The Mosque Should Be Built!

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

It may be a right, but it doesn't mean it's right.

Legality and civility are separate in this issue. The government can't say no, but the people surely can. They have made their case as well.

It's not all Crusading Karate Kids looking to bust some Middle Eastern hiney either. A bi-partisan disapproval from decent American citizens chiming in about a domestic issue. It's a bad move for those wishing to heal relations in the Muslim community -- regardless if the Imam represents them or not.

But if "The People" don't want it, what difference does it make? They have no power to prevent it outside of legal means.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

But if "The People" don't want it, what difference does it make? They have no power to prevent it outside of legal means.

Nobody said they did anymore than people that protest other things, but they have as much right to voice their opinions that they believe something is right or wrong

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

But if "The People" don't want it, what difference does it make? They have no power to prevent it outside of legal means.

The issue is not if they have a legal, constitutional right at all.

The People DO have a right to express their disapproval. That may or may not effect the outcome.

It amazes me that some not only oppose those who are not in support of this building plan, but actually SUPPORT and are proponents for the Mosque to be built. Makes me scratch my head. It's like those who see issues with the Church, and their critique sounds more like a "everything not associated with the church is awesome -- while anything to do with church folks is horrendous." I've heard this in several books I've read recently. Fortunately, I was able to strip it down and hear their critique over their anti-church rhetoric. This doesn't apply to you, but just a general commentary. Self-righteousness isn't just an issue for ultra cons -- it affects all those who boast their social justice efforts, those who think they know it all and have all the answers to all things while looking low on those who aren't as arrived as them, etc...

Yes, I just took a HUGE tangent... ah well.

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

The issue is not if they have a legal, constitutional right at all.

The People DO have a right to express their disapproval. That may or may not effect the outcome.

It amazes me that some not only oppose those who are not in support of this building plan, but actually SUPPORT and are proponents for the Mosque to be built. Makes me scratch my head. It's like those who see issues with the Church, and their critique sounds more like a "everything not associated with the church is awesome -- while anything to do with church folks is horrendous." I've heard this in several books I've read recently. Fortunately, I was able to strip it down and hear their critique over their anti-church rhetoric. This doesn't apply to you, but just a general commentary. Self-righteousness isn't just an issue for ultra cons -- it affects all those who boast their social justice efforts, those who think they know it all and have all the answers to all things while looking low on those who aren't as arrived as them, etc...

Yes, I just took a HUGE tangent... ah well.

Your huge tangent aside, my primary issue here has nothing to do with my like or dislike of "The Church." You know, actually, that's not true. It has to do with my "Like" of "The Church. I've said this 'til I'm blue in the face, but when the precedent is set of being able to block a church establishment simply because of the "kind" of religion it is, the pattern will be established of preventing other religions...maybe yours...from establishing your local church.

Just imagine if you were from a very liberal city, Seattle or San Francisco for example, that already has a bent toward disliking religion, if this effort in NYC succeeds, how long will it be until liberal cities use this as a precedent to shut down your church?

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

Your huge tangent aside, my primary issue here has nothing to do with my like or dislike of "The Church." You know, actually, that's not true. It has to do with my "Like" of "The Church. I've said this 'til I'm blue in the face, but when the precedent is set of being able to block a church establishment simply because of the "kind" of religion it is, the pattern will be established of preventing other religions...maybe yours...from establishing your local church.

Just imagine if you were from a very liberal city, Seattle or San Francisco for example, that already has a bent toward disliking religion, if this effort in NYC succeeds, how long will it be until liberal cities use this as a precedent to shut down your church?

That's really not the issue at all. And if you keep repeating that, you are only showing an inability to hear the issue and arguments by others. It's not an issue of "your x religion, so we don't like you and you can't have your building." That's rather simplistic and naive way to understand this situation.

I wouldn't support any government by saying "just because you are x religion, you can't have a building." Again, you are not broadening what the argument really is.

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

That's really not the issue at all. And if you keep repeating that, you are only showing an inability to hear the issue and arguments by others. It's not an issue of "your x religion, so we don't like you and you can't have your building." That's rather simplistic and naive way to understand this situation.

I wouldn't support any government by saying "just because you are x religion, you can't have a building." Again, you are not broadening what the argument really is.

Thanks for being concerned about what the issue is, but whether you like it or not, it's MY issue and precedent means everything in law, so therefore I'm making it an issue and it's the issue this thread was based on. If you don't want that to be the issue, then start your own Mosque thread.

When you said, "Naive" I literally laughed out loud here in my living room. Whatever, Maxi.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

The issue is not if they have a legal, constitutional right at all.

The People DO have a right to express their disapproval. That may or may not effect the outcome.

It amazes me that some not only oppose those who are not in support of this building plan, but actually SUPPORT and are proponents for the Mosque to be built. Makes me scratch my head. It's like those who see issues with the Church, and their critique sounds more like a "everything not associated with the church is awesome -- while anything to do with church folks is horrendous." I've heard this in several books I've read recently. Fortunately, I was able to strip it down and hear their critique over their anti-church rhetoric. This doesn't apply to you, but just a general commentary. Self-righteousness isn't just an issue for ultra cons -- it affects all those who boast their social justice efforts, those who think they know it all and have all the answers to all things while looking low on those who aren't as arrived as them, etc...

Yes, I just took a HUGE tangent... ah well.

Maybe it's like reverse racism? People in American will have been known in the future as the people that shot thenselves in the foot

How to stick it to Christians? Support more Mosques.
How to stick it to the white man? Hire more blacks than whites (never mind that there are other races too)
How to stick it to the government? Support Communisim

Maybe that's exaggerated but it seems that in America it's chic to go oppose something. We see it here in this forum when it comes to the UPC...Don't just leave and go somewhere else, be belligerently anti UPC at least in rhetoric.

America, if it is ever to succumb to Jihad, will do so by hanging itself. What did they say about Capitalists,the communists? about hanging the last capitalist with the rope they sold us? If there is to be a Jihad or if there is one already it will be one where they can mostly sit back and watch us destroy ourselves. One in which there will be no bloody war. They will immigrate here, reproduce in large numbers, use and manipulate politics and leftists until they are a majority.

That's what happened in Lebanon. They were a Christian nation by majority. They took in muslims as part of their humanitarianism. They gave them equality in politics. The Muslims became the majority and now it's a completely different nation

The problem wasn't the nominal Muslim. It's the ambitious political Imams who, along with other Imam's and political groups like Iran, want to bury Israel and spread Islam all over the world. I suspect most Muslims are unwitting partners in that at least in most places.

In Israel when you read of the riots in the street, it always was preceded by a meeting in a Mosque where a Imam preached a fiery sermon about how evil Jews are. People would be whipped into a frenzy and come pouring out of the mosques with hatred enflamed. I say enflamed because that's not all to say there isn't a need for healing, but it's clear the Imams and others at the top don't want healing and see the ordinary citizens as fodder for their cause