Hysteria over Muslims spreads all over America!

[Khalil]

I sorta had a long argument but Kuya summed up my point in a sentence.

[Plow]

I'm just curious, for those who think it's ok to build the mosque, is it ok for Germany to build a cultural center at Aushvitz? Would it be ok for the Japanese to build a cultural center at Pearl Harbor?

I barely read this thread, sorry if these questions have been answered.

Edit: And didn't the guy who is funding the Mosque say 9/11 is our fault? Or is it the preacher? or w/e he is called

The simple answer is yes.

Would it be in bad taste, arguably even blatantly disrespectful?

Sure.

Law does not dictate taste.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

I dunno, city ordinances (not that there is one) > bad taste.

[Plow]

There's a significant difference between the kinds of taste we're talking about.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

No were not. I think a great argument can be made that, of all the things that are "ordinanced," there is nothing more offensive than the mosque at ground zero.

[kuronosan]

No were not. I think a great argument can be made that, of all the things that are "ordinanced," there is nothing more offensive than the mosque at ground zero.

But I guess it's okay to continue to build churches in places where children were molested on a daily basis right? Or it's okay for Christians to build churches around the Salem area? Maybe it's okay for Christians and white people to build KKK centers in black communities, right?

Guess what, that shit happens all the time and no one gives a fuck.

Equally, nobody should give two shits if someone wants to build a muslim cultural center near (not in) ground zero. Is it insensitive? Probably. Is it wrong? No. It's not against the law.

And holy shit, people are going to be crying that Obama is a Muslim now that he's actually telling people to leave them the fuck alone. I hate this fucking country sometimes. So many ignorant people and instead of calming them down the stupid fucking Repubs and Teabaggers pander to it all the time because they just want to be elected.

Fucking hypocrites. Repubs and Democrats.

[Kuya]

No were not. I think a great argument can be made that, of all the things that are "ordinanced," there is nothing more offensive than the mosque at ground zero.

Such an argument flies in the face of freedom of religion, and is bigoted. Bigoted, because, as has been mentioned again and again, it rests on the assumption that every Muslim is to blame for what a few Muslims did. In order for a mosque near "ground zero" to be offensive, you have to rely on that assumption which is an affront to reason and is bigoted.

[Plow]

Such an argument flies in the face of freedom of religion, and is bigoted. Bigoted, because, as has been mentioned again and again, it rests on the assumption that every Muslim is to blame for what a few Muslims did. In order for a mosque near "ground zero" to be offensive, you have to rely on that assumption which is an affront to reason and is bigoted.

No, it doesn't.

[Khalil]

Generalizing a whole religion because of what couple bad apples did shouldn't be your argument. Time and time again, it's been explained that not all of muslims share the same misconstrued views of the extremists.

[kuronosan]

No, it doesn't.

Uh, yes it does.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Such an argument flies in the face of freedom of religion, and is bigoted. Bigoted, because, as has been mentioned again and again, it rests on the assumption that every Muslim is to blame for what a few Muslims did. In order for a mosque near "ground zero" to be offensive, you have to rely on that assumption which is an affront to reason and is bigoted.

Muslim's have a history of building mosques at sites that represent some great Muslim victory as a symbol to that victory. The sponsor of this Mosque says 9/11 was our fault (60 mins sept 30) and wants to build a mosque at ground zero.

There's your argument, not the one I just quoted.

[kuronosan]

Muslim's have a history of building mosques at sites that represent some great Muslim victory as a symbol to that victory. The sponsor of this Mosque says 9/11 was our fault (60 mins sept 30) and wants to build a mosque at ground zero.

There's your argument, not the one I just quoted.

9/11 was indirectly our fault. That's not much of an argument. If our country wasn't so full of ignorant idiots who persist on bigoted behavior towards anyone not white/Christian/American-born, we wouldn't have so many people hating us.

[Plow]

Uh, yes it does.

It really does not. Swamp just covered one of the big things, there's also the intention to break ground on 9/11.

It's not about people being responsible for it, it's about people celebrating it and shoving it in people's faces.


Again, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed, but to say there's no legitimate argument other than "muslims r bad mmkay" as to why people would be offended by it is to simply be willfully ignorant.

[kuronosan]

It really does not. Swamp just covered one of the big things, there's also the intention to break ground on 9/11.

It's not about people being responsible for it, it's about people celebrating it and shoving it in people's faces.


Again, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed, but to say there's no legitimate argument other than "muslims r bad mmkay" as to why people would be offended by it is to simply be willfully ignorant.

I admitted it was insensitive to do this and it is more than likely a political statement, however, it is their right to build a center and they should not be chastised "because they're Muslims".

What you are arguing for (It is bad because they are being blatantly insensitive) is not what the rest of the country is arguing for (It is bad because Muslims caused 9/11 and these guys are Muslims).

[Kuya]

Muslim's have a history of building mosques at sites that represent some great Muslim victory as a symbol to that victory. The sponsor of this Mosque says 9/11 was our fault (60 mins sept 30) and wants to build a mosque at ground zero.

There's your argument, not the one I just quoted.

The stated reason (which you can confirm yourself) for building the community center which also houses a mosque near (two or three blocks) from ground zero is to promote tolerance and understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims. You can distrust their stated reasons, but that's your prerogative. It's on you to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they're lying. And even if their intent were to insult, that might not even be enough to reject their ability to build that community center.

What you should ask yourself is why is it that your inmediate assumption is that they're lying. You don't trust Muslims?

[Kuya]

It really does not. Swamp just covered one of the big things, there's also the intention to break ground on 9/11.

It's not about people being responsible for it, it's about people celebrating it and shoving it in people's faces.


Again, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed, but to say there's no legitimate argument other than "muslims r bad mmkay" as to why people would be offended by it is to simply be willfully ignorant.

The community center is not being built on ground zero, if that's what you mean.

If you feel insulted/upset/whatever that a mosque might be built near ground zero, then you are associating the muslims building that mosque with the muslims who carried out the attack on the twin towers.

Do you have any other explanation for why one might feel visceral at the thought of a mosque near ground zero?

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

The stated reason (which you can confirm yourself) for building the community center which also houses a mosque near (two or three blocks) from ground zero is to promote tolerance and understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims. You can distrust their stated reasons, but that's your prerogative. It's on you to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they're lying. And even if their intent were to insult, that might not even be enough to reject their ability to build that community center.

What you should ask yourself is why is it that your inmediate assumption is that they're lying. You don't trust Muslims?

If there intent is to insult, I don't think it would be enough.

If they weren't lieing though, why would they still build it there after all the outcry? New York is a big fucking city, it's not like they are going to lose their audience if they move it further away.

And I'll be honest, I just found it offensive and insensitive, I didn't need to hear the likely reason the dude wants to build it there to think it shouldn't be built.

Edit: And I don't associate the Muslims building it with the terrorists. I would drink a beer with them. It is entirely possible that you can be against something for being insensitive, but not dislike the person performing the action.

[Rhinox]

Muslim's have a history of building mosques at sites that represent some great Muslim victory as a symbol to that victory. The sponsor of this Mosque says 9/11 was our fault (60 mins sept 30) and wants to build a mosque at ground zero.

There's your argument, not the one I just quoted.

agreed 100%

I mean American based companies wouldn't do anything like this.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...jiAtwD9HI37U00


even if The Cemetery was 'fake' which is still heavily disputed its built right next too a sacred Muslim Cemetery.


Wonder if the ADL will file on behalf of the Palestinians?


I wouldn't hold my breath.

[Plow]

You people sure make a lot of unreasonable assumptions in order to accuse people of making unreasonable assumptions.

@kuro:

says who?

@kuya1:
again says who? I suppose it's unreasonable to believe he's looking at the fact that all signs point to this particular group of people wanting to celebrate 9/11 and push it in people's faces?

Nah, it must be because he doesn't trust Muslims.

@kuya2:

A. The center is planned for a lot where a building was destroyed by landing gear from one of the planes. We've been over this, repeatedly. It is, literally, on the site of the destruction.

B. Or, you simply find it insensitive for them to do it, regardless of if they're celebrating/related to/supporting the terrorism.

C. Or, best of all, you see that they blame America for 9/11, and want to build a center literally replacing a building destroyed due to an ideology they partake in and start building it on the anniversary of the fucking event.

Or, it could be because you hate all muslims. Yeah, must just be that. Way easier to argue if you can convince yourself that's all it is.

[Kuya]

If there intent is to insult, I don't think it would be enough.

If they weren't lieing though, why would they still build it there after all the outcry? New York is a big fucking city, it's not like they are going to lose their audience if they move it further away.

And I'll be honest, I just found it offensive and insensitive, I didn't need to hear the likely reason the dude wants to build it there to think it shouldn't be built.

Edit: And I don't associate the Muslims building it with the terrorists. I would drink a beer with them. It is entirely possible that you can be against something for being insensitive, but not dislike the person performing the action.

1- Bolded: Ask them yourself.

2- Finding the building of a mosque near ground zero insensitive is different than finding the building of a mosque near ground zero obscene. Finding it insensitive would mean you emphasize with the people who would be uncomfortable with the mosque near ground zero. Finding it obscene and insulting implies something else entirely.

edit: Finding it insensitive also means that you wonder why the muslims building the mosque didn't consider the feelings of those who would be uncomfortable with the building of a mosque near ground zero.