Proposed Mosque Near Ground Zero

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/groun...he-real-issue/

Wow. I don't even need to finish that article to know that the entire thing is not based on fact, but rather on fear and hatred.

"The proposed mosque near to ground zero is not really a religious institution. It would be — as many mosques throughout the nation are — a terrorist recruitment, indoctrination and training center."

How can you possibly believe that the above quote is true?

[FeminineAllure]

"But there are non-Sharia mosques where peaceful and spiritual Muslims worship God in their own way without promoting violence. A soon-to-be published study funded by Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy, found that 20% of the mosques in the United States have no taint of Sharia and simply promote peaceful worship."

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

"But there are non-Sharia mosques where peaceful and spiritual Muslims worship God in their own way without promoting violence. A soon-to-be published study funded by Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy, found that 20% of the mosques in the United States have no taint of Sharia and simply promote peaceful worship."

1 - Anybody can make a study to prove anything that they want. I'm sure you could also find studies that have the exact opposite results.

2 - Frank Gaffney is not a sane, responsible, or unbiased voice. If you do some research on him you'll find that he's got a very clear hate-on bias against Muslims. It's personal for him. I do not trust anything he says on the subject, or anything said by any organisation that he is a part of. The man has no credibility as far as this issue is concerned.

3 - At least the truth has come out. I'm glad that you have admitted (in a roundabout way) that your true issue is not about "bringing people together v dividing people" and rather about "scary Muslims". Thanks, I always like to know who I'm dealing with.

[betenoire]

Frank Gaffney is a batshit paranoid moron who believes that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, the '93 attacks on the WTC -and- the Oklahoma City bombing.

linkyloo

Why would anybody take -anything- he says seriously?

[FeminineAllure]

Originally Posted by betenoire

1 - Anybody can make a study to prove anything that they want. I'm sure you could also find studies that have the exact opposite results.

2 - Frank Gaffney is not a sane, responsible, or unbiased voice. If you do some research on him you'll find that he's got a very clear hate-on bias against Muslims. It's personal for him. I do not trust anything he says on the subject, or anything said by any organisation that he is a part of. The man has no credibility as far as this issue is concerned.

3 - At least the truth has come out. I'm glad that you have admitted (in a roundabout way) that your true issue is not about "bringing people together v dividing people" and rather about "scary Muslims". Thanks, I always like to know who I'm dealing with.

I was simply offering anothers opinion and point of view. I am not scared of Muslims. And thank you, as I see who I am dealing with as well.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

I was simply offering anothers opinion and point of view. I am not scared of Muslims. And thank you, as I see who I am dealing with as well.

Do you really think that the Center that is being built in New York is a a place where people are being recruited to fight and kill???


Really?

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

I was simply offering anothers opinion and point of view. I am not scared of Muslims. And thank you, as I see who I am dealing with as well.

These points of view are spreading hate and lies about a people. It's blatantly obvious ffs it's a COMMUNITY CENTER not a military camp.

[betenoire]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

I was simply offering anothers opinion and point of view. I am not scared of Muslims. And thank you, as I see who I am dealing with as well.

I don't believe for one second that you were playing Devil's Advocate.

[Jude]

Feminine Alllure:
Could you please provide evidence for your statement that Islamic Centers (mosues or community centers or whatever you'd like to call them) don't honor sharia law? Sharia law is the basis of Islam. I'd really like to hear your sources.

That's akin to suggesting that Judaism generally tosses out all vestiges of Abrahamic law (talmudic law or rabbinical law) and only a few fanatical Jews attempt to abide by the law.

What's your source, please?

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by Jude

Feminine Alllure:
Could you please provide evidence for your statement that Islamic Centers (mosues or community centers or whatever you'd like to call them) don't honor sharia law? Sharia law is the basis of Islam. I'd really like to hear your sources.

That's akin to suggesting that Judaism generally tosses out all vestiges of Abrahamic law (talmudic law or rabbinical law) and only a few fanatical Jews attempt to abide by the law.

What's your source, please?

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/groun...he-real-issue/

paragraph four

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

I was simply offering anothers opinion and point of view. I am not scared of Muslims. And thank you, as I see who I am dealing with as well.

Wait, I'm not sure I understand this. So you are saying that even though you do not endorse or agree with what Mssrs Morris or Gaffney are saying, and even though you do not put a disclaimer along the lines of "the views I quote do not represent my views..." you quoted the aforementioned gentlemen and expect us NOT to conclude--quite reasonably--that you are posting their views because you agree with them. Really? See, if I'm going to post something quoting from someone that I disagree with but that view is representative of a position I disagree with, I will take the time to make certain that the reader *knows* that I'm quoting someone I disagree with. If I don't, then I work under the idea that the reader will conclude (correctly) that if I'm quoting someone then I'm doing so because I *agree* with them. I find your disclaimers somewhat disingenuous, FA.

So your argument appears to be that you want a place where "all people can come together", well why not, say, the site of the strip club? Is that also not a place that all people could come together in? And does NYC *really* need another strip club? Which will be a place more welcoming to the largest number of people, a strip club or the Cordoba house?

Also, if I pulled a made-up statistic like, say, "20% of all Christian churches are not Reconstructionist or Dominionist or otherwise theocratic and simply want to worship in peace..." would you believe that statistic? Look, I'm going to preempt the "I have a right to my opinion" spiel and state that your right to your opinion and your right to express it are not at issue here. However, your right to *express* an opinion does not insulate that opinion from being challenged nor does it render you immune to having said expression eviscerated if it is not based upon solid, reliable evidence (yes, such an animal exists).

Cheers
Aj

[The_Lady_Snow]

I am shocked when I hear things like.... Not in our city.

A lot of Muslims reside there too. Should they too get out of your city? (general you)

AJ said it best in another thread.

To be Brown, or Muslim is a scary fucking time in America, either we are terrorists, taking jobs, building facilities that are training monsters, decapitating folks in the desert.


It's coming, soon you will want us to wear some symbol, you'll want us in lil camps cause you want to make sure who we are....



This Saturday more of that fear is gonna be spread..

On September 11th, 2010, from 6pm - 9pm, we will burn the Koran on the property of Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, FL in remembrance of the fallen victims of 9/11 and to stand against the evil of Islam. Islam is of the devil

In the name of god it's being done, in the name of all that is good, so yeah if you can't see how all the above I mentioned isn't coming I don't know. I fear for our youth the messages they are getting and how dismissed and belittled they feel when something that is holy to them is being burnt and disrespected cause well...

They are comin' to get cha.

Racism in America is at its dangerous....

[SuperFemme]

We really ARE playing into the hands of Al Queda. Already, US Servicemen are being attacked as Afghan people protest the burning o the Koran by burning American Flags and what not. This idiot pastor is putting the lives of our young ones in the military in grave danger, and does NOT care.

GAINESVILLE, Fla. --

The pastor at Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville has vowed to burn Korans next weekend on the ninth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks -- a plan that has sparked a fiery and emotional protest in Afghanistan.

Pastor Terry Jones called the book burning a warning. He said he plans to send a message to Muslim extremists by burning copies of the Koran on his church's lawn.

"We believe people are afraid of radical Islam. We hope it brings awareness," Jones said.

The pastor's plans to torch the holy books ignited outrage in Kabul. Hundreds of Afghans shouted anti-American slogans.

The protesters burned American flags, along with a replica of the pastor.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39034907

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

I am shocked when I hear things like.... Not in our city.

A lot of Muslims reside there too. Should they too get out of your city? (general you)

AJ said it best in another thread.

To be Brown, or Muslim is a scary fucking time in America, either we are terrorists, taking jobs, building facilities that are training monsters, decapitating folks in the desert.

As the calendar inexorably marches toward what would be my mothers 88th birthday and having just left behind in mid-August what would have been my father's 88th, I find myself grateful that they did not live see America take this turn. About 65 years ago, my father--along with a whole lot of other Americans--began to demobilize as WW II closed. My father, as part of the 761st Tank Battalion, earned a Purple Heart and Bronze star for his actions in that war. My parents, my father particularly since he SAW the camps, drilled into us that we had an obligation to make good a promise of 'Never Again', a promise that to our (all of humanity) eternal shame we have not made good on. They also drilled into us that at the time that Hitler came to power, Germany was the most educated, liberal and culturally advanced nation in Europe if not the world. They made us aware that if it could happen in Germany it could just as easily happen here. Seeing their country do this--and keep in mind that these are people who lived through Jim Crow, both my parents had siblings who were the victims of physical violence that cost one uncle his life and another uncle the ability to walk right--would break their hearts.

As my parent's generation exits the stage I am seeing one of my great cultural fears come to pass; namely that we would soon forget once the last generation of Americans who had stared evil--real, true, visceral, unmitigated evil--right in the face were gone. And here we are. My father, if he were alive, would be on his way to D.C. for the 2 October rally and would tell everyone who would listen that "we've heard this song before" just because now the words are in English and not German and just because the targets are Muslims and not Jews, doesn't mean that this isn't the same old ugly song. I understand that a lot of people on the other side are people of good will. I also understand that they *really and genuinely* believe that 8 of 10 mosques are *actually* terrorist training facilities carefully disguised as places of monotheistic worship.

Here's the thing--and to anyone on the other side, I want you to really read what I'm saying here and then sit with these questions--does anyone really believe that the Germans didn't think that the Jews were *really and genuinely* a threat to all things German? Does anyone here believe that the Germans didn't *actually* think that Jews were trying to bring down Germany or that Jews controlled 'all the banks' or that Jews didn't have all kinds of bizarre rituals wherein they killed Christian babies? Is there a single person reading these words that has ANY doubt that every German who turned in a Jewish neighbor, every German who was in the SS or the SA, every German who saw the persecution of the Jews, didn't think that THEY were on the side of right and good? That THEY didn't really hate or fear the Jews per se, they just needed to make certain that they weren't a threat? It's comforting but wholly wrong to believe that the evil done by people is done with the perpetrators knowing that they are doing evil. That is so incorrect that it is not even wrong.

Rather, the Germans thought that THEY were on the side of good in slaughtering the Jews and the gypsies and the homosexuals and the communists and the socialists and the trade unionists. White segregationists didn't think they were evil or propping up an evil system, rather they believed that THEY were on the side of right and good. The Soviets under Stalin did not think that their system was dehumanizing and cruel, they were doing what needed to be done to promote the interests of the proletariat. The Khmer Rouge thought that it was necessary to kill the writers, teachers, lawyers, artists, musicians and others who did not have sufficient revolutionary fever or the children of same because they carried the bourgeois taint of their parents. The Chinese under Mao, the Serbs under Milosevic or the Rawandans all believed the same thing as they committed stomach-turning atrocities. They were on the side of good, the other guys were on the side of evil and the elimination--as regrettable as it might be--just had to happen in order to protect all that was good and noble.

In the name of good, righteousness, nobility and, ironically, freedom we are poised to do the same thing to at least two other groups in this country--Muslims and Hispanics. If you aren't a Muslim or a Hispanic, you might feel safe but don't put your money on that bet. You aren't. If you are reading this then you're queer and make NO mistake that they will come for us. Now, they might get around to us AFTER they are done with the Muslims and the Hispanics but that's actually counter to the historical pattern. The pattern in Germany was that, actually, homosexuals were really part of the test run, to see what they could get away with.

If you are queer, your white skin will not protect you. If you are queer, your Christian religion will not protect you. You'll be gotten around to eventually because movements that seek to cleanse or purge the Other are never satisfied with one group, there's always one OTHER group preventing the nation from achieving its true historical zenith that is its due and when that group is removed THEN all will be well. I know this sounds alarmist but that's only because we're on the 'before' side of whatever historical event we seem hell-bent on hurtling toward. Maybe I'm wrong. I want to be. I hope I am. So far, though, everyday we seem to be taking more and more steps toward an abyss.

Cheers
Aj

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

I was simply offering anothers opinion and point of view. I am not scared of Muslims. And thank you, as I see who I am dealing with as well.

I hope you will take this in the spirit in which it is given, FA. You say you see who you are dealing with but I wonder if you do. Most everyone here arguing the other side simply wants a cogent, coherent, *reason* to oppose this community center that doesn't rely on stereotypes, breathless accusations of Muslim triumphalism or other non-evidence based arguments. I know that's all I want.

Look, I get it that you oppose this community center being built. I also understand that it can be lonely arguing a contrary opinion on a message board. However, if you say you oppose this community center and your opposition is based upon the idea that this is inappropriate then the rest of us are perfectly within reason to ask why it is inappropriate. But, unless I missed a post of yours, I haven't really read an argument why this center shouldn't be built. I certainly haven't had one that met the Kantian imperative that one should never back a law, ethic or principle that one would not want to see applied universally without prejudice.

So let's say, for instance, that you were to wake up tomorrow morning and find that an a Christian church in, say, Indonesia (the largest Muslim country in the world) had been burnt to the ground. The BBC, doing 'man on the street', interviews in Jakarta shows person after person saying "we burned this church to the ground because of all the Muslims who have been killed by Christians". Would you shrug your shoulders and say "well, of course" or would you feel an injustice had been done? What if, the day after that, you saw a headline that Indonesia had passed a law saying you could not practice Christianity in that nation? Again, the BBC interviews the average Indonesian and again you hear that it is insensitive for Christians to be in a Muslim nation given all the demonstrable blood shed by Christians. Would you agree, at least in principle, with the passage of said law or would you, again, think an injustice had been done? The following day you wake up and you see an American soldier, his face is bruised and bloodied, his lips are swollen. The man in the face mask, standing just behind him with a pistol to his head, says that this soldier is the first but not the last who will pay with his blood for deaths of all the Muslims who died in Iraq and Afghanistan. Would you think that this was a reasonable act? On another day, there is footage of a mass Bible burning. Would you think that this was fine because the Bible is the book of Christians and the people setting the book to the torch are Muslims.

I doubt that any of those would sit well with you. So is this principle of "its insensitive" one that you would want applied universally without favor or prejudice?

Cheers
Aj

[FeminineAllure]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

I hope you will take this in the spirit in which it is given, FA. You say you see who you are dealing with but I wonder if you do. Most everyone here arguing the other side simply wants a cogent, coherent, *reason* to oppose this community center that doesn't rely on stereotypes, breathless accusations of Muslim triumphalism or other non-evidence based arguments. I know that's all I want.

Look, I get it that you oppose this community center being built. I also understand that it can be lonely arguing a contrary opinion on a message board. However, if you say you oppose this community center and your opposition is based upon the idea that this is inappropriate then the rest of us are perfectly within reason to ask why it is inappropriate. But, unless I missed a post of yours, I haven't really read an argument why this center shouldn't be built. I certainly haven't had one that met the Kantian imperative that one should never back a law, ethic or principle that one would not want to see applied universally without prejudice.

So let's say, for instance, that you were to wake up tomorrow morning and find that an a Christian church in, say, Indonesia (the largest Muslim country in the world) had been burnt to the ground. The BBC, doing 'man on the street', interviews in Jakarta shows person after person saying "we burned this church to the ground because of all the Muslims who have been killed by Christians". Would you shrug your shoulders and say "well, of course" or would you feel an injustice had been done? What if, the day after that, you saw a headline that Indonesia had passed a law saying you could not practice Christianity in that nation? Again, the BBC interviews the average Indonesian and again you hear that it is insensitive for Christians to be in a Muslim nation given all the demonstrable blood shed by Christians. Would you agree, at least in principle, with the passage of said law or would you, again, think an injustice had been done? The following day you wake up and you see an American soldier, his face is bruised and bloodied, his lips are swollen. The man in the face mask, standing just behind him with a pistol to his head, says that this soldier is the first but not the last who will pay with his blood for deaths of all the Muslims who died in Iraq and Afghanistan. Would you think that this was a reasonable act? On another day, there is footage of a mass Bible burning. Would you think that this was fine because the Bible is the book of Christians and the people setting the book to the torch are Muslims.

I doubt that any of those would sit well with you. So is this principle of "its insensitive" one that you would want applied universally without favor or prejudice?

Cheers
Aj

First of all, I stand up and applaud you as well. I appreciate that you did not call me names, put words in my mouth, assume you know me, my heart and what I feel, and think or that I am posting to play a victim here.

Let me now do the best I can do conveying what I think in this post. But I am not here to to have people not like my reasoning so they start assuming again.

I *DO NOT* oppose a community center.
I at first said "I thought it would be "inapproprite" to put a Mosque which I am being told is not a Mosque so a *community center* so close to ground zero.
I then apologized for using the word "inappropriate" because who am I to judge what is and is not appropriate?
I then said I thought it would be nice to have a center which represented all faiths as a place to come together.
Unfortunately, I then chose a poor source for a resource.
Now let me ask you something? Have you never put your foot into your own mouth before? I have on this thread. And I am done inserting it any farther. Understand?
Thanks.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

First of all, I stand up and applaud you as well. I appreciate that you did not call me names, put words in my mouth, assume you know me, my heart and what I feel, and think or that I am posting to play a victim here.

Let me now do the best I can do conveying what I think in this post. But I am not here to to have people not like my reasoning so they start assuming again.

I *DO NOT* oppose a community center.
I at first said "I thought it would be "inapproprite" to put a Mosque which I am being told is not a Mosque so a *community center* so close to ground zero.
I then apologized for using the word "inappropriate" because who am I to judge what is and is not appropriate?
I then said I thought it would be nice to have a center which represented all faiths as a place to come together.
Unfortunately, I then chose a poor source for a resource.
Now let me ask you something? Have you never put your foot into your own mouth before? I have on this thread. And I am done inserting it any farther. Understand?
Thanks.

Why is it not OK for this to be built?? What is *your* reasoning?

As for a place for all to come and pay their respects, I believe a few people have pointed out that a memorial is being built on ground zero..

This of course has not happened 9 years later, why is no one up in arms about this?


So I ask cause I am curious to know your opinion, why can't a Community Center/ Mosque be built where it is being built?

What is so wrong about that?

Oh, and I am not seeing where anyone called anyone names.....

[Corkey]

I do it all the time, and my wife loves me anyway.
Thanks for clarification FA

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

First of all, I stand up and applaud you as well. I appreciate that you did not call me names, put words in my mouth, assume you know me, my heart and what I feel, and think or that I am posting to play a victim here.

I don't think I can know what people's hearts are like. I do think I know what people's thoughts are based upon what they write. But thank you, I'm glad you find my tone civil; I strive for my posts to always be civil.

Let me now do the best I can do conveying what I think in this post. But I am not here to to have people not like my reasoning so they start assuming again.

I *DO NOT* oppose a community center.
I at first said "I thought it would be "inapproprite" to put a Mosque which I am being told is not a Mosque so a *community center* so close to ground zero.
I then apologized for using the word "inappropriate" because who am I to judge what is and is not appropriate?
I then said I thought it would be nice to have a center which represented all faiths as a place to come together.
Unfortunately, I then chose a poor source for a resource.
Now let me ask you something? Have you never put your foot into your own mouth before? I have on this thread. And I am done inserting it any farther. Understand?
Thanks.

Have I ever put my foot in my mouth? Absolutely! Part of why I can be verbose is that I try to make it absolutely clear what I am and am not saying. Being a writer I know that the reader cannot and should not have to try to get inside my head to fill in the things I think are self-evident because they are self-evident to ME. I am curious why you chose the sources that you did.

As far as the having a place for people of all faiths to come together why would it have to be at the Cordoba house site? The argument that the community center should not be built close to the WTC site because it would be better to have a place for people of all faiths to come together seems, well, let's just say I don't follow the logic. The same could be said of ANY building use that was not an interfaith center. "We want to build a 100 story shopping mall a block over from the WTC site..." "Why not build a 100 story center where all people could come together...." See how that works? Extending the logic--and I'm taking your words to mean what they appear to mean--then really ANY building around the WTC site would be just as well used as an ecumenical center. So why is it that the use that would result in a community center frequented by Muslims is questionable while the use as, say, a Burger King or sushi restaurant or, for that matter, 100 story shopping mall wouldn't be?

As far as your statement "who am I to judge..." well, you are a citizen of a democratic republic and so, in point of fact, it is kind of in the job description of citizen to judge such things. If someone wanted to, for instance, open a strip club across the street from the high school I would have issues about that. I would go and make certain that those issues received a public hearing. Am I anti-strip clubs? No, not particularly. Am I anti-sex? Absolutely not! However, I judge it inappropriate to put a strip club across the street from a high school. Am I making a judgement? Yes. That's part of being a responsible citizen. However, in making said judgement, I should expect that my position will be challenged by people who may hold a contrary view. I should be expected to be prepared to explain my reasoning and, if my reasoning is shown to be flawed, incoherent, or based upon non-factual or non-evidentiary grounds then I should also be prepared to change my position.

As I said in my post to you, all of us arguing the other side, are simply looking to understand the why of it and so far, I can't say that I've seen, read or heard a cogent argument about why the place shouldn't be built. I certainly haven't seen a principle applied that any person would want applied universally without favor or prejudice.

Btw. just as an aside--I am defending the rights of practitioners of a religion I do not practice and would not practice (because I don't 'do' theism generally or monotheism specifically) because I believe that minority faiths, ethnic minorities, racial minorities, and queer people are the canaries in the social coal mine. If this is happening to Cordoba house today, and the mosque (which IS a mosque) in Tennessee or California tomorrow, then it's only a matter of time before someone gets around to noticing the couple of million Americans who practice Zen Buddhism and decide that because Japan was Buddhist (which is sort of correct but Shinto was the majority religion in Japan during the War) and since we fought a war 70 years ago, it's not a good idea for there to be Buddhist temples in America.

Btw. the next time you hear someone say something along the theme of "they can build their mosque, just not there" run this one around your head and see what you come up with:

"Blacks can marry anyone they like, as long as the person isn't white."
"Blacks can live anywhere they want, just not next door."
"Gays and lesbians can marry any person they want, just so long as it is a member of the opposite gender."

Different words, identical sentiments. It's like being in favor of, say, your neighbor coming for dinner provided that they don't eat or drink anything.


cheers
Aj

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by FeminineAllure

First of all, I stand up and applaud you as well. I appreciate that you did not call me names, put words in my mouth, assume you know me, my heart and what I feel, and think or that I am posting to play a victim here.

Let me now do the best I can do conveying what I think in this post. But I am not here to to have people not like my reasoning so they start assuming again.

I *DO NOT* oppose a community center.
I at first said "I thought it would be "inapproprite" to put a Mosque which I am being told is not a Mosque so a *community center* so close to ground zero.
I then apologized for using the word "inappropriate" because who am I to judge what is and is not appropriate?
I then said I thought it would be nice to have a center which represented all faiths as a place to come together.
Unfortunately, I then chose a poor source for a resource.
Now let me ask you something? Have you never put your foot into your own mouth before? I have on this thread. And I am done inserting it any farther. Understand?
Thanks.

Although, I am usually on the left side of these discussions and honestly view this entire story/issue as just one cog on the wheel of an ever increasing anti-Muslim ladder in the US - I get what you are saying, here.

So often, one statement from a poster is jumped all over when, everyone, has put a foot in their mouth at one time or another. It happens. And since we do not have a 3 dimensional way of "hearing" each other, I find pile ons (not saying that is happening presently) to be very unfair. And a tool for hindering communication because once put on the defensive, most people will dig further into their stance and not consider opposing convictions.

One of the things that I value the most on the site is seeing what other people think about issues, etc. I don't always agree, but, there have been many times that my own thinking has been enriched by someone else's take on things.