I think that people who beleive reparations are appropriate have a right to say so.
People who beleive reparations are a bad idea have a right to say so.
From your position which of these sets of people should be shutting up?
Should shutting them up have the force of law?
Neither and no. But why is an in depth examination of each position so hard to accomplish?
I think we have repeated often enough (that you should have noticed) that the folks who want to build the GZ mosque have a right to do so.
They certainly do, having passed all legal hurdles to do so.
Much as we have a right to point out that this is perceived as crass , insinsitive and counterproductive and self defeating to any good purpose.
The focus of my examination.
Quote
You are the one who is arguing that the perception of the opposition to Park51 trumps the reality of whether complicity exists amongst the builders of Park51 to the 9-11 attack.
I simply asked whether perception trumping reality was a universal truism.
That question still hasn't been answered.
Now if radical Islamists like actual members of Al Queida were wanting to build any sort of gathering place in New York , they would have no right to do so. Anything that the Al Quieda owns in US territory ought to be confiscated , if not burnt down along with occupants.
Is this a straw man? Is anyone claiming that the Park51 folks are Al Queda?
Atlanta has a lovely park dedicated to the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Within walking distance of that center are numerous Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist churches. The primary religions of the Confederacy.