• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Obama enters GZ Mosque debate

Actually, there has been plenty of opposition to mosques throughout the USA. It's sad that the media has not really highlighted theses oppositions. One mosque was even bombed.
 
Unabogie said:
It remains to be seen. We have a great capacity for generosity and wisdom, but also a weakness for demagoguery and tribalism. I suspect that even though a majority of people do "oppose" the mosque, most polls will continue to show support for their right to build it and Obama's support of that right will prove to be courageous and correct.

But I could be wrong...
Click to expand...

I don't think Obama showed any great courage. He voiced the same opinion as what I believe is the majority belief. The have the right to construct the building.
He was so courageous that he had to follow with his statement from the next day.

While I do not think he was courageous I do agree he was correct.
 
eeyore1954 said:
I have heard a few commercials in the Tri-state area where conservative politicians have tried to use the fact that their opponets are in favor of the mosque as a tool.
Click to expand...

And this is news because...?

As both Brainster and I have alluded to before, this is likely good raw meat for the bases of each party, but in the end your middle-of-the-road voter (you know, the ones who actually tend to decide election outcomes) probably couldn't give a crap about this issue.

If everything with the economy, jobs, people's pensions, their mortgages, health care, 401k plans, kids' college funds, etc were just plain hunky-dory then it might be a bigger issue. But seeing as how we're not living in the land of milk & honey, then please explain to the middle-of-the-road voter exactly why this is more important than them making their next house payment...
 
Last edited:
thaiboxerken said:
Actually, there has been plenty of opposition to mosques throughout the USA. It's sad that the media has not really highlighted theses oppositions. One mosque was even bombed.
Click to expand...

Now those people are bigots but they are a small minority.
 
eeyore1954 said:
I don't think Obama showed any great courage. He voiced the same opinion as what I believe is the majority belief. The have the right to construct the building.
He was so courageous that he had to follow with his statement from the next day.

While I do not think he was courageous I do agree he was correct.
Click to expand...

This is one reason I want to get my hands on that poll everyone keeps talking about. Lots of people want to paint Obama as going against public opinion on this, but I'm not really so sure that is what's happening here. It's not as simple as many would like to have us believe, I think.
 
I think Obama shouldn't have touched this with a 10' pole.. How many KKK rallies have happened where the president himself decided to chime in and rebut their arguments on white superiority? It would just give them more attention they don't deserve.

Did the Israeli PM see fit to personally rebut Mel Gibson's drunken anti-semitic theories? When someone exposes themselves as a bigot, make a note of it and then ignore them. They eventually fade into the background like the KKK and lose their power to garner media attention. Obama is trying to put out a trash fire with gasoline IMO.. This madness will only spread further.
 
A minority community is being abused by the rightwacko media who encourage the multitude of dimwits to attempt to deprive them of their rights under the constituion. For the president to remain silent is to acquiesce to that abuse.

Should the president have remained silent when the Civil Rights marchers were beaten down in the 1960's?
 
leftysergeant said:
A minority community is being abused by the rightwacko media who encourage the multitude of dimwits to attempt to deprive them of their rights under the constituion. For the president to remain silent is to acquiesce to that abuse.

Should the president have remained silent when the Civil Rights marchers were beaten down in the 1960's?
Click to expand...

Have some perspective here. No Muslim has been harmed, no law has been broken. This is all talk so far, coming from bigots. Your civil rights march analogy does not work as bigots have the right to spout racism, they don't have the right to turn fire hoses and dogs on Muslims, nor are they doing that.

When someone says something obviously racist it's beneath the President of the United States to respond IMO. In doing so he will only draw more attention to people who don't deserve it.
 
leftysergeant said:
So far.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the final meaningful response of every CT proponent ever though? If it isn't happening.. so far.. then we shouldn't act like it is happening.. so far. Openly intolerant people don't deserve their views being directly responded to by the President IMO, if they resort to violence they should be responded to.. by the cops.

(Edit: Basically the difference between thoughts/words and actions is significant here. Many people hold a variety of intolerant beliefs but the President is not a garbageman, this debate wasn't worth the attention it was getting as-is so Obama is not helping any.
 
Last edited:
He's sworn to defend the constitution. There are violently anti-Muslim whackadoodles in this country and they do act out.

Obama sort of put his foot down and pointed out that the thugs will not be tolerated should they try to violate the rights of other citizens. That block of domestic enemies is on notice:"Don't get froggy."
 
Emperor_Gestahl said:
Have some perspective here. No Muslim has been harmed, no law has been broken.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's true, as a matter of fact. I think plenty of Muslims have been harmed (physically and otherwise) by this sort of bigotry. In the wake of 9/11 there were occurrences of anti-Muslim violence (or even violence against people mistaken for Muslims).

I think even in this particular case, Muslims have at least suffered harm by the smearing of their reputations and by the repeating of falsehoods. I think falsely calling someone a terrorist can be harmful.

Disclaimer: I'm an atheist. I'm a strong supporter of separation of church and state. I have no sympathy whatsoever for the beliefs of Islam. I support the First Amendment rights of all Americans, even Muslims.
 
Emperor_Gestahl said:
Isn't that the final meaningful response of every CT proponent ever though? If it isn't happening.. so far.. then we shouldn't act like it is happening.. so far. Openly intolerant people don't deserve their views being directly responded to by the President IMO, if they resort to violence they should be responded to.. by the cops.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, none of us are calling for the repeal of the First Amendment rights of these bigots to voice their nonsensical views as long as they do so peacefully. (Though I do think there may be the possibility of defamation charges in some cases.)

I see nothing analogous to CT proponents here. In fact, there has been plenty of anti-Muslim violence, especially right after 9/11. We do know that this bigotry can lead to such violence.

I think primarily what we're doing is trying to exercise our own free speech rights to point out that their arguments are irrational and often based on flat-out lies. So far, other than here in the JREF forum, our voices are mostly being drowned out by those repeating the irrational arguments and flat out falsehoods.

But if you're going to construe our criticism of irrational nonsense as an attempt to curtail the free speech rights of the bigots, then we can just as well accuse you of attempting to curtail our free speech rights. (Playing that game just goes on and on.)

Yes, the police should be the ones to deal with violence after it happens. But rational people who see the potential for violence (especially since we've seen it in the past) should speak up and try to insert a modicum of sanity into a situation that does indeed seem to be heading toward violence.
 
Emperor_Gestahl said:
(Edit: Basically the difference between thoughts/words and actions is significant here.
Click to expand...
I think you're making a false distinction here. The law recognizes some speech acts as criminal.

And again, we've seen a great many examples of this kind of hysteria descending into many broken laws and even violence. We've seen witch hunts before. . .literal and figurative. It's foolish to act as if there is no precedent and this "Ground Zero mosque" thing is happening in a vacuum.

Many people hold a variety of intolerant beliefs but the President is not a garbageman, this debate wasn't worth the attention it was getting as-is so Obama is not helping any.
Click to expand...

I agree this should never have been a controversy or debate. But it now is, and as long as discussions and news coverage is so skewed to the side of those making false assertions and irrational arguments, reasonable people ought get involved in it.

I do think the President should have used his bully pulpit to stand up for the First Amendment. I think that sort of paternalism is indeed very presidential and entirely appropriate. I think his first comments were just about perfect.

I criticize him for giving in to the popular hysteria and subsequently waffling on his first comments.
 
The smart Obama shows up in year three. Right now, he's trying to elect as many Republicans as possible.

He's following Bill Clinton's playbook pretty closely...
 
Emperor_Gestahl said:
Have some perspective here. No Muslim has been harmed, no law has been broken. This is all talk so far,
Click to expand...

once construction starts, the harrassing phone calls and posting of all construction worker's names will begin.

the daily protests will start. workers will be called terrorists and Muslim-lovers.

..and that will be just the start.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom