Sorry but I find this hard to believe.

Obama’s mosque duty

By Michael Gerson
Monday, August 16, 2010; A13

President Obama has a peculiar talent for enraging his critics while deflating the enthusiasm of his friends, on full display in the Manhattan mosque controversy.

His first intervention, at a White House dinner for Ramadan on Friday, was an unqualified defense of both religious liberty and religious tolerance, implying that opposition to a mosque near Ground Zero violated both. In his second intervention, in an unplanned exchange with a reporter on Saturday, he insisted that he was not commenting “on the wisdom” of building the mosque, merely affirming the right to a construction permit. It was not a contradiction, but it was a marked change in tone. Obama managed to collect all the political damage for taking an unpopular stand without gaining credit for political courage.

But being hapless does not make the president wrong.

Though columnists are loath to admit it, there is a difference between being a commentator and being president. Pundits have every right to raise questions about the construction of an Islamic center near Ground Zero. Where is the funding coming from? What are the motives of its supporters? Is the symbolism insensitive?

But the view from the Oval Office differs from the view from a keyboard. A president does not merely have opinions; he has duties to the Constitution and to the citizens he serves — including millions of Muslim citizens. His primary concern is not the sifting of sensitivities but the protection of the American people and the vindication of their rights.

By this standard, Obama had no choice but the general path he took. No president, of any party or ideology, could tell millions of Americans that their sacred building desecrates American holy ground. This would understandably be taken as a presidential assault on the deepest beliefs of his fellow citizens. It would be an unprecedented act of sectarianism, alienating an entire faith tradition from the American experiment. If a church or synagogue can be built on a commercial street in Lower Manhattan, declaring a mosque off-limits would officially equate Islam with violence and terrorism. No president would consider making such a statement. And those commentators who urge the president to do so fundamentally misunderstand the presidency itself.

An inclusive rhetoric toward Islam is sometimes dismissed as mere political correctness. Having spent some time crafting such rhetoric for a president, I can attest that it is actually a matter of national interest. It is appropriate — in my view, required — for a president to draw a clear line between “us” and “them” in the global conflict with Muslim militants. I wish Obama would do it with more vigor. But it matters greatly where that line is drawn. The militants hope, above all else, to provoke conflict between the West and Islam — to graft their totalitarian political manias onto a broader movement of Muslim solidarity. America hopes to draw a line that isolates the politically violent and those who tolerate political violence — creating solidarity with Muslim opponents and victims of radicalism.

How precisely is our cause served by treating the construction of a non-radical mosque in Lower Manhattan as the functional equivalent of defiling a grave? It assumes a civilizational conflict instead of defusing it. Symbolism is indeed important in the war against terrorism. But a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy’s victory; it is a prerequisite for our own.

The federal government has a response to American mosques taken over by advocates of violence. It investigates them, freezes their assets and charges their leaders. It does not urge zoning decisions that express a general discomfort with Islam itself.

Here again, this debate illustrates a gap in perspective. A commentator can speak with obvious sincerity of preventing American hallowed ground from being overshadowed by a mosque. A president not only serves Muslim citizens, not only commands Muslims in the American military, but also leads a coalition that includes Iraqi and Afghan Muslims who risk death each day fighting Islamic radicalism at our side. How could he possibly tell them that their place of worship inherently symbolizes the triumph of terror?

There are many reasons to criticize Obama’s late, vacillating response to the Manhattan mosque, and perhaps even to criticize this particular mosque. But those who want a president to assert that any mosque would defile the neighborhood near Ground Zero are asking him to undermine the war on terrorism. A war on Islam would make a war on terrorism impossible.

Pres. dropped 3 pts. since Ithtar speech. Is there any way we can drag this thing out for at least another 6-8 weeks?
- tell Patterson to Mind His Own Business! LOL!!!

I said the same thing in a post several days ago. No news here.

The Mosque will NEVER be built. The only people that don’t know that are the left-wing press and kooks that post here.

The building owners are about to cave soon.

NORBIT said:
Pres. dropped 3 pts. since Ithtar speech. Is there any way we can drag this thing out for at least another 6-8 weeks?

Gretchen O’Van Karlson is trying her very best to do just that and in general to start a religious war and rid ourselves if the free exercise portion of the First Amendment. Perhaps, you should knock heads with her.

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

gordonbloyershow said:
I said the same thing in a post several days ago. No news here. The Mosque will NEVER be built. The only people that don’t know that are the left-wing press and kooks that post here. The building owners are about to cave soon.

Well that’s super Marceaux, I mean Blower. I assume you’re going to hold a party complete with cheap domestic beer and generic wieners roasted over a buring Bill of Rights?

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

gordonbloyershow said:
I said the same thing in a post several days ago. No news here.

The Mosque will NEVER be built. The only people that don’t know that are the left-wing press and kooks that post here.

The building owners are about to cave soon.

Maybe the can relocate the mosque to somewhere tolerant and open-minded, like Indiana.

Why no recent statements on this from the notoriously shy Chuckie Schumer and Ant’ny Weiner ? Where are youse guys ?

Yes, Bill’s argument for punishing people who’s only crime is being Islamic. His way of saying, all Islmanics should be treated unjustly because a few Islamics committed a crime. For sure he does not say that construction crews should not build the next Catholic Church because of the thousands of reported cases of Priest abuse of children.

The Real Royal King said:
Well that’s super Marceaux, I mean Blower. I assume you’re going to hold a party complete with cheap domestic beer and generic wieners roasted over a buring Bill of Rights?

No one is saying that the federal government, or local government should forbid them to build the mosque. That would be a violation of the 1st Amendment. People, about 70% of the US population and 60% of the New York population are simple practicing their 1st Amendment right of Free Speech.

paulmdoro said:
Maybe the can relocate the mosque to somewhere tolerant and open-minded, like Indiana.

New York is very tolerant. Maybe the people that want to build the Mosque should also be tolerant of other peoples beliefs.

More Liberty said:
No one is saying that the federal government, or local government should forbid them to build the mosque. That would be a violation of the 1st Amendment. People, about 70% of the US population and 60% of the New York population are simple practicing their 1st Amendment right of Free Speech.

Nothing wrong with exercising the 1st Amendment. Liberty, don’t you think that, at least to a small degree, some people are letting fear cloud their judgment?

Predictions , if it is built ……………………………..http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/so_what_happens_if_the_ground.html

No matter what anyone might think about RRK – and I’m sure that would be creative – at least he did what few Democratic candidates are willing to do…….Meet with the President! lol!

DEMAND every Democrat state where they stand on the mosque issue!
heh – heh – heh

What do people think of this?

“As it relates to religious buildings in the vicinity of ground zero, it’s either all or nothing — churches, synagogues and mosques should be treated the same,” said Chris Gibson, a Republican running against a House incumbent in upstate New York.

paulmdoro said:
Nothing wrong with exercising the 1st Amendment. Liberty, don’t you think that, at least to a small degree, some people are letting fear cloud their judgment?

I don’t know to be honest, maybe some, but everyone has a right to their opinion. This is obviously a very sensitive subject for almost all Americans, especially those that live in New York. No one is saying that Muslims shouldn’t be able to worship their “Allah.” New York city, and the burros (SP?) have plenty of Mosques. I’m simply pointing out that both sides need to be tolerant, not just one side. Those that want to build the mosque say it is for healing…..I think we can all agree that it is doing the precise opposite of that.

paulmdoro said:
What do people think of this?

“As it relates to religious buildings in the vicinity of ground zero, it’s either all or nothing — churches, synagogues and mosques should be treated the same,” said Chris Gibson, a Republican running against a House incumbent in upstate New York.

What do i care about what some politician thinks?

Snarky much? Cripes. You have no opinion on his all or nothing suggestion?

More Liberty said:
I don’t know to be honest, maybe some, but everyone has a right to their opinion. This is obviously a very sensitive subject for almost all Americans, especially those that live in New York. No one is saying that Muslims shouldn’t be able to worship their “Allah.” New York city, and the burros (SP?) have plenty of Mosques. I’m simply pointing out that both sides need to be tolerant, not just one side. Those that want to build the mosque say it is for healing…..I think we can all agree that it is doing the precise opposite of that.

And what distance is acceptable? Currently there is a mosque 4 blocks from Ground Zero. Should they move?

paulmdoro said:
Snarky much? Cripes. You have no opinion on his all or nothing suggestion?

Sorry. No offense.

paulmdoro said:
And what distance is acceptable? Currently there is a mosque 4 blocks from Ground Zero. Should they move?

No…it was already there if I’m not mistaken.

More Liberty said:
New York is very tolerant. Maybe the people that want to build the Mosque should also be tolerant of other peoples beliefs.

So now it represents “intolerance” to engage in a constitutionally protected activity?

paulmdoro said:
Nothing wrong with exercising the 1st Amendment. Liberty, don’t you think that, at least to a small degree, some people are letting fear cloud their judgment?

No, I don’t think it’s fear. It’s anger at a provocation.

Why did they change the name from Cordoba House? Why, when they announced it, did they declare that it would open on 9/11/11? Provocation.

More Liberty said:
I don’t know to be honest, maybe some, but everyone has a right to their opinion. This is obviously a very sensitive subject for almost all Americans, especially those that live in New York. No one is saying that Muslims shouldn’t be able to worship their “Allah.” New York city, and the burros (SP?) have plenty of Mosques. I’m simply pointing out that both sides need to be tolerant, not just one side. Those that want to build the mosque say it is for healing…..I think we can all agree that it is doing the precise opposite of that.

Only because many people are blaming Islam for terrorism, equating the two. Like equating Catholocism with child abuse.

If they want to build a Mosque in my backyard, I don’t care as long as they pay me.

Just because you loons keep repeating that this about religious freedom won’t make it true.

The Mosque will NEVER be built in that location. The loons are about to lose the issue and you can’t take it.

RRK you are an idiot and nothing you can do will change it.

Pablo said:
Why did they change the name from Cordoba House? Why, when they announced it, did they declare that it would open on 9/11/11? Provocation.

Isn’t that like Glenn Beck, who greatly offends black people, having his freedom rally at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial on the anniversary of the King dream speech? Isn’t Glenn doing that to heckle black people?

valkyrie101 said:
So now it represents “intolerance” to engage in a constitutionally protected activity?

There are plenty of intolerant acts that are constitutionally protected. That’s the thing about the First Amendment. We only need it for speech people don’t like, because no one tries to restrict speech they do like.

Is it constitutionally protected to protest NAMBLA or Nazis? How about military funerals?

valkyrie101 said:
So now it represents “intolerance” to engage in a constitutionally protected activity?

In some aspect, it can be. Simply because it is legal, does not mean it is tolerant. Nazi parades through jewish neighborhoods is legal, although clearly intolerant.

So you are saying that those that are expressing their belief, through free speech, that this Mosque, set to open on 9/11/11 (ten years after the towers fell, and ten years after landing craft from one of the planes hit that building), should be opened somewhere else are intolerant? Yet the mosque is tolerant….even though 70% of Americans and 60% of New Yorkers don’t agree with them.

valkyrie101 said:
Isn’t that like Glenn Beck, who greatly offends black people, having his freedom rally at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial on the anniversary of the King dream speech? Isn’t Glenn doing that to heckle black people?

How does he greatly offend black people? Is Alveda King offended by Glenn Beck? Do you really think, anywhere in your rancid little brain, that the point of the rally is heckling black people? Where does Rev Moon fit into this?

Val says:

Only because many people are blaming Islam for terrorism, equating the two.

Hey, Val, in case you didn’t realize, around 95% of the worlds terrorism IS from RADICAL Islam. The more moderate Muslims should take this into account when deciding where to build shrines. And not that you’d read it hear on Mediaite, but alot of muslims agree it’s totally insensitive to build it here. I’d post links, but I’ve already done it and am sick of doing the leg work for you libs.

gordonbloyershow said:
If they want to build a Mosque in my backyard, I don’t care as long as they pay me. Just because you loons keep repeating that this about religious freedom won’t make it true. The Mosque will NEVER be built in that location. The loons are about to lose the issue and you can’t take it. RRK you are an idiot and nothing you can do will change it.

You could be right, gordon, the mosque may never be built. And that represents a victory for the radical Islamics who want nothing more than to instill hostility between moderate Islam and the west.

MichelleF said:
Val says:

Only because many people are blaming Islam for terrorism, equating the two.

Hey, Val, in case you didn’t realize, around 95% of the worlds terrorism IS from RADICAL Islam. The more moderate Muslims should take this into account when deciding where to build shrines. And not that you’d read it hear on Mediaite, but alot of muslims agree it’s totally insensitive to build it here. I’d post links, but I’ve already done it and am sick of doing the leg work for you libs.

As someone who often complains of religious intolerance being directed at them, you’d think you would possess a little more religious tolerance.

valkyrie101 said:
Only because many people are blaming Islam for terrorism, equating the two. Like equating Catholocism with child abuse.

Fair point, but as that Catholic Priest is violating the child he is not yelling “God Is Great” and doing ti in the name of Mary. Yet when Suicide bombers and Jihadists attack, they yell “Allah Akbar…Allah Akbar.” I saw and heard it in Iraq, and even the Army major that decides to murder people on Fort Hood was yelling “Allah Akbar.”

MichelleF said:
Val says: Only because many people are blaming Islam for terrorism, equating the two. Hey, Val, in case you didn’t realize, around 95% of the worlds terrorism IS from RADICAL Islam. The more moderate Muslims should take this into account when deciding where to build shrines. And not that you’d read it hear on Mediaite, but alot of muslims agree it’s totally insensitive to build it here. I’d post links, but I’ve already done it and am sick of doing the leg work for you libs.

Yes, and 90% of the bigomists in this country are “Mormon”. What is your point? That bigomy represents Mormons? That terrorism represents Islam? That Catholocism represents child abuse? That the Christian Serbs who slaughtered thousands of Islamics in Bosnia represent “Christians”? A tiny fraction of Islamics support or engage in terror.

paulmdoro said:
As someone who often complains of religious intolerance being directed at them, you’d think you would possess a little more religious tolerance.

Does that involve ignoring objectively verifiable facts?

Val, I always suspected from your comments that you hate mormons. Thanks for finally being honest. The stat I posted is provable fact, what you posted is pure bigotry.

More Liberty said:
Fair point, but as that Catholic Priest is violating the child he is not yelling “God Is Great” and doing ti in the name of Mary. Yet when Suicide bombers and Jihadists attack, they yell “Allah Akbar…Allah Akbar.” I saw and heard it in Iraq, and even the Army major that decides to murder people on Fort Hood was yelling “Allah Akbar.”

History is laughing if you think that belief in God has not been the primary motivating factor in Millions, or hundreds of millions of deaths, including, just 15 years ago, the “ethnic cleansing” of Islamics in Bosnia. Do those Christians who killed those thousands of people, in the name of Jesus, thereby cause all of Christianity to lbe abeled “terrorists”?

oops, “be labeled”

And for the record, my stat was regarding RADICAL islam. Did you not see that part? I mean I put it in all caps. But as usual, you try to twist what people say. If you are against ILLEGAL immigration, you hate immigrants and wish them death. Blah, Blah, Blah. You are too ignorant to waste my time on.

The most frightening aspect of this whole thing occurred yesterday when Speaker Pelosi said the opponents of the mosque should be investigated…. ARE YOU F*CKING KIDDING ME!!!!!!!!

MichelleF said:
Val, I always suspected from your comments that you hate mormons. Thanks for finally being honest. The stat I posted is provable fact, what you posted is pure bigotry.

Aren’t many Christians in America intolerant of Mormonism?

Paul says:

As someone who often complains of religious intolerance being directed at them, you’d think you would possess a little more religious tolerance.

Paul, what about my statement was intolerant? Is it or is it not true that nearly ALL of the terrorism in today’s world is committed by RADICAL islam. I NEVER said all muslims are bad, nor do I think that. You libs twisting what people say in order to avoid a debate is getting tired. You and Val can convo with each other, i’m don’t wasting my time with you.

MichelleF said:
Paul says:
i’m don’t wasting my time with you.

Boy if I had a nickel for every time I heard that, I could almost retire.

In 2006, Al Jazzera conducted a poll of 41,000 muslims throughout the middle-east. The poll results were only released on the Arabic language website, not the english version.

One of the questions asked “Do you support Osma Bin Laden?’
49.9% said yes
50.1% said no

While more recent polls show support for Osama is declining, the percentage is non-the-less interesting.

gordonbloyershow said:
I said the same thing in a post several days ago. No news here.

The Mosque will NEVER be built. The only people that don’t know that are the left-wing press and kooks that post here.

The building owners are about to cave soon.

if they do, the terrorists win.

BTW, community center, not mosque.

Anyway, no way workers are turning down paychecks in this economy over something this petty.

Happy Ramadan!

paulmdoro said:
Aren’t many Christians in America intolerant of Mormonism?

I’d say that many are, and most liberals are as well.

ReFlex76 said:
BTW, community center, not mosque.

You have no clue do you. Many mosques, especially large ones are called “Community centers” because in Islam, the community is center around their Mosque.

More Liberty said:
I’d say that many are, and most liberals are as well.

I was speaking strictly in terms of organized religion and not political affiliation.

MichelleF said:
Val, I always suspected from your comments that you hate mormons. Thanks for finally being honest. The stat I posted is provable fact, what you posted is pure bigotry.

There are as many as 50,000 polygamists in the US. http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/2004-10-03-turley_x.htm Many, if not most, are “Mormon”. Are those people who practice the Mormon faith, and who still accept the Brigham Young approach to marriage, “Mormons”? They certainly believe that they are. In fact, they consider Mormons who do not practice polygamy to not be “true” followers of the faith. Do those polygamists represent the Mormon Church? I assume your answer is no. So why do you believe that terrorists represent the Islamic faith?

paulmdoro said:
I was speaking strictly in terms of organized religion and not political affiliation.

Oh of course you were. I wonder if the liberal community would be just as siked about changing the definition of marriage in order to accommodate polygamy. I’d guess no, even though there is more historical precedent in polygamy.

NORBIT said:
No matter what anyone might think about RRK – and I’m sure that would be creative – at least he did what few Democratic candidates are willing to do…….Meet with the President! lol! DEMAND every Democrat state where they stand on the mosque issue!heh – heh – heh

In a snarky way, you raised a good point. We are in the midst of terribly contentious times. Although we have a broad middle, we have some ideological lines that are simple never crossed, even if it were to be in our nation’s best interest to do so. I can go back and say this all began with Raygun’s Southern Strategy, a cynical, divisive, hate-based pandering to a segment of White Southerners and Christian Fundamentalists. I can certainly make very good case for that. I can make an even better case that the Poppy/Attwater period was when the true divide began. But, I cannot defend the case that the Democrats have been anything but tit- for-tat. 45% of Americans were going to be opposed, at times illogically and irrationally to anything Clinton did. 55% of Americans were going to have the same mindset when it came to W2. And now, 45% of Americans have the same mindset about President Obama. It is easy to put on the ideological armor and rage into battle. I certainly find it very difficult to say anything positive about Raygun or W2, and I realize that ideological rightists seem to have the same handicap with reference to President Obama. But, this attitude has turned us into a nation of angry, bitter, unpleasant kvetchers, and we are watching our nation continue to fall as we persist is this silly nastiness. I own up to contributing to this. Shamefully. It really has to stop. If it doesn’t, we’re destined to second rate status.

More to your point, yes some Democrats are running from President Obama. Not as far and as fast as many Repubicans ran from W, at least at this stage, but this is all part of that hyper-ideological mindset.

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

Pablo said:
No, I don’t think it’s fear. It’s anger at a provocation.

Why did they change the name from Cordoba House? Why, when they announced it, did they declare that it would open on 9/11/11? Provocation.

9/10/11; get your facts straight.

Fox in Socks by Dr. Seuss
————————-

Fox
Socks
Box
King

King in box.
Fox in socks.

King on fox in socks in box.

Socks on King and King in box.

Fox in socks on box on King.

Chicks with bricks come.
Chicks with blocks come.
Chicks with bricks and blocks and clocks come.

Look, sir. Look, sir. Mr. King, sir.
Let’s do tricks with bricks and blocks, sir.
Let’s do tricks with chicks and clocks, sir.

First, I’ll make a quick trick brick stack.
Then I’ll make a quick trick block stack.

You can make a quick trick chick stack.
You can make a quick trick clock stack.

And here’s a new trick, Mr. King….
Socks on chicks and chicks on fox.
Fox on clocks on bricks and blocks.
Bricks and blocks on King on box.

Now we come to ticks and tocks, sir.
Try to say this Mr. King, sir….

Clocks on fox tick.
Clocks on King tock.
Six sick bricks tick.
Six sick chicks tock.

Please, sir. I don’t like this trick, sir.
My tongue isn’t quick or slick, sir.
I get all those ticks and clocks, sir,
mixed up with the chicks and tocks, sir.
I can’t do it, Mr. Fox, sir.

I’m so sorry, Mr. King, sir.

Here’s an easy game to play.
Here’s an easy thing to say….

New socks.
Two socks.
Whose socks?
Sue’s socks.

Who sews whose socks?
Sue sews Sue’s socks.

Who sees who sew whose new socks, sir?
You see Sue sew Sue’s new socks, sir.

That’s not easy, Mr. Fox, sir.

Sue sews rose on Slow Joe Crow’s clothes.
Fox sews hose on Slow Joe Crow’s nose.

Hose goes.
Rose grows.
Nose hose goes some.
Crow’s rose grows some.

Mr. Fox!
I hate this game, sir.
This game makes my tongue quite lame, sir.

Mr. King, sir, what a shame, sir.

Big band! Broom band!
My poor mouth can’t say that. No, sir.
My poor mouth is much too slow, sir.

I can’t blab such blibber blubber!
My tongue isn’t make of rubber.

Mr. King. Now come now. Come now.
You don’t have to be so dumb now….

Try to say this, Mr. King please….

Through three cheese trees three free fleas flew.
While these fleas flew, freezy breeze blew.
Freezy breeze made these three trees freeze.
Freezy trees made these trees’ cheese freeze.
That’s what made these three free fleas sneeze.

Stop it! Stop it!
That’s enough, sir.
I can’t say such silly stuff, sir.

Very well, then, Mr. King, sir.

Fox in socks, our game is done, sir.
Thank you for a lot of fun, sir.

Rhymes ? We don’t need no stinkin’ rhymes .

More Liberty said:
You have no clue do you. Many mosques, especially large ones are called “Community centers” because in Islam, the community is center around their Mosque.

Right, and YMCAs are churches.

valkyrie101 said:
. Do those polygamists represent the Mormon Church? I assume your answer is no. So why do you believe that terrorists represent the Islamic faith?

Actually the Mormon Church has denounced and forbids polygamy. The Imam of this Mosque won’t denounce suicide bombings and attacks conducted by Hamas. Hamas, as you might know, is listed as a terrorist organization according to the State Department. The Taliban on the other hand is not.

MichelleF said:
And for the record, my stat was regarding RADICAL islam. Did you not see that part? I mean I put it in all caps. But as usual, you try to twist what people say. If you are against ILLEGAL immigration, you hate immigrants and wish them death. Blah, Blah, Blah. You are too ignorant to waste my time on.

MichelleF said:
Paul says: As someone who often complains of religious intolerance being directed at them, you’d think you would possess a little more religious tolerance. Paul, what about my statement was intolerant? Is it or is it not true that nearly ALL of the terrorism in today’s world is committed by RADICAL islam. I NEVER said all muslims are bad, nor do I think that. You libs twisting what people say in order to avoid a debate is getting tired. You and Val can convo with each other, i’m don’t wasting my time with you.

Yes, indeed, Michelle-in-Utah, the perpetual victim, the chronic carrier of loads of crap, the viral copier and paster, the terminal linker to descrdited and disreptuable sources.

I am handing a cyber tissue to you now, and a valium to all who have been exposed to your numerous pathologies.

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

ReFlex76 said:
Right, and YMCAs are churches.

You just don’t have a clue to the reality behind this. Even the mosque Imam says it’s a Mosque, among other things.

More Liberty said:
Oh of course you were. I wonder if the liberal community would be just as siked about changing the definition of marriage in order to accommodate polygamy. I’d guess no, even though there is more historical precedent in polygamy.

I’m not suggesting many liberals are not intolerant of Mormonism. I was just speaking to religious faiths in particular.

VW said:
The most frightening aspect of this whole thing occurred yesterday when Speaker Pelosi said the opponents of the mosque should be investigated…. ARE YOU F*CKING KIDDING ME!!!!!!!!

Sounds like a good idea; might be quite revealing.

Happy Ramadan!

More Liberty said:
Actually the Mormon Church has denounced and forbids polygamy.

Let’s not forget the denunciation and forbidding of coffee, as well.

We Catholics have also denounced and forbidden all manner of debauchery, none of which seems to have been eradicated.

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

ReFlex76 said:
Sounds like a good idea; might be quite revealing.

Happy Ramadan!

Let her investigate. She won’t be Speaker of the House much longer anyway. Once again she proves that she is on the opposite side of America.

The Real Royal King said:
Let’s not forget the denunciation and forbidding of coffee, as well.

We Catholics have also denounced and forbidden all manner of debauchery, none of which seems to have been eradicated.

At least they denounced it, this Imam won’t even denounce Hamas.

More Liberty said:
You just don’t have a clue to the reality behind this. Even the mosque Imam says it’s a Mosque, among other things.

“Other things” including a community pool; it’s a community center, deal with it.

ReFlex76 said:
“Other things” including a community pool; it’s a community center, deal with it.

Like I said earlier, and you just proved, that such facilities are common in Muslim communities. Yes it has a pool and a library, but it is centered around the Mosque, as are all things in Islam. Try to at least educate yourself before opening your soup cooler.

More Liberty said:
At least they denounced it, this Imam won’t even denounce Hamas.

Wasn’t Hamas legitimately elected in an election process praised by W and Dick, Donnie and Condi?

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

More Liberty said:
no. So why

You are totally wrong on that. Go on-line and you will find that the fundamentalist Christians are the primary group that rejects Mormonism as a ‘cult” or illegitimate faith. And that has definiely been the case for more than 150 years. Liberals believe in liberty for all to practice their religion within the law. That is our argument with the mosque. Your argument is that you do nor like Islamics, they insult us, and we blame them for the 911 terrorist attack, so we will try to restrict their rights. And if that does not work, we will encourage, for example, the builders to refuse to build.

The Real Royal King said:
Wasn’t Hamas legitimately elected in an election process praised by W and Dick, Donnie and Condi?

I don’t give a rats ass about those NeoCons. Hamas is an organization dedicated to the destruction and murder of Israel and Jews. Even Obama”$ admin has declared them a terrorist organization, although the Taliban which are currently fighting our warriors overseas are not.

More Liberty said:
Actually the Mormon Church has denounced and forbids polygamy. The Imam of this Mosque won’t denounce suicide bombings and attacks conducted by Hamas. Hamas, as you might know, is listed as a terrorist organization according to the State Department. The Taliban on the other hand is not.

The Iman is not a supporter of terror. That’s the bottom line.

More Liberty said:
I don’t give a rats ass about those NeoCons. Hamas is an organization dedicated to the destruction and murder of Israel and Jews. Even Obama”$ admin has declared them a terrorist organization, although the Taliban which are currently fighting our warriors overseas are not.

Didn’t the Iman work with the FBI? Didn’t this Iman fly around to Moslem countries advising Karen Hughes who was advising W? when did he become a supporter of terrorism? Late January 2009?

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

The Real Royal King said:
Didn’t the Iman work with the FBI? Didn’t this Iman fly around to Moslem countries advising Karen Hughes who was advising W? when did he become a supporter of terrorism? Late January 2009?

Yes he selected by Karen Hughes to participate in a Muslim outreach program.

More Liberty said:
the opposite side of America

That would be what? Fargo if you’re in Laredo? Bangor if you’re in Marin?

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

Valkyrie101,

You just claimed I said “no. So Why.” Can you please point to where I made that comment, or are you trying to put words in my mouth. Don’t lie and claim I said something through quotes when I did not.

I never said Muslims can’t practice their religion. I’m a libertarian for the most part so I believe that the government shouldn’t tell a private property owner what they can/can’t do with their property. That goes for Wal-Marts or religion. With that said, I also believe that individuals have the right to voice their opinion about Wal-Mart, a mosque, Church or whatever.

paulmdoro said:
Yes he selected by Karen Hughes to participate in a Muslim outreach program.

I never realized Hughes “pal-ed around” with terrorists.

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

More Liberty said:
That goes for Wal-Marts or religion

Are they mutually exclusive?

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

valkyrie101 said:
The Iman is not a supporter of terror. That’s the bottom line.

Why won’t he denounce Hamas? he might not be giving material support, but the fact that he believes Hamas is just AOK is troubling. As an individual in this country, I have a right to express my beliefs. If he believes that suicide bombings and attacks on civilians via Hamas is just find and dandy, well that’s his right as well.

More Liberty said:
Valkyrie101,

You just claimed I said “no. So Why.” Can you please point to where I made that comment, or are you trying to put words in my mouth. Don’t lie and claim I said something through quotes when I did not.

I never said Muslims can’t practice their religion. I’m a libertarian for the most part so I believe that the government shouldn’t tell a private property owner what they can/can’t do with their property. That goes for Wal-Marts or religion. With that said, I also believe that individuals have the right to voice their opinion about Wal-Mart, a mosque, Church or whatever.

In some communities opposition to a Wal-Mart opening has been overwhelming, but they build anyway. Is that right or wrong?

The Real Royal King said:
Are they mutually exclusive?

private property is private property, but a community has the right to voice their opposition via the 1st Amendment to Wal-Mart or a church or mosque.

paulmdoro said:
In some communities opposition to a Wal-Mart opening has been overwhelming, but they build anyway. Is that right or wrong?

I would say that it is legal. But those people have a right not to purchase fro that Wal-Mart, protest on public property regarding that Wal-Mart.

More Liberty said:
private property is private property, but a community has the right to voice their opposition via the 1st Amendment to Wal-Mart or a church or mosque.

Then, I guess I understand the angst. Wal-Mart is cramming a big box store down the throats of northwest austin residents, despite a huge outcry. Of course, some of those crying the loudest will be in the store as soon as it opens buying mounds of cheap Chinese crap.

EACH AND EV’RY DAY
FOX FANS RAISE THE CALL:
GIVE US RIGHTIST LIES,
OR NOTHING AT ALL!

More Liberty said:
Actually the Mormon Church has denounced and forbids polygamy. The Imam of this Mosque won’t denounce suicide bombings and attacks conducted by Hamas. Hamas, as you might know, is listed as a terrorist organization according to the State Department. The Taliban on the other hand is not.

Show me where the Iman has endorsed terror and violence.

More Liberty said:
I would say that it is legal. But those people have a right not to purchase fro that Wal-Mart, protest on public property regarding that Wal-Mart.

So let people protest outside the mosque.

The Real Royal King said:
Then, I guess I understand the angst. Wal-Mart is cramming a big box store down the throats of northwest austin residents, despite a huge outcry. Of course, some of those crying the loudest will be in the store as soon as it opens buying mounds of cheap Chinese crap.

You’re right they will. They don’t have to go there and purchase the products, and they also have the right to protest the store and voice their outrage.

paulmdoro said:
So let people protest outside the mosque.

On the public street, if it’s built, that is their right. Since sensitivity is out the window, those people should be allowed to hold signs with cartoon caricatures of Allah and Muhammad. We all know how tolerant Muslims are of cartoon characters.

More Liberty said:
Why won’t he denounce Hamas? he might not be giving material support, but the fact that he believes Hamas is just AOK is troubling. As an individual in this country, I have a right to express my beliefs. If he believes that suicide bombings and attacks on civilians via Hamas is just find and dandy, well that’s his right as well.

Of course you have the right to express your opinions. That is why we come here to mediaite. As for the Iman, your argument is that because he has not condemned a particular organization, then that means he endorses terror. That is unfair. If someone does not condemn the Catholic Church, do they therefore endorse child abuse?

The Catholic Church has come out and condemned Child abuse, and those that assault children. The Imam has not come out and condemned suicide bombings and attacks by Hamas. But that is his right to look the other way.

More Liberty said:
On the public street, if it’s built, that is their right. Since sensitivity is out the window, those people should be allowed to hold signs with cartoon caricatures of Allah and Muhammad. We all know how tolerant Muslims are of cartoon characters.

Yes, most Islamics do not like ridicule of their prophet. But only a small percentage would engage in violence in response to that. Likewise, most Christians do not like ridicule of Christ (e.g. the Maplethorn “Piss Christ” showing), and only a small percentage would engage in or threaten violence in response to that.

More Liberty said:
The Catholic Church has come out and condemned Child abuse, and those that assault children. The Imam has not come out and condemned suicide bombings and attacks by Hamas. But that is his right to look the other way.

For hundreds of years the Catholic Church has hidden cases of child sex abuse by Priests, not admitted or condemned it.

More Liberty said:
I would say that it is legal. But those people have a right not to purchase fro that Wal-Mart, protest on public property regarding that Wal-Mart.

A better example would be the boycott of Glenn Beck sponsors.

valkyrie101 said:
Yes, most Islamics do not like ridicule of their prophet. But only a small percentage would engage in violence in response to that. Likewise, most Christians do not like ridicule of Christ (e.g. the Maplethorn “Piss Christ” showing), and only a small percentage would engage in or threaten violence in response to that.

Fair point. But why is it, do you believe, that Comedy Central refused to show the full episode of South Park where Muhammad was shown? Yet day in and day out they show Jesus. Now I believe that show is hilarious. I love how they make fun of everyone, but it was interesting none-the-less.

Another interesting point is how an artist by the name of Van Gogh was murdered because he had a film critical of Islams treatment towards women.

valkyrie101 said:
For hundreds of years the Catholic Church has hidden cases of child sex abuse by Priests, not admitted or condemned it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1945056.stm
Here is an article with the pope condemning child abuse. I do agree though that they tried to cover it up.

ReFlex, the Mosque will never be built, deal with it.

This just gets better & better!

Did you all hear the latest Democrat Campaign? —— “TEAM PELOSI !”
I kid you not!
They’re rallying around one of the most dis-respected Speakers of all time!!

That’s like saying: “Team Cleveland Browns!” – or – “Team Jimmy Carter!”
————————

Hey, Make sure to grill “Team Pelosi” about that Islamic Terrorist “Victory Mosque” going up at Ground Zero!!
- we want to keep that story going until Nov. 2!!!!

More Liberty said:
Valkyrie101, You just claimed I said “no. So Why.” Can you please point to where I made that comment, or are you trying to put words in my mouth. Don’t lie and claim I said something through quotes when I did not. I never said Muslims can’t practice their religion. I’m a libertarian for the most part so I believe that the government shouldn’t tell a private property owner what they can/can’t do with their property. That goes for Wal-Marts or religion. With that said, I also believe that individuals have the right to voice their opinion about Wal-Mart, a mosque, Church or whatever.

My response was to this post, but the quote portion, an intelligible sentence fragment, was not my intention. Sorry.

More Liberty said:
paulmdoro said:
Aren’t many Christians in America intolerant of Mormonism?
I’d say that many are, and most liberals are as well.

A Murder in Amsterdam, about Van Gogh’s brutal murder, is an excellent book.

Liberty are you really concerned about “sensitivity” here? Is that the main issue?

valkyrie101 said:
My response was to this post, but the quote portion, an intelligible sentence fragment, was not my intention. Sorry.

The right initially tried to stop the mosque as a matter of law, or even by constitutional authority. Then, after people pointed out that such an approach was a clear violation of the Constitution, the right moved on to their current argument which is that building the mosque was like dancing on the grave of the 911 victims.

paulmdoro said:
A Murder in Amsterdam, about Van Gogh’s brutal murder, is an excellent book.

Liberty are you really concerned about “sensitivity” here? Is that the main issue?

I’m not to hot for the sensitivity police. I’m glad to see that the government is not denying them the right to build the mosque, yet I stand behind those that voice their own, individual, concern and outrage. It is surely an interesting situation, and no matter the outcome there will be no real winners.

But don’t you at least find it interesting that they are opening it on 9/10? I mean, I can see how people feel that this is a thumb in the eye.

gordonbloyershow said:
ReFlex, the Mosque will never be built, deal with it.

But will Glenn’s event go off as planned on the 28th in front of the Lincoln memorial? I’m thinking Sharpton is going to show up on that, any time now. Which would be too bad, IMHO.

More Liberty said:
Fair point. But why is it, do you believe, that Comedy Central refused to show the full episode of South Park where Muhammad was shown? Yet day in and day out they show Jesus. Now I believe that show is hilarious. I love how they make fun of everyone, but it was interesting none-the-less. Another interesting point is how an artist by the name of Van Gogh was murdered because he had a film critical of Islams treatment towards women.

I am not denying that some Islamics take insulting their prophet as a major offense. That has to change if Islamics are going to interface with the rest of the world.

valkyrie101 said:
But will Glenn’s event go off as planned on the 28th in front of the Lincoln memorial? I’m thinking Sharpton is going to show up on that, any time now. Which would be too bad, IMHO.

You mean Tawana Sharpton, and his non-working class “leeches-on-society” followers?

From The Huffington Post (I know, I know, but I have to site the source):

In March 2003, federal officials were being criticized for disrespecting the rights of Arab-Americans in their efforts to crack down on domestic security threats in the post-9/11 environment. Hoping to calm the growing tempers, FBI officials in New York hosted a forum on ways to deal with Muslim and Arab-Americans without exacerbating social tensions. The bureau wanted to provide agents with “a clear picture,” said Kevin Donovan, director of the FBI’s New York office.

Brought in to speak that morning — at the office building located just blocks from Ground Zero — was one of the city’s most respected Muslim voices: Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. The imam offered what was for him a familiar sermon to those in attendance. “Islamic extremism for the majority of Muslims is an oxymoron,” he said. “It is a fundamental contradiction in terms.”

And of course I meant cite. Sorry.

How messed up will that be, when people show up to protest an event honoring the civil rights movement, our troops; and other relevant major historical events?

But go ahead Leftists, America is watching. You’re doing a great job winning over hearts and minds so far.

paulmdoro said:
Brought in to speak that morning — at the office building located just blocks from Ground Zero — was one of the city’s most respected Muslim voices: Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. The imam offered what was for him a familiar sermon to those in attendance. “Islamic extremism for the majority of Muslims is an oxymoron,” he said. “It is a fundamental contradiction in terms.”

So I guess that Hamas, which has been proven to conduct terrorist activities is counter to Islam and it’s belief. MMMMMmmm….wonder why he won’t admit that.

Would the FBI really select a dangerous radical terrorist to speak about improving relations with Muslim and Arab-Americans?

“When was the last time the left cared about freedom of religion?”

Thanks Bill. It’s worth repeating.

Azarkhan said:
“When was the last time the left cared about freedom of religion?”

Thanks Bill. It’s worth repeating.

You can care about freedom of religion and still believe in the separation of church and state. It isn’t nuclear physics.

ReFlex76 said:
9/10/11; get your facts straight.

Mine are. Check yours.

valkyrie101 said:
The Iman is not a supporter of terror. That’s the bottom line.

He supported the Flotilla of Death.

valkyrie101 said:
The right initially tried to stop the mosque as a matter of law, or even by constitutional authority.

Who? How?

“You can care about freedom of religion…” paulmdoro

And freedom of speech. Paul, I recently completed an artistic construction called “Piss Muhammad”.
Since you live in NYC, would you please contact the Met and MOMA and ask if they will schedule an exhibit.
Thanks.

More Liberty said:
So I guess that Hamas, which has been proven to conduct terrorist activities is counter to Islam and it’s belief. MMMMMmmm….wonder why he won’t admit that.

Who has killed more people in the last five years, Israel or Hamas? (Don’t get excited, just asking.)

Pablo said:
valkyrie101 said:
The right initially tried to stop the mosque as a matter of law, or even by constitutional authority.
Who? How?

LOL

NORBIT said:
You mean Tawana Sharpton, and his non-working class “leeches-on-society” followers?

Isn’t Sharpton a regular FOX News talking head? I mean, he does not get as much FOX air time as an expert on racial matters as, for example, King Samir Shabazz, who appeared on FOX as a talking head expert over twenty times, but he is a FOX regular.

valkyrie101 said:
LOL

They tried to stop the mosque by LOLing? Who?

valkyrie101 said:
Who has killed more people in the last five years, Israel or Hamas?

Hamas.

Pablo said:
Hamas.

Who keeps track of that?

Pablo said:
They tried to stop the mosque by LOLing? Who?

The right wanted to prevent the mosque, legally, but Obama stood up for the Constitution and said that would not be allowed.

Pablo said:
Hamas.

Try again.

paulmdoro said:
Who keeps track of that?

Hamas. But their records all say the Zionists did it.

Pablo said:
Hamas. But their records all say the Zionists did it.

So no unbiased sources?

valk you are so twisted up trying to stay on your side of the issue, i bet you could lick your own asshole

Constantly said:
valk you are so twisted up trying to stay on your side of the issue, i bet you could lick your own asshole

Spoken like someone with experience in that department.

Constantly said:
valk you are so twisted up trying to stay on your side of the issue, i bet you could lick your own asshole

Very classy, but no.

fuck you libpussies, did i hurt your sensitivities?

Constantly said:
fuck you libpussies, did i hurt your sensitivities?

Keep wasting your breath.

hey paul you learn how to scroll yet? try this http://www.videoprofessor.com/

Apostrophe jones said:
Fox
Socks
Box
King

King in box.
Fox in socks.

King on fox in socks in box.

You’ve truly got the Royal King in a box. But I guess that’s what he gets for basing his political philosophy on Green Eggs and Ham.

Constantly said:
fuck you libpussies, did i hurt your sensitivities?

Nope. We liberals love profanity and irreverence.

Hey Nancy, give me that list of people funding the people against the Mosque.

I didn’t get my check.

Valk said…………..
But will Glenn’s event go off as planned on the 28th in front of the Lincoln memorial? I’m thinking Sharpton is going to show up on that, any time now. Which would be too bad, IMHO.

Valk, I think your crystal ball is broken. Sharpton only shows up when he outnumbers his opponents. He is a coward and a liar.

WOW! Love the marketing strategy implemented by those who secretly and so often now a days wish ill upon the American system ( which is wishing ill on the American people!) SEE how they are trying so hard to re-brand the “Ground Zero Mosque” to the “the Park51 Islamic Center”. This is the kind of bullshit people are sick of. Call a spade a spade. Ok you can call it a Center because they will have an Islamic community basketball court and some other activities on the first couple floors. Oh — and on the top or one of the top floors they will have a “prayer” place … a Mosque. So like everything around this place — you have to go through layers of (floors) to get to the core purpose. Why do people think we are stupid??? We can smell this shit-bomb a 100 miles away. Don’t get me wrong — the Mosque itself is not the issue … it is the symbolism, the spiritual connotation and faithfulled purpose for such a place in such a location. What is the imans secret payer for this place? That is were the danger is. And like radical Muslim wolf warriors .. they will shield themselves in the sheep skin of peace and the real bodies of the living innocent … woman, child and young people. Hence the “the Islamic Center”

More Liberty said:
Fair point. But why is it, do you believe, that Comedy Central refused to show the full episode of South Park where Muhammad was shown? Yet day in and day out they show Jesus. Now I believe that show is hilarious. I love how they make fun of everyone, but it was interesting none-the-less.

I think that Comedy Central’s actions speak more of Comedy Central than it does of Islam.

paulmdoro said:
And what distance is acceptable? Currently there is a mosque 4 blocks from Ground Zero. Should they move?

so there is a Mosque that is four blocks away as you say. The one they want to build is two blocks away, something very strange here.

By the way I’m glad you are putting forth all this energy towards this mosque and I’m sure you have giving an equal amount of energy towards St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church in their rebuilding efforts. I mean they have only been held up BY THE GOVERMENT for 9 years! And I’m sure Paul you are not biased towards any one religion.

puck30 said:
so there is a Mosque that is four blocks away as you say. The one they want to build is two blocks away, something very strange here.

By the way I’m glad you are putting forth all this energy towards this mosque and I’m sure you have giving an equal amount of energy towards St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church in their rebuilding efforts. I mean they have only been held up BY THE GOVERMENT for 9 years! And I’m sure Paul you are not biased towards any one religion.

Why is the government holding up this particular church’s rebuilding? And no I am not biased against any one religion. I’m sure you aren’t either.

gordonbloyershow said:
Valk said…………..But will Glenn’s event go off as planned on the 28th in front of the Lincoln memorial? I’m thinking Sharpton is going to show up on that, any time now. Which would be too bad, IMHO. Valk, I think your crystal ball is broken. Sharpton only shows up when he outnumbers his opponents. He is a coward and a liar.

No. He is chomping at the bit to find his next crusade. He might make a name for himself again if he quickly mounts up and challenges, at least, the place. On the other hand, previously he wanted to be political but the Brawley case is an absolute deep six for those aspirations. So, he did compromise his credibility with that case, and all the accusations he made which were proved to be false. Though, like Breitbart, Sharpton points out that his only crime was believing Tawana’s story, and passing it along.

TO: Valkyrie
“Yes, Bill’s argument for punishing people who’s only crime is being Islamic. His way of saying, all Islamic s should be treated unjustly because a few Islamic s committed a crime. For sure he does not say that construction crews should not build the next Catholic Church because of the thousands of reported cases of Priest abuse of children.”

No, Valkyrie this is not just Bills argument. This stems from the fact that other than the Catholic Church; which admitted, condemned and deposed those found guilty of crimes against the Church and State, the Islamic Iman’s have not gone after these people that constantly; yes constantly, kill, maim, innocent people in acts of terrorism and defamation to Women. If Islam is this religion of “Peace” Why are they not on the forefront of the spear in condemning and demanding blood for blood for every victim that is killed, maimed, or defamed all in the name of Allah? Why?
I’ll tell you why, because if a person is a converted Muslim, they are still a Muslim they are under the sharia law of the Koran, and therefore are not subject to what the World thinks. The Iman’s have not gone on public Television for months condemning these atrocities. Oh sure, once in awhile they will get on and say “This is wrong, we are not about this” but actions, speak louder than words. The Islamic Faith and it’s followers, should all be with us on finding these rouges in their congregations, but instead much of the time all they do is raise their voice a bit and tell them they are not part of their agenda, like a Californian Dr. Spock Parental Manual they tell them to go have a time out. And then it happens again, all in the name of Allah. Even scarier many of these wacko’s have been protected by Iman’s and Mosques.
Don’t ever compare the Christian Church and Islam together again, you have no idea of the differences.

Looking at today’s comments, the rightwing types are really in full panic because they know they are going to have to ultimately accept that the Community Center/Mosque will be built. As more people find out what the real issues are the ‘polls’ will change. Rabblerousers usually don’t know which way is up or down, they just follow the idiots (O’Reilly et al) who are shouting fire! fire!. I live in Manhattan and the tide is turning aginst the the poor sheep who think they’re defending American values by their bigotry, hate and ignorance which is really what this is all about. To his credit, Mayor Bloomberg has taken a highly principled stand against the intolerance of these people, most of whom live far away from New York, who are merely acting out of their emotions. As Maureen Dowd has made clear in today’s New York Times, at this point denying the building of an Islamic Center would obviously be a victory for the terrorists and go against the principles that have made this country great. It would be nothing short of a miracle to have Bush come in and do something positive to atone for the mess he made of everything during his presidency. I really pray that those of you who have been so strident in your oppostion to the Islamic Center would see that what you’ve been doing is wrong. It’s time to think positively and realistically about the future of our country

CLTstraightguy said:
No, Valkyrie this is not just Bills argument. This stems from the fact that other than the Catholic Church; which admitted, condemned and deposed those found guilty of crimes against the Church and State, the Islamic Iman’s have not gone after these people that constantly; yes constantly, kill, maim, innocent people in acts of terrorism and defamation to Women. If Islam is this religion of “Peace” Why are they not on the forefront of the spear in condemning and demanding blood for blood for every victim that is killed, maimed, or defamed all in the name of Allah? Why?

There is a long history of the same type of behavior involving the Christian Church, which, until the 1500s, was exclusively the Catholic Church. So condemning the religion of Islam because of the actions of a relatively few radicals who are as much at war with other Islamics, or more, than they are mad at the west. It is a kind of civil war. Most of the fatalities are Islamic. 150 years ago a nation of Christians, all praying to the same God, slaughtered each other in the fields with long knives. Our task is to hook up with and encourage the moderate Islamics, not condemn their religion which for 99.999% of Islamics is a peaceful one.

paulmdoro said:
Why is the government holding up this particular church’s rebuilding? And no I am not biased against any one religion. I’m sure you aren’t either.

First two things: On another thread the other day you gave an indication that you knew the area well’ now I have not been there for many years I did grow up not to far away from WTC and hung out a lot up in the observation and out on the deck. Everybody knew where St Nicholas was, right next to WTC.

It was Greek Orthodox but everybody went there to pray, or a lot of folks from the towers or Wall Street would go there to chill and have some quiet time. The building was from the 1830′s, Originally a Tavern the Church moved in about 1915. Church got leveled on 9/11 since it was right next door. And the Port Authority has been stonewalling their efforts to rebuild for nine years.

Why hasn’t Mayor McNanny who wants the Mosque fast tracked so it can open on 9/11, can’t seem to care about the little Greek Church?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2571371/posts

Well, maybe you don’t know I’ll give you a pass on this one.

I work but have never lived in Manhattan. My office has quarterly meetings near the WTC. I’ve been down there a few times. Don’t know about the church or why Bloomberg doesn’t care about it.

CLTstraightguy said:
I’ll tell you why, because if a person is a converted Muslim, they are still a Muslim they are under the sharia law of the Koran, and therefore are not subject to what the World thinks.

Fundamentalist Christians also consider their “law” higher than secular law. How about the Mormons, is their law higher than secular law? They argued that in Reynolds v. US. Indeed, that was their justification for engaging in polygamy. How about Catholic law? Is the Pope still “infallible”. Well, if not, Reverend Moon certainly is. Sharia law is nothing to us. Any Islamics that live in the U.S. are required to follow US law. Do you actually think that is ever going to change? But if they follow our laws, then they should have all the rights that people are accorded by our Constitution. We are Americans, we are not afraid.

CLTstraightguy said:
Don’t ever compare the Christian Church and Islam together again, you have no idea of the differences.

Isn’t the Christian one where they eat flesh and blood?

paulmdoro said:
I work but have never lived in Manhattan. My office has quarterly meetings near the WTC. I’ve been down there a few times. Don’t know about the church or why Bloomberg doesn’t care about it.

So what you are saying it doesn’t spark you interest? The question here is why does Bloomberg want the Mosque fast tracked and could care less about St,Nicholas?

Bureaucrats block rebuilding the church, but smooth the way for a mosque, I suppose that’s what passes for “freedom of religion” these days!

puck30 said:
So what you are saying it doesn’t spark you interest? The question here is why does Bloomberg want the Mosque fast tracked and could care less about St,Nicholas? Bureaucrats block rebuilding the church, but smooth the way for a mosque, I suppose that’s what passes for “freedom of religion” these days!

Nothing is fast tracked in NYC.

puck30 said:
So what you are saying it doesn’t spark you interest? The question here is why does Bloomberg want the Mosque fast tracked and could care less about St,Nicholas?

Bureaucrats block rebuilding the church, but smooth the way for a mosque, I suppose that’s what passes for “freedom of religion” these days!

Not saying I’m not interested. Just that I don’t know anything about it. No idea why no one cares about the church.

A NY Times story from 2008 says the delay is due to “endless negotiations, design disputes, delays and mounting costs.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/nyregion/03trade.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/B/Bagli,%20Charles%20V

valkyrie101 said:
Nothing is fast tracked in NYC.

Really Valk? They are going to have this Mosque, which hasn’t been started yet open on 9-11-11. That’s not fast tracked?

paulmdoro said:
A NY Times story from 2008 says the delay is due to “endless negotiations, design disputes, delays and mounting costs.” http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/nyregion/03trade.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/B/Bagli,%20Charles%20V

Paul I got called out, so I apologize for the delay. But here again Mosque fast tracked by Bloomberg. But Bloomberg won’t step in for St. Nicholas after almost 9 years? St. Nicholas was wiped out on 9-11 and it had been there for 85 years! You don’t find this the least bit odd?

valkyrie101 said:
Fundamentalist Christians also consider their “law” higher than secular law. How about the Mormons, is their law higher than secular law? They argued that in Reynolds v. US. Indeed, that was their justification for engaging in polygamy. How about Catholic law? Is the Pope still “infallible”. Well, if not, Reverend Moon certainly is. Sharia law is nothing to us. Any Islamics that live in the U.S. are required to follow US law. Do you actually think that is ever going to change? But if they follow our laws, then they should have all the rights that people are accorded by our Constitution. We are Americans, we are not afraid.

No, you are out of line as far as “Fundamentalist Christians” go, they are more strict in their following Scripture, down to each line and The Bible itself teaches to follow the laws of the State, and pray for their leaders, Even if they persecute you.
Romans 13:1
1 Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.

Yes there is Scripture that does talk about God’s authority usurping Earthly Authority, The Bible itself makes it quite clear that God has placed all leaders in their positions, and the church is subject to them.

According to the Koran Sharia law what Islam is built upon. (Islam, the word itself means Submit) Doesn’t sound like their is much room for tolerance there??

How about Catholic Law? As far as I know there is no “Catholic Laws” They follow the Bible for the most parts besides the Vatican Edicts. These Edicts are not law, but more over governing functions for the church itself.
The Pope being infallible? Well if you truly believe the Bible than you know that no man is perfect, but God.

Mormons? Well besides believing in the Bible, the Book of Mormon is Cultist at best with no archeology nor historic symmetry to back it up, it is not a sect of Christian belief other than that the Mormon Congregation does believe in the Bible, but that is where it stops.
Reverend Moon, has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity, he was more New Age than anything and the head of the Unitarian movement.

So your words are not worth much in your synopsis’s of Christianity. Your experience with the religion itself shows your ignorance and I would be careful in addressing any thoughts on The Christian Religion specifically.

I don’t disagree with those who follow U.S. Laws, but according to the Qur’an itself Muslim’s can lie to non Muslim’s even denying their faith henceforth:
“Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness (vain) in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.” Surah 2:225. The principal also has support in the Qur’an 3:28 and 16:106.
So how can you trust them?
I have no problem with someone who is Middle Eastern or Arabic people, I have a problem with a religion that teaches that it is okay to lie, or kill in the name of Allah. I have a problem with the leaders of the Muslim Religion not vehemently opposing the killing of innocent Jews, and Westerners and calling the Holocaust a hoax… That is the a BIG problem, it should be for anyone.

valkyrie101 said:
Isn’t the Christian one where they eat flesh and blood?

I hope you are joking, cause that is a laughable statement, if you aren’t please elaborate so you can actually understand what that analogy is about… :P

The idea of Communion, which is an allegoric representation of the blood of Jesus (The Wine) and the Broken Body of (The Bread). It is not about cannibalism, :P It is more about the comparison and remembering the Death and the Resurrection of Christ until he returns.
Crumb, did none of you go to Sunday School growing up? That’s like Christianity 101 :P

It’s no more weirder then a Passover Seder (In fact Seder and the death and resurrection Christ have very strong parallels) or even a tradition like Ramadan. It is just a way for the Christian Church to remember the sacrifice that Christ did.

valkyrie101 said:
There is a long history of the same type of behavior involving the Christian Church, which, until the 1500s, was exclusively the Catholic Church. So condemning the religion of Islam because of the actions of a relatively few radicals who are as much at war with other Islamics, or more, than they are mad at the west. It is a kind of civil war. Most of the fatalities are Islamic. 150 years ago a nation of Christians, all praying to the same God, slaughtered each other in the fields with long knives. Our task is to hook up with and encourage the moderate Islamics, not condemn their religion which for 99.999% of Islamics is a peaceful one.

Are you crazy? Slaughtering innocents in the 1000 year war?
The Islamic armies did this just as much if not more then those in the name of christiandom. (I use a lower case because this is not true Christian behavior and contrary to the Bible in whole)
The Catholic Church has admitted fault for these atrocities, btw they didn’t just kill Muslims, they killed Protestant Christians too.

Where are you getting your Statistics from? The World is sadly full of Islamic uprisings, and they are on the rise! Why? What the early church did was wrong, but why is their a steady increase in Islamic uprisings?
I would love to say that Islam is a religion of peace, but I can’t be duped into saying that when the actions of many, Not all are in scrutiny!
Yes, you can say that not one bad apple spoils a whole bunch, but how about an orchard?
Imams preach jihad and extremism in 10 percent of the 2,000 mosques in the United States, the FBI estimates.
Doesn’t that send up some warning flags???
As I said before it’s all in the name Islam means (SUBMIT), doesn’t sound like there is too much room for tolerance there folks, sorry.