Ground Zero Mosque

[mimartin]

For another, YOU'RE the ones framing it as those opposed to the building are a bunch if bigots and racists.

YOU ARE SAYING WHOMEVER MADE THIS VIDEO IS NOT BEING BIGOTS AND RACISTS? (look I can type in all caps too) At the very least they are being anti-Muslim.

 

TL;DR:(This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.)

 

 

I am portraying those people as bigots and racists, because quite frankly I don’t know how you can get any other message from that video. I have not used the same broad strokes as they have when painting all Muslims as attacking us. I have not said everyone that is opposed to the building is anything. I just find it funny that you want to go there. Why is that? You can’t defend it any other way so you attack me?

Not sure where you're going with the "repossessions" bit. I'm sure it probably has something to do with the price of tea in China.

Then your power of understanding is extraordinary because you got the point perfectly, my statement had just as much to do with the topic as your saying some Muslims are against the civic center. (You got the jest even though I meant "repercussions."

 

And if you have even bothered to read ANY of my posts inb this thread...

I try to read your post and I know you think it is within their right to build and that it is a New York State issue and New York City issue and not a United State of America federal issue.

 

I also know you are intelligent enough to know that not all Muslims are the enemy of the United States (something that the maker of the video seems to be strongly implying). I also know we disagree with the definition of ground zero. I believe it is the site of the former Twin Towers. You believe it is anywhere a building was damaged during the attack. I however, don’t know to what extent a building had to be damaged to meet your definition (you could be talking about most of Manhattan for all I know considering the cloud of dust that enveloped the area).

 

Frankly I believe you are reading too much into my post if you believe this:

You are never going to get that through people’s heads. Some anti-Muslim groups decides to attack the community center based on the lie that it is at Ground Zero and people are gullible enough to believe it.

 

Reminds me of a line from The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, “when the legend becomes fact print the legend.”

Or this:

So what? I’m a Christian American and I’m not opposed to the location. I don’t think the person that owns the land is opposed to the community center and that is the only person that counts.

 

I don’t see why Muslims obliviously worried about repercussions matter more than those not opposed to the site.

Equal everyone against the Civic Center are “bigots and racists.” Like I wrote ealier in the thread, I’m guessing in a post you must not have read,

I do not dispute that people are against it (I’m not on the extreme right), I don’t have a problem with opinion polls that do not coincide with my opinion. I don’t know anyone in the real world that are actual for the building of the Mosque (Texas). However, that all means nothing. The only thing I’m looking at is if it can be legally built or not. Do they have the right to build it? Personally if I was a decision maker, I would not build it there because of backlash. However, I would defend their right to build it with my last breathe. I don’t like people burning the Flag either, but I strongly support their right to do it.

So even my mother is against the "Mosque" (even though it is not a Mosque), you really think I'd call my Mother a Bigot or a Racist?

[Jae Onasi]

Let's turn the thermostat down a bit--it's getting a touch warm in here.

[Tommycat]

@mimartin: first off, my apologies. I erred in including you in the ones claiming the opposition are racists and bigots. You have a more level head than that. So again, sorry. I acknowledge that there ARE racists and bigots that oppose it. I just refuse to believe that the majority of opposition comes from racists and bigots when even NYC Muslims oppose the building. I accidentally threw you in with Samnmax.

 

Second, I feel that AT BEST, it is a state/city of New York issue, but frankly even if that were the case, the First Amendment right trumps any opposition to the mosque/civic center. I do not oppose the building of it in the slightest. All I am arguing is that it's in poor taste. When you combine the statements made by the organizer, the proximity to Ground Zero, and the fact that they applied for 9/11 grant money, it's hard not to be able to call it "tacky." Do I feel like all Muslims are responsible for the actions of a few? ABSOLUTELY NOT! I work with, have friends, and even just randomly hang out with Muslims(strangely enough, since I've quit drinking, it's nice to be with people who don't drink). Perhaps it's because I'm Japanese and know what it's like to be treated like an attacker even though you had nothing to do with it(Pearl Harbor).

 

Now, to Samnmax. Quite frankly the majority in the US oppose the building in that location. Are you saying that the majority of that majority are racist bigots? I would like clarification, as The Anti Defamation League is one of the groups that opposes the "mosque"(Yes, mosque. Park51 on their own site listed the mosque as part of the facilities, but they have since changed the name, but their prior statements were specific to mention "mosque" as opposed to "prayer room" which is the top 2 floors). Also the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. Oh sure, those racist bigots at the American Islamic Forum for Democracy are surely out to get... um... Islam?

 

Oh and by the way, If there's a mosque in the Pentagon, could you please post a pic of it? Just one pic. I know there's an interfaith chapel, but that is open to all faiths.

[mimartin]

Second, I feel that AT BEST, it is a state/city of New York issue...

I was meaning more along the lines of building codes, zoning and possibly deed restrictions being under the New York City’s jurisdiction and possibly New York State jurisdiction. I don’t care what is being built; it should not be exempt from building codes just because it is a religious institution. A church ripped off roof slams into my house during a hurricane will possibly do just as much damage as any building’s roof of similar size and composition.

 

Personally I don't think the First Amendment trumps states rights to protect public safety. Nor do I believe the First Amendment exempts religious institutions from obeying local laws and ordinances unless those laws infringe on the freedoms granted by the Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[/Quote] I don’t see a violation, but then again I’m no expert on the Constitution nor am I a lawyer.

[Tommycat]

@mimartin: Ah, my mistake. I thought you were saying that my position was that the state could tell them not to build a mosque there. But yes, there are federal, state and NYC building codes that they would have to be held to. Regardless of what the building is, it must comply with all applicable regulations. Not to mention, there is the possibility of requiring an environmental impact study(of course there shouldn't be any hold ups there as there's already a building there).

[Samnmax221]

Now, to Samnmax. Quite frankly the majority in the US oppose the building in that location. Are you saying that the majority of that majority are racist bigots? I would like clarification, as The Anti Defamation League is one of the groups that opposes the "mosque"(Yes, mosque. Park51 on their own site listed the mosque as part of the facilities, but they have since changed the name, but their prior statements were specific to mention "mosque" as opposed to "prayer room" which is the top 2 floors). Also the American Islamic Forum for Democracy. Oh sure, those racist bigots at the American Islamic Forum for Democracy are surely out to get... um... Islam?

 

Oh and by the way, If there's a mosque in the Pentagon, could you please post a pic of it? Just one pic. I know there's an interfaith chapel, but that is open to all faiths.

Do I think the general public are a bunch of idiots and easily manipulated, yes indeed I do.

 

The ADL position is that many of the people who oppose the Islamic center are bigots, though they urged to builders to consider current political sensitivities.

 

A YMCA is not considered a church just because they contain a chapel, and neither should this.

 

No chapel within the DOD is reserved for one specific religion, it's all interfaith. Some areas might be reserved for certain times, and the facilities set up for specific faiths, but nothing is designated as a say a Baptist church or a Catholic church or a mosque.

[mimartin]

I would disagree. Mosque – “A Mosque is a place of worship for followers of Islam”. So when a Muslim is praying inside the non-denominational pentagon Memorial Chapel it is a Mosque. I may be taking the definition a bit too literal. However, I don’t see the difference between calling it a Mosque than calling a civic center with a prayer room not at ground zero, the Ground Zero Mosque. I can be just as stupid as the rest of America; it is my right as an American.

[Tommycat]

Actually mimartin, a mosque is a dedicated prayer location which is reserved for prayer five times per day. That's the definition under the Islamic faith, according to the Muslims I know.

 

Now, Park51 MAY have reconsidered and decided that the top two floors should be just a prayer space. Personally I think they could call it whatever they want, but if it meets the definition of mosque then it is a mosque. The building itself may be more like the YMCA, but that does not mean that there is no mosque. Just that the whole building is not a mosque. It also happens to be larger than any other mosque in the area. The closest size held 1400 worshipers(incidentally it closed down, and they moved to the new location in 2009 in the location of Park51). This one will have the capacity for over 2000 worshipers. So please don't insult people's intelligence by pretending that it's just some Islamic equivalent of the YMCA. But lets face it, the NYC area really does need a large mosque.

[mimartin]

Actually mimartin, a mosque is a dedicated prayer location which is reserved for prayer five times per day. That's the definition under the Islamic faith, according to the Muslims I know.[/Quote] I guess Muslims are all different. Because the guy that owns the shop next door says it would be a Mosque.

[Tommycat]

Of course the Pentagon spokesperson says there is not a mosque in the Pentagon. My buddies say it would not be a mosque, but could be called a "mussallaah." Though to the untrained, the "mussallaah" and "mosque" could be interchangeable.

[Samnmax221]

So the south tower was a mosque under your definition? I guess no one told the hijackers.

[urluckyday]

Why does it matter if it's called a Mosque or not? It's a meeting place for Muslims, and that's the biggest point of contention for most people I think. Not that I care either way.

[Darth Avlectus]

Why does it matter if it's called a Mosque or not? It's a meeting place for Muslims, and that's the biggest point of contention for most people I think. Not that I care either way.

[HK-47] Answer: Because, master, athough you agree with the crux of the issue at hand in principle, it would seem that if you have an opinion with the least bit of reservations towards the issue, according to the proponents, you deserve to have your face sandpapered off until you submit quietly and utterly to their way of thinking and living.

 

Speculation: As the saying goes: Antics with semantics. That is all. Any way they can beat any perceived opposition out of you, they will attempt, no matter how petty and spiteful it may plainly be. [/HK-47]

 

EDIT:

[HK-47]Clarification: This is all despite, or perhaps in spite of, essentially stating non-opposition in principleof freedom of religion.[/HK-47]

[The Doctor]

Why does it matter if it's called a Mosque or not? It's a meeting place for Muslims, and that's the biggest point of contention for most people bigots and racists who clearly don't understand the difference between an extremist and a moderate I think. Not that I care either way.

 

Fixed.

[Tommycat]

Samnmax, NO! The whole of the south tower was not reserved for praying 5 times a day. Was there a room that was? I was not aware of a room reserved for prayer 5 times daily. If there was, then that room would be considered a mosque. Then it could be said that the South tower had a mosque IN it. I swear it's like arguing in Fortran with some of you people.

[Sabretooth]

I was not aware of a room reserved for prayer 5 times daily. If there was, then that room would be considered a mosque.

No it wouldn't. ^_^

[Samnmax221]

Samnmax, NO! The whole of the south tower was not reserved for praying 5 times a day. Was there a room that was? I was not aware of a room reserved for prayer 5 times daily. If there was, then that room would be considered a mosque. Then it could be said that the South tower had a mosque IN it. I swear it's like arguing in Fortran with some of you people.

The Islamic center is not wholly committed to prayer 5 times a day, much like the south tower was bot wholly committed to prayer just because there were was a prayer room on it's 17th floor.

 

Oh and if you want tacky, there's a couple of churches right next to the Oklahoma city National Memorial Park, why isn't anyone complaining about that?

[Tommycat]

The Islamic center is not wholly committed to prayer 5 times a day, much like the south tower was bot wholly committed to prayer just because there were was a prayer room on it's 17th floor.

 

Oh and if you want tacky, there's a couple of churches right next to the Oklahoma city National Memorial Park, why isn't anyone complaining about that?

The prayer room on the 17th floor was devoted to prayer 5 times a day? I hadn't heard that. And the community center is not tacky. The top two floors devoted to worship are. Again, it(the "prayer room") is larger than any mosque in the area.

 

Ugh... Timoty McVeigh did not bomb the Murrah building in the name of Christianity. He did it as an anti-government statement. While he agreed with the Davidians in Waco, he was not a Davidian. Nice try though.

[urluckyday]

Fixed.

 

I'm beginning to wonder if you understand anything about the issue...

[Totenkopf]

I'm beginning to wonder if you understand anything about the issue...

 

Why bother trying to understand anything when you can simply pull out the race/victim card and bash your adversaries? Was kind of surprised anyone bothered resurrecting this thread as the pov divide is very toxicly polarized by now.

[The Doctor]

I'm beginning to wonder if you understand anything about the issue...

Why bother trying to understand anything when you can simply pull out the race/victim card and bash your adversaries?

 

I'm beginning to wonder why I keep coming back to this thread to argue with racist idiots. Maybe I would "understand the issue" better if anyone against the centre was capable of constructing an argument that didn't involve the fact that the man who wants to build it happens to be Muslim. That's racism and bigotry, plain and simple, and no self-respecting member of western culture should stand for it, if you ask me.

[Totenkopf]

I'm beginning to wonder why I keep coming back to this thread to argue with racist idiots. Maybe I would "understand the issue" better if anyone against the centre was capable of constructing an argument that didn't involve the fact that the man who wants to build it happens to be Muslim. That's racism and bigotry, plain and simple, and no self-respecting member of western culture should stand for it, if you ask me.

 

Your analysis is demonstrably and repeatedly shallow. Interesting given that many of the "racists" you seem incapable of understanding have already pointed out multiple times that oposition isn't merley based on his being muslim. That's just a convenient strawman argument you resurrect ad nauseam. You might as well scream,for instance, that if NAMBLA were to build a center near a grade school that any oppostion could only be steeped in hating homosexuals. Frankly, most of your arguments have been very banal and bereft of any value (ie. you guys hate muslims, you facist bigots fom hell, yadda yadda yadda...). Perhaps for your own sanity you should avoid the thread less you start shooting blood out your eyes or somesuch.

[Tommycat]

I'm beginning to wonder why I keep coming back to this thread to argue with racist idiots. Maybe I would "understand the issue" better if anyone against the centre was capable of constructing an argument that didn't involve the fact that the man who wants to build it happens to be Muslim. That's racism and bigotry, plain and simple, and no self-respecting member of western culture should stand for it, if you ask me.

 

I don't know if you saw it, but you have now called mimartin's mother a racist idiot, as he has said in this very thread that she opposes the mosque.

 

Reason that the mosque shouldn't be built there that has nothing to do with Islam specifically. The Imam Ruaf(I think that's his name) SPECIFICALLY pointed out that the US made Osama what he is(this is true, but there was no reason to make a point of it). He also blamed our foreign policy etc. for the attacks. Labeling the US as an accessory to the attacks, when America was still grieving, plants a bad taste in people's mouth. (see a reason that has nothing to do with race/religion/lack of knowledge)

 

However just because I don't think it should be built there out of politeness sake, does not mean that I think anyone should step in to prevent it being built. I'm a big proponent of personal property rights. If he owns the land, has the proper permits and the design passes inspection, he could build whatever he wants there. It is neither mine nor the government's place to step in.

 

Honestly, I'd be more worried about anti-Muslim hate groups using that as a symbolic building to target. Than it being a training ground for Islamic terrorists.

[mimartin]

Please stop the name calling of other members. If you do not feel the other side is not worth debating/discussing the topic with, then you can always ignore them.

4. Personal attacks: We realize many of the topics in Kavar's are controversial or sensitive. However, you need to keep your posts as polite as possible. Attacking other posters, either directly or through veiled insinuation and sarcasm, is not allowed on this forum. If you're feeling the need to make sarcastic comments or attacks on someone, you need to calm down or simply agree to disagree with that person. Posts that are racist, homophobic, sexist, or that directly or indirectly attack someone's character are ad hominem attacks and are not allowed. Veiled insinuations, sarcastic comments, or other impoliteness are also unacceptable, and the poster may well receive sanctions for this behavior.[/Quote] I hope everyone notices that this rule includes both direct and indirect attacks.

 

This next warning is as much for me as it is for some of rest of you:

5. Repeatedly posting the same thing: This refers specifically to repeating the same point over and over in a way that becomes irritating, without an attempt to clarify a point or to contribute to the conversation. This should not be construed to mean that you are required to answer someone else's questions. If it's the same argument and doesn't contribute to the discussion, the post may be edited or deleted, and the poster may receive an infraction.[/Quote]

[mimartin]

He also blamed our foreign policy etc. for the attacks.

 

Give him a pair and then he will be as blind to our own actions as the rest of us.