Merged Obama enters GZ Mosque debate

[A'isha]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100818/pl_nm/us_usa_mosque

Muslims in lower Manhattan just want a full size Mosque to pray.

That's the Masjid Manhattan people, the ones who had been at their mosque location four blocks from Ground Zero for 40 years. In 2008 their former landlord ended their lease, and they're currently in a temporary spot a few doors down from their original location. Said temporary spot is far, far too small for the worshipers to gather in, so they've been trying to raise money to purchase a new location large enough for all of them.

 

[332nd]

For the... The reason the center shouldn't be there is....
What?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

That's the Masjid Manhattan people, the ones who had been at their mosque location four blocks from Ground Zero for 40 years. In 2008 their former landlord ended their lease, and they're currently in a temporary spot a few doors down from their original location. Said temporary spot is far, far too small for the worshipers to gather in, so they've been trying to raise money to purchase a new location large enough for all of them.

Thanks for that. I wasn't aware of these details.

Isn't the proposed building more than a mosque, though? I think it's also supposed to be some kind of Islamic community center, and I've heard that the building itself will be quite large (6 stories?). Do you have correct info on these points?

 

[A'isha]

Thanks for that. I wasn't aware of these details.

Isn't the proposed building more than a mosque, though? I think it's also supposed to be some kind of Islamic community center, and I've heard that the building itself will be quite large (6 stories?). Do you have correct info on these points?

As far as I'm aware, there's been no finalized plans since they haven't obtained either the building or final funding yet, but their website has a list of facilities that they're planning on.

Park51 will grow into a world-class community center, planned to include the following facilities:

* outstanding recreation spaces and fitness facilities (swimming pool, gym, basketball court)
* a 500-seat auditorium
* a restaurant and culinary school
* cultural amenities including exhibitions
* education programs
* a library, reading room and art studios
* childcare services
* a mosque, intended to be run separately from Park51 but open to and accessible to all members, visitors and our New York community
* a September 11th memorial and quiet contemplation space, open to all

 

[thaiboxerken]

As far as I'm aware, there's been no finalized plans since they haven't obtained either the building or final funding yet, but their website has a list of facilities that they're planning on.

It's obviously a playground for terrorists........

 

[leftysergeant]

One thing that a lot of the shrieking monkeys overlook is that the Muslim community lost law-abiding members in the towers that day, too. Would you deny them the right to commemorate the loss of those people anywhere near the site of the tragedy?

 

[Emperor_Gestahl]

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.

Well if he must sink himself down to the level of this debate then yes waffling was a mistake and his original comments weren't nearly sharp enough. I still see participating in this as no better than dignifying the KKK and giving them more attention by debating with them about white superiority. Obama's heart is in the right place, but making this an even bigger circus is the wrong approach IMO.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I think this is more than just a NY issue, as intolerance of Muslims is becoming more violent and widespread.

 

[Brainster]

Howard Dean, bigot:

Calling for compromise, Dean said on WABC radio today the mosque plan "a real affront to people who lost their lives" and laments Islam's being "in the 12th century" in Iran and some other Muslim countries.

He also says he believes the Cordoba organizers are in good faith, and that their project should be built elsewhere.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Howard Dean, bigot:

I agree. Glad he's not in office.

 

[elbe]

To some degree I have sympathy for people who accept they have a right to build it and that it's not a threat but still don't want it built "near" GZ. It's an emotional response, and sometimes emotions can be tough hurdles.

But this is America, land of the free. Suck it up.

 

[johnny karate]

I agree. Glad he's not in office.

Seconded. Dean should be ashamed of himself for both tacitly equating Islam with al Qaeda, and furthering the myths that the structure in question is a mosque and that it will be actually built on Ground Zero.

 

[Emperor_Gestahl]

Howard Dean, bigot:

Agreed, good find.. The list of bigots and appeasers coming "out of the closet" these days is troubling but I'm glad they're at least exposing themselves so we don't haplessly vote for one of them someday.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Well if he must sink himself down to the level of this debate then yes waffling was a mistake and his original comments weren't nearly sharp enough. I still see participating in this as no better than dignifying the KKK and giving them more attention by debating with them about white superiority. Obama's heart is in the right place, but making this an even bigger circus is the wrong approach IMO.

I disagree. As chief of the executive branch, his job is to enforce the laws. The circus already started before Obama chimed in, and I think the presidential bully-pulpit is appropriate to try to calm things down and remind people of what our Constitution actually has to say about the subject.

I think he made it a bigger circus by waffling on it--basically undoing his first comments, but I think his first comments were just about right.

I don't think it's about sinking down to anyone's level to point out that there ought be no controversy. That all Americans should come together in standing up for First Amendment rights for everyone.

 

[Thunder]

Howard Dean, bigot:

I never liked Howard Dean. And he is indeed exposing his own bigotry.

 

[Emperor_Gestahl]

I don't think it's about sinking down to anyone's level to point out that there ought be no controversy. That all Americans should come together in standing up for First Amendment rights for everyone.

At the moment and until the govt actually tries to prevent the construction it's not about first amendment rights, it's about public bigotry. The media shouldn't be covering it as a legitimate debate on first amendment rights nor should Obama treat it like one. Most of the objections aren't from a legal standpoint they are from a prejudice standpoint.

I admit that the appeasers and defenders of the alleged bigotry of the masses probably outnumber the bigots themselves on this one, but that's no large comfort to me..

 

[MattusMaximus]

You can download the CNN poll here.

Thanks, Brainster.

ETA: Interesting. Here's the exact wording of the question everyone is discussing...

As you may know, a group of Muslims in the U.S. plan to build a mosque two blocks from the site
in New York City where the World Trade Center used to stand. Do you favor or oppose this plan?

Aug. 6-10, 2010

Favor 29%
Oppose 68%
No opinion 3%

As I suspected, it seems that the "oppose" result can be interpreted a couple of ways:

1. One could agree with the constitutional right of the Muslims to build the mosque, but oppose the plan.
2. One could disagree with the constitutional right of Muslims to build the mosque in the first place.

Here's an analogy: Rev. Fred Phelps and his merry band of jackoffs. While I strongly support their constitutional right to protest in the reprehensible manner that they choose, I oppose them being present at the funerals of soldiers. (And no, I'm not comparing the Muslims who want to build this mosque to Fred Phelps - it's just the best analogy I could come up with at the time). I could understand that a lot of people would fall into category #1 above.

I suppose it could be asking too much of our media, but it would have been nice to see CNN ask a follow-up question regarding opinions on the constitutionality of building the mosque. But that might provide too much clarity on the issue

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

At the moment and until the govt actually tries to prevent the construction it's not about first amendment rights, it's about public bigotry. The media shouldn't be covering it as a legitimate debate on first amendment rights nor should Obama treat it like one.

I undertand you're point, but I do think the discussion is or ought be about First Amendment rights.

That is, there is an upswell in public sentiment that seems not to realize that if they had their way they would be denying First Amendment rights to a minority group. I think it's important to remind them of this point.

No, I don't think New York City or any other government entity will deny them the right to build. I think it's important that people understand why this is so, and why it's not only legal but also proper and fitting and in accordance with our most cherished principles.

Most of the objections aren't from a legal standpoint they are from a prejudice standpoint.

Exactly. I think it's very important that we remind them that what their prejudice is advocating is in fact a violation of the law and one of the most basic fundamental principles on which our country is founded. That is, we could make the discussion more reasonable. (And that begins with clarifying the facts. I think by now most people do understand that no one is proposing a mosque on Ground Zero--finally! As I mentioned on Face the Nation on Sunday morning--just over 3 days ago-- two Republican politicians repeated the false statement that this was a proposed mosque on Ground Zero. I think they're all being careful to say "near Ground Zero" now.)

I realize the public debate is not a legal process of any sort, but that doesn't mean we can't use legal and logical arguments to counter the incoherent rantings. I think given a chance most Americans really would uphold the First Amendment.

 

[Thunder]

As I mentioned on Face the Nation on Sunday morning--just over 3 days ago-- two Republican politicians repeated the false statement that this was a proposed mosque on Ground Zero. I think they're all being careful to say "near Ground Zero" now.)

typical GOP lies.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Thanks, Brainster.

ETA: Interesting. Here's the exact wording of the question everyone is discussing...



As I suspected, it seems that the "oppose" result can be interpreted a couple of ways:

1. One could agree with the constitutional right of the Muslims to build the mosque, but oppose the plan.
2. One could disagree with the constitutional right of Muslims to build the mosque in the first place.

Here's an analogy: Rev. Fred Phelps and his merry band of jackoffs. While I strongly support their constitutional right to protest in the reprehensible manner that they choose, I oppose them being present at the funerals of soldiers. (And no, I'm not comparing the Muslims who want to build this mosque to Fred Phelps - it's just the best analogy I could come up with at the time). I could understand that a lot of people would fall into category #1 above.

I suppose it could be asking too much of our media, but it would have been nice to see CNN ask a follow-up question regarding opinions on the constitutionality of building the mosque. But that might provide too much clarity on the issue

Very good point. Also, the poll was conducted at least 8 days ago. I think a lot may have changed by now (like people hearing more about the actual facts of the story).

I'd even be curious to see how people answer a question about whether or not they believe the muslims proposing the mosque and community center are somehow connected with the 9/11 attacks. Sadly, the "yes" to that would certainly be a non-zero percentage.