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

[The Barbarian]

(Elohiyim declares Catholic bigotry)

Barbarian infers:
You're Catholic?

No. You are!

So much for your argument, then.

And you have a church history and tradition of bigotry.

Well, that's a testable claim. What does your church say about Muslims?

Barbarian suggests:
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?

Your behavior.

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.

Show us that one. Show us where Jesus, for example condemned the Samaritans.

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

Just slightly scratching the surface...

Verses that don't say we should force people to worship our way:
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.

See. I can't find any, either.

You need to read the Bible more, Barbarian.

Perhaps it's your reading comprehension that's at fault here.

 

[elohiym]

I don't even need to respond to that.

Thanks! Barbarian. :chuckle:

 

[Nick_A]

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.

The building was destroyed by the landing gear of a Muslim terrorist's attacking plane regardless of how many feet from the Twin Towers.

When Carmelite nuns moved into a building near Auschwitz, the Nazi death camp, in 1984. Pope John Paul II interceded and asked the nuns to move. Though the nuns were not responsible for the Holocaust, it was the proper thing to do in respect to the dead and to the Golden Rule so they moved. A person either "feels" the need for and the value of the Golden Rule or they don't and just demand "rights."

 

[lightbringer]

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.

Why speak of the hypothetical when the legality is what answers the question?

The USS Arizona memorial is a National Historic Landmark and is under the control of the U.S. Park Services, government property with "boundaries" established.

Pearl Harbor is also a port (harbor) that has vessels (civilian and military) at dock, at anchor and transiting the harbor, therefore the reason for the boundaries. This was established for two reasons, 1. The preservation of the memorial and 2. Safety in navigation.

Has there been any restrictions enacted by any government agency to set boundaries at this site?

If the plan was to build a Mosque on the foot print of the twin towers, then yes, sensitivity would play a big part in this, but the Mosque is to be built two blocks from ground zero.

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.

It would be illegal!

We were not at war with the Buddhist, we were at war with Imperial Japan, and Japan was not and is not the only country that is Buddhist. So why are you being insensitive to all the peace loving Buddhists around the world?

Probably for the same reason you are dead set against all Muslims!

 

[kmoney]

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.

You are burning some books but you aren't really eliminating the Quran. It will still be readily available to anyone who wants to read it. All they are doing is burning the Qurans in a symbolic fashion that is based on misconceptions and it does damage to our relations with Muslims and also our "war on terror". I don't think you can use the bible to justify this.

 

[kmoney]

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

The difference being that those were idols, etc. being used by the Israelites.

 

[Lovejoy]

I am sure someone has posted it, and I have too much going on to hunt it down, but why exactly do they want to build the mosque there? Is there some fantastic reason for it, and is that reason still valid in the light of the clear resistance?

 

[kmoney]

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 will not agree that their intentions are unclear. They have given their reasoning. You can choose to accept it or not.

What does that mean?

I don't think it's that mysterious.

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?

I don't know if it is to further Sharia law but I did find this...

“Imam Feisal wants to establish a ‘shariah state’ in America.”

Actually, quite the contrary. Imam Feisal believes that all Muslims must adhere to the laws of the land in which they reside, including in America. This is a basic tenet of Islam. He has repeatedly stated that America is already one of the most Shariah compliant countries in the world because of America’s adherence to our Bill of Rights and because it allows members of all religions, including Muslims, to practice their faith freely. In other words, Imam Feisal believes that Muslims practice Shariah when they fast, pray, give to charity and uphold the commandments of protecting life, liberty, dignity, the pursuit of happiness and the right to freedom of worship.

- from the link provided earlier
Cordoba Initiative FAQs

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.

After the dust has cleared? You make it seem like this is a few weeks after the attacks. It's been 9 years.

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

The presence of this mosque doesn't endanger any American principles. And in some ways it symbolizes them. Also, I question if Sharia Law is really Rauf's goal here. Or even one of 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.

I agree with you here. Actions speak louder than words.

Would they want a church or a Jewish temple placed where many Muslims were killed. No.

Did you ask them? It probably depends on the circumstances.

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.

Rights have been talked about a lot on TOL. I haven't seen Rauf mention it though.

 

[kmoney]

I am sure someone has posted it, and I have too much going on to hunt it down, but why exactly do they want to build the mosque there? Is there some fantastic reason for it, and is that reason still valid in the light of the clear resistance?

http://www.cordobainitiative.org/?q=content/frequently-asked-questions

That link should provide some answers.

 

[GuySmiley]

See TH's post for a better answer.

Oh sure, cheater!

 

[Lovejoy]

http://www.cordobainitiative.org/?q=content/frequently-asked-questions

That link should provide some answers.

Thank you. They state that: "We look forward to actively engaging with leaders of the victims of 9/11 to respond to their concerns and obtain their support for our efforts."

I wonder if that includes changing their plans if it is clear that support is not forthcoming. I don't have much of a position on the matter, other than believing that those who most suffered from the attacks should have the greatest say in this.

 

[The Barbarian]

I don't even need to respond to that.

It would have been pretty hard for you; but I'll ask again:

Show us where God says we should force people to worship the "right" way. This was your last attempt:
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.


But neither of these say that. You invented your own doctrine, and now you're trying to put words in God's mouth.

This doesn't seem like something a Christian would do, does it?

 

[Choleric]

Build it wherever you want. This is a free country.

Too many people are too short sighted with these types of issues. People like enforcing freedom of religion only when it's their religion. It always comes back to bite you.

 

[elohiym]

Why speak of the hypothetical when the legality is what answers the question?

Sorry you missed the point. If you cannot pretend that it would be legal for the hypothetical, and must instead nitpick the hypothetical, then the point would likely be wasted on you anyway. So drop it.

If the plan was to build a Mosque on the foot print of the twin towers, then yes, sensitivity would play a big part in this...

Why? Is this where you equivocate my point?

We were not at war with the Buddhist, we were at war with Imperial Japan...

Go learn history. Imperial Japan was driven by Buddhism.

Probably for the same reason you are dead set against all Muslims!

The same reason that Jesus will destroy all unbelievers when he comes. You ready?

 

[elohiym]

It would have been pretty hard for you; but I'll ask again:

Show us where God says we should force people to worship the "right" way. This was your last attempt:
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.


But neither of these say that. You invented your own doctrine, and now you're trying to put words in God's mouth.

This doesn't seem like something a Christian would do, does it?

I'm sorry you don't understand the verses and their clear implications, but I simply don't have any more time to waste with you. Perhaps you should ask your priest if Muslims will be in the Kingdom of God, having rejected Christ and the authority of the Pope. After your priest explains to you that they will not be in the Kingdom of God and why that is, then you can extract your foot from your mouth and will be able to place it on solid ground.

Good luck!

 

[MrRadish]

Go learn history. Imperial Japan was driven by Buddhism.

Except that by World War Two the government was actually repressing Buddhism and had been ever since Emperor Meiji had enforced State Shinto in 1890.

That and the fact that the Pearl Harbour attacks had little to no religious basis and rather were the result of nationalism, prevalent concepts of honour and, most importantly, a crippling economic blockade of Japan by the USA.

In your own words - go learn history.

 

[elohiym]

You are burning some books but you aren't really eliminating the Quran. It will still be readily available to anyone who wants to read it. All they are doing is burning the Qurans in a symbolic fashion that is based on misconceptions and it does damage to our relations with Muslims and also our "war on terror". I don't think you can use the bible to justify this.

First, I understand that it would not be eliminating the Quran, but would be eliminating some Qurans. That would be a good start.

Second, the Bible condemns all unbelievers regardless of the religious affiliation. Unbelieving "Christians" and every other Christ hating, Christ denying religion will be destroyed.

Tell me, Kmo. Is Mohammed the Way, or is Jesus the Way?

Should you tear down signs that tell people to go the wrong way to their destruction?

 

[fool]

First, I understand that it would not be eliminating the Quran, but would be eliminating some Qurans. That would be a good start.

:idea:
You could download a bunch of Korans from Amazon and delete them.

 

[Tathagata]

Go learn history. Imperial Japan was driven by Buddhism.

In order for that statement to be true, there would have to be some Buddhist doctrine that supports violence or imperialism. The fact is, there is not one single passage in scripture advocating violence, and Buddha was against authority and said that one should be self-governed, i.e. not governed by anybody else. (See my quote on the side.)

The same reason that Jesus will destroy all unbelievers when he comes. You ready?

So unexpected from the Prince of Peace!

 

[elohiym]

Except that by World War Two the government was actually repressing Buddhism and had been ever since Emperor Meiji had enforced State Shinto in 1890.

Buddhism and Military Expansionism

Fortunately or unfortunately, Buddhism had already been accepted by the Japanese as part of Japanese culture and tradition. Therefore, apart from its religious beliefs and practices, Buddhism had permeated even to the lowest strata of the people and was removed from few of them. Only a very small number of priests and monks endured and reaffirmed their Buddhist discipline despite the hardships.

They also reevaluated their religion in the light of modern scholarship. However, as time went on, this critical study and application of Buddhism was often interrupted by the nationalistic military government, and Buddhist institutions were once again utilized by it during two World Wars.

And you can hear this Japanese Zen Buddhist monk state that Zen Buddhism was complicit in Japan's military expansion.

Japanese Buddhism in World War II

So there!

You want to split hairs over Shinto verses Buddhism, while you ignore the larger point that we were attacked by religious fanatics. Have fun with that! :chuckle:

That and the fact that the Pearl Harbour attacks had little to no religious basis and rather were the result of nationalism, prevalent concepts of honour and, most importantly, a crippling economic blockade of Japan by the USA.

In your own words - go learn history.

I suggest you read the book Zen at War and educate yourself.

You may now pull your foot from your mouth. :chuckle: