Obama supports Mosque near ground zero...

[CosmicCowboy]

Really? You have a cons utional right to hang black people?

Way to deliberately misquote me asshole. Do you think you are cute?

I said hang blacks in effigy which you deliberately clipped off.

Do you not know what the word means?

[Goran Dragic]

.

[DMX7]

I said hang blacks in effigy which you deliberately clipped off.

It sure is... It sure is.

[spursncowboys]

Exactly, it's an emotional issue that's making people forget about upholding first amendment rights. Civil rights were an emotional issue that had the same effect. That's why it's up to people like the president and supreme court justices to put emotion/what most Americans feel aside and interpret the cons ution on their own.

what does the first amendment have to do with this?

[CosmicCowboy]

The original quote:

It is still within my cons utional right to burn crosses and hang blacks in effigy but that doesn't make it right.

[Goran Dragic]

what does the first amendment have to do with this?

Seriously?

[admiralsnackbar]

That has nothing to do with bringing violence on others. The two most important of the commandments were...

And you only know that because you've spent time with Christianity and have interpreted it to essentially be a doctrine of love and forgiveness. But just as some Christians don't interpret Matt 10:34 the way you do, some people interpret the Quaran to justify violence. If the majority of the Muslim world really believes in killing infidels whenever possible, why is the majority of the Muslim world peaceful? You do realize that Muslims basically live by the Decalogue, don't you?

[ChumpDumper]

SnC: I still need to see the Imam's "bad quotes" and the laws exempting Muslims from revealing the financing of the construction of their "churches."

[Goran Dragic]

SnC: I still need to see the Imam's "bad quotes" and the laws exempting Muslims from revealing the financing of the construction of their "churches."

Or that laws that require everyone else to explain where they get the financing from.

[CosmicCowboy]

what does the first amendment have to do with this?

I think he is trying to say that the first amendment rights of the Islamic Cleric that wants to build the mosque are not in question.

The real issue is whether it is an appropriate location considering the emotional provocation of that specific location.

At least, I hope thats what he is saying...

[Goran Dragic]

The real issue is whether it is an appropriate location considering the emotional provocation of that specific location.

That's not an issue with me. If people are too ignorant to educate themselves about what the true beliefs and morals of the Muslim religion are and instead judge Muslim based off what some extremist terrorists do, therefore having animosity towards them, we shouldn't make it the problem of innocent Muslims who are trying to build a community center.

[CosmicCowboy]

That's not an issue with me. If people are too ignorant to educate themselves about what the true beliefs and morals of the Muslim religion are and instead judge Muslim based off what some extremist terrorists do, therefore having animosity towards them, we shouldn't make it the problem of innocent Muslims who are trying to build a community center.

I think you are really stretching the definition of "innocent" when discussing this specific cleric. From previous quotes (his) it could be a reasonable assumption that the specific location was chosen exactly because it WAS a provocative location. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to assume ignorance just because they disagree with you on this issue.

[admiralsnackbar]

That's not an issue with me. If people are too ignorant to educate themselves about what the true beliefs and morals of the Muslim religion are and instead judge Muslim based off what some extremist terrorists do, therefore having animosity towards them, we shouldn't make it the problem of innocent Muslims who are trying to build a community center geared towards offering a moderate version of Islam to compete with more conservative, un-American strains because you win ideological conflicts via "hearts and minds," not bombs (see Stalinism).

Fixed.

[admiralsnackbar]

I think you are really stretching the definition of "innocent" when discussing this specific cleric. From previous quotes (his) it could be a reasonable assumption that the specific location was chosen exactly because it WAS a provocative location. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to assume ignorance just because they disagree with you on this issue.

If you're fighting for hearts and minds, the first thing you want to do is put yourself on the moral high ground. Forgiveness is a good example of this.

[ChumpDumper]

I think you are really stretching the definition of "innocent" when discussing this specific cleric. From previous quotes (his) it could be a reasonable assumption that the specific location was chosen exactly because it WAS a provocative location. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to assume ignorance just because they disagree with you on this issue.

Everyone keeps mentioning these quotes. The only one I've really seen is the one about US foreign policy's role in 9/11, and I could probably find a clip of Glenn Beck saying exactly the same thing.

What are the other quotes?

[DMX7]

There were mosques by the World Trade Center before it became Ground Zero.

[ChumpDumper]

There were mosques by the World Trade Center before it became Ground Zero.

Yeah, and look what happened![/PalinGingrichDarrinS]

[admiralsnackbar]

There were mosques by the World Trade Center before it became Ground Zero.

Not to mention this.

[Ignignokt]

That's not an issue with me. If people are too ignorant to educate themselves about what the true beliefs and morals of the Muslim religion are and instead judge Muslim based off what some extremist terrorists do, therefore having animosity towards them, we shouldn't make it the problem of innocent Muslims who are trying to build a community center.

Honestly, this post has only half it's basis on reality. It's correct to say that it is unjust to pin the blame on all muslims for the acts of a few. Each muslim chooses how much the koran should be applied to his life. Therefore as much as muslims are Islamist, they are also human beings in that they have free will to practice atleast in their minds his choice of the truth of the book.

The truth is the koran is the source of Islam. So your implication that the Muslim religion is that of peace is wrong.

You're right, anyone can interpret a religous decree to his liking, just like one can do to the bible. But that is not to say that there is an OBJECTIVE truth of that interpretation, or should i say ABSOLUTE.

When the writers of these religous decrees penned their writings they had an absolute and objective message of what they wanted to say. They didn't write them with the intention of being interpreted in 300 different ways. They had an ORIGINAL INTENT.

The truth is that Mohammed the prophet spread his religion through force, and that Islam has a philosophy intended for earthly dominion. It's methods of expanding it's message are known throughout the muslim world and that's why when Arabs and muslims saw the images of 911, a significant plurality saw it through righteous lens.

Islam is not a religion of peace, it's inception was not peace, it's expansion was done through coercion. And i'm not talking about centuries later after it's original writer passed. I'm saying that Mohammed himself spread Islam through coercion and submission, therefore he did give political Jihad sanction through his own writings and actions.

To say that Islam is a religion of peace is the greatest lie that has existed in this century. Muslims can be peaceful. Their do ent and religion is not.

[Ignignokt]

Not to mention this.

Stupid.

Is there christian architecture?

Is there Jehovahs witness architecture.

That architecture is more arabic and north african than mohammed. Did mohammed set forth a treatise on muslim architecture? lol!

[CosmicCowboy]

We can quibble all day about whether his quotes about Osama Bin Laden being "made in the USA" or quotes about implementing Sharia law in democracies, or quotes about not believing in religious dialogue are relevant.

I propose that if his REAL GOAL is to build a "bridge" between moderate Islam and the US then a good first step would be to choose a less inflammatory site for his community center.

How can you even argue that point?

[admiralsnackbar]

You make your point well, Ig, but you assume that original intent matters (and that it can be known), when only present intent does. If a majority of Muslims have embraced the message of peace in Islam in the present, how is that different than a majority of Christians embracing a bellicose interpretation during the Inquisition and Crusades? Ultimately people believe what they want to believe and bend their ideological strictures accordingly.

Insofar as I can pretend to understand human nature, when people are angry or frightened, they'll allow themselves to be sucked into a more defensive and antagonistic ideological framework. When they aren't, they're much more charitable and open-minded to "the other."

[ChumpDumper]

We can quibble all day about whether his quotes about Osama Bin Laden being "made in the USA" or quotes about implementing Sharia law in democracies, or quotes about not believing in religious dialogue are relevant.

I propose that if his REAL GOAL is to build a "bridge" between moderate Islam and the US then a good first step would be to choose a less inflammatory site for his community center.

How can you even argue that point?

Why is it automatically inflammatory?

Because it is now a political issue.

Nobody gave a about this when it was first announced. Commentators on Fox News were citing it as a positive development. Only when the "right" people decided to make it a wedge issue and started spreading panic about the quotes you are mentioning did this become the burning issue of the day. I understand many people have feelings, but I can't help but think most of the outrage here is manufactured from focus groups. America is a pool of gullible suckers.

[Ignignokt]

You make your point well, Ig, but you assume that original intent matters (and that it can be known), when only present intent does. If a majority of Muslims have embraced the message of peace in Islam in the present, how is that different than a majority of Christians embracing a bellicose interpretation during the Inquisition and Crusades? Ultimately people believe what they want to believe and bend their ideological strictures accordingly.

Insofar as I can pretend to understand human nature, when people are angry or frightened, they'll allow themselves to be sucked into a more defensive and antagonistic ideological framework. When they aren't, they're much more charitable and open-minded to "the other."

Those events are after the fact of the bible and are political. If a christian bangs a and peed on her dead eye socket, would that be a biblical source for interpretation.

I don't see anywhere where the crusades or inqusition are in Jesus's and the epistles writing.

[DMX7]

If a christian bangs a and peed on her dead eye socket, would that be a biblical source for interpretation.

lol what?