Ron Paul Backs "Ground Zero Mosque," Splitting with Son Rand

[scipio337]

…on the wrong side of the issue. Private property, religious freedom and the right to assemble are protected rights.

T…the correct answer is “nonexistent”. No one is asking any government to stop them from buidling the community center *(with mosque). Freedom of speech, and the right to peacefully assemble to excersise opposition are equally protected rights.

 

[new_User1357246]

Lastly it is not a mosque./QUOTE]

It is a community center with a mosque in it; so it’s not entirely fair to say that it is not a mosque.
RACJ;6996161:

BTW, this “community center” includes a Victory Mosque.

Are they calling it a “Victory Mosque”? No. You are. It’s a mosque and a community center. That’s it.

It’s one thing to be offended by the proposed location; it’s quite another to make intolerant and insensitive remarks (calling it a “Victory Mosque” is arguably as offensive as the proposed location) that frankly speaking make mosque opponents look like a bunch of Islamophobes.

 

[ishii]

josephdavid;6994391:

Lastly it is not a mosque./QUOTE]

intolerant and insensitive remarks make mosque opponents look like a bunch of Islamophobes.

I am an Islamophobe, and here’s why: (from an excellent article by Satoshi Kanazawa - italics added by me)

"Major Nidal Malik Hasan (Fort Hood terrorist) is a native-born American citizen, trained military officer, and educated MD and psychiatrist. Yet none of these things matters for him;* first and foremost, he is a Muslim.* He’s not at all like other native-born American citizens; he’s not at all like other military officers; he’s not at all like other medical doctors or psychiatrists. Anwar al-Awlaki (terrorist trainer) is a native-born and educated American citizen. Three of the four perpetrators of the 7/7 bombings in London were native-born British citizens, and the fourth was Jamaican-born. Of the five US citizens currently under detention in Pakistan for terrorism charges, one has been reported to be native-born American, two originally from Yemen, one from Egypt, and one from Sweden. Yet, once again, none of their varied national and cultural backgrounds matters to them. They are all united in their values and goals by their singular identity of being Muslims

psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201001/what-s-wrong-muslims

Ishii

 

[Michael_C]

T…the correct answer is “nonexistent”. No one is asking any government to stop them from buidling the community center *(with mosque). Freedom of speech, and the right to peacefully assemble to excersise opposition are equally protected rights.

I agrree 100 % that voicing opposition is American. I disagree that no one is asking the government to do anything. Public pressure is driving politicians to do something.

As he article states:

“The House Speaker is now treading on a slippery slope by demanding an investigation – a bold rejection of property rights, 1st Amendment rights, and the Rule of Law – in order to look tough against Islam”

 

[Michael_C]

I would “feel” very angry if I was just kicked in the teeth by an man who would sooner see me dead. And I would NOT kowtow to his subsequent demands. :doh2: Rob

So your feelings should determine who is permitted to do what in our society? I’m not sure I’m following you.

 

[curlycool89]

This is not about property rights, or “islamophobia” or anything else Ron Paul is spouting. It is nothing more than lots of upset citizens in New York (and elsewhere) trying to shame the Islamic group into not building the mosque so close to ground zero through vigorous use of their right to free speech. Would the people of Hawaii countenance the building of a pro-Japanese “Tenno” Shinto shrine next to a WW2 memorial? No, they would be up in arms - and rightly so. Wouldn’t there be an outcry in Japan if we built a monument to the Enola Gay in the city of Hiroshima? And rightly so. The Cordoba Intiative who are planning to build a mosque so close to ground zero are doing so as an act of deliberate provocation. We have every right to speak out against this.

Ishii

So mob mentality and liberal uses of bullying are a good thing then?

psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201001/what-s-wrong-muslims

Ishii

I don’t really think that’s the best article and I think more than anything it reflects a very American point of view.

Personally, I would identify as a Catholic before I would say Canadian, university student, or engineer. I already attend university in a different province and have worked a job in both my home province and the one I go to school in. I don’t really care where I work. If there was a good job in another country, I’d jump at it.
I don’t find I have too much in common with other engineering students (they’re all to busy drinking whenever they can), and mostly I hang out with other Catholics. I would say that as a Western Canadian that I have not much in common with Ontarians (especial Torontonians ) or people from BC and even less with Quebecers.

 

[scipio337]

I agrree 100 % that voicing opposition is American. I disagree that no one is asking the government to do anything. Public pressure is driving politicians to do something.

As he article states:

“The House Speaker is now treading on a slippery slope by demanding an investigation – a bold rejection of property rights, 1st Amendment rights, and the Rule of Law – in order to look tough against Islam”

From what I’ve heard, the proposed community center doesnt have much in donations, yet, and am unaware of any call for Pelosi to investigate the funding of the center. What I have heard is Pelosi’s call to find out who is funding the “opposition”.

 

[ishii]

.

So mob mentality and liberal uses of bullying are a good thing then?

Since when is exercising your right to free speech “bullying” ? Please explain.

I don’t really think that’s the best article and I think more than anything it reflects a very American point of view.

The article was written by Satoshi Kanazawa - I’m guessing he’s Japanese. Interesting that he would have an American point of view. I kind of see what you mean about the author’s point about being American or black or French first and Catholic second. I would consider myself Catholic first. But it was this point that the author made that I think is important: the terrorists are "are all united in their values and goals by their singular identity of being Muslims". Whether from Indonesia, Philipines, Iran, or Saudi Arabia, the terrorists do what they do in the name of Islam. Kanazawa also goes on to cite respected mainstream columnist and noted non-Islamophobic, Thomas Friedman, as saying that 50% of Islam adherents applauded the terrorists on 9/11. Presumably half of Islam opposed the bombings. But what of that half who remain silent on the whole issue of Islamic terrorism? Since the only thing we can presume from silence is consent, is it possible that a portion of the other “good” Islam actually support the terrorists? Terrorism is overwhelmingly Islamic. Now (the good half?) wants to build a victory mosque a couple of blocks from ground zero. They have absolutely no consideration for what happened on 9/11 and are rubbing our noses in it. Legally they can build it, of course, but I doubt there will be very many American construction workers who would participate in the construction.

Ishii

 

[pnewton]

This is not about property rights,

Then you do not object to the structure being built on private property, as per the plan?

 

[curlycool89]

Since when is exercising your right to free speech “bullying” ? Please explain.

I was going by your words. The specific word you used was to “shame” them. There is nothing fair and logical about “shaming” people. Bullies very commonly try to control people through shame (eg. the bully in high school beats someone up, thereby emasculating and shaming them).

The article was written by Satoshi Kanazawa - I’m guessing he’s Japanese. Interesting that he would have an American point of view. I kind of see what you mean about the author’s point about being American or black or French first and Catholic second. I would consider myself Catholic first. But it was this point that the author made that I think is important: the terrorists are "are all united in their values and goals by their singular identity of being Muslims". Whether from Indonesia, Philipines, Iran, or Saudi Arabia, the terrorists do what they do in the name of Islam. Kanazawa also goes on to cite respected mainstream columnist and noted non-Islamophobic, Thomas Friedman, as saying that 50% of Islam adherents applauded the terrorists on 9/11. Presumably half of Islam opposed the bombings. But what of that half who remain silent on the whole issue of Islamic terrorism? Since the only thing we can presume from silence is consent, is it possible that a portion of the other “good” Islam actually support the terrorists? Terrorism is overwhelmingly Islamic. Now (the good half?) wants to build a victory mosque a couple of blocks from ground zero. They have absolutely no consideration for what happened on 9/11 and are rubbing our noses in it. **Legally they can build it, of course, but I doubt there will be very many American construction workers who would participate in the construction. **

Ishii

Then I guess the free market will compensate for that. Isn’t that what American’s preach anyways?

 

[ishii]

I was going by your words. The specific word you used was to “shame” them. There is nothing fair and logical about “shaming” people. Bullies very commonly try to control people through shame (eg. the bully in high school beats someone up, thereby emasculating and shaming them).

Then I guess the free market will compensate for that. Isn’t that what American’s preach anyways?

First of all, shame on those who would want to build their mosque near ground zero. This has nothing to do with bullying. In the past, a sense of shame helped me avoid doing bad things I otherwise might have done. In many ways, we have lost our sense of shame in this country as we do just about anything that “feels good”. If the moslems have any shred of shame inside of them, they will change their planned location of the mosque.

Second, yes hopefully the free market will prevent the building of the mosque. That’s a good thing about the free-market and America and its historic sense of justice.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Then you do not object to the structure being built on private property, as per the plan?

I totally object to their building the victory mosque so close to ground zero, while I acknowlege their legal right to do so. Just because someone has a legal right to do something, doesn’t mean they should do it.

Ishii

 

[pnewton]

I totally object to their building the victory mosque so close to ground zero, while I acknowlege their legal right to do so. Just because someone has a legal right to do something, doesn’t mean they should do it.

Ishii

Thank you.
Yes they have the legal right to do so and those that oppose it have the legal right to protest. I said earlier that I really do not see that Ron Paul and his son are that far apart. It seems that when it comes down to the facts here, there is far more agreement than disagreement, but then agreement doesn’t sell news.

1. They have the legal right to build.
2. Protesters have the right to protest.
3. Muslims have freedom of religion.
4. Others have the right to criticize Islam.

I think most of Americans agree with these.

 

[ishii]

Thank you.
Yes they have the legal right to do so and those that oppose it have the legal right to protest. I said earlier that I really do not see that Ron Paul and his son are that far apart. It seems that when it comes down to the facts here, there is far more agreement than disagreement, but then agreement doesn’t sell news.

1. They have the legal right to build.
2. Protesters have the right to protest.
3. Muslims have freedom of religion.
4. Others have the right to criticize Islam.

I think most of Americans agree with these.

What it will come down to is whether or not the moslems who want to build the mosque/community center bow under the pressure of public opinion which is overwhelmingly opposed to the location. What made the headlines with Ron Paul were his comment that opposition to the mosque is “all about hate and Islamophobia”. When people say such things on this forum they are rightly criticized for engaging in ad hominem attacks. So is Paul, in this case.

Ishii