Mosque near Ground Zero
- Thread starter YukonJack
- Start date
The determination of appropriateness should be the decision of those in the community where it is proposed... If it's in my community, then I would contribute my opinion.
ahhhhhhh...so since you don't live in Manhaten, your opinion does not matter. Plus since the majority of New Yorkers, including the city council, have no problem with it then this whole thread is moot.
Moot from the first post. City Council had already overwhelmingly approved of the construction of the centre, not to mention that the request for permission was more of a formality and expression of respect for City Council and the community seeing that bylaws already permitted them to build the mosque without City Council's approval to begin with.
So essentially, the first post of the thread was already expressing offense at something that was really none of his business to begin with.
So essentially, the first post of the thread was already expressing offense at something that was really none of his business to begin with.
Definitely moot from the first post. I'd say founding the basis of algebra ranks higher as a muslim achievement. I'm sure Jack the flapper would love us to believe that Muslims rank this as a great achievement, and some probably do. But not the ones building the community center. They're working against ignorance such as Jack's. That's a big battle. They have their work cut out for them.
Awww... Did my analogy not fit in with your preconceived view point?.. Did it offer a bit of a conundrum similar to what the mosque is about?
Personally, I could care less, then again, unlike yourself, I haven't internalized this specific issue to the point of hurling insults to any that disagree.
Don't know and don't care. The comment I made illustrates that the idealistic rebuttal of "it's a free country" is meaningless.
Yeah, that must be it.... There couldn't possibly be another perspective, certainly not if YOU say so.
That question should be put to New Yorkers first and Americans second... What you and I think is way down the list.
Agreed.. Who can we speak to in deleting this thread?
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been trying to wade through this Thread, when not pulled away to
deal with other things, or swimming through the reciprocal Trolling, &
I think this Thread comes down to two basic camps of thought.
1) Those that see this Mosque as a place of worship and a memorial
for a segment of those that were lost in the 911 attack.
2) Those that see this Mosque as a political statement to be able to
claim that there is now a Mosque built on the rubble of the Twin Towers.
Am I up to speed so far? Is this where the last 14 pages has arrived at
when the Trolling is removed and the debate it left standing on its own?
The above points assume the Mosque will be built...am I correct so far?
deal with other things, or swimming through the reciprocal Trolling, &
I think this Thread comes down to two basic camps of thought.
1) Those that see this Mosque as a place of worship and a memorial
for a segment of those that were lost in the 911 attack.
2) Those that see this Mosque as a political statement to be able to
claim that there is now a Mosque built on the rubble of the Twin Towers.
Am I up to speed so far? Is this where the last 14 pages has arrived at
when the Trolling is removed and the debate it left standing on its own?
The above points assume the Mosque will be built...am I correct so far?
OK...I just wanted to make sure I had a grasp on things here. Now there
have been well over a hundred posts made in this Thread alone in less
than the last 24hrs. If I had to wade through them, & just remove the posts
that included personal attacks (& quotes of the same), & Trolling (& quotes
of the same), and off-topic shyte (& quotes of the same), there wouldn't be
a whole lot left in this Thread.
Do I close this & edited out the above, so that I can stay ahead of things?
Or will folks just chill out and go forward from this point without intervention?
have been well over a hundred posts made in this Thread alone in less
than the last 24hrs. If I had to wade through them, & just remove the posts
that included personal attacks (& quotes of the same), & Trolling (& quotes
of the same), and off-topic shyte (& quotes of the same), there wouldn't be
a whole lot left in this Thread.
Do I close this & edited out the above, so that I can stay ahead of things?
Or will folks just chill out and go forward from this point without intervention?
That doesn't answer the question.
Should a group known to be involved in pedophilia be allowed to erect a church near a school?
Here comes the biased fun police.:roll:
It answered perfectly, just not what you wanted.
Why limit it to just the Catholic Church? There is no religion, culture or group that does not have a tie to this obscene action. that said, seeing how both men and women (as far as groups go) have been involved in acts of child abuse (pedophilia), I'd say that makes for a problem.
Did you mean:
"Should a group be discouraged from erecting a church near a school because a related yet separate group is involved in pedophilia?"
Wouldn't this apply to terrorism too?
Absolutely, terrorists are either male or female (it's a wiki fact).. Based on Avro's initial question/logic to me, it looks like that we'll be banning everyone from building anything from places of worship to hospitals to residential homes as they (the group/individual) will qualify in some form as a child molester.
... or a terrorist.
So based on that, unless we're going to be offended at the building of a church near ground zero, why be offended at an Islamic Centre?
That's right.. or a terrorist.
On the church point, they aren't proposing the construction of a church in that spot, are they?
My point is about appropriateness. I asked the question earlier and it was answered only by one individual in the form of personal attacks and insults so maybe I'll try with you.
Would you support a proposal by an American group that wished to construct an "education facility" that celebrated historical American advances in the development of nuclear weapons technology?
The proposed site would be in the vicinity of ground zero in Hiroshima - all would be welcome, no discrimination.
Personally, I'd say it should be allowed unless one could argue convincingly that it shouldn't be, though I can see why it would be offensive. You have a group praising nuclear weapons technologies wanting to build a facility right where a city was vaporized by such technology.
A parallel would be if a group celebrating historical Arab advances in terrorism decided to build such a facility near Ground Zero.
Now let me help you make an alternative parallel:
An American group that wants to build a YMCA in Hiroshima with a church in one floor. Yes, I'd support it wholeheartedly and I would see nothing offensive or inappropriate about it. So what is so inappropriate about this Islamic Centre?
Unless of course you equate religious worship with the advancement of nuclear weapons technologies?
That was a legitimate question.
Last edited by a moderator:
It was not any where near a legitimate question. The 2 can not be equated.
What this bigot suggested could be equated with what the 7th Cavalry did at wounded knee recentley.