Obama backs mosque near ground zero

  • Thread starter Thread starter Musicadmirer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Whitacre_Girl said:
I have to agree here. Is it the right of the muslims to build a mosque there? It sure is - and their rights should be defended. As to whether or not they should build it, that’s a different issue. It shows a great sense of insensitivity to what happened there, especially with the name they chose (suggests conquered land).

Frankly, I fight fire with fire on this issue. Muslims are told in the Quaran not to incite scandal or fan the flames of hostility. In this case, they are doing exactly that. They are picking a site that muslim extremists murdered more than 3,000 Americans, to build a site of muslim worship. It just seems tacky.

Finally, if it were put to popular vote, I would say that I would vote that they be allowed to build there. Freedom of religion is not to be restricted. However, I am deeply embarassed for them for their lack of sensitivity. It certainly does nothing to alleviate the discord towards Muslims in this country (not that that I am defending hate-mongers against the muslim faith, just that they really aren’t doing anything to ease tension in this move).
Click to expand...
Well said
 
Middleman said:
Well said
Click to expand...
Yes, but it makes 2 mistakes.
Whitacre_Girl said:
Frankly, I fight fire with fire on this issue. Muslims are told in the Quaran not to incite scandal or fan the flames of hostility. In this case, they are doing exactly that. They are picking a site that muslim extremists murdered more than 3,000 Americans, to build a site of muslim worship. It just seems tacky.
Click to expand...
  1. A Muslims religious obligation to avoid scandal does not mean Muslims are in the wrong every time there is a scandal. That is to say, something has to actually be scandalous before Muslims are obligated to avoid it. So the question remains: why is the Islamic center scandalous? Whitacre_Girl graciously provides the answer in the form of opponent response #3.
Whitacre_Girl said:
Finally, if it were put to popular vote, I would say that I would vote that they be allowed to build there. Freedom of religion is not to be restricted. However, I am deeply embarassed for them for their lack of sensitivity. It certainly does nothing to alleviate the discord towards Muslims in this country (not that that I am defending hate-mongers against the muslim faith, just that they really aren’t doing anything to ease tension in this move).
Click to expand...
  1. Firstly, this statement fails to answer the question: why is the center controversial in the first place?
    Secondarily, as a separate issue, I will respond as I have in the past by comparing the argument to arguments that might have been made in Rosa Parks time. Should blacks have moved their seats to the back of the bus merely to avoid criticism from and ease relations with the white community? Clearly not. Why then, are we proposing to treating Muslim-Americans this way?
edit adding for clarity:
TheTrueCentrist said:
  1. Opposition group: The Islamic centre is insensitive.
  2. Support group: Why is the Islamic centre insensitive?
  3. Opposition group: Because those involved with the Islamic centre are Muslim, as were the 9/11 terrorists.
  4. Support group: But those involved with the Islamic centre, along with the majority of other Muslims, have denounced the terrorists’ interpretation of Islam. Therefore equating the two groups because of religion is not reasonable.
  5. Opposition group: But those involved with the Islamic centre have not proven they have not taken money from terrorists, nor can we be sure they do not sympathize with the terrorists.
  6. Support group: No, but we have no reason to be suspicious. Why do you suspect the Muslims involved with the Islamic centre are lying about their beliefs and intentions?
  7. Opposition group:
    a) Normal response: I’m not saying I don’t believe them, I am saying that if they wanted to be sensitive, they could build somewhere else.
    b) Prejudiced response: They are not being truthful because they are Muslims, we should be suspicious because Islam says x y and z. Discussion ended.
Click to expand...
c) Possible response (not yet observed): You are right, I guess it does not make sense to be offended by this mosque. Discussion ended.
d) Possible response (observed, but evidence is insubstantial or anecdotal): no, here is substantial evidence that the centre is affiliated with terrorism. Discussion shifted to the validity of evidence.
8) Support group response to 7a: Why is the Islamic centre insensitive? (goto 3)
 
estesbob said:
It appears that the mosque builders are having second thoughts about the location. Perhaps they are finally beginning to see the problems that all their supporters do not.
Click to expand...
I’ve not really been following this issue but that can only seem like a good thing to me. I could’nt believe the idea was ever conntemplated in the first place. The whole thing just seemed so insensitive.
 
GeoCyclist said:
I’ve not really been following this issue but that can only seem like a good thing to me. I could’nt believe the idea was ever conntemplated in the first place. The whole thing just seemed so insensitive.
Click to expand...
The fact that nobody is objecting to the mosque being moved to another locatkon shows that the opposition was based only on where it was being built, not on racial or religious considerations. I am pleased to see the developers appear to have finally realized this.
 
estesbob said:
The fact that nobody is objecting to the mosque being moved to another locatkon shows that the opposition was based only on where it was being built, not on racial or religious considerations. I am pleased to see the developers appear to have finally realized this.
Click to expand...
Ignoring the fact that this fails to answer the question “why was the location controversial in the first place,” how far away is acceptable? Across the street? 3 blocks from ground zero? 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 blocks away? What if they moved it to the other side of ground zero, but kept it two blocks away? There is no way to definitively answer this question, which means it is a red herring. If there were some function that mapped “human and financial toll of atrocity” to “radius in which memorials cannot be tastefully built” then you might be able to make an argument.
 
estesbob said:
The fact that nobody is objecting to the mosque being moved to another locatkon shows that the opposition was based only on where it was being built, not on racial or religious considerations. I am pleased to see the developers appear to have finally realized this.
Click to expand...
Imagine what would happen if they moved, say, 1/4 block at a time. We want to move as little as possible, they say. So they go from 2 blocks to 2 and 1/4 blocks away. Everyone would be furious! “They are taunting us!” would be the cry. So the Muslims make plans at 2 and 1/4 blocks for a while, then decide to move again. They move to 2 and 1/2 blocks. People would be in hysterics! It could continue until they were… say 5 blocks away. They have more than doubled the distance between them and ground zero. Would people still be mad? You better believe it. By that point people would be calling for it to not be built at all.
 
From this report it appears the project of Park 51 is not changing location.

english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2010/08/20108177834864507.html

The project’s backers vowed on Monday to press ahead with their plans to build the Cordoba Initiative Mosque and Cultural Centre, denying a report in Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper, that they were going to scrap the $100m project.

Sharif El-Gamal, the owner of the building where the centre would be located, said the report that Cordoba House would be relocated further from Ground Zero, was false.

Haaretz had reported that leaders agreed to abandon the site to prevent an escalation of anti-Muslim sentiment.
 
Ground Zero Mosque On The Move?

There was a possible resolution in the works Tuesday night in the debate surrounding the proposed mosque and Islamic cultural center near ground zero.

CBS 2′s Marcia Kramer has learned it looks as if the developers of the mosque may be willing to budge and move away from the Park 51 location where they originally planned the construction.

forums.catholic-questions.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6961995

It appears everybody is realizing what a terrible idea this was.
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
Ignoring the fact that this fails to answer the question “why was the location controversial in the first place,” how far away is acceptable? Across the street? 3 blocks from ground zero? 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 blocks away? What if they moved it to the other side of ground zero, but kept it two blocks away? There is no way to definitively answer this question, which means it is a red herring. If there were some function that mapped “human and financial toll of atrocity” to “radius in which memorials cannot be tastefully built” then you might be able to make an argument.
Click to expand...
If I’m not mistaken the original argument was to move the mosque away from this location which is a 150 year old building that was damaged by the debris from 9/11. This was way before it became a national hot topic and the predictable mantra from liberals was being regurgitated.

I don’t know New York, or this location very well. Is there a building or lot closer to 9/11 they could have purchased but didn’t? That might make things a little easier on them if someone could point that out and say “See we are not trying to ruffle anyone’s feathers or we would be building it there.”.

Otherwise, they have some issues to deal with. One, the liberal supporting media is just calling everyone bigots. If these people were considering the feelings of those around them the liberal media should be reporting it. At least it would look like they are trying to come up with a solution, instead of flying us the bird.

The other issue is, once they start looking for construction crews if they try to build on this lot here, they may run into some resistance there.

But you’re arguments have been worthless in trying to convince anyone that you are right, so please stop trying to take an argument and turn it into an entirely different argument to prove a point. You have over 60 percent of the population who see things differently than you do.
 
Ignoring the fact that this fails to answer the question “why was the location controversial in the first place,” how far away is acceptable? Across the street? 3 blocks from ground zero? 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 blocks away?
Click to expand...
i’m sure i speak for many when i say they can build their mosque back in the country they came from. that’s far enough away for me. minus that, at least they could move their mosque to a less controversial place, i’m sure the city can figure that out. if you want a number–10 blocks.
 
“Yes, Muslims have the right to build on private property and worship as they please. However, the President has a right to voice his objection to such an incredibly stupid and insensitive exercise of rights. Instead, he supported them in their obamination, showing where his true loyalties lay.”

What he supported was the First Amendment to the Constitution. I didn’t see anywhere in that speech where he said, “This location is a great idea for the mosque.” I really wish that all of you who are saying how much he supports it, would post a link to that part of the speech.

If you don’t like the First Amendment, try mounting a campaign to get rid of it.
 
Whitacre_Girl said:
I have to agree here. Is it the right of the muslims to build a mosque there? It sure is - and their rights should be defended. As to whether or not they should build it, that’s a different issue. It shows a great sense of insensitivity to what happened there, especially with the name they chose (suggests conquered land).

Frankly, I fight fire with fire on this issue. Muslims are told in the Quaran not to incite scandal or fan the flames of hostility. In this case, they are doing exactly that. They are picking a site that muslim extremists murdered more than 3,000 Americans, to build a site of muslim worship. It just seems tacky.

Finally, if it were put to popular vote, I would say that I would vote that they be allowed to build there. Freedom of religion is not to be restricted. However, I am deeply embarassed for them for their lack of sensitivity. It certainly does nothing to alleviate the discord towards Muslims in this country (not that that I am defending hate-mongers against the muslim faith, just that they really aren’t doing anything to ease tension in this move).
Click to expand...
Exactly. This Imam stated he was all about “building bridges”. Ya right.:rolleyes: If he was truly all about building bridges, he would have pulled back immediately and said…“ya know what? In order to honor the sensitivities of surviving family members and respect the memory of those lost here, we will look for another location.” Now THAT would have gone a long way in “building bridges”. Instead, he said something to the effect of: “I will stand strong in the face of opposition, I will not be the target of opposing groups.” It all goes back to “common sense”. Of which there seems to be a growing segment of the population that has no concept of what common sense is.

This has absolutely NADA to do with freedom of religion or legalities. He is certainly free to do whatever he wants to, if he has the means to do it. It has everything to do with the respect of what I consider a Memorial Site and the people that have lost loved ones there…and ALL AMERICANS actually.

Now, if he wanted to build a “Center” that housed places of worship for Christians and Jews as well, I would say that he might truly be in the business of “building bridges”. But he wants to build a Mosque, which almost looks like they are claiming a TROPHY. Kind of like Americans have done in war when they win a battle…put up the American Flag. The whole thing smells rotten. And the President of the United States is defending this? Gee…that’s nice.:rolleyes:
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
I was playing 20 questions with a young child at one point. After just 15 questions it was pretty clear that he was thinking of the Lego car he had just been building. I acted stumped until the last question and asked if it was the car. The look on his face told me yes, but he squirmed and said no. I asked a few more questions and he hemmed and hawed about each answer, while he was trying to think of a new object. I finally gave up and asked what the object was. He gave an answer that was clearly ruled out by a previous question.
“That can’t be it! It has to have wheels.” I said
“I was kidding” He said.
“So what is it?” I asked.
“I know, but I’m not going to tell you.” was the reply.

If you know there is a flaw in my outline, please tell me what it is.
Click to expand...
You’ve made an incorrect assumption at #3.

BTW, your ‘story’ was not amusing. It shows more about you than you probably understand.
 
I wonder what all the mosque defenders here think about the Westboro Baptist Church’s habit of protesting at soldiers funerals?

They have a right do do so.

Do you think they should stop? If so why?

If you think they should continue protesting, why?
 
iamrefreshed said:
You’ve made an incorrect assumption at #3.

BTW, your ‘story’ was not amusing. It shows more about you than you probably understand.
Click to expand...
Yup, #3 was a tell on the agenda behind the summary. It was also pivotal to the whole argument.
 
tomarin said:
There are two principles actually. One is that religious freedom applies to everyone across the board; otherwise it’s a meaningless concept. Muslims shouldn’t have to jump through hoops that other religions don’t have to.

Another is that just because a torch-carrying mob shows up at City Hall demanding Muslims be denied their rights, public officials should not cave in. We are a country governed by laws, not mob rule.

He articulated the first principle in his statement; he stood up for the second principle by not jumping on the populist anti-mosque bandwagon like so many other politicians are doing. I admire him for that.
Click to expand...
I can’t totally disagree with this, matter of fact I tend to think its very acurate. Honestly I just have personal feelings about this issue, which I have mentioned earlier for several reasons.

I just can’t get past the fact that there are already two Mosques within a 5-block radius of this proposed sight. One is adjacent to Strip Club, the other next to a sight which sells Pornography. So we should allow this Mosque, and then what? Build a BBQ Pit next door which sells PORK to Pedifiles?🤷

ANYWAY…

I certainly don’t suggest that I should be the one drawing the lines, in the line drawing game. But someone has to stop the descent down the sewer, somewhere, and at some point. And I do firmly believe that this area is a great place to have the better thinking begin to prevail.

When you come right down to the bottom line. Who really cares what Obama thinks?. Is he the worst President in US history? Of course not, but he’s certainly on the negative side of average. And thats not good enough with the position we are presently in. No practical experience, questionable religion, an overall terrible attitude, inability to gain respect from world leaders etc, etc…it just isn’t good enough. Another mistake like obama and the world may very well end in nuclear war. In case if you haven’t read Castros comments to Obama?

Believe me we can go on and on about this Mosque and Obama. But really all you need to do instead of studying his 2-year journey, is pick up any major newspaper in the Tri-State area today. And read the front page. Murder has doubled since Obama took over in all the major cities. Polititians and Police are going Door to Door today in Bridgeport [40-minutes from Ground Zero] to try to gain a better perspective on the Murder Rate. DOOR to DOOR? When is HISTORY have you ever heard of that in the USA? And this is after a 15-year decline with the murder rate? 93 it was at its highest.

BTW McChrystal was hired by YALE today. They believe he should be instructing the future leaders of the US on warfare. Kind of contrary to Obama’s thinking wouldn’t you say?

But hey, this is just another day at the wood shed, and these are simply the facts in the Tri-State area today. BUT for those not of this faith…I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss GOD and the Christian Faith, and what its tellin you. I seriously suggest, if your a young adult, you should put your lifes philosophy on hold for a couple decades. I guarentee you, your thinking “is” going to change. Don’t paint yourself into a corner there’s no way out of.

The sadest reality today, is that one of Satans greatest abilitys, is to remain unknown to the world and skeptical to many. And man, does he thrive because of it. If you think the War on Terror is something, take a good look at the one with Good and Evil. THATS the BIGGER PICTURE! And when the Pope said “we need more Catholic Polititians today”. The gravity of his words are still sinking in.

God Bless, GT
 
I’m not at all surprised at this. Building a mosque so near Ground Zero is a definite statement. Makes me wonder what it will take to wake up some people and make them wary or at least wisely cautious.

"Mosque Developer Rejects Meeting With Paterson

The developers of an Islamic cultural center that would include a mosque near Ground Zero have rejected Gov. David Paterson’s offer to help them find a different site."…

Entire article: nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Mosque-Developer-Says-No-Meeting-Scheduled-With-Gov-100967889.html
 
Does anyone have any idea at all who they will get to actually build this Mosque, if it is indeed a go ahead project?
 
iamrefreshed said:
I wonder what all the mosque defenders here think about the Westboro Baptist Church’s habit of protesting at soldiers funerals?
Click to expand...
I don’t see the mosque as provocative the way that protesting a soldiers funerals is. I know there are many people here who will think I am blind for saying so, but since it is (in New York terms) a considerable distance from the WTC site, and since this group of Muslims have been in the downtown area for years, I really think they also honestly didn’t realize that they would be seen as polluting “sacred ground”. (They also probably feel that they didn’t have anything to do with 9/11, just like I don’t feel responsible for the actions of Eric Rudolph, even though he is a Christian and did what he did in the name of Christ.)

I don’t think there’s any justification for the Westboro Baptist Church’s actions. Their freedom of religion doesn’t give them the right to disrupt people’s private funerals. If they want to protest American foreign policy, that’s fine, but do so in a public space like every other protester.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top