But thats not their thing.

They can build it in all fairness let us all understand.

NOt all Germans were Nazi's, Not all Vietnamese were communists, and not all Muslims are killers. For this to work they must reform a bit to the society they choose to live in. When they come off as secular and intolerant which does not jive with what we do in this country. France is stepping up and outlawing Berkas. Its their (frances) right to also dictate some things.

Let them build it but they must understand they must deliver on its intention and that we reserve the right to knock it the phuch down.

I fundamentally think they should build it because "bad taste" is not enough reason to not.

Nalod wrote:I think that its also fair to expect a reform movement of islam to work on reaching out and bridge.

But thats not their thing.

They can build it in all fairness let us all understand.

NOt all Germans were Nazi's, Not all Vietnamese were communists, and not all Muslims are killers. For this to work they must reform a bit to the society they choose to live in. When they come off as secular and intolerant which does not jive with what we do in this country. France is stepping up and outlawing Berkas. Its their (frances) right to also dictate some things.

Let them build it but they must understand they must deliver on its intention and that we reserve the right to knock it the phuch down.

I fundamentally think they should build it because "bad taste" is not enough reason to not.

But are the people who live with the Nazis, communists, and Muslims in any way guilty of complicity, especially if they know what is going on and do not try to stop it? This is just a question and is not implying or inferring my POV. I regards to Nazis, I have long heard that there were many Germans that did not condone the party's actions, but whey did they not fight against it? Clearly there was a matter of numbers and power (i.e.: controlling the military) among the Nazis. If the fundamentalist Muslims are a small minority, why would the majority of Muslims let them and their actions sully the world's view of their religion? Some conservative pundits have more than suggested that all Muslims are to some extent a party to the actions of extremists. I want to believe otherwise, but when Islamic nations and governments guard the safety of internationally wanted and vilified terrorists one wonders. At times it seems like we're fighting wars about politics and resources (which we are), but our foes are fighting for their god and are far more willing to die for their cuase then we are. How to win an enemy with that philosophy?

Pertaining to the "taste" comment, are any other religious buildings being erected in the area, outside of those that may have been destroyed on 9/11? If not why should any be built? And what makes a temple a good choice? Is it worth upsetting so many people. I want to welcome it, if only for the fact that Fox News and it's viewing oppose it so vehemently, but it just doesn't sit right as a stand alone piece. Markji's spin on my notion that creates a religious center cover many belief systems seems a better choice.

martin wrote:

Markji wrote:

grillco wrote:I'm against it unless they're also putting a church and a temple there. In that case all religions should have the right to be included.

I like your idea of having a religious center there where all religions can have a place of worship in that location. That would open up the possibility for mutual understanding and respect.

to me the answer of having a religious center dodges the underlying question and point: this is private property and you are telling the people that own it what to do when in fact they are well within the bounds of what they are doing.

I'm not sure it's that simple. This could be considered a historic site.

As to the original topic, I don't have a strong opinion either way on this one. I think both sides make good points. I think grillco's idea is a very good compromise, but being as it's the most logical solution, it probably will not happen.

OldFan wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:I am against it but they have the right to build it. Why am I against it? Americans are always asked to be sensitive to other cultures and in this case I think it should be the other way around. A mosque will be a reminder for many people of this painful day. I think the builders of the mosque should be sensitive to that and build elsewhere. Similar to if a Christian group flew to a middle eastern country and killed 3000 people I do not believe it would be right for another christian group to then plant a church close to that location as well. Sensitivities should take over at some point.

How bout a middle eastern restaurant or another group of people that wore a head wrap? Should they refrain from building anything in the area?

If an atheist group carried out a terrorist act - should I then change how I live my life because someone may be offended by atheists? Why should people refrain from doing something within their rights because someone else associates them with an act they had nothing to do with?

The people building the Mosque are innocent and the association with terrorists is something that exists in other peoples minds.

Christians did enslave and kill thousands of people in the U.S. and many Christian church's encouraged slavery - sometimes on "biblical" grounds. No one believes Christians should not build church's here.

There are theoretical and practical issues involved here.

In theory, if the folks who want to build the mosque are sincere and they have control of the property, they can build what they want there, assuming that there are no laws preventing them from doing what they want to do on that property. Hell, even if they are doing it for reasons mentioned in this thread- as a sign of "conquest," I would think that they still have the right to build there if they own the property and there are no zoning restrictions to building the mosque.

If I want to be realistic and practical, I have to think that the mosque will be a polarizing presence in the area, and will become a target of vandalism at some point. You might almost make a case that building a mosque there is akin to inciting a riot. I wonder about the intentions of those who want to build the mosque-perhaps they want to provoke a response. I'm sure that this affair is being looked at by people and nations all over the world-there are probably some Islamic leaders who actually hope that the we don't allow the mosque to be built because they will be able to use if for anti-West propaganda purposes.

The best thing, IMO, would be if the folks who want to build the mosque decline to do so, and choose to build one elsewhere. Maybe some kind of property swap can be worked out. I am no supporter of Christianity, but I have to think that building the mosque will cause more problems than it is worth, and that down the line there will be trouble.

The Constitution tells me they can construct the mosque, but common sense tells me that it is not a good idea at this time.

DurzoBlint wrote:as if no one of Islamic faith was killed in the towers. This is another case of arrogant american's thinking they are better than everyone else. How many people have been killed to spread christian values around the world.

No one religion follower has caused more death and misery than the catholic missionary.

That being said they of course have every right to do it. Just as they have the right to build it, we Americans should also have the right to oppose it without being called bigots, racists, and islamaphobes.

DurzoBlint wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:How is this 'arrogant american's' thinking they are better than everyone else? It sounds more like someone is being arrogant looking down reflively on anyone who doesn't share their anti-american or anti western bias. I also want you to back up your next statement. How many people have been killed? Please compare it with other religions. Please compare it with those that died under athiestic regimes.

DurzoBlint wrote:as if no one of Islamic faith was killed in the towers. This is another case of arrogant american's thinking they are better than everyone else. How many people have been killed to spread christian values around the world.

No one religion follower has caused more death and misery than the catholic missionary.

no, do your own research

Uh...but you are the one making the statement. This is a pretty silly thing to say. Maybe you don't have to provide numbers but maybe elaborate on why you think it to be true.

Would it be OK for other countries to look at the atrocities my beloved country has committed that easily could be considered Terrorism.

Slavery, placing Asian-Americans in concentration camps, America's current history of Harassment of the Black Man through social economic methods, when is the last time YOU saw a native american?, ....

I can go on and on but it just shows the Arrogance of Americans (which I am one) but, Islam is treated like the Devil's religion. Do you think no one of Islamic faith died in those towers.

This whole issues is as Un-Christian as it gets but, I bet most of those involved would consider themselves to be CHRISTIANS.

and the hate over there isn't just because we aren't Muslim's ourselves. They hate us more so for our support of Israel over the years. They hate us for invading a sovereign country under patently false pretenses.

And the pilots were from Saudi Arabia who's royal fam was hanging out at bushes ranch during the attack. (not relevant but just felt the need to add this tid bit.

Not one bit. My buddy lived in America, where we value our guaranteed rights and would never want our government to arbitrarily prevent a group from exercising those rights due to the acts of a lunatic fringe. As a Jew, I am particularly sensitive to the sort of fear-mongering coming from the likes of such demagogues as Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin. Muslims deserve the rights of citizenship the same as every American. Their religion makes no difference whatsoever.

I don't agree that it is callous to build there. If anything, I think it can help bridge the wide gap in understanding between Judeo-Christian Americans and Muslims.

WASHINGTON — A New York imam and his proposed mosque near ground zero are being demonized by political candidates – mostly Republicans – despite the fact that Islam is already very much a part of the World Trade Center neighborhood. And that Muslims pray inside the Pentagon, too, less than 80 feet from where terrorists attacked.

And that the imam who's being branded an extremist has been valued by both Republican and Democratic administrations as a moderate face of the faith.

Even so, the project stirs complicated emotions, and Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a complex figure who defies easy categorization in the American Muslim world.

He's devoted much of his career to working closely with Christians, Jews and secular leaders to advance interfaith understanding. He's scolded his own religion for being in some ways in the "Dark Ages." Yet he's also accused the U.S. of spilling more innocent blood than al-Qaida, the terrorist network that turned the World Trade Center, part of the Pentagon and four hijacked airplanes to apocalyptic rubble.

Many Republicans and some Democrats say the proposed $100 million Islamic cultural center and mosque should be built elsewhere, where there is no possible association with New York's ground zero. Far more than a local zoning issue, the matter has seized congressional campaigns, put President Barack Obama and his party on the spot – he says Muslims have the right to build the mosque – divided families of the Sept. 11, 2001, victims, caught the attention of Muslims abroad and threatened to blur distinctions between mainstream Islam in the U.S. and its radical elements.

A look at some of the claims and how they compare with the known facts:

___

_"The folks who want to build this mosque – who are really radical Islamists who want to triumphally prove that they can build a mosque right next to a place where 3,000 Americans were killed by radical Islamists – those folks don't have any interest in reaching out to the community. They're trying to make a case about supremacy." – Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a potential 2012 presidential candidate.

_Some of the Muslim leaders associated with the mosque "are clearly terrorist sympathizers." – Kevin Calvey, a Republican running for Congress in Oklahoma.
Story continues below

_"This radical is a terrible choice to be one of the faces of our country overseas." – Statement by GOP Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Peter King of New York.

THE FACTS:

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.

In a July 2005 speech at the Bob Hawke Prime Ministerial Center in Adelaide, Australia, Rauf said, according to the center's transcript:

"We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al-Qaida has on its hands of innocent non-Muslims."

While calling terrorism unjustified, he said the U.S. has supported authoritarian regimes with heinous human rights records and, faced with that, "how else do people get attention?"

In the same address, he spoke of prospects for peace between Palestinians and the Israelis – who he said "have moved beyond Zionism" – and of a love-your-neighbor ethic uniting all religions.

___

_"Mr. President, ground zero is the wrong place for a mosque." – Rick Scott, Republican candidate for Florida governor.

_"Nazis don't have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There's no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center." – Gingrich.

_"Just a block or two away from 9/11." – Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, another 2012 GOP presidential prospect.

THE FACTS:

No mosque is going up at ground zero. The center would be established at 45-51 Park Place, just over two blocks from the northern edge of the sprawling, 16-acre World Trade Center site. Its location is roughly half a dozen normal lower Manhattan blocks from the site of the North Tower, the nearer of the two destroyed in the attacks.

The center's location, in a former Burlington Coat Factory store, is already used by the cleric for worship, drawing a spillover from the imam's former main place for prayers, the al-Farah mosque. That mosque, at 245 West Broadway, is about a dozen blocks north of the World Trade Center grounds.

Another, the Manhattan Mosque, stands five blocks from the northeast corner of the World Trade Center site.

To be sure, the center's association with 9/11 is intentional and its location is no geographic coincidence. The building was damaged in the Sept. 11 attacks and the center's planners say they want the center to stand as a statement against terrorism.

___

_"There should be no mosque near ground zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia. ... America is experiencing an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization." – Gingrich.

_"This religion's plan is to destroy our way of life. ... If we have to let them build it, make them build it nine stories underground, so we can walk above it as citizens and Christians." – Ron McNeil, a House GOP candidate in the Florida Panhandle, in an exchange reported by The News Herald in Panama City.

THE FACTS:

Such opinions are shared by some Americans, while others are more reluctant to paint the religion with a broad brush and more welcoming of the faith in this country. Bush, himself, while criticized at the time for stirring suspicions about American Muslims, traveled to a Washington mosque less than a week after the attacks to declare that terrorism is "not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace."

In any event, the U.S. armed forces field Muslim troops and make accommodations for them. The Pentagon opened an interfaith chapel in November 2002 close to the area where hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 slammed into the building, killing 184 people.

Muslims gather there for a daily prayer service Monday through Thursday and hold a weekly worship service on Fridays, drawing no complaints. Similar but separate services are provided for other faiths.

DurzoBlint wrote:

Andrew wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:elaborate...ok
Muslim's are being discriminated again in a country founded on religious freedom. Islam did not attack America, just fanatics from a specific region known for the faith. There are Muslims of every color living in just about every country city and state. They are being penalized because of the actions of a few (when looked at globally)

Would it be OK for other countries to look at the atrocities my beloved country has committed that easily could be considered Terrorism.

Slavery, placing Asian-Americans in concentration camps, America's current history of Harassment of the Black Man through social economic methods, when is the last time YOU saw a native american?, ....

I can go on and on but it just shows the Arrogance of Americans (which I am one) but, Islam is treated like the Devil's religion. Do you think no one of Islamic faith died in those towers.

This whole issues is as Un-Christian as it gets but, I bet most of those involved would consider themselves to be CHRISTIANS.

and the hate over there isn't just because we aren't Muslim's ourselves. They hate us more so for our support of Israel over the years. They hate us for invading a sovereign country under patently false pretenses.

And the pilots were from Saudi Arabia who's royal fam was hanging out at bushes ranch during the attack. (not relevant but just felt the need to add this tid bit.

What does any of this have to do with the catholic missionary? I'm not well versed in their practices.

first they would send the missionaries in to speak and try to convert the so called heathens. After, the U.S. forced would arrive waving their guns and rifles. The method the U.S. used in the near destruction of the Native Indian race as well as the method they used to gain control of pre apartheid Africa.

The Church also supported Slavery, the lack of rights for women; has been in bed with the Mafia, supposedly wiping away their sins for in return for large donations that led to the building of Cathedrals and those hugely expensive stained glass windows.

The church is and has been as corrupt as anything in this world is....lets not talk about all the kids clergymen have sexually abused and treated like their own personal suppositories.

To demonize another religion is just laughable.