• 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

And therefor should not have first amendment rights.

If that were so, Pat Buchannan would have had a muzzle slapped on him about ten years ago when he refused to do anything about mildew problems in some property he rented out.

(And the Rushblob was right there to defend him on that. This is even more egregious because Buchannan calls himself a Christian, and there are prohibitions in the Bible agaisnt occupying a mildewed house.)
 
But all this has what, exactly, to do with the Park51 project he and a host of other partners and developers are involved with? Seriously, after all the "he's a Wahhabist-loving extremist" crap didn't pan out, this is the straw that opponents of the project are now grasping at?

This and something that happened 1200 years ago in spain.
 
It seems some people in this thread think a defense of Rauf's right to build this community center on the proposed site is somehow a defense of him or his beliefs, and that if they succeed in tearing down one or both it will undermine that defense.

A rather myopic thought process, I would say.
 
It seems some people in this thread think a defense of Rauf's right to build this community center on the proposed site is somehow a defense of him or his beliefs, and that if they succeed in tearing down one or both it will undermine that defense.

A rather myopic thought process, I would say.


That's why I don't bother to investigate Rauf's beliefs or defend him in threads on this issue. I don't want there to be any question that my opposition to the opposition to this project is somehow tied to the moderation or acceptableness of these particular Moslems. It's simply irrelevant to the question of this building in any neighborhood.
 
That's why I don't bother to investigate Rauf's beliefs or defend him in threads on this issue. I don't want there to be any question that my opposition to the opposition to this project is somehow tied to the moderation or acceptableness of these particular Moslems. It's simply irrelevant to the question of this building in any neighborhood.

What I found kind of rich is that some of the most persistent, party-line opposition to Rauf on this board - the posters who go on at length about how scary and immoderate Rauf is - are themselves some of the most immoderate posters on the entire board.

I had to shake my head a few times: "wait, are we really letting Skeptic/BAC set the bar for what is considered 'moderate'?? Thats like asking Fred Phelps to define homosexuality!"
 
Can I play, too?

The Imam wears white after Labor Day.

The Imam doesn't wash his hands after using the toilet.

The Imam is a chronic masturbator.

It's all just as relevant. Has anyone in the opposition actually stopped to consider why this matters? The mildest version of the opposition argument is the claim that (for whatever reason) this center should not be built. How do any of the claims attempting to paint Rauf as a "bad guy" point towards that conclusion? Are we to conclude that nobody with differing points of view should oversee any kind of construction? What a barren world you would have us live in.
 
The Imam talks very loud on his cell phone in crowded areas.

The Imam does not flush or use air freshener.

The Imam does not slow down at yellow lights.
 
It the Imam was the Moselm version of Mahatma Gandhi, those opposed to the Mosque would still find reasons to attack him.
 
I should start by saying that I've not heard of Bill Keller before. I found this link on one of the pages linked above:
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/30/bigot_establishes_ground_zero_church

To be perfectly clear, Keller should be permitted to build anything he wants as long as it's legal.

But the only logic by which Keller's project would not be horrifying to those who oppose Park51 is if they believe all Muslims, including the progressive Muslim Americans behind Park51, should be treated as suspicious or even in the same category as the Sept. 11 terrorists. If mosque opponents' concerns are truly about sensitivity to the neighborhood around ground zero -- and not about Muslims -- we'll hear them denounce Keller loudly in the coming days.

I was wondering what people here would say.
 
Does Rauf or his property manager run the operation day-to-day?

Are the tennants polite and quiet or do they knock out the walls?

Have you ever owned a rental property and hired a manger to do maints and collect rent?
 
Does Rauf or his property manager run the operation day-to-day?

Are the tennants polite and quiet or do they knock out the walls?

Have you ever owned a rental property and hired a manger to do maints and collect rent?

Now be honest. If the landlord were Pat Robertson you would be yammering for his immediate arrest.

"Nor was Rauf a very good landlord. Both The Record and the the New York Post report a litany of complaints at Rauf’s buildings dating back decades and continuing to this day: heaps of garbage, overgrown grass, lack of heat and hot water; rat, cockroach, and bedbug infestations; and general filth."

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/245321/slums-rauf-daniel-foster
 
I'm trying to find the part in the Constitution that says if you're a bad landlord you lose your First Amendment rights, but no luck.

Cicero, can you help me?
 
I'm trying to find the part in the Constitution that says if you're a bad landlord you lose your First Amendment rights, but no luck.

Cicero, can you help me?

Does this urge to check the Constitution for landlord 1st Amendment rights plague you frequently?
 
Only when partisan rabble-rousers engage in ad hominem attacks against brown people they don't like.
 

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