Dude, there's already a cultural center a couple blocks down. What the hell is with this arbitrary 5 miles bullshit?
Would love to see that argument fly on ANYTHING else.
"Dude, you can't build a church next to my house. It's insensitive"
"How's that?"
"Because you can build it further away, therefore building it next to my house is insensitive."
But don't you think it is equally insensitive to condemn an entire religion based on the actions of a few extremists?
In a case where you have to opposing insensitive actions which one takes precedence?
Edit: These questions are obviously based on the hypothetical situation where there is something insensitive about the cultural center. Which I still don't think there is because no one has given one single good reason why it is insensitive.
I see your Mosque and raise you one gay bar right next door that caters to Islamic men...
Saying it's insensitive is rather stupid. I'd say it just isn't a smart decision though. It is always a tough call. If you have idiots protesting, do you stand up for it, and have it built anyway with the strong risk of it getting vandalized, and people getting hurt if they go in/leave the mosque? Or do you go somewhere else and build it where it'll end up being a little more safer?
I wish we lived in a world where none of this shit would be an issue, and people wouldn't be stupid about generalizing. But it is a reality and I don't know if it would be a safe thing at this point to have it built. And considering a place of worship is often a place for people to feel safe, I think the worshippers' safety is a priority.
Basically, I wish they could built it wherever they wanted, but I don't like to think of what would happen to them if they did build it.
I have a feeling a lot of people are taking a "Common Sense" approach to calling this insensitive. Ie: "The people building this cultural center are being insensitive because they know middle America has the average IQ of an Onion and is going to find a way to be pissed and insulted about this, why do they insist on rocking the boat?"
I think it's a rather brave move to be perfectly honest, and there is absolutely no better way to bring media attention to peace-loving Muslims than a controversy that the pundits just won't ignore. Here's to hoping no one gets lynched or stoned on their way to prayers or morning workouts.
Let me just put this here...
http://www.haaretz.com/news/internat...enter-1.308426
Muslim leaders to abandon plans for Ground Zero community center
Insiders say Muslim spiritual leaders behind the controversial initiative are considering giving up on the former World Trade Center location, in a gesture of appeasement.
By Shlomo Shamir
After weeks of heated debate over plans for an Islamic community center near Ground Zero - the site of the 9/11 attacks on New York - it seems Muslim leaders will soon back down, agreeing to move to a new site.
The decision follows a high-profile campaign against the project that included advertisements on New York buses showing images of the burning Twin Towers, an iconic landmark razed when al-Qaida terrorists flew packed passenger planes into them in 2001. The New York Republican party is also said to be planning a hostile television campaign.
Sources in New York said on Monday that Muslim religious and business leaders will announce plans to abandon the project in the next few days.
New York Governor David Patterson said last weekend that Muslim leaders had rejected outright his proposal tto swap the site in for another in Manhattan.
But several people familiar with the debate among New York's Islamic activists now claim that the leaders are convinced abandoning the site is preferable to unleashing a wave of bitterness towards Muslims.
They also hope the move will be seen as a show of sensitivity to families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks, and to the American public generally.
Another factor in the apparent climbdown is a lack of funds to pay for construction of the center, estimated to cost a hundred million dollars. Backers hope moving it will lead to a wave of support, accompanied by cash donations.
It is also possible that the decision was also influenced by comments made by U.S. President Barack Obama on Sunday, in which he appeared to reverse an earlier show of support.
Obama said that when he went on record backing the center, he meant only that it was the right of every religious group to establish its own places of worship – but he did not intend to justify building the center specifically at Ground Zero/
So we beat the terrorists?
I'd say it's the opposite
In before they buy space in the new World Trade Center, eat shit fuckers
The smart thing to do, at this point, is to pose as a leader in a Christian organization and submit a proposal to build a non-demoninational civic center in the same damn spot. Once the bid is secured, build it, and then lease it to the Muslim group at twice the price.
If the Christians don't do this, the Jews will.
I just wonder why no one is getting mad about all the other churches within a couple of blocks of the WTC site?
As for our foreign policy leading to 9/11... didn't we help oust a secular democratic prime minister from Iran, claiming he would turn it into a communist nation, and wind up putting the Shah back into power. Later leading to Khomeini seizing power while damning the Shah for his relationship with the U.S., as well as providing inspiration for more radical groups to claim justification for terror attacks based on islamic principles?