The Glade 4.0

Did I seriously just read a conservative complaining about vacation time for the President, and another conservative who I *know* was a GW Bush fanatic laugh along with it?

Really?



Quoted for much truth.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

Did I really see a brain dead lib get his panties in a bunch about people joking about presidents taking time off and golfing when he was all up in arms about the last president but is, not surprisingly, not so upset about the current one doing so?

Really?

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

No, it really is not. Did you totally miss my examples of Hagia Sophia and Temple Mount? It isn't some kind of "counterpoint" at all.



No, it doesn't. It supports their message, because they can then portray the construction of this mosque as a victory. "See? The infidels are so weak they cannot even stop us from putting a mosque at the site of our greatest victory! Allah has provided!"

You don't deny them a propaganda victory at all by doing that; they are going to portray this as a West vs. Islam clash anyhow, and have been doing so for years. It's far too late to close the barn door on that horse.

I don't think you really grasp the significance of putting a mosque on a site. Mosques are not like churchs; everyone is not welcome to enter. It makes the place holy ground, and not just in the way Catholics understand it. It becomes a "Muslims only" place, for all intents and purposes.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

So much for my kudos about your posting change in the other thread.

Are you actually saying that you need to have some kind of prejudice, or that you conflate Muslims with terrorists for a Mosque built near the 9/11 attack to be "a very least a disturbing reminder of, people associated with 9/11"?

Were the 9/11 terrorists all Muslim? Do Muslims adhere to Islam? Is Islam represented by the Mosque?

If all the people involved in the 9/11 attack were Catholics I'd have a hard time going into any Catholic church without it being "a disturbing reminder", not to mention one within sight of the place where the attacks occurred. By that logic, I guess I'm prejudiced against Catholics.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

The community center has a monument in honor of the people killed in the attacks. This is not an Osama friendly kind of place.

And again, I ask the conservatives here that stand in opposition to this community center/mosque - what about the first amendment?

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

What about it? Its not speech, has nothing to do with establishing a state religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... etc.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

I view this in the same way as the Neo-Nazi march in that Jewish neighborhood, constitutionally protected *** hatery.

_________________
"Life isn't divided into genres. It's a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you're lucky."
— Alan Moore

What evidence to you have to equate this mosque with the kind of hate speech present at a Neo Nazi rally?

@Mus - the Free Exercise of religion is exactly what I am talking about. These people have a right to set up a place of worship and worship there, just like any other church.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Huh. Well, lets apply the "all mosques are the same" logic to christianity, shall we?

If this group of Muslims is exactly the same as the kind of "Islam" that people like Osama Bin Laden promote, then it's fair to say that every Christian church is the same as the Westboro Baptist Church.

Using your logic, I mean.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

Why can't they practice their first amendment right 20 miles somewhere else? Why do they have to build it right there?

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

So zoning laws are unconstitutional?

That's good to know.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Zoning is not an issue in this case.

@Nitefox - why should they have to? Why should they have to build elsewhere so bigoted, small minded people can feel more comfortable? It's their religion, and they should be judged as individuals. If we aren't forcing all Christians to bear the burden of extremists like Fred Phelps, we ought to apply the same standards of fairness to this church.

There are a lot of folks here seeming to argue that all Muslims = Osama.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

It doesn't need to be. No one said these people were AQ supporters.

However, there is a very large segment of muslims that we would call "conservative" (as opposed to the 'radical' sort that directly support terrorism) and including some of what we refer to as "moderate" muslims (as they are moderate relative to the Islamic world, not moderate relative to the U.S. political scene) that, while they may not condone and may even condemn AQs behavior, are highly sympathetic to the wrongs, real or imagined of the "West" or of the U.S. specifically.

As such, getting to place a mosque at the sight of an attack by muslims on the U.S. is still a victory over the "other" (i.e. us) in the sense that wile they may not approve of airliner missile attacks, they still see it as the will of Allah giving them victory over the enemy that they get to place a mosque at the sight of what they perceive as our humilitation.



That's been addressed. The First Ammendment does not entitle you to palce a house of worship on whatever specific spot you damn well please. No one is advocating a church be placed their either.

I think you'd not be so worried about the first ammendment though, if it were a group wanting to build a church there.



If it seems that way, it's because of your lack of understanding on the issue, and desire to paint everyone else as a bigot. Stop letting it seem that way.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

You asked for an example of Constitutionally protected speech, I gave it to you.

It's not my logic, that all mosques are the same, it's the current Turkish Prime Minister's logic. Adequate strawman effort though, I give you a C+.

You can't even be assed to look at my position, much less make an attempt to understand the logic.

edit:


Show one relevant example of this argument you are putting in others' mouths.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

First of all, "All mosques are the same" is not the same thing as "all muslims are the same". All mosques are not the sam, but all are considered holy ground by muslims that non-muslims are not welcome to enter.

Second, since Christianity does not work the same way as Islam, you can't apply that same logic. Catholic churches have a concept of consecrated ground; no Protestant denomination does to my knowledge and in any case the Catholic concept is not the same as the Muslim one.

Third, in your last comparison what you're really trying to say is that all Christians are just like the ones that attend Westboro Baptist.

This is silly. All Christians are not just like Phelps and his folks, but in Christianity, all denominations do not have the same belief about the church building. Islam does not work that way. All sects of Islam have very similar views about the status of mosques regardless of what kind of Muslim goes there.

Why do you think Mecca is open to all Muslims of all sects for the Hajj, but no one who is not a Muslim is allowed there?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Actually, it's been said in conservative circles recently, but not here. Aside from that, if no one is saying it, then what is the problem?



What's the problem with that? There are plenty of legitimate reasons for a person to be sympathetic to the wrongs and injuries caused by this country and the West in general.

Regardless, they have every right to those opinions, and to express those opinions. Everyone does. They also have the right to freely exercise their religion.



By radical terrorists calling themselves Muslims. You continue to treat Islam as if it is a single, monolithic entity. It is not.



They want to build a community center. If they were Christians, you would not be objecting. However, despite all evidence that shows that they are note extremists, that they are in fact Muslims in opposition to the kind of hate that fueled the 9-11 attacks, they are still branded by those attacks. Their rights should not be limited because people have a limited capacity to separate the hateful radical brand of Islam that attacked us from the type of Islam practiced by nearly every Muslim American.



But if they were, you wouldn't have a problem with it, I imagine. The Christian's right to freely exercise their faith would be something you would probably just assume by default. But since these people are the "other", the Muslims that right wing talkers and other cynical hate mongers constantly smear, suddenly their rights don't matter so much. They put together the money. They got the building. The only thing standing between them and their rights is bigotry and ignorance.



I wouldn't have a problem at all with a church there, or a church community center. Just because you imagine I am anti-religion doesn't mean I actually am. If a church bought the property, it's theirs. And they can use it as a house of worship. It's their right, and certainly no skin off my back. And I would certainly argue in support of their right to do exactly that.

I can believe that religion is irrational mythology and still fervently support a person's right to free religious expression.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

Bullshit.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

The creation of mosques at the Hagia Sophia and Temple Mount happened in 1453 and the late 600s, respectively. Are you seriously suggesting they have any relevance whatsoever to the construction of a Muslim community-center and mosque in downtown NYC in 2010?

And even if 500-1500 year old events are still relevant, you might want to consider that (a) Christians were happily burning witches, massacring Jews, and launching Crusades back then, (b) the Orthodox Hagia Sophia was ransacked, desecrated and converted to a Catholic cathedral when Catholic armies conquered Constantinople in 1204, and (c) Christians built a church on the (long-since conquered) Temple Mount during the late Roman period and then, just before the Muslims got there in the 600s, tore down the remains of the Jewish temple and turned it into a garbage dump. Hooray for the religious tolerance of the Ancient World! But what's it got to do with anything happening today?


Not true.

What do you mean, bullshit? For example, I fully support equal marriage rights for gay couples, but also support a church's right to not marry them according to their own beliefs. I fully support the right of parents to teach their kids their particular mythology, but I also oppose those mythologies being taught in public institutions.

I do believe that ultimately religious organizations must, at some point, be beholden to the law. For example, I would not support a church's right to perform human sacrifice. But i think we would agree that's an extreme example.

I support the right of Native American religions to use substances that would otherwise be illegal. I support the right of the Catholic Church to discriminate against women when it comes to who can and cannot be a priest. I would certainly hope they changed their tune on that issue, and I certainly support efforts to change that about the Catholic church, but I don't support the *law* changing that.

I'm a big believer in the separation of church and state, and that separation cuts both ways.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

A) I'm not responsible for what's said in unnamed "conservative circles"
B) I explained what the problem is.



Notihng's wrong with them thinking it (other than the fact that there is no such thing as "the West"). What's wrong is them wanting to have a "victory" and claiming innocently that they really just want a mosque, and oh, it just happens to be at a sight that gives us a moral victory.



Which is irrelevant here. No one is saying that they can't have an opinion. What' being said is that they should not be allowed to act on that opinion in order to perpetuate conflict.



I'm not treating it as a single monolithic entity. I've explained this. you're jsut pretending I am because you don't want to have to deal with my points.

As for the terrorists, they were muslims; they are not just "calling themselves muslims".



No they want to build a mosque with a community center. If it were Christians wanting to build a church with a community center I would also object. If it were either group building only a community center I would not.



Their rights aren't being limited. As for being "branded" they're doing that to themselves by choosing to try to build a mosque at that site. It's not a coincidence they're putting it there unless you're going to assert they're all stupid. Do you think they're stupid Monty?

It's not anyone with a "limited capacity to separate" that's the problem, it's this group being disingenuous about its motives and people like you falling for it. The muslim world is not divided neatly into "radicals" and "muslims that are just like you and me in every way except they go to a mosque."



You imagine wrong. I don't want to see a church there; that would look to the muslim world like this really was about Islam v. Christianity.



I know this is really convenient for you to assume, but it's wrong.



And a good understanding of the history of actions like this dating back over 1,000 years, and of what a mosque means in Muslim thinking.



We know perfectly well that you're only anti-Christian, not anti-religion. No one gives a **** about the community center, except that it's a smokescreen for the mosque. If it were just a bunch of muslims wanting a community center with no mosque it wouldn't be an issue.



Funny, you never supported their rights to use a radio station they pay for.

[/quote]

Except that you only do this when it's not Christians. It's really about your beefs with America and Christianity.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

It's nice that you support people practicing their religion in private, but doesn't address the bullshit in your statement.

While you're working on that how about an answer to this:


You asked for an example of Constitutionally protected speech, I gave it to you.

It's not my logic, that all mosques are the same, it's the current Turkish Prime Minister's logic. Adequate strawman effort though, I give you a C+.

You can't even be assed to look at my position, much less make an attempt to understand the logic.

edit:


Show one relevant example of this argument you are putting in others' mouths.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Not in and of themselves, but the principle remains. In Middle Eastern thought, they tke a much longer view of history. I don't think you really get that they aren't just like us in terms of their views.



Becuase Islam is not Christianity, and has not evolved in the same way. I notice you're fixating on the Hagia Sophia, and mischaracterizing it as an issue of religious tolerance. The Hagia itself isn't the big issue today (unless you're an Orthodox Christian, many of whom feel it should be returned to them) but what happens to a place once it becomes a Mosque. The Turks can't return it to Christians without sparking a major outcry.

As for the Temple Mount, maybe you didn't notice but it has been a point of contention for centuries and still is today. In part, it formed Israeli objectives in the Six-Day War because the Jordanians had denied them access to the Wailing Wall for 18 years. It is still a major reason for friction between the Arabs and Israelis; the Muslims are offended that the site, despite still being a mosque, is not under a muslim government, while the Israelis know that if they were to give it up Jews would, once again, be denied access to the Wailing Wall. Moreover, your pointing out of Christian actions in regard to that area is disingenuous; Christians are not insisting that the Temple Mount be given over to Christians. It's a nonissue to us.

You seem to think that all you need to do is point out some things that Christians have done in the past and that somehow the fact that we don't burn witches any more means Muslims have changed their views on how a Mosque is significant. This despite the fact that they still treat Mosques as holy ground that unbelievers may not enter. Like I pointed out, you cannot get into Mecca if you are not a Muslim. Islam is not Christianity; you cannot make the claim that because Christian teaching and behavior has changed, muslim behavior has necessarily changed in the same way. Christianity had its major schisms 1000 and 1500 years after its founding (approximately) and separated into major sects along doctrinal lines.

Islam does not allow for that; it is highly legalistic and the arguments are mainly over interpretation of law. Islam schismed almost immediately and that was not over doctrine, but over Muhammed's sucessor. What seems like ancient history to us is the source of the single largest division in the muslim world.



Your own source points out that in the Arabian penninsula and Morocco do not allow non-muslims in, and that many other places put strict rules on it. I did not say "Under no circumstances can a non-Muslim ever enter a Mosque", I said "Muslims only, for all intents and purposes." Turkey, in your example, is widely cited as a secular and liberal muslim nation (which it is) and yet it still regulates non-muslim visits to mosques far more strictly than any church does.

You don't seem to get that there is not some wide gulf in Islam with a few radicals on one side and all these nice moderates on the other. There's a large spectrum of millions of conservative and fairly conservative moderates that may not agree with AQ and their methods, but also still see the U.S. as an enemy to varying degrees and consider this sort of thing a victim for Islam over the infidel.

For someone who preaches tolerance, you certainly seem intent on thinking a totally different culture thinks the same way we do.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

So, DE's objection to these people exercising their rights under the constitution is that this mosque might maybe constitute a win for Islamic people entirely unrelated to this mosque. So much for the first amendment.

Vindi - You're position is entirely baffling. Perhaps it's reasoned out along the same lines as those who used to think that criticism of the war equaled criticism of the troops. Now, both lines of reasoning are seriously flawed, but I can understand why a guy like you might think along those lines.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show