The Glade 4.0

What about me?

I am a Christian and I do not see the problem with the building of a mosque a couple blocks away from ground zero. Not sure I'd go with the 11 story bling mosque they have planned, but it is their money. I liked the concept of let the people of New York decide and the rest of us stay out of it.

How are we ever going to regain our melting pot culture if we all stay hunkered down in our own chafing dishes. If we can't welcome the immigrants with open arms and be willing to have them become Americans, and grant them freedom of religion and grant them the right to practice their religion peacefully, we've lost our way and need to stop and find it again.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

Yeah we should welcome this with open arms and the President should point out how this is what makes us better than other governments who discriminate against religion.

Make it a beacon of our pride.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Since they don't have a right under the Constitution to build mosques anywhere they want... so much for your reasoning. As for "might maybe", since you're totally ignorant of what I'm talking about..

[quote[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.[/quote]

We can also understand how you can't understand anyone else's line of reasoning. You lack the ability to deal with it.

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

I still think that this would be better left to the residents of New York to make the choice on, not anyone trying to armchair quarterback from Washington DC, Las Vegas, Texas, etc.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

What does being a Christian have to do with it? This isn't about Christianity.

[/quote]

This has nothing to do with "welcoming immigrants" or our "melting pot culture" which is was only ever sort of true anyhow. It's not an automatic imperative to do either of those things; there is no "way" we've lost.

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

That reasoning I can support, since it was, after all, them who actually suffered the attack. However, I think their choice should be "no."

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

Those who bought the property, if they are in compliance with local ordinance, can build whatever they want there, as is their right.

And they, along with any contractors, material suppliers, design firms etc. which bid and are awarded for the contract for said project will suffer whatever social stigmatization, loss of business and loss off access to many other non-public services and goods that others see fit. As is their right.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

You had the right of it until you said it was up to the people of NY to decide. Sorry, if you're thinking in democratic terms, no it's not. The mosque builders have every right to build there, the people of NY be damned. The mosque builders, on the other hand, have to live with the people of NY, and that is radically different.



Yep, it was as I thought, you couldn't be assed to read my position until called out, and when you were, you couldn't understand it. Sorry, the box you'd put me in didn't fit.

_________________
"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

Actually, after re-thinking this, I've changed my mind. NYC should let them have their mosque.

1) While Freedom of Religion is not relevant to the issue of precisely where houses of worship can be built, property rights are. If it's their private property that they purchased, they should be allowed to build the mosque provided it complies with zoning laws, building codes, etc. It isn't to be built on the actual site of the WTC anyhow, so it isn't taking over what is essentially a national monument.

2) Inevitably, there will be a propaganda victory for militants no matter what we do since they will spin it how they please. If they don't get to build it, they will paint it as the infidels oppressing muslims; if it is built they will portray it as some sort of humiliation for us. However, since most of the people whose opinions we care about don't get the significance of a mosque and insist on understanding muslim thinking in terms of how we think, we may as well score our own propaganda victory by pointing out that we are so strong that we can allow them to build a mosque at the site of an attack, and they can gain no advantage from it. Essentially the message should be "We will permit your mosque because it conforms with how we choose to run our country. Do not mistake this for weakness, or you will suffer the consequences - again."

3) It will serve well to expose people who are really not interested in simply having a mosque to peacefully practice Islam. Inevitably, it will be closely wached by the press and the public. It will serve to expose militants and hostile muslims who come there and preach violence, which could mean another propaganda victory if it is revealed that the motives behind it were not as pure as many like to believe.

In other words, from a standpoint of strategic advantage, the cost-benefit analysis, plus property rights, indicate that we really should let them go ahead.

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

How about Ali Al-Ahmed, a native of Saudi Arabia and the founder of the Institute for Gulf Affairs? According to the Boston Globe, he says: "A mosque should be a good thing," he tells me. But he worries about the number of Americans who may be "hurt and upset" by the project, and wonders whether a mosque is really the best thing for Muslims to build so close to Ground Zero. Why not something less emotionally charged, he asks -- a social-service agency, perhaps, or an assisted living center for the elderly?

Or, Stephen Suleyman Schwartz, a devout Muslim and director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism? He says the Cordoba house comes across as "grossly insensitive".

I guess Dr. Jasser, practicing Muslim and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, must believe all Muslims are terrorists, and Ali Al-Ahmed must have irrational prejudices against them? Does Stephen Suleyman Schwartz show up on the irrational fear and prejudice radar for his thoughts on the matter?

Read more at the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, the Center for Islamic Pluralism and the Institute for Gulf Affairs.

_________________
"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

Out of curiosity, for those of you who still oppose the construction of this mosque, do you feel the Pentagon should close the mosque they constructed there after the attacks? I mean, it's right in the heart of our national security apparatus.

_________________


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

Were the people who live in that area given any say in the matter? Did they give it the okay or the no thanks? Do they give a **** now?

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Yes, but if I were them and did not identify with some extrimist assholes and did not view said assholes as being the same as myself, why would I wear the cloak of shame and built my **** somewhere else? I'm just as goddamn patriotic as an other American, why should I feel guilty about building my church here? Because some other people who are bigots might use their myopic vision to see my actions as disrespectful? **** them.

It's the same as saying I should apologize to every black person, because some white guy might have owned one of their great great great grandparents.

_________________
"...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Mainly because it is disrespectful, for reasons that have nothing to do with myopia. What you're really just saying is "but why shouldn't I just be an ***? **** anyone who thinks I'm an ***; they're being myopic." It wouldn't be the least bit offensive to most people if 9/11 hadn't ever happened. This argument that it must be about bigotry is essentially a circular argument: They're bigots, which is why the oppose the mosque, which is how we know they're bigots.

That doesn't mean they still shouldn't be allowed to do as they please with their own property, but it does mean they're still being asses by doing it. You didn't see us build churches in downtown Baghdad for Iraqi Christians (or mosques for the rest of them) after our tanks rolled in, even though we build a lot of other stuff. A church for Iraqi Christians would be just another thing for us to build, and we'd see it as supporting all religions and ethnicities equally, but it would be hudely offensive and humiliating to many Iraqi Muslims.



Not really. You're talking about major generational separation there, and again, you're ignoring that there is a wide segment of the muslim world that doesn't agree with AQs specific actions, but aren't exactly against war with the infidel, the west, etc. Besides, no one is asking for an apology from these people, we're asking them not to be insensitive asses and build something that the people who planned these attacks and those like them will view as a victory symbol, even if that isn't what it means to the muslims that will actually build it.

The double standard here is that everyone else needs to be sensitive to muslim feelings and not lump them in with terrorists, but people get all upset at the idea that they ought to be sensitive to the feelings of others. That isn't about what they have a right to do; they have a right to use their property as they wish. It's about a level playing field in terms of coming to a peaceful understanding in our society.

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

Khross, I am truly astonished and saddened by your position on this.

_________________


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

Why Monte?

His position is very consistent with his normal attitude. Believe it or not he does prefer that people do things with class whenever possible, himself especially.

I'm for letting them build it because opposing it is in opposition to one of the core and major values the country was founded on, the freedom to worship as you choose. Khross is not opposed to letting Muslims worship, far from it. He just feels that their choice of location is unwise, tacky and provocative. It is in my opinion as well, but I'm not going to promote stopping them because they are being a bit unclassy. If we did that we would have to eliminate professional sports in the USA, or at least a lot of fan attendance at them.

Or is this just one of your stock moral disaprovals without any substance behind it? Did you actually read and consider Khoss' words? Or did you just get to the point where he dissapproves and object to that?

Really, I don't understand your extremely odd statement.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

I pretty much agree there... its their property, their right to build on it what they want (pending local zoning ordinances and codes). It might be inconsiderate and poorly thought out, but it still their land and property.

I was surprised and disappointed that he saw it as disrespectful.

_________________


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

I'm surprised that you can't see that other people may have different emotional and intellectual viewpoints than you. Or that those opinions can have as much validity as yours.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

I see that people have different emotional and intellectual viewpoints than me. I am disappointed when I see someone whom I consider to be pretty intelligent take a position that seems to accept the idea that all Islam=Extremist Islam. Someone like Khross, who bravely stands up for his ideals of individualism and individual accountability, sounds unnatural when he makes a statement like that.

These people are being judged based upon the actions of other people entirely unassociated and aligned with them. I would normally expect Khross to stand with the people not only on a legal level, but on a moral level as well.

_________________


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

Muslims feel there's no place for a church in Mecca.

By their own standards, there are places other ideals aren't welcome. Why don't you accept their standards and over-ride them with your own?

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

It is not a matter of all Islam=Extremist Islam, that is your first misunderstanding. It is a matter that the construction of a holy place, a place of worship, is (or should be) a very symbolic and important decision - especially in a place where an act of of war has taken place. The terrorists struck in the name of Allah, in the name of Islam. The practitioners of Islam have done very little to either disown the terrorists or say they were wrong in their strike against the United States. This failure to decry the acts of the extremist followers of their faith still taints the majority of Islam.

I understand that the Imam for this group has decried these terrorist acts, has said many things in opposition to Al Qaeda. He battles their leaders in the media and among his followers.

Recognizing that the sentiment of the followers of other faiths will balk at the proximity of the Bling Mosque to ground zero would seem well within his intellectual capabilities. That he chooses to do erect this gaudy mosque (look at the plans) in spite of this very predictable sentiment indicates that he is not as respectful of the practitioners of other religions as he asks them to be of his.

It may be meant with the best intentions in the world, but it is still a horrendously insensitive and tacky thing to do. My point is that the Muslims are quite comfortable with insulting American sensibilities, as long as we don't insult theirs. There is no growth toward a mutual understanding. It shows an inability on the part of the followers of Islam, or at least the followers of this Imam, to consider the feelings of others.

There are reportedly over 200 mosques in Manhattan alone. There are reportedly no churches or synagogues or temples of a faith other than Islam in all of Saudi Arabia. I can understand Mecca (328.2 sq. miles) being this way, as no non-Muslims are allowed into the city. But all of Saudi Arabia? As a side note, I wonder if there are any churches other than Catholic in the Vatican City (0.17 sq. miles). Probably not.

Because we hold freedom of religion as one of the core tenets of our country, we must let them build the mosque there. We would be hypocritical if we didn't, they are following the laws of this country, and while insensitive and tacky and ultimately classless, the only reason not do so is emotional, not legal. This only goes to prove that our values as a country are not identical to the values of Islam. However, lest they mistake this as a symbol they have conquered the United States, I expect them to have every inspection, every permit, every worker, fully documented and in order. We have separation of Church and State, they do not. We can insist they follow our laws.

I also expect more protests at this building, both during construction and after its opening.

I've already had to talk one of my conspiracy fanatic friends down from his tirade of how they are going to sneak a nuclear bomb into their own mosque, set it off, level New York and blame it on American home-grown terrorists. I'm tired of all the fuss about this already.

Really Monte, your holier than thou attitude about people not having the right to their own opinion and their own emotions, because they are intellectually aware, intelligent and in a supporter of freedom of religion does a lot to support the accusations made against you of not thinking things through. It also sets yourself up as proclaiming your emotions and opinions as being superior in all ways to those of others.

The condescending disappointment is an old tired tactic, please lose it.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

Yes we should be be so respectful of Islam after all they offer their followers peace



http://planet-iran.com/index.php/news/19414

Where else is child prostitution even consider acceptable

_________________
History of the Condom
In 1272, the Muslim Arabs invented the condom, using a goat's lower intestine.
In 1873, the British somewhat refined the idea, by taking the intestine out of the goat first.

That's simply untrue. Just because it does not get media play does not mean that the practitioners of Islam have done little to disown terrorism. However, that shouldn't be necessary. Plenty of Islamic leaders and muslim laypersons came out powerfully against the terrorist attacks and terrorism in general, and continue to to so to this day. They simply don't get a lot of play in the media. Doesn't fit the narrative. To GW Bush's credit, he made a point of talking about that issue after the attacks, and was joined in his condemnation by many Islamic people of faith.



Only if you paint them all with a single broad brush. Again, that's like blaming all of Christianity for the **** the WBC pulls.



So what the hell is the problem, then? Must he be judged for the actions of people entirely unrelated to him except by the most strained definition of Islam?




Or, if we simply leave aside our irrational fears of Islam, we could see it as the ultimate act of defiance in the face of radical hatred. This community center, representing Islam in a way entirely counter to Al Qaeda's vile and twisted form of the religion, offers the strongest possible rebuke to AQ's mission. Not only were they not strong enough to topple our country, but they could not topple our founding principle of religious tolerance.




What is horribly insensitive and tacky is allowing ourselves to be ruled by fear instead of tolerance. We continue to lose the battle with terror if we continue to sacrifice our better principles for comfort.





Are we to abandon our principles of religious tolerance because Saudi Arabia is oppressive? Why should we strive to be like Saudi Arabia? Why not show why our society is more correct?



Sorry. I think it takes great courage to construct this community center here, and the classless act is attacking them for doing it.



And like all things, with knowledge and experience comes the end of ignorance and intolerance. As people see this community center grow and thrive, they will come to accept it and will put aside their bigotry.




Don't invent my attitude, Micheal. You're the one being condescending here, looking down your nose at good Americans who just happen to be Muslim. They should not have to endure such intolerance. It was their city, too. They were attacked, just as much as any Jew or Christian. No one would be batting an eyelash if they built a church near the site of the Oaklahoma City bombing. But irrational hatred of the eeeeeevil Muslim is driving people to make some very bad judgment calls regarding this community center.

_________________


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

Wrong, entirely wrong. You have no sensitivity, no real purpose here, you just want to win.

Why is it wrong to be offended when you see someone acting in an offensive manner? You have yet to address that simple point.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones