Author Topic: Just not there  (Read 27189 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Just not there
« Reply #30 on: August 17, 2010, 03:48:29 AM »
Quote
Actually its not.  If it were, I and most folks would be claiming some legal reason a mosque couldn't be built there.  Care to demonstrate comments to the contrary?

Actually it is if we are a nation of laws. And the reason you aren't arguing legal points is because you don't have a legal leg to stand on, so you have downgraded your argument to an emotional one, bolstering your arguments with legions of pundits who agree with you as if that matters.

here's some advice. If you want conservatives to take back the House and possibly the Senate, focus on the economy, don't get drawn into this local issue because it really isn't your concern and you appear to have a problem distinguishing between radical Muslims and those who may not be.



sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #31 on: August 17, 2010, 04:27:36 AM »
Quote
Actually its not.  If it were, I and most folks would be claiming some legal reason a mosque couldn't be built there.  Care to demonstrate comments to the contrary?

Actually it is if we are a nation of laws.

Actually it's not, since I don't recall this ever being about denying me my 1st right amendment to criticize the location and opine on the grotesque insensitivity being placed at the feet of thousands of familes who lost someone(s) on 911.

Is it?


And the reason you aren't arguing legal points is because you don't have a legal leg to stand on

LOL.....BECAUSE THIS HAS NEVER BEEN ABOUT ANYTHING LEGAL OR ILLEGAL OR EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL, so there was never a leg to even consider or downgrade to anything.   oy   Why are you trying to refute a point that was never made??  That's generally Tee's tactic, with garbage like refuting how Saddam never did threaten the continental U.S.  Whoever said he did??

So, if you don't mind, I'll keep exercising my 1st amendment right to criticize both you and those who think it's a swell idea to place a symbol of the very religion Islamic terrorists invoked, within a rocks's throw of the thousands murdered, in the name of that very religion

But don't fret, I'll have plenty of energy to talk ecomomy, debt, and blatantly desperate accusations that the GOP are out to destroy SS, this coming election cycle
« Last Edit: August 17, 2010, 11:14:43 AM by sirs »
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #32 on: August 17, 2010, 06:13:06 AM »
Quote
Folks who mutate the message of either the Koran or the Bible, are the ones that are responsible for their acts, and them alone.  The fact remains that the folks who took down the WTC towers, acted in the name of Islam.  Putting up an Islamic Mosque, in full view of the WTC site, makes the circle complete.

Did Bin Laden mutate the message of the Koran?
Not really, if we had Osama handy to ask he might be able to quote the shura that he thinks supports him. But he is hardly the first to interpret Mohammeds teaching in this way . Why would not Mohammed himself participate in the raids with Osama , if he were availible?
Quote

Do abortion clinic bombers mutate the message of the Bible?
I have mixed feelings about that , do people who defend the right of abortion have a scriptural leg to stand on? Violence in the defense of the lives of innocents can be justified , but is bombing an abortion clinic really going to save any of these lives?  Sometimes violence however justified is merely the second best choice because it is bound to fail.
Quote

Are they both claiming to act in the names of their respective religions?



Yes , but this claim can be hollow or substantial depending on the real nature of the scripture involved. Is there no diffrence between the message of Mohammed and that of Jesus?

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #33 on: August 17, 2010, 11:49:21 AM »
There is a fundamental difference between the message of Mohammad and the message of Jesus. The similarity is that both claim to be superior experts on the Divine, Mohammad as the last and greatest prophet, and Jesus as an incarnation of God Himself. The difference is that Islam stresses obedience to a rather confusing and illogically organized verses in a tongue foreign to the vast majority of humanity, and Christianity stresses love and the promise of Heaven (a vague place where everyone apparently enjoys singing for all eternally). Of course, Christianity has its looniness as well, in the Book of Revelations, which most resembles parts of the Koran.

Christians are supposed to love God and obey him in his more pleasant New Testament form.
Muslims are supposed to submit to Allah in his more magical and paternalistic Old Testament form.

Both religions want everyone to be prepared for the return of a Messiah, but they define him differently. Mohammad is not coming back as a Messiah, but Jesus is. Maybe. Next Tuesday or perhaps in 3402
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Just not there
« Reply #34 on: August 17, 2010, 12:02:36 PM »
Quote
Actually it's not, since I don't recall this ever being about denying me my 1st right amendment to criticize the location and opine on the grotesque insensitivity being placed at the feet of thousands of familes who lost someone(s) on 911.

Is it?


I think your newest concern is misplaced.

Quote
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.

The only government action in this issue was the actions of the local board that approved the plans for the building.

In a nutshell, the opponents of this land use are saying the followers of Islam are of the same mindset as Bin Laden and those who perpetrated the attacks on the WTC on 9/11. Because they were followers of Islam. You have said it, I'm sure the families have said it. I'm sure all the pundits who agree with you have said it. Why else would the erection of a Mosque, two blocks from Ground zero be such an insult. Why else would this be a symbolic win for Bin Laden?

And that just strikes me as prejudicial, bigoted  and wrong.






sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #35 on: August 17, 2010, 12:28:32 PM »
And it strikes me as completely missing the point being made, as well as apparently wishing to deny me my 1st amendment right to disagree with the location of this Mosque. 

I guess it is about the law and the Constitution.  I just didn't realize it was about my free speech

And one last time....it not, nor has ever been, about some expectation that fellow Mosquettes attending will be of a similar mindset as Usama.  That borders on misrepresentation
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Just not there
« Reply #36 on: August 17, 2010, 12:38:47 PM »
Quote
And it strikes me as completely missing the point being made, as well as apparently wishing to deny me my 1st amendment right to disagree with the location of this Mosque. 

No one on this forum has the power to deny your exercise of free speech. We are not the government.

Quote
And one last time....it not, nor has ever been, about some expectation that fellow Mosquettes attending will be of a similar mindset as Usama.  That borders on misrepresentation

Then why would a Mosque so close to ground zero be insulting?

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #37 on: August 17, 2010, 01:17:36 PM »
Quote
And it strikes me as completely missing the point being made, as well as apparently wishing to deny me my 1st amendment right to disagree with the location of this Mosque.  

No one on this forum has the power to deny your exercise of free speech. We are not the government.

Yet, that's the only legal/constitutional issue at hand, since the Mosque issue has never been about either.  And since you keep implying it is a legal matter, I'm left to conclude it must be about free speech


Quote
And one last time....it not, nor has ever been, about some expectation that fellow Mosquettes attending will be of a similar mindset as Usama.  That borders on misrepresentation 

Then why would a Mosque so close to ground zero be insulting?

You do understand what symbolism refers to, right?  And I'll be sure to pass on your sense of "its just hunky dory..what's the problem?" position to the 911 families.  Perhaps you can educate them on how irrational they're being
« Last Edit: August 17, 2010, 01:27:11 PM by sirs »
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Just not there
« Reply #38 on: August 17, 2010, 01:46:03 PM »
Quote
You do understand what symbolism refers to, right?

Yes i do.

The Mosque would be insulting because it symbolizes the religion of Islam.

Bin Laden practiced the religion of Islam.

The connection is obvious.


sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #39 on: August 17, 2010, 02:23:13 PM »
Close.  It symbolizes a religion he mutated to justify killing thousands on 911.  Hopefully, you're catching on now
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Just not there
« Reply #40 on: August 17, 2010, 03:06:40 PM »
Did Bin Laden mutate the religion or did he mutate the perception of the religion?

And if it was the perception of the religion that was mutated, was the change in perception rational and realistic?




sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #41 on: August 17, 2010, 03:09:00 PM »
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #42 on: August 17, 2010, 04:02:31 PM »
I know how the left likes to trot out P. Buchanon when he's dissing conservatives and Bush Foreign policy, so I'll be interested in how well they embrace his comments, regarding Obama and the Mosque, as the points regarding what the issue is, dovetail on much of what I've been having to repeat myself on, as it relates to the non-legal rationale & wisdom of such a location.  

He does go on though to address Islam as a militant religion.  But I've seen plenty of militant behavior in both the bible and some extremists who claim to be Christian, so I think he goes too far in his stance stand there.  His points on "should we" and how completely tone deaf & clueless a supposed smart university professor is demonstrating, is spot on
------------------------------------------------

Have we ever had a president so disconnected from the heart of America?

On Friday night, at a White House iftar, the breaking of the Ramadan fast, Obama strode directly into the blazing controversy over whether a mosque should be built two blocks from Ground Zero.

Speaking as though this were simply an open-and-shut case of constitutional law, Professor Obama declared that Muslims "have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country," including "the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan."

Hailed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who also sees this as an issue of tolerance and religious freedom, Obama had poured gasoline on a fire that had him in headlong retreat Saturday morning.

"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That is what our country is about."

Professor Obama finally seemed to grasp the point.

This is not a question of "Can they build a mosque near Ground Zero?"

It is an question of "Should they build a mosque in the shadow of the twin towers, where 3,000 Americans were suffocated, crushed or burned to death by Islamic fanatics whose Muslim faith was integral to their mission of mass murder and to their identify?"


Unless one is without kidney, spleen, heart or common sense, the answer would be "No!"

A decent respect for the opinions of one's fellow Americans would seem to shout out: Put the mosque somewhere else. This is hallowed ground. This is a burial site sacred to the families of those who died, to New Yorkers, to all Americans. A Muslim mosque is out of place there.

Indeed, if, as backers claim, the purpose of this Cordoba mosque and community center were healing, reconciliation and harmony, it has failed in its purpose. It has already had the opposite effect, enraging and dividing the city and country.

Why would backers of the project press ahead when its purpose is impossible of attainment, unless the real purpose were to impose on the people of New York a mosque they do not want there.

With the president's intervention, the issue has metastasized into a major clash in America's religious and culture war. It has gone global, as Hamas has now weighed in on the side of building the mosque near Ground Zero.

"We have to build the mosque, as you are allowed to build the church, and Israelis are building their holy places," said Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas and the organization's chief in Gaza.

His arguments echo Bloomberg's and Obama's: We have the right and we Muslims must now move ahead with the mosque.

With America's head of state enlisted on one side of this quarrel, and most Americans on the other, damage will be done to the national unity and there will be consequences for the president's party.

So be it. For if the president believes the Constitution decides this issue with finality, he is profoundly mistaken. We were a country before we ever had a Constitution. We were a nation, born in the furnace of a revolutionary war. That infant nation wrote its own birth certificate, a dozen years after Lexington and Concord Bridge.

While that Constitution guarantees freedom of religious belief and practice to all Americans, we were a Christian country then. And we remain a Christian country, Barack Obama's dissent notwithstanding.

Three-in-four Americans profess a Christian faith. That reality is not changed because the Warren Court outlawed Bible reading and prayer in public school, ordered the Ten Commandants taken down from classroom walls, purged Christianity from our public institutions or denies to Americans their freedom to put Christmas creches in their public squares.

Islam is a rising faith, the largest on earth, with 1.5 billion adherents. It is a militant faith that believes it will one day encompass all mankind. It holds there is but one God, Allah, that his last and greatest prophet was Muhammad, that Islam, the path of submission, is the path of salvation. It believes that its sacred book, the Koran, should inform the culture, that Sharia should be the basis of civil law.

Where it has become the dominant faith, it has been intolerant of rivals, especially Christianity, the faith of the Crusaders.

By no means are all or most Muslims fanatics of the Osama bin Laden variety, but many are uncompromising in their belief that, once their faith becomes the majority faith in a community or society, Muslims should write the rules and Muslims should make the laws.

And if Americans believe that Islam is consistent with pluralism, ecumenism and a belief in the equality of all religions and all lifestyles, we are headed for what the Chinese call "interesting times."


Our Clueless Professor
« Last Edit: August 17, 2010, 06:04:43 PM by sirs »
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Just not there
« Reply #43 on: August 17, 2010, 08:19:08 PM »
NEW YORK (CBS 2) - There was a possible resolution in the works Tuesday night in the debate surrounding the proposed mosque and Islamic cultural center near ground zero.

CBS 2′s Marcia Kramer has learned it looks as if the developers of the mosque may be willing to budge and move away from the Park 51 location where they originally planned the construction.

So will the mosque be moving?

New York Gov. David Paterson plans to meet with developers of the controversial ground zero mosque as early as this week to offer them state land, at another location , for their cultural and religious center. Paterson told Congressman Peter King about the meeting, and King said the governor asked him to make it public.................


That's all we're saying.
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Just not there
« Reply #44 on: August 17, 2010, 08:44:20 PM »
Quote
New York Gov. David Paterson plans to meet with developers of the controversial ground zero mosque as early as this week to offer them state land, at another location , for their cultural and religious center. Paterson told Congressman Peter King about the meeting, and King said the governor asked him to make it public.................


Unless the state sells the land at fair market value, there will be a problem with this compromise.