Reply With Quote
If Mormons attacked us on 9/11 (and had been attacking us for the past 40 years), I'd have a problem with an enormous Morman temple being constructed at Ground Zero.
Yes, your "terrorist sympathizer" angle certainly showed your rational capabilities, your fairness and your eagerness not to engage in mudslinging.
If Mormons attacked us on 9/11 (and had been attacking us for the past 40 years), I'd have a problem with an enormous Morman temple being constructed at Ground Zero.
Then you would be a Mormon-phobe.
As it is, you're an Islamophobe.
Perhaps terrorist empathizer would be more appropriate?
As it is, you're an idiot.
WHY is it in poor taste? Would you explain that?
Is it your argument that because a small number of people who practice Islam did something horrible against us, therefore, it is wrong to open a mosque within the vacinity?
That's rather poor logic, wouldn't you say? Do you think it's acceptable to hold the actions of the few against the many?
If Americans were really so intolerant, they'd throw all Muslims in an internment camp. Oh wait, liberal hero FDR did that to the Japanese. Now THAT, I wouldn't agree with.
yes!!!!!
Most of us were able to deduce that you would be Mormonophobic if Mormons attacked us and other Mormons wanted to build a temple at Ground Zero.
I'm going to do what apparently you and some others won't and give you the benefit of a doubt.
Does that really need expounding? Could it really be that perplexing as to know a (radical) segment of a group celebrates, takes pride and finds accomplishment in the building of a mosque, on what is being referred to as sacred ground, a place that became sacred because of their willingness to slaughter thousands in the name of Islam? You couldn't see anyone having a moral dilemma as to what the right thing to do is or being so emotional towards the subject as to have a visceral-type reaction and not look to be academic and introspective?
Really?
If so, I suggest you meet some new people and hang around a more diverse group -- group-think ain't all it's cracked up to be.
I did (again).
No, it's not.
A sizable amount of its supporters and followers of its teaching are.
We've established you can Google, unfortunately, we've also discovered you lack basic reading comprehension.
Racism implies superiority and, in most cases, hatred. It's not really as subtle a nuance as many who throw around the word think.
Fear, ignorance or making broad judgments on the basis of a few bad or horrific events in one's life, that's not racist.
Prejudice, yes. Racist, no.
Do you; trying to be me ain't workin'.
I did (yet again).Then make it easy on yourself and asnwer the question.
Maybe you'd like to keep asking questions you've already been given the answer to?
Again ... do you.
this is exactly what i'm saying you are asserting and in the same manner that the thesis purports the left to be doing (by categorically accusing the opponents of the mosque of being racist, etc.)
not all of the amorphous and mythological "left" that you have created in your mind (or have allowed to be brainwashed about by the likes of krauthhammer) disregard the arguments of opponents to the mosque in the fashion that you are alleging. to those who do feign such antipathy will be assigned to them such a classification. to those who make other arguments, emotive or not, would not come such a label.
If anyone can come up with some more, I'm open to hear it.....but so far I have counted 3 reasons:
racism, Islamophobia, and people who think it's just inapproproate (i.e. bad taste).
All lousy reasons to be crying about the mosque.
Do you use small numbers of radical figures as a slight against larger groups in other areas? For instance, if a few Republicans do something negative, do you then paint the whole group in a negative light?
Define "sizable", please. Are we talking about just numbers, or percentages?
And do you think that all terrorists against the US are so only due to religious preference?
I'm for the building of the mosque. It is not my view that an extremist group that happens to use the same teachings of Islam should be taken into consideration when rendering a verdict/decision on what to do.
But it's naive to believe that there aren't people out there that genuinely wrestle with that notion and find themselves opposing this mosque.
Again, like I've said before, there are never good reasons to do the wrong thing. The right thing is always they right thing, regardless of any pain, suffering or consternation that might come in the process.
I don't think there aren't those people out there. I just think their set of morality is skewed. But hey, I've known people who said that if they ever stopped believing in God, they'd go out and do whatever they wanted. Those people are messed up too.
Sounds good to me.
So it's back to it being a moral issue for some.
So again, what is the moral dilemma?
so you think that justifies their Islamophobia, racism, feelings of bad taste or that they think it's morally wrong?No, it's not.
A sizable amount of its supporters and followers of its teaching are.
racism (n)We've established you can Google, unfortunately, we've also discovered you lack basic reading comprehension.
Racism implies superiority and, in most cases, hatred. It's not really as subtle a nuance as many who throw around the word think.
Fear, ignorance or making broad judgments on the basis of a few bad or horrific events in one's life, that's not racist.
Prejudice, yes. Racist, no.
Synonyms: racial discrimination, discrimination, prejudice, bigotry, intolerance, xenophobia, bias, racialism
prejudice
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: belief without basis, information; intolerance
Synonyms: ageism, animosity, antipathy, apartheid, aversion, bad opinion, bias, bigotry, chauvinism, contemptuousness, detriment, discrimination, disgust, dislike, displeasure, disrelish, enmity, foregone conclusion, illiberality, injustice, jaundiced eye, mindset, misjudgment, narrow-mindedness, one-sidedness, partiality, pique, preconceived notion, preconception, prejudgment, prepossession, racism, repugnance, revulsion, sexism, slant, spleen, tilt, twist, umbrage, unfairness, warp, xenophobia
We've established that either you are hung on semantics or lack the ability to google up a thesaurus.
Your answer was a vague blurb about how it could be a moral dilemma for some without expounding on what the moral dilemma might be.I did (yet again).
Maybe you'd like to keep asking questions you've already been given the answer to?
Again ... do you.
I can see that you trying to be you is not workin' either.
Last edited by Blake; 08-27-2010 at 08:23 PM.
Do you feel they are justified in wrestling with that notion?
There are always the bat crazy people. There's no getting around that, and every segment/group/race/party/religious faction has them.
But those that genuinely wrestle with the notion of deciphering between what's right and wrong in an issue so fueled with emotion, I can't be so dismissive of their view. I disagree with them, I believe in my heart they're wrong, but I respect their struggle with the issue. I can't simply dismiss them as being racists or bigots, even if there will inevitably be those out there.
I'm not religious. I'm not affiliated with any sort of religion. But truthfully, I've always known there's something. I've always had some sort of spirituality. That's me, though. To each his own.
I think anything is bad if used or practiced naively, without the requisite knowledge or done without the right amount of respect. If you're a follower -- in the worst sense of the word (i.e., lemming) -- than you'll never be worth your salt.
Not all can be leaders, but it'd be nice if everyone had the intellectual curiosity to know exactly who or what they're following.
Last edited by Blackjack; 08-27-2010 at 08:41 PM.
Yes. Those that genuinely wrestle with the idea that thousands of their fellow countrymen/women were slaughtered by Islamic extremists and are now being forced with the proposition of having to allow those that did the slaughtering to claim any kind of victory because of it, absolutely.
I think in terms of "human," not ideology or whatever suits my point of view.
If 90% of Muslims denounced and/or were appalled by the actions of 9-11, there'd still be 10% that found it to be a joyous event. Reconciling with that is a lot easier for some than others.
The rest of your retort has fallen into the irresponsible. Not that it's the first, I'm just not willing to take the time copying and pasting the same things over again.
The fact that you don't understand that prejudice on it's own doesn't imply superiority or hatred, is another matter . . .
so you are wrestling with the notion of deciphering right and wrong regarding the issue of those wrestling with the notion of deciphering between what's right and wrong on this issue.
What reason do you think justifies them wrestling with this notion?
Honestly, if people would approach it this way, nobody would have a problem. As it stands though, those people that struggle with the issue are doing so at the expense of Muslim people's right to worship their faith. In here, everything is academic, but give people like Darrins enough leaway on this and soon you'll find that its no longer academic and the mosque is now being built somewhere else.
The bottom line in all this is, one can empathize with why the protest but they are ultimately wrong. I think you have the right approach, as long as it remains evident that you can't let people like Darrins force America to commit what would be a grave injustice in the name of fear.
Where exactly are these people that did the slaughtering?
If these people are out there, then they aren't claiming victory because a mosque is being built. They would be claimining victory that there are those wrestling with that idea.
In other words, they would be claiming victory because of the hypocrisy and butthurt of these American people.
I think we've established you aren't good at using google.prej·u·dice /ˈprɛdʒədɪs/ Show Spelled [prej-uh-dis] Show IPA noun, verb, -diced, -dic·ing.
–noun
3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or at udes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.
You fail really hard, Blake.
HARD -- but at least I won't call you a racist.
Na, it's clear now you are unable to show where "those that did the slaughtering" are which amounts to you setting up a strawman that butthurt Americans apparently are also using to justify their racism, prejudice, and Islamophobia.You fail really hard, Blake.
HARD -- but at least I won't call you a racist.
You failed to acknowledge that prejudice and racism are synonyms, (even though it's of minor relevance to any argument you are trying to make)
You also failed to justify your confused feelings for those with confused feelings.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions