Advertisement

by Coccygia » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:42 pm

by North Suran » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:47 pm
Coccygia wrote:There are a number of Muslims who think that putting a mosque there is wrong, including a Sufi.
Coccygia wrote:Just as the Vatican doesn't "get it" about pedophile priests, unfortunately, a lot of Muslims don't "get it" about 9/11.
Coccygia wrote:-snip unrelated-
Coccygia wrote:It's not Muslims or Islam I object to. It's religious triumphalism. And this particular example is going to piss a LOT of people off.
Neu Mitanni wrote:As for NS, his latest statement is grounded in ignorance and contrary to fact, much to the surprise of all NSGers.
Geniasis wrote:The War on Christmas

by Unchecked Expansion » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:49 pm
Coccygia wrote:There are a number of Muslims who think that putting a mosque there is wrong, including a Sufi. Just as the Vatican doesn't "get it" about pedophile priests, unfortunately, a lot of Muslims don't "get it" about 9/11. Apparently neither do quite a few non-Muslims, such as Obama - who typically is waffling all over the place on the issue and trying to have it both ways. (At least stick to your guns, willya?) The people behind the mosque, I'm sure, have good intentions, or believe that they do - as did the Catholic Church when it built a convent at Auschwitz where the nuns would pray for the conversion of the Jews, or the Mormons when they started retroactively baptizing Jewish Holocaust victims as part of their "Baptism of the Dead" program. It's not Muslims or Islam I object to. It's religious triumphalism. And this particular example is going to piss a LOT of people off. Starting with me (even though I'm already pretty bored with the issue).

by Helertia » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:50 pm
Coccygia wrote:There are a number of Muslims who think that putting a mosque there is wrong, including a Sufi. Just as the Vatican doesn't "get it" about pedophile priests, unfortunately, a lot of Muslims don't "get it" about 9/11. Apparently neither do quite a few non-Muslims, such as Obama - who typically is waffling all over the place on the issue and trying to have it both ways. (At least stick to your guns, willya?) The people behind the mosque, I'm sure, have good intentions, or believe that they do - as did the Catholic Church when it built a convent at Auschwitz where the nuns would pray for the conversion of the Jews, or the Mormons when they started retroactively baptizing Jewish Holocaust victims as part of their "Baptism of the Dead" program. It's not Muslims or Islam I object to. It's religious triumphalism. And this particular example is going to piss a LOT of people off. Starting with me (even though I'm already pretty bored with the issue).

by Ovelebertane » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:53 pm
Sailsia wrote:So, is there anyone on right now who OPPOSES it? I'm looking for a debate, but it seems that most everybody agrees this is a victory for the religious freedom.

by Unchecked Expansion » Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:56 pm

by UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:01 pm

by Tekania » Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:03 pm
Coccygia wrote:There are a number of Muslims who think that putting a mosque there is wrong, including a Sufi. Just as the Vatican doesn't "get it" about pedophile priests, unfortunately, a lot of Muslims don't "get it" about 9/11. Apparently neither do quite a few non-Muslims, such as Obama - who typically is waffling all over the place on the issue and trying to have it both ways. (At least stick to your guns, willya?) The people behind the mosque, I'm sure, have good intentions, or believe that they do - as did the Catholic Church when it built a convent at Auschwitz where the nuns would pray for the conversion of the Jews, or the Mormons when they started retroactively baptizing Jewish Holocaust victims as part of their "Baptism of the Dead" program. It's not Muslims or Islam I object to. It's religious triumphalism. And this particular example is going to piss a LOT of people off. Starting with me (even though I'm already pretty bored with the issue).

by UnitedStatesOfAmerica- » Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:09 pm

by Dyakovo » Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:30 pm
Gift-of-god wrote:Augarundus wrote:Ifreann wrote:Didn't I already ask you for a load of sources on this kind of thing? I don't remember you getting back to me on that....
Imam is a radical.
He's friends with this guy.
And the Audacity of Hope sets sail in September.
Your "evidence" that he is a radical seems to rest on the fact that he had an office next to an organisation that the FBI believes is associated with Hamas.
The person sitting beside me is Cree. Is that evidence that I am a Canadian aboriginal?


by Dyakovo » Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:34 pm

by Dyakovo » Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:39 pm
Katganistan wrote:The Marist Poll showing what the residents of Manhattan, who really are the only ones involved, think of the mosque:
Manhattan: favors Park51: 53%, Opposes: 31% Undecided: 16% MoE +/-4%

by Unchecked Expansion » Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:40 pm

by Dyakovo » Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:41 pm
by Whole Conviction » Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:43 pm
No one has established a link between the cleric and radicals. New York Police Department spokesman Paul Browne said: "We've identified no law enforcement issues related to the proposed mosque."
Ros-Lehtinen and King were referring to the State Department's plan, predating the mosque debate, to send Rauf on another religious outreach trip to the Middle East as part of his "long-term relationship" with U.S. officials in the Bush and Obama administrations. The State Department said Wednesday it will pay him $3,000 for a trip costing the government $16,000.
Rauf counts former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright from the Clinton administration as a friend and appeared at events overseas or meetings in Washington with former President George W. Bush's secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and Bush adviser Karen Hughes.
He has denounced the terrorist attacks and suicide bombing as anti-Islamic and has criticized Muslim nationalism. But he's made provocative statements about America, too, calling it an "accessory" to the 9/11 attacks and attributing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children to the U.S.-led sanctions in the years before the invasion.

by North Calaveras » Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:41 pm
UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:Interesting. Mosque or community center. The name does not matter. It is how it used that matters. If it is intended as a holy site, the government cannot ban it.
I find it interesting that the same people who are whining about the building of a Muslim prayer building have no problems strip clubs right next to ground zero and teen girls going there to prostitute themselves. Nor do they seem to have any problems with people being mugged there.

by Exilia and Colonies » Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:52 pm
North Calaveras wrote:UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:Interesting. Mosque or community center. The name does not matter. It is how it used that matters. If it is intended as a holy site, the government cannot ban it.
I find it interesting that the same people who are whining about the building of a Muslim prayer building have no problems strip clubs right next to ground zero and teen girls going there to prostitute themselves. Nor do they seem to have any problems with people being mugged there.
Strippers and prostitutes aren't known for holy wars and blowing themselves up.

by North Calaveras » Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:56 pm
Exilia and Colonies wrote:North Calaveras wrote:UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:Interesting. Mosque or community center. The name does not matter. It is how it used that matters. If it is intended as a holy site, the government cannot ban it.
I find it interesting that the same people who are whining about the building of a Muslim prayer building have no problems strip clubs right next to ground zero and teen girls going there to prostitute themselves. Nor do they seem to have any problems with people being mugged there.
Strippers and prostitutes aren't known for holy wars and blowing themselves up.
Yet... *looks shifty*

by Tekania » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:01 pm
Whole Conviction wrote:Those 'provocative' statements, and everything else he's ever said, have been echoed from inside the US by people on the left and the right (including Glenn Beck and, I believe, Ron Paul). They just stick to him more because he's a Muslim, I guess. Well, part of his job is to help create interfaith understanding. You don't do that by being a loyal agent of one side. You have to see both sides, and that necessarily involves seeing flaws and benefits of both.

by Exilia and Colonies » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:01 pm
North Calaveras wrote:Exilia and Colonies wrote:North Calaveras wrote:UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:Interesting. Mosque or community center. The name does not matter. It is how it used that matters. If it is intended as a holy site, the government cannot ban it.
I find it interesting that the same people who are whining about the building of a Muslim prayer building have no problems strip clubs right next to ground zero and teen girls going there to prostitute themselves. Nor do they seem to have any problems with people being mugged there.
Strippers and prostitutes aren't known for holy wars and blowing themselves up.
Yet... *looks shifty*
>.>

by Bluth Corporation » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:03 pm

by Tekania » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:03 pm
North Calaveras wrote:UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:Interesting. Mosque or community center. The name does not matter. It is how it used that matters. If it is intended as a holy site, the government cannot ban it.
I find it interesting that the same people who are whining about the building of a Muslim prayer building have no problems strip clubs right next to ground zero and teen girls going there to prostitute themselves. Nor do they seem to have any problems with people being mugged there.
Strippers and prostitutes aren't known for holy wars and blowing themselves up.

by North Calaveras » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:05 pm
Tekania wrote:North Calaveras wrote:UnitedStatesOfAmerica- wrote:Interesting. Mosque or community center. The name does not matter. It is how it used that matters. If it is intended as a holy site, the government cannot ban it.
I find it interesting that the same people who are whining about the building of a Muslim prayer building have no problems strip clubs right next to ground zero and teen girls going there to prostitute themselves. Nor do they seem to have any problems with people being mugged there.
Strippers and prostitutes aren't known for holy wars and blowing themselves up.
Neither, generally, are Manhattan native Muslims, nor the members of and advisers for the Cordoba Initiative.

by Tungookska » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:07 pm
North Calaveras wrote:All im saying is that Islam has the nasty habit of killing lots of people and causing problems over "misinterpretations"
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bracadun, Edush, Ifreann, Point Blob, Senkaku, The Holy Therns, Violetist Britannia
Advertisement