46
   

Mosque to be Built Near Ground Zero

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:22 pm
@parados,
No. I read it was on-site. Then, why the hub-bub?
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:26 pm
Yes, I understand why some people are upset that a mosque isn't welcomed in the vicinity.
0 Replies
 
chai2
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:28 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

No. I read it was on-site. Then, why the hub-bub?


That's what I was saying in my post.

joefromchicago
 
  6  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:35 pm
@failures art,
failures art wrote:
I must however express some passion myself here. I mirror what was said previously, why would they want to build here? Now I understand that any piece of Manhattan real estate is heavily fought over, so that could be enough by itself. However, I don't think the Mosque to be oblivious to the nerve this strikes. The mosque is not a AQ or Taliban recruiting center, but I have zero doubt that groups like those will use this as a HUGE piece of propaganda and for recruitment elsewhere on the globe.

So what?

Suppose that the group that wants to build the mosque stated that it wants to build on that particular site as a way of metaphorically sticking a finger in the eye of the USA. Suppose it issues a statement of support for the 9/11 hijackers and solidarity with al Qaida. Suppose it has worse motives for building at that site than could ever be conjured in the fevered imaginations of Newt Gingrich or Sarah Palin.

So what?

I imagine that a lot of people would get their feelings hurt or be deeply offended, but then there's no guarantee in this country that your feelings won't get hurt or that you won't be offended. I find the demagogues and cranks who have ginned up this controversy and who cynically use the WTC site as a prop for their demagoguery and crankery to be highly offensive, but I wouldn't dream of saying that they shouldn't be allowed to speak near the WTC site. If the group that plans to build the mosque wants to make a statement by being near the WTC site, it wouldn't be the first.
Lash
 
  7  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:44 pm
@chai2,
Obviously, I didn't read the entire thread. If I'd read cyclops a few pages back... I wonder if the other detractors are mistaken about the location. I don't understand the problem with "near" Ground Zero...
parados
 
  8  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:48 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

No. I read it was on-site. Then, why the hub-bub?

I'm guessing 90% of the hub-bub is from people that mistakenly think it is on-site since that seems to be the way Fox News is presenting it.
Irishk
 
  4  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:58 pm
Let 'em build it. Put a strip club on one side and a Hooters on the other.

USA! USA! USA!
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  7  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:59 pm
@Lash,
"There's not going to be some huge, ostentatious mosque with some minaret or some giant crescent located 'at' Ground Zero, nor within clear sight of it, nor even on the way (in terms of virtually all natural paths a commuter or tourist might take) to Ground Zero. Rather, there's going to be a mixed-use retail building that contains some kind of reformist mosque, located somewhere in its general vicinity -- as there already is now. It would not impose upon or offend anyone unless they were going out of their way to be imposed upon or offended."

linky clicky
hamburgboy
 
  5  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:00 pm
@parados,
a/t CNN the mosque will NOT be built on the WTC site but will replace a building currently standing at PARK PLACE .

is park place an acceptable location for a mosque ?

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/08/04/dodds.mosques.new.york/#fbid=L-c_aXnDoGI&wom=false
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  2  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:01 pm
@joefromchicago,
You are correct that even if they had the worst intentions, the law would still allow for them to build. I don't need to be convinced that they can build it. I agree. So what's you're point?

I'm not assuming something ill about their intentions. I'm assuming they have the BEST intentions for that matter. I'm saying that other will seek to exploit this, and their intentions will be lost or irrelevant. That's a bad thing, and probably work's against their own goals.

Is it out of bounds to say that building the mosque should not be obstructed, but I think it's a poor idea? Why must this be both for or both against?

It is not so terrible to ask "are you sure you want to do this?" I can accept the answer. It certainly won't be my problem to deal with (knock on wood), and I certainly hope that people don't go around giving them more problems.

At this point it's a done deal. My only last concern is that they put the effort into making it a nice piece of architecture. When I'm in NYC, I would certainly go see any nice building if it had notable character.

A
R
T
parados
 
  4  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:04 pm
@joefromchicago,
I think most of the people obsessing about this are missing this important fact as well

Quote:
Rather, there's going to be a mixed-use retail building that contains some kind of reformist mosque, located somewhere in its general vicinity -- as there already is now.


This is replacing an existing store front mosque which seems to get lost in the hub-bub and general gnashing of teeth.
joefromchicago
 
  2  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:07 pm
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

You are correct that even if they had the worst intentions, the law would still allow for them to build. I don't need to be convinced that they can build it. I agree. So what's you're point?

Well, that certainly isn't it. My point isn't that they can build it, it's that their motives in building it don't matter. You, on the other hand, think they do.

failures art wrote:
I'm not assuming something ill about their intentions. I'm assuming they have the BEST intentions for that matter. I'm saying that other will seek to exploit this, and their intentions will be lost or irrelevant. That's a bad thing, and probably work's against their own goals.

So what? If they're making a mistake in building a mosque there, then that's their problem.
Lash
 
  9  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:08 pm
@joefromchicago,
I have to say, it seems like you and parados are right. It appears that an anti-Muslim brou-ha-ha is being intentionlly whipped up on this issue. Thank you for the facts.
joefromchicago
 
  3  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:11 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:

I think most of the people obsessing about this are missing this important fact as well

I think they're missing all the important facts. But then facts are decidedly secondary in this matter. This is a textbook example of "truthiness" -- something that should be true because you feel in your gut that it should be true. The people who have been offended by the new mosque (as opposed to the mosque that it's replacing) are only interested in the truthiness of their position, not the truth.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  0  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:12 pm
@Linkat,
Linkat- Exactly- I have no problem with any religion erecting a house of worship, but the choice of that particular site is extremely insensitive.

Bob (Craven) Maybe if you had formerly worked with some people like I had, and then agonized if they had been amongst the ones who had been killed on 9/11, you might feel differently.

If the Muslims who are erecting the site are moderate as you imply, they would certainly have shown more empathy towards their neighbors.

The thing is, I am not talking about rights. Of course they have a perfect RIGHT to build a mosque. I am talking about common decency.
Robert Gentel
 
  5  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:16 pm
@Phoenix32890,
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Bob (Craven) Maybe if you had formerly worked with some people like I had, and then agonized if they had been amongst the ones who had been killed on 9/11, you might feel differently.


I did, and it didn't. Personal tragedy isn't going to make me illogical and start blaming billions of people who have nothing to do with it.

Quote:
If the Muslims who are erecting the site are moderate as you imply, they would certainly have shown more empathy towards their neighbors.


Nonsense. This is a non-issue (not even visible from "ground zero") whipped up by bigots and it works well.

Quote:
The thing is, I am not talking about rights. Of course they have a perfect RIGHT to build a mosque. I am talking about common decency.


I know, and I'm saying that it takes an ignorant and bigoted outlook on Islam to see it as indecent. Islam is a religion that a handful of idiots committed a crime in the name of but they do not speak for Islam. It takes a simplistic and monolithic world-view to take offense at this.
engineer
 
  7  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:23 pm
@Phoenix32890,
This line of thought brings up several additional questions. Exactly how far from ground zero would be appropriately sensitive? Given that there is already a store-front mosque there, does that mosque have to close in order to show proper sensitivity? Since the Oklahoma City bomber claimed Christian credentials, do all the churches in Oklahoma City need to close or just the downtown ones? To me, this does seem to be a non-issue being whipped up into something more sinister for unknown purposes. I can see that some people directly affected by the terrorist attacks might feel emotional pain over this, but only because other people are blowing it up and throwing it in their faces.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:27 pm
@engineer,
engineer wrote:
This line of thought brings up several additional questions. Exactly how far from ground zero would be appropriately sensitive? Given that there is already a store-front mosque there, does that mosque have to close in order to show proper sensitivity?


Since the Oklahoma City bomber claimed Christian credentials,
Did he say something about that??
I thought his objections were political, not theological.





David
0 Replies
 
Pronounce
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:36 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Christians don't scour their ranks to rid itself of extremist nut cases, why would anyone expect Muslins to. But it should also be noted that Islam is a fundamentalist religion with a history of conquest and oppression. Also like the worldwide body of Catholics that look to the Vatican for leadership, the worldwide body of Muslins look to their imams and sheiks for leadership. So the correlation here, for reference and understanding, is that the voice of the majority rests in hands of the minority. If you're not a Catholic you probably don't understand what it means to be excommunicated and the amount of power and sway that holds over all Catholics worldwide. But if you did understand it then you'd know that even while the vast majority of Muslins are not normally violent by adopting the religion of Islam they are easily controlled by a minority of individuals quite effectively. Cursory search of the Internet for Amnesty International, Voices of the Martyrs and other humanitarian organizations will give you an insight into the oppression that is Islam.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  0  
Reply Wed 4 Aug, 2010 02:46 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Quote:
I did, and it didn't. Personal tragedy isn't going to make me illogical and start blaming billions of people who have nothing to do with it.


I am not blaming anybody. I reiterate.............Ground zero has a strong emotional effect on many people. IMO, it is the height of insensitivity on the part of moderate Muslims to erect a mega-edifice right near that particular site.

I was blaming no one. Let the Muslims built whatever type of house of worship that they desire.............but not right near ground zero.
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/20/2019 at 05:47:31