Figured I'd aggravate you guys a bit more

[mitch]

Now would be the time to find an endangered species on that property....

[Bailey Guns]

Now would be the time to find an endangered species on that property....

Like an...American?

[Ranger]

Like an...American?

That would be a white, straight, conservative American male .

[Hoosier]

Well, when the majority of Americans can't tell the difference between what's a right and what's wise, it is hard to relate to them. He said two different things there. They absolutely have the right to build their community center two blocks closer to Ground Zero than the oversubscribed mosque that's been there for decades. Is it wise? Of course not.

Jake continues his streak of pointing out the obvious.

H.

[Bailey Guns]

I wish I could've put it in these words. But this is why it's wrong and shouldn't be allowed. As a matter of fact, we (generic) shouldn't even be having this debate:

by Charles Krauthammer:

"A place is made sacred by a widespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent (Lourdes, the Temple Mount), by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice (Gettysburg), or by the blood of martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent (Auschwitz). When we speak of Ground Zero as hallowed ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there -- and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated. ... Religious institutions in this country are autonomous. Who is to say that the [near-Ground Zero] mosque won't one day hire an Anwar al-Aulaqi -- spiritual mentor to the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas Day bomber, and one-time imam at the Virginia mosque attended by two of the 9/11 terrorists? An Aulaqi preaching in Virginia is a security problem. An Aulaqi preaching at Ground Zero is a sacrilege. Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history -- perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed. ... America is a free country where you can build whatever you want -- but not anywhere. That's why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn't meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all. These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz -- and no mosque at Ground Zero. Build it anywhere but there."

Well, when the majority of Americans can't tell the difference between what's a right and what's wise, it is hard to relate to them.

In a sense, I'll have to agree with you...which is rare (but that's OK). After all, the majority did elect Obama. And I curse them every day.

[Bailey Guns]

That would be a white, straight, conservative American male .

Or even female in this day and age.

[Hoosier]

I wish I could've put it in these words. But this is why it's wrong and shouldn't be allowed. As a matter of fact, we (generic) shouldn't even be having this debate:

by Charles Krauthammer:

"A place is made sacred by a widespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent (Lourdes, the Temple Mount), by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice (Gettysburg), or by the blood of martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent (Auschwitz). When we speak of Ground Zero as hallowed ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there -- and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated. ... Religious institutions in this country are autonomous. Who is to say that the [near-Ground Zero] mosque won't one day hire an Anwar al-Aulaqi -- spiritual mentor to the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas Day bomber, and one-time imam at the Virginia mosque attended by two of the 9/11 terrorists? An Aulaqi preaching in Virginia is a security problem. An Aulaqi preaching at Ground Zero is a sacrilege. Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history -- perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed. ... America is a free country where you can build whatever you want -- but not anywhere. That's why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn't meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all. These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz -- and no mosque at Ground Zero. Build it anywhere but there."

In a sense, I'll have to agree with you...which is rare (but that's OK). After all, the majority did elect Obama. And I curse them every day.

No. This isn't about building a mosque on ground zero. It's in the neighborhood. There are other mosques in the neighborhood. There are strip joints and lingere stores in that neighborhood too. Those wouldn't be built on Gettysburg either. Steps were taking to prevent the mosque from being built, such as trying to classify the building as historic. I don't know what Zoning regulations would prevent a house of worship from being built.
Krauthammers argument is that some zoning law should be enacted to prevent ... what, exactly? A mosque from being built in a neighborhood? Would it be worded as such, to single out an entire religion, or would we ban all churches/synagogues/mosques/etc from that area?

Saying that all Muslims are the same as terrorists is the same as saying all Christians are members of Westboro Baptist. Stop making broad generalizations, they are not accurate and counter productive to a peaceful world.

If you want to be pissed off about something, how about the fact that almost 10 years later, ground zero is still a pile of dirt.

H.

[mx'r]

Quote:

1. Because Islam treats Muhammad as the "perfect man" and makes it normative for every muslim to emulate and copy Muhammad in every regard, this means that now forcible conversion by placing a sword at the neck becomes part of Islamic law! This is now cast in stone, and becomes an act of great piety for every muslim, because he is, after all, following his beloved Prophet!

2. Muhammad - a man whom every Meccan knew since childhood, in 10 years of preaching in Mecca, could get only about 100 followers. After 10 years of trying and failing to convince people of his claims to Prophethood, he left for Medina, and returned later to Mecca with the sword in hand. Once he offered the "convert or die" choice to the pagans of Mecca, his ranks quickly swelled to almost 35,000 followers by the time he died a few years later. This is the way Islam spread. Not by peace, but ENTIRELY by the sword. The numbers tell the whole story. His first 10 years of peaceful preaching got Muhammad 100 followers. His last 2 years of using the sword brought him 35,000. Islam had discovered the magic formula for fast expansion - put the sword on the neck and say "Convert or die!"


All muslims are taught to hate us. They are terrorists. Nobody will convince me different. One practice of the Muslim religion is Jihad. How are they not terrorists? So let's let them practice NEAR ground zero? Call me ignorant i guess, but we cant let that happen.

[Bailey Guns]

"Who is to say that the [near-Ground Zero] mosque..."

"...perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed."

No. This isn't about building a mosque on ground zero. It's in the neighborhood. There are other mosques in the neighborhood. There are strip joints and lingere stores in that neighborhood too. Those wouldn't be built on Gettysburg either. Steps were taking to prevent the mosque from being built, such as trying to classify the building as historic. I don't know what Zoning regulations would prevent a house of worship from being built.
Krauthammers argument is that some zoning law should be enacted to prevent ... what, exactly? A mosque from being built in a neighborhood? Would it be worded as such, to single out an entire religion, or would we ban all churches/synagogues/mosques/etc from that area?

Saying that all Muslims are the same as terrorists is the same as saying all Christians are members of Westboro Baptist. Stop making broad generalizations, they are not accurate and counter productive to a peaceful world.

If you want to be pissed off about something, how about the fact that almost 10 years later, ground zero is still a pile of dirt.

H.

Comprehend what you read much?

I think it's obvious you didn't read - or didn't read well, or didn't understand, or chose not to agree - with Krauthammer simply to be argumentative.

Krauthammer clearly stated the mosque would be "near ground zero". I think everyone knows, Captain Obvious, they aren't going to build the mosque right on top of the spot where the former WTC towers stood.

Furthermore, Krauthammer was clear in his description of the perpetrators of the attacks as belonging to "a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed." Now, that may be a broad generalization to you, but I don't share your left-of-center and politically correct sensibilities, so it's pretty clear to me he's writing of the extremists within the religion.

And as far as what is or isn't at "ground zero", I'd rather it remain the way it is. A "pile of dirt" as you put it. I'd describe it as exactly the opposite...a whole in the ground. I, too, believe it's a sacred location.

And by the way. I don't give a rats ass about what you consider "counter productive to a peaceful world". Especially in the sense that it might offend someone of the Muslim faith. Or you. If they all were to disappear tomorrow, I doubt I'd shed too many tears.

So, with all due respect, how about you let me decide what makes me angry?

[Mtn.man]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100815...20100815184754