toldailytopic: How do you feel about building a mosque at ground zero?

[drbrumley]

From Cordoba House: The Acid Test
Liberty against the lynch mob: which side are you on?
Justin Raimondo

Is it me, or does anyone else find it passing strange that – at a time when conservatives are on the ascendant, with this administration’s increasingly unpopular economic program under attack from all sides – that the American right-wing is taking up yet another nasty-minded “cultural” issue? Forget the bank bailouts, don’t worry about the nationalization of large swathes of the American economy (banking, healthcare, housing), and try to forget that China owns us – what’s really really wrong with America is that the New York City government is allowing a mosque to be built within a four-block radius of where the World Trade Center once stood.

Never mind that it isn’t a mosque, and that we’re talking about four New York City blocks, which, where I come from, is the equivalent of the other side of town. Also please ignore the fact that there are already mosques in the vicinity – go here for the Google map – and not only that, but what about all those Muslims living and working in the general vicinity? Isn’t their mere presence a slap in the face? What about Alfanoose, the excellent Arabic restaurant a few blocks away, where customers regularly consume such pro-terrorist items as lamb shawarma? Not to mention falafels!​

:think:

 

[Nick_A]

Kmoney

You can if the same place is symbolic of 2 things. They are choosing to focus on one aspect and you another. If they have ill motives and are trying to conceal them, using a name "Cordoba Initiative" is not a very subtle way of doing it. So instead of being ignorant or trying to declare victory, they are either ignorant or their motives aren't as nefarious as you think. And since I've seen no good evidence that they are trying to declare victory.....

So it could go several ways. They could be just ignorant or think we are so stupid and politically correct that we wouldn't notice the obvious. We can agree that the developer's intentions are unclear.

I'm not sure what you mean by political, but they have Muslim-Western relations in mind. This isn't JUST about building a mosque/cultural center.

What does that mean? It sounds wonderful but what does it mean in reality. If its purpose is to further Sharia law in the United States as furthering Muslim-Western relations, Is that really respectful to the sufferings of 911? It appears to me as a political statement asserting that after the dust has cleared, the mosque furthering Sharia law and its politics has planted its roots.

What do you want to see them say to show this? As I've said before, they may be naive for not seeing the controversy, but perhaps they don't see it as a violation of the golden rule since any offense taken by this mosque is based on misconceptions. We aren't fighting Islam. Not all Muslims are held responsible for the attacks. And Rauf has spoken against the attacks. He's been there for years. They already hold some services in the building, I believe.

We are fighting in order to preserve the principles America was founded upon. Sharia law does not accept them.

The Golden Rule is not reflected by what someone says but rather by what they do. It isn't a matter of what the developers say but rather what they do. Would they want a church or a Jewish temple placed where many Muslims were killed. No. I would not want one there either for the sake of the innocent people that lost loved ones because of the battles of governing bodies. If they valued the Golden Rule, then they would FEEL the truth of this and not wish to impose a mosque at Ground Zero.

Honestly, I'm not sure they have been yelling about rights.

I don't know about you but that is all I've read from those supporting the mosque. They claim they have the "RIGHT" to build it. I have yet to read anything about their OBLIGATIONS in support of the Golden Rule if they believe in it.

And what obligations are those? Should all Muslims stay 500 feet from ground zero? Should they not talk about it? Should they submit themselves to mistreatment because of what some Islamic extremists did?

The basic obligation is to keep politics away from Ground Zero which means no Sharia mosques. However, Individuals should always be welcome since 911 is a human tragedy.

I really do see your point here. And, as I've said before, part of me does wish that Rauf would have foreseen this controversy and planned something else. And if he ends up choosing to move it to somewhere else, I would support that. But I stand by my statements that no offense should be taken for this and this can actually be a good thing if people embrace it.

There are many examples of the golden Rule. Here is one:

One should treat others according to how one would like others to treat one's self

All political agendas take the position that it will be a good thing after it is imposed upon society.

The Golden Rule asserts that rather than imposing your good intentions at this place of national tragedy, you become able to put yourself into the position of another. It doesn't further political agendas but does serve the heart. And since the purpose of the essence of religion is to heal the heart, the idea of a controversial Sharia mosque at Ground Zero seems all the more hypocritical

 

[drbrumley]

If they were actually building this thing at ground Zero, then yes I would oppose it. But since they are not, what exactly is the issue that I need to concern myself with regarding this non mosque?

 

[Nick_A]

If they were actually building this thing at ground Zero, then yes I would oppose it. But since they are not, what exactly is the issue that I need to concern myself with regarding this non mosque?

It is being built at a site where a building once stood that was destroyed by the landing gear of an attacking plane. That is Ground Zero.

 

[GuySmiley]

Good. :up:

The Dove World Outreach Center is burning Korans to remember 9/11? :chuckle:

Anyway, I agree its good. Why do you think its good?

I'll go ahead and answer too instead of waiting for yours. I think its good because burning a pile or Korans is extremely insensitive and inflamatory (pun intended). I think the first amendment would allow this church to have their book burning, city ordinance or not. But I think they should choose not to, because of the harm it will do to the Christian - Muslim relationship. Does any of that sound familiar?

 

[drbrumley]

It is being built at a site where a building once stood that was destroyed by the landing gear of an attacking plane. That is Ground Zero.

A landing gear destroyed a 5 story building? Not to be argumentative but that is ridiculous. For starters, the proposed building is between church and w. Broadway and Murray st is behind it. Park Place is the main street it will be on. Which is 3 streets from Ground Zero. Vessey, Barclay and then Park Place. I'm not seeing a problem.

 

[Town Heretic]

The Dove World Outreach Center is burning Korans to remember 9/11? :chuckle:

Anyway, I agree its good. Why do you think its good?

I'll go ahead and answer too instead of waiting for yours. I think its good because burning a pile or Korans is extremely insensitive and inflamatory (pun intended). I think the first amendment would allow this church to have their book burning, city ordinance or not. But I think they should choose not to, because of the harm it will do to the Christian - Muslim relationship. Does any of that sound familiar?

Except that attacking an entire religion for the actions of an overwhelming minority of its adherents isn't really rational, is it? So those Doves are being more than insensitive, they're acting from a profound ignorance or emotional confusion-evidenced by the tie in with the date. Similarly, assuming or asserting that a religion or a group of its adherents should accept some form of social censorship (self imposed or not) for acts neither promoted nor a part of their particular religious understanding seems equally under thought and overly emotional. Being insensitive to that might be entirely called for, given that sort of sensitivity begs to breed a sense of justification for those who carry an over reaching and errant bias.

 

[bybee]

Please!

Please!

Inflammatory? I don't doubt it. Declare a fatwa? :idunno:

But, bybee, don't tell me you actually would support burning Qurans?

It would serve no good purpose.

Of course not!
But, yet, that which might be inflammatory regarding the building of "the mosque" ought to be considered also.
The old "Shoe on the other foot" scenario.
bybee

 

[Granite]

Inflammatory? I don't doubt it. Declare a fatwa? :idunno:

But, bybee, don't tell me you actually would support burning Qurans?

It would serve no good purpose.

None whatsoever, and it makes those doing it look like Philistines.

 

[elohiym]

How do you think religion ought to be prohibited then? What religion(s)?

Did I say that religion should be prohibited now? No.

When Christ returns (second coming) all other religions will be wiped off the face of the earth, along with their temples. It's simply a fact of scripture.

I am intolerant of any religion, including the numerous apostate Christian denominations, that teach doctrine in opposition to the gospel.

Religious freedom allows people over time to subvert government and force or intimidate everyone to worship their way, which will always be the wrong way.

You're Catholic?

No. You are! :duh:

And you have a church history and tradition of bigotry.

Might I suggest a place to live where you won't be so infuriated by all the tolerance?

Who said I am infuriated by all the tolerance? :idunno:

I'm laughing at it, because it's idiotic, especially coming from Christians who are supposed to be intolerant of any religion or "Christian" denomination in opposition to the gospel.

I don't see the part where Jesus says to force people to worship the right way.

Just slightly scratching the surface...

John 4:22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

Luke 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

You need to read the Bible more, Barbarian.

Would love to see a link showing that it would be legal to park a boat there!

For the hypothetical it's legal. Get it? I have no idea whether it's actually legal, or why it would be illegal. Perhaps those reasons would support my point, not diminish it. :think:

I lived on the island for five years and never saw any vessels parked (anchored) near the memorial...temporary docking at the memorial dock is allowed but only for short periods of time.

So would it be inappropriate (insensitive, etc.) for a floating Buddhist temple to be parked only 600 feet from the site of a national tragedy where religiously driven, fanatical, suicidal Buddhists attacked us with planes and killed the men entombed there? Yes or no.

 

[elohiym]

...don't tell me you actually would support burning Qurans?

It would serve no good purpose.

How can you say that as a Christian? :idunno:

 

[kmoney]

How can you say that as a Christian? :idunno:

What good do you think it would serve?

 

[kmoney]

Of course not!

Good. :up: I didn't think you would support it.

But, yet, that which might be inflammatory regarding the building of "the mosque" ought to be considered also.
The old "Shoe on the other foot" scenario.
bybee

If they reconsider the location of this mosque fine, but I don't think the two scenarios are completely comparable. There are no shoes on feet.

 

[Granite]

What good do you think it would serve?

Well gee, kmo, nothing bad ever happens after people start burning books.

 

[kmoney]

The Dove World Outreach Center is burning Korans to remember 9/11? :chuckle:

Anyway, I agree its good. Why do you think its good?

I'll go ahead and answer too instead of waiting for yours. I think its good because burning a pile or Korans is extremely insensitive and inflamatory (pun intended). I think the first amendment would allow this church to have their book burning, city ordinance or not. But I think they should choose not to, because of the harm it will do to the Christian - Muslim relationship. Does any of that sound familiar?

That is basically my answer as well. But I don't think the two scenarios are completely comparable. The wrong reasoning that would lead people to burn Qurans in response to the 9/11 attacks is the same wrong reasoning that offends people at this mosque. See TH's post for a better answer.

 

[elohiym]

What good do you think it would serve?

The elimination of a book that contains an anti-gospel message is a good thing, just like the destruction of any idol is a good thing. See the Bible.

 

[The Barbarian]

The basic obligation is to keep politics away from Ground Zero

You guys have no sense of irony at all, do you?

 

[elohiym]

None whatsoever, and it makes those doing it look like Philistines.

Or like Hezekiah. 2Ki 18:4 :think:

 

[Granite]

You guys have no sense of irony at all, do you?

Or sense. The site will always be inherently political.

 

[Adam]

Q. How did the terrorist fool America into thinking he was peaceful?
A. He wore a mosque.