Plan for Mosque III...

[Truronian]

So, exactly who's feelings do we have to take into account Re: this mosque then? Manhattaners, New Yorkers, Americans or everyone in the world?

 

[MobBoss]

Yes, there are people who don't want this mosque to be built; if, as a result of their actions, this mosque doesn't get built, over the objections of the builder (or even because he feels that he has no choice but to give in), then yeah, people's rights have been violated.

No, if they choose not to do it out of their own concerns, no ones rights have been violated.

I dont expect you to agree, but legally, I am correct. Again, thats the entire point of legal dissent, and an integral part of the freedom of speech.

Public pressure may lead to government pressure, that's my worry . . .

I have highlighted the appropriate word in your comment. When that changes to 'has' let me know. Then we will talk.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

People want it to; what's more worrisome is that that fact doesn't bother you.

 

[MobBoss]

People want it to; what's more worrisome is that that fact doesn't bother you.

I took an oath to defend the consitution. Part of that is the freedom of speech. So, no, people exercising that right doesnt bother me.

And it shouldnt bother you either.

 

[nonconformist]

ALso, would anyone mind explaining the concept of "too soon"?

Considering it's been 10 years, and a relatively paltry 3000 died in the attacks, and considering the French have been making comedy films about the German occupation a mere 20 years after the war, under which 350,000 Frenchmen, including Jews deported to extermination camps died, can the Americans not be considerd as being overdramatic and touchy?

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I am not bothered that people are exercising free speech - although I can be, and am, bothered by the content of that speech.

But what you are saying is that that speech should be turned into action - that Park51 should do what their opponents want them to, despite the ridiculousness of what they are asking.

 

[BSmith1068]

I have highlighted the appropriate word in your comment. When that changes to 'has' let me know. Then we will talk.

Here you go:

Ground Zero Mosque: Paterson Tries To Broker Deal For Alternate Location

ALBANY, N.Y. — Gov. David Paterson, who last week suggested that developers of a proposed Islamic center and mosque near ground zero might want to consider a different location, will meet soon with them, a spokesman said Tuesday.

Paterson's office declined to say what the meeting would be about, but Rep. Peter King told The Associated Press that the governor wants to discuss possible alternate locations for the Park51 Islamic cultural center and mosque. King said he spoke with the governor Tuesday.

Representatives of the project said no meeting had been scheduled.

Paterson last week offered his help and the possibility that state land could be provided as an alternate site for the center. The project has ignited nationwide debate over freedom of religion and anger over the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/17/ground-zero-mosque-paters_1_n_684814.html

 

[MobBoss]

ALso, would anyone mind explaining the concept of "too soon"?

Considering it's been 10 years, and a relatively paltry 3000 died in the attacks, and considering the French have been making comedy films about the German occupation a mere 20 years after the war, under which 350,000 Frenchmen, including Jews deported to extermination camps died, can the Americans not be considerd as being overdramatic and touchy?

It took over 20 years for the city of Honolulu to give back the shinto shrine to the Japanese it belonged to.

So maybe there is a difference between that 10 and 20 year mark.

 

[nonconformist]

Not really, I mean 3000? Come on, compared to 350,000?

Americans are just being over touchy with this "too soon" crap.

For the rest of the world, it was fair game for humour before the smoke cleared.

 

[MobBoss]

I am not bothered that people are exercising free speech - although I can be, and am, bothered by the content of that speech.

But what you are saying is that that speech should be turned into action - that Park51 should do what their opponents want them to, despite the ridiculousness of what they are asking.

Except for the rather pertinent fact that 'action' you are referring to would be entirely voluntary.

And since people on the other side dont see it as a 'ridiculous' request, could you stop referring to it in that manner. Nothing is gained by such emotional baiting.

What is being asked simply isnt ridiculous, because if it were, this wouldnt be news, and we wouldnt be having this discussion.

Here you go:

Again, voluntary, and as such, completely legal.

 

[MobBoss]

Not really, I mean 3000? Come on, compared to 350,000?

Americans are just being over touchy with this "too soon" crap.

For the rest of the world, it was fair game for humour before the smoke cleared.

You are right, we are touchy about it. We havent had the experience of getting attacked at home like most of Europe has.

 

[useless]

I remember making jokes about the twin towers favourite crisps being "Plain" flavoured on the same day it occured, during school.

 

[JerichoHill]

I took an oath to defend the consitution. Part of that is the freedom of speech. So, no, people exercising that right doesnt bother me.

And it shouldnt bother you either.

You oath (defend the constitution) also includes freedom of religion, and freedom of assembly. And of respecting private property.

May I remind you that some of your fellow soldiers are Muslim, and some are buried in Arlington National Cemetary. Some of the 3,000 innocent workers and NYC citizens who died were Muslim. Some of the firefighters who bravely went into the WTC to save people, were, guess what, Muslim.

Why is that pertinent?
Don't make me answer. It should be obvious.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be draped in a flag'

 

[GoodGame]

In before round IV:


The mosque will train holy fighters who will carry suitcase nukabombs supplied by Iran into the heart of the city, and the rest of the nation, finalizing their death to Amerika plans for a new world order in which everyone is Muslim, or dead, just like the time in the medieval crusades when christian dawgs helped us by sacking Constanople and then by killing jews in Jerusalem about 1099 CE. The holy fighters will tunnel underground and lay stink bombs in the foundation of the memorial to the bombings of the WTC. If we don't cordon off twenty blocks of NYC, Iran will laugh at us, and the price of oil would raise. Famous Deists wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights which gives us the right to accuse other citizens of practicing funny religions and conspiring to dance on our graves.


*=Anything in italics in this post is not my honest opinion.


TBH, more energy should be invested in caring for the orphans of 9/11 than any memorial ettiquete.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Except for the rather pertinent fact that 'action' you are referring to would be entirely voluntary.

Technically voluntary, but still wrong on the part of those who started it. I can annoy my neighbor enough to make him move, that doesn't mean I should.

And since people on the other side dont see it as a 'ridiculous' request, could you stop referring to it in that manner. Nothing is gained by such emotional baiting.

No, it is ridiculous. Of course they don't see it as such, but so? If I say that it isn't a ridiculous demand that you do everything I say, is it then not a ridiculous request?

What is being asked simply isnt ridiculous, because if it were, this wouldnt be news, and we wouldnt be having this discussion.

I don't see how the fact that an opinion exists somehow makes it correct.

Again, voluntary, and as such, completely legal.

Legal =/= right.

Okay, so there are two groups who don't want Park51 built, represented by Newt Gingrich and Rudy Guiliani.

The Newt group says that Islam is evil, that allowing Park51 to be built is allowing Islam to infiltrate into the US, that those who will build it are making a mockery of what the US stands for.

The Rudy group says that religious freedom is important and that Park51 has a right to be built. "But wait," they say, "the Newt group doesn't want it to be built. Their feelings are hurt. So, they are wrong, and Park51 is right, but we had better do what the Newt group says anyways, because they consider it important."

Not sure which is worse, honestly.

 

[warpus]

You are right, we are touchy about it. We havent had the experience of getting attacked at home like most of Europe has.

This particular image made its rounds on the internet many years ago:

Nobody cared. Isn't this far more offensive than the community centre?

 

[dirtyparrot]

Or eighteen.

Three other mosques projects face protests at the same time as the GZM.

That's ignoring the insults (both overt and implied) that everyday Muslims face at school, at work, and outside in general. Unless you're Kareem Abdul Jabbar or Mohammed Ali, a Muslim trying to lead a "normal" life is probably not an easy thing. Muslims are effectively 2nd class citizens in the Land of the Free.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Three threads and I still fail to see a logical conection between the community center and 9/11. Not a single Muslim using it contributed to 9/11.

 

[nonconformist]

The day London got blown up by Al Quaeda:

"When the news reporter said "Shopkeepers are opening their doors bringing out blankets and cups of tea" I just smiled. It's like yes. That's Britain for you. Tea solves everything. You're a bit cold? Tea. Your boyfriend has just left you? Tea. You've just been told you've got cancer? Tea. Coordinated terrorist attack on the transport network bringing the city to a grinding halt? Tea dammit! And if it's really serious, they may bring out the coffee. The Americans have their alert raised to red, we break out the coffee. That's for situations more serious than this of course. Like another England penalty shoot-out. ~Jslayeruk, as posted on Metaquotes Livejournal, in response to the July 2005 London subway bombings
"

 

[GhostWriter16]

Basically, anyone trying to in any way prevent via protest, etc or any other way this mosque from being built is opposed to the 1st Amendment.

Wrong, anyone trying to get the GOVERNMENT to refuse them the right to build it is yes, infringing upon the first amendment.

People who protest to appeal to the BUILDERS OF THE MOSQUE asking them to reconsider are not.