yet, but have the libs started blaming all of this on conservatives/republicans? I’m sure they will start soon if not…

Will probably read something like “If this wasn’t an election year, this wouldn’t be an issue. Just like they did with immigration. They not only hate blacks, but mexicans and now muslims too.”

 

[ChristopherJB5]

Your rant has done nothing to disprove my claim that you oppose the mosque because you are equating mainstream Islam with that of the terrorists. In fact you seem to be suggesting that not only are Muslims terrorists, they are also spiteful and intolerant. If I understand you, I think you want to be placed in the “prejudiced” camp. Please correct me if I’ve misinterpreted your statements.

My ‘rant’ is actually a little more sophisticated than the ‘Muslims attacked us, building a mosque there is offensive, therefore moderate Muslims will be offended’ sophistry that you’ve valiantly been putting in our mouths and then dispatching.

I did not suggest that all Muslims are terrorists.

I’ve stated explicitly that Muslims are ‘moderate’ in proportion with how un-Muslim they are. If radical Muslims epitomize violence, and completely secular Muslims epitomize peace, what does this suggest to you?

There’s a ‘syllogism’ for ya, lil’ guy.

Moreover, I’d like to point out that your argument absolutely rests on moderate Muslims who are sooo offended by the fact that Muslims are building a mosque… not yet clear whether the mosque is moderate or radical or what… in an area where they attacked. I say Bring 'em on! Put up or shut up. Let’s see these offended Moslems.

Oh, and by the way, pedophilia and ephebophilia is openly discussed, condoned, and approved of in their most fundamental text. Now, I suppose that I’m a ‘racist bigot’ for rejecting Islam.

Argue with that.

 

[4elise]

I’m glad he did it, and it makes me think better of him. It is easy to stand up for politically popular opinions, but when you are already be called a “secret muslim” and the majority of the country opposes the mosque standing up for basic American principles or religious freedom and rights regarding privately owned property isn’t so easy. Even if you don’t like the man or what he is supporting you have to give him credit for sticking to his principles.

And while he is at it I hope he will use the opportunity to remind the American People that this is a country FOUNDED ON THE PRINCIPAL OF FREEDOM OF RELIGION - not just my religion but your, and theirs,

We only hurt ourselves when we let ourselves follow the same obscene excuse for hate that those responsible for the deaths of 3000 + people on 9/11 ---- Not Muslims - but hateful extremists - Our hope for the future is also sticking to our principles - it isn’t just my freedom that matters - but yours - and theirs - otherwise none of us are free.

**Islam did not kill 3,000 people on 9/11. Hatred and religious intolerance did. Let us not stoop to this level - **

"The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself.
The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends. It is not our many Arab friends. Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists and every government that supports them. " George Bush - Sept. 20, 2001 washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/specials/attacked/transcripts/bushaddress_092001.html

*Heavenly Father guide your people to a deeper understanding that we are all your children. Jesus our brother instill in us the peace and trust that your words may be deeply etched on our hearts ‘do not be afraid’. Holy Spirit move within your Church that we may be the instrument for peace here and now and speak always for the value of every life, born and unborn, living here and in every country. Blessed Mother watch over our sons, brothers and fathers who risk their lives to bring peace to people around the world - keep them safe and help us all turn to your Son when we lose our footing and begin to fear. Amen *

 

[ChristopherJB5]

… As has been pointed out, all it takes is one loose canon…

Is this a double-entendre, Brother?

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

The issue here is that the government is not being fully sincere with these folks. It is failing its moral duty. The government has a duty to remind the people that while they have the legal right to build a place of worship in zones that are designated for such constructions; it may not be a good idea to build this one at this location. The reason is simple. As has been pointed out, all it takes is one loose canon to decide to bomb the place killing innocent people, again. The government cannot pretend that it has the power or the means to protect them 24/7. It should be honest and admit this to the public.

It only takes one loose cannon to organize the destruction of the twin towers, so why were they not deterred from being built? They were, after all, a symbol of our capitalist system.

It only takes one loose cannon to blow up a mosque anywhere in the world.

You suggest that building the mosque is inappropriate because of safety concerns. Why would you worry about safety if the mosque were uncontroversial? You wouldn’t! If you wanted to increase the safety of the mosque, the best thing to would be to try and reduce the controversy and convince people that such a building is acceptable. If you go around sowing the idea that the mosque was somehow a bad idea (regardless of your rationale) you are only giving more ammunition to those “loose cannons.”

If the mosque is built and attacked by a loose cannon, you would be right in telling me that you saw it coming. I would respond that you were the one supplying people with cannons.

 

[ChristopherJB5]

Finally, I’d like to make one very common sense appeal…

We’re not a racist nation. We’re not an anti-religious, or bigoted nation. We allow mosques, synagogues, temples, shrines, churches, basilicas, cathedrals, and community centers to be built here by the thousand.

Think about what this news story would be called if it were 5miles in any direction. It would be…: ‘Mosque built in NYC.’ So what. Who cares. Another mosque… grrrrr-eat. Instant. Non. Story.

Now, build it within sneezing distance of where Muslims killed a bunch of Americans. There is obviously an emotional reaction. If people would only have the common courtesy to go preach their imperialistic, backwards ideology a few thousand feet further away from where it killed thousands of Americans, then obviously it would be totally fine.

To say… ‘What? I didn’t know anything was uncool about this… I thought it was a free country?’ is just abusing the laws that protect religious liberty.

Its making us rethink how we feel about how to proceed with ‘religious liberty’, and that’s the only consequence.

 

[ChristopherJB5]

And while he is at it I hope he will use the opportunity to remind the American People that this is a country FOUNDED ON THE PRINCIPAL OF FREEDOM OF RELIGION - not just my religion but your, and theirs,

We only hurt ourselves when we let ourselves follow the same obscene excuse for hate that those responsible for the deaths of 3000 + people on 9/11 ---- Not Muslims - but hateful extremists - Our hope for the future is also sticking to our principles - it isn’t just my freedom that matters - but yours - and theirs - otherwise none of us are free.

Islam did not kill 3,000 people on 9/11. Hatred and religious intolerance did. Let us not stoop to this level -

"The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself.
The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends. It is not our many Arab friends. Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists and every government that supports them. " George Bush - Sept. 20, 2001 washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/specials/attacked/transcripts/bushaddress_092001.html

*Heavenly Father guide your people to a deeper understanding that we are all your children. Jesus our brother instill in us the peace and trust that your words may be deeply etched on our hearts ‘do not be afraid’. Holy Spirit move within your Church that we may be the instrument for peace here and now and speak always for the value of every life, born and unborn, living here and in every country. Blessed Mother watch over our sons, brothers and fathers who risk their lives to bring peace to people around the world - keep them safe and help us all turn to your Son when we lose our footing and begin to fear. Amen *

Look… please, this is absolutely uncharitable of you.

The people who masterminded and participated in the September 11th attack were anything except un-Muslim. They were Muslims living their religion to the fullest. They were ‘orthodox’ Muslims, actually following their religion and ultimately giving their lives for it. Kudos to them, and its offensive for you to impugn their religious practice.

They did not hijack Islam. They were the Franciscans of Islam, actually following the dictates of their holy figure–quite a novel idea, I know–in the face of people who had fallen away from religious purity. The only people who are ‘betraying’ Islam are the apostates, the Rushdis of the world.

So, please. Don’t even start.

Also, the crux of the issue is that (1) the mosque is not simply a religious center, and the (2) liberal democratic system that ensures our treasured religious liberty must be defended.

 

[Kadaveri]

they want to take our women

Raaa.

 

[CatholicGerman]

I’ve stated explicitly that Muslims are ‘moderate’ in proportion with how un-Muslim they are. If radical Muslims epitomize violence, and completely secular Muslims epitomize peace, what does this suggest to you?

Yes, this was a point I was making on the other thread. Moderate Muslims are like moderate Catholics. They’re cafeteria-style Muslims. Spiritual secularists.

But traditionalist Catholics aren’t necessarily as inclined to kill people who don’t agree with them, because Catholicism doesn’t demand it. We don’t have to ignore direct commands from Christ or the Pope in order to live in peace with our neighbors.

 

[4elise]

Finally, I’d like to make one very common sense appeal…

We’re not a racist nation. We’re not an anti-religious, or bigoted nation. We allow mosques, synagogues, temples, shrines, churches, basilicas, cathedrals, and community centers to be built here by the thousand.

Think about what this news story would be called if it were 5miles in any direction. It would be…: ‘Mosque built in NYC.’ So what. Who cares. Another mosque… grrrrr-eat. Instant. Non. Story.

Now, build it within sneezing distance of where Muslims killed a bunch of Americans. There is obviously an emotional reaction. If people would only have the common courtesy to go preach their imperialistic, backwards ideology a few thousand feet further away from where it killed thousands of Americans, then obviously it would be totally fine.

To say… ‘What? I didn’t know anything was uncool about this… I thought it was a free country?’ is just abusing the laws that protect religious liberty.

Its making us rethink how we feel about how to proceed with ‘religious liberty’, and that’s the only consequence.

Yet communities around the country are trying to keep Mosques from being built in other communities around the country because of the mistaken impression that those who are Muslims are the same as the terrorists - a bit more than sneezing distance…to name a few:

**Temecula, California: **beforeitsnews.com/story/135/262/California_Mosque_Protest:_Protesters_Call_for_No_More_Mosques_in_America.html

**Nashville, Tenn: **usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-07-05-newmosques04_ST_N.htm

Wisconsin: rightviewwi.com/the_right_view_wisconsin/2010/08/stop-the-mosque.html

We can do better than this! We are a better country than this! This is why we are different! No one is free to practice their religion unless everyone is.

 

[ChristopherJB5]

It only takes one loose cannon to organize the destruction of the twin towers, so why were they not deterred from being built? They were, after all, a symbol of our capitalist system.

**Uhh, actually it took an entire network of them.

The reason why you only know Osama bin Laden’s name–I’m assuming this is the ‘one loose cannon’ you’re referring to–is because CNN knows that your feeble mind couldn’t possibly memorize names that are morphologically different than those used in your culture.**

It only takes one loose cannon to blow up a mosque anywhere in the world.

Well, one intelligent loose cannon with access to unexploded ordinance.

You suggest that building the mosque is inappropriate because of safety concerns. Why would you worry about safety if the mosque were uncontroversial? You wouldn’t! If you wanted to increase the safety of the mosque, the best thing to would be to try and reduce the controversy and convince people that such a building is acceptable.

**So you’re suggesting social engineering the entire population of the NYC metropolitan area, in order to convince them that their loss on September 11th wasn’t due to Muslims who were indoctrinated at… wait… Islamic education centers and places of worship. Wait a second… how do we know that this one isn’t similarly radical and bankrolled by the same people who funded the other, radical centers?

Naow wouldn’t that be suttin, herh? If these anonymous donors are actually ultra-radical Muslims who are building a center to espouse their ideology right next to the gigantic American building that their pawns destroyed. Wow-wee, what a thought. Thankfully, the Saudi radicals neeeeever spend hundreds of millions building radical mosques in foreign countries. /sarcasm.

I’ll have Joseph Goebbels get right on it. Leni Rieffenstahl will make her next hit: ‘The Calm and Serenity of the Islamic Religion and How the Hijackers Wore Forelocks**’.

If you go around sowing the idea that the mosque was somehow a bad idea (regardless of your rationale) you are only giving more ammunition to those “loose cannons.”

**Or they could simply build it somewhere else. My uncle is involved in real estate in the NYC area, and knows of several places in need of development. Funny that they want it there, I suppose for the benefit of all the Muslims hanging around ground zero.

Though, I suppose we can just blame Brother J and his adamant belief that building it there is controversial, a belief coincidentally shared by most of America and the world.**

If the mosque is built and attacked by a loose cannon, you would be right in telling me that you saw it coming.

Newsflash: Yeah, so will everyone else.

I would respond that you were the one supplying people with cannons.

If you’re going to make a stupid metaphor, at least do it correctly. He could either be forging cannons out of people or supplying cannons with ammunition.

 

[ChristopherJB5]

Yet communities around the country are trying to keep Mosques from being built in other communities around the country because of the mistaken impression that those who are Muslims are the same as the terrorists - a bit more than sneezing distance…to name a few:

**Temecula, California: **beforeitsnews.com/story/135/262/California_Mosque_Protest:_Protesters_Call_for_No_More_Mosques_in_America.html

**Nashville, Tenn: **usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-07-05-newmosques04_ST_N.htm

Wisconsin: rightviewwi.com/the_right_view_wisconsin/2010/08/stop-the-mosque.html

We can do better than this! We are a better country than this! This is why we are different! No one is free to practice their religion unless everyone is.

OK, try to understand this: I am saying that building an INDIVIDUAL mosque, anywhere else, would be a non-story.

The demographic trends of mosque-building and Muslim immigration are interesting and relevant, and opposition to them will be expected. Mass movements, yes, they’re interesting.

Building a single mosque wouldn’t appear as a national issue in the USA Today, NYT, Boston Globe–nobody would care about this mosque if it were anywhere else.

 

[CatholicGerman]

No one is free to practice their religion unless everyone is.

That is not actually true. Are you suggesting that Israelis are not free to practice Judaism just because it is given preferential treatment under the law?

Furthermore, there should be a debate about whether or not the public practice of a particular religion could be harmful to our liberties and government. The AMA has seriously considered allowing female circumcision here. Sharia courts are increasing their influence within western countries. Crucifixes are being taken out of German classrooms. Women are walking around in burqas. We are having to change our way of life to accomodate them, and they are pushing the social boundaries in order to score political points against us and make us look like fools.

Shouldn’t we have a discussion of whether or not that is a wise course of action?

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

You’ve proposed this, but you’re too dense to realize that this amounts to a strawman. A stawman is where a belligerent jerk advances a grossly simplified, impotent version of their opponent’s argument and then ineptly argues against it, like a child playing with his ghost cowboy and astronaut action figures, making them fight. Naturally, the LGBTA S+M Biker action figure wins.

I have read back through your posts and have not seen you make any argument for insensitivity that does not fit my summary. For example: you said that “the September 11th attack can still be justified as ‘success’ for Islam.” which is an overt attempt to associate moderate Muslims with radicals. You have made many other claims with similar ends. This only difference from my summary in that your equating radicals with moderates was not accidental.

Shall we review the definition of prejudice?
“unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.”

I think you will admit that you hold hostile feelings towards the religious group of Islam. Are those feelings unreasonable? This website: mediamonitors.net/riadabdelkarim3.html shows that Muslims explicitly condemned the terrorist attacks. A refusal to believe the statements of Muslim leaders is, to me at least, unreasonable. It would be as unreasonable as saying “Catholics worship Mary” and refusing to listen to any Catholics who say they do not.

If you feel that my summary is a straw man, why don’t you lay out your arguments in a nice simple way, as I did.

 

[4elise]

Also, the crux of the issue is that (1) the mosque is not simply a religious center, and the (2) liberal democratic system that ensures our treasured religious liberty must be defended.

A Catholic parish is not simply a religious center either - we educate people in faith, we also have fish fries, celebrate holidays together, have parish carnivals… it is a place where people who share a faith may come together in community.

Our treasured religious liberty is only worthy of defense when it is equally available to all.

 

[ChristopherJB5]

Raaa.

Living in the UK, I’m sure you see those stupid placards all the time, and hear nuts talking about it. Nevertheless, there are laws in classical Shari’a to ensure that this takes place.

Please understand that I’m not saying this as a: ‘Thiir gurna teck arr wimenz.’ statement.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

humanevents.com/article.php?id=38567

Debra Burlingame, co-founder of 9/11 Families for a Safe and Strong America and the sister of hijacked American Airlines flight 77 pilot Charles Burlingame, also released a statement expressing her outrage at Obama’s support for the mosque. In poignant language, Burlingame rejected the President’s framing of the issue as one of religious freedom, and said that Obama’s remarks on the mosque amounted to a betrayal of the country, not a defense of its most basic values.

“Barack Obama has abandoned America at the place where America’s heart was broken nine years ago, and where her true values were on display for all to see,” Burlingame said. “Since that dark day, Americans have been asked to bear the burden of defending those values, again and again and again. Now this President declares that the victims of 9/11 and their families must bear another burden. We must stand silent at the last place in America where 9/11 is still remembered with reverence or risk being called religious bigots.”

“Muslims have worshipped in New York without incident both before and after the attacks of 9/11. This controversy is not about religious freedom. 9/11 was more than a ‘deeply traumatic event,’ it was an act of war,” said Burlingame. “Building a 15-story mosque at Ground Zero is a deliberately provocative act that will precipitate more bloodshed in the name of Allah. Those who continue to target and kill American civilians and U.S. troops will see it as a symbol of their historic progress at the site of their most bloody victory.”