• 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

My mistake. Clearly, you had the noblest of intentions when you started a thread to smear a guy who had the audacity to exercise his freedom of religion in a place bigots don't approve of.
 
This is all highly relevant if you tend to see the Park51 issue as a black-and-white, all-or-nothing, team against team type of affair. If you're wearing the "Team Edward Geller" t-shirt, then you see this as a really effective criticism of your enemies on the other side. Alternatively, if you're wearing the "Team Jacob Rauf" t-shirt, you feel the need to defend Rauf, maybe by suggesting that these accusations are exaggerations, etc. Presumably you could also respond by pointing out that Newt Gingrich divorced his wife while she was in the hospital, or that Pam Geller has dandruff or unpaid parking tickets or something.

I'm on team "If you own a piece of property and wish to develop it you may do so provided you conform with building codes and zoning laws and you certainly cannot be prevented from doing so on religious grounds merely because it might hurt the delicate fee-fees of those who confuse your religion with the religion that motivated some admittedly vile individuals to commit some admittedly horrific acts a few blocks away, and although I am in general fairly apathetic with respect to religious buildings, finding them a waste of resources, I also recognize and appreciate the efforts at bridge-building even though the bridge-builder is occasionally clumsy in his construction." And that doesn't really fit on a t-shirt, but it's all right. And so this thread does puzzle me.

I do find the accusations more plausible than not, and if true Rauf deserves every criticism any slumlord deserves. But why are we even talking about it?
 
johnny karate said:
My mistake. Clearly, you had the noblest of intentions when you started a thread to smear a guy who had the audacity to exercise his freedom of religion in a place bigots don't approve of.
Click to expand...
Cicero is just concerned that Park51 might pose a fire hazard or that the urinal puck things won't be changed frequently enough.
 
linusrichard said:
I'm on team "If you own a piece of property and wish to develop it you may do so provided you conform with building codes and zoning laws and you certainly cannot be prevented from doing so on religious grounds merely because it might hurt the delicate fee-fees of those who confuse your religion with the religion that motivated some admittedly vile individuals to commit some admittedly horrific acts a few blocks away, and although I am in general fairly apathetic with respect to religious buildings, finding them a waste of resources, I also recognize and appreciate the efforts at bridge-building even though the bridge-builder is occasionally clumsy in his construction." And that doesn't really fit on a t-shirt, but it's all right. And so this thread does puzzle me.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Cicero, what is the purpose of this thread? How does knowing the information in the OP help me evaluate the appropriate course of action in the Ground Zero mosque issue?
 
Ladewig said:
Agreed.

Cicero, what is the purpose of this thread? How does knowing the information in the OP help me evaluate the appropriate course of action in the Ground Zero mosque issue?
Click to expand...

Perhaps if the 'ground zero mosque' proposal was dropped the people opposing it would be happy for Rauf to be as slummy a landlord as he liked. Hey, at least it's capitalism!
 
Hmm...this is all sounding awfully familiar.

Oh, that's right. Someone else here tried to do the same thing Cicero is doing...three weeks ago.

I'm disappointed, Cicero. You're slipping.
 
Cicero said:
Now be honest. If the landlord were Pat Robertson you would be yammering for his immediate arrest.
Click to expand...

No. I personally cannot stand Pat Robertson. The only preacher I hate more than him is Fred Phelps. But even if Fred Phelps were shown to beat his children, smoke pot, and steal cars, I would still defend his right to preach his (stupid, stupid) message in public. His committing crimes does not abrogate his First Amendment rights to assembly and religion.
 
Wonder why there was no big out cry against this guy when the Bush Administration was promoting him as a moderate, AMERICAN moslem? Now, he's just inches to the left of Bin Ladin. My point is that he is an imperfect vehicle like many a religious leader and, even if he is smarmy, what does that have to do, ultimately, with building the community center? If you replaced "Islamic" with "Catholic" in front of "community center" no one would bat an eye or accuse it of being too close or desecrating ground zero.
 
leftysergeant said:
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?
Click to expand...

"Why doesn't he help the tenants he has before he builds a new place, claiming he wants to help people?" said a disgusted Jamie Barillas, who lives in a Rauf-owned apartment at 2206 Central Ave. in Union City
Click to expand...

I don't see where this has much to do with the so called ground zero mosque but i am flabberghasted (sp?) and amazed by Leftysergeant's answer.
 
Ladewig said:
No. I personally cannot stand Pat Robertson. The only preacher I hate more than him is Fred Phelps. But even if Fred Phelps were shown to beat his children, smoke pot, and steal cars, I would still defend his right to preach his (stupid, stupid) message in public. His committing crimes does not abrogate his First Amendment rights to assembly and religion.
Click to expand...

I think you would still be upset if Fred Phelps was going to build a new church next door to you, right? Perhaps you would even hold some signs outside of the planned site protesting him. Maybe you would hope that public opinion and media pressure (Okay, bad example, this would never work on Fred Phelps) would convince him to build his church elsewhere.
 
Newtons Bit said:
I think you would still be upset if Fred Phelps was going to build a new church next door to you, right?
Click to expand...

Phelps is not a minister. He's a public nuisance. No parallel. He's lower than the idiot Jones in Florida. He lives to annoy people.
 
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