Merged Obama enters GZ Mosque debate

[Darat]

Where did you get that from this survey question?

'''...that proceeding with the plan would be an insult tothat proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center."


The question isn't worded, even though Rauf is not a Wahhabist Sunni Muslim as those who planned and carried out 9/11, is the mosque "an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center."

Would a Roman Catholic Church being built in the same location be an insult in the same way?

 

[leftysergeant]

Currently, this is about the court of public opinion. Do you think Union City Mayor Brian Stack has it in for Rauf?

That is possible.

The video of the conditions at Rauf's property seems compelling evidence to his dereliction.

Did you see the address on the city's complaints about the properties?

So you do condemn Rauf for his mistreatment of his tenants? OK.

No. But I do think that the Christian whose name appears on the citations has got some explaining to do come the Judgement Day.

 

[Cicero]

But how would anyone get the idea that a project by a religious group which had nothing at all to do with the WTC attacks would be an insult to its victims?

TIME's survey did not phrase their question in this way.

Would a Roman Catholic Church being built in the same location be an insult in the same way?

I guess we will have to wait until a terrorist act on the U.S. is committed in the name of the RCC, and then see if there is a priest who wishes to build a church on a site where debris from a commercial airliner landed, and then wait to see if anyone protests the decision.

 

[Cicero]

No.

Since you believe Rauf's slumlord label is undeserved, would you volunteer to live in a Rauf New Jersey property?

 

[Chaos]

TIME's survey did not phrase their question in this way.

Of course they didn´t. They assumed that people knew already the the center was to be built by Sufis, while the WTC attackers were Wahhabis.

What do you think: did people know but not care, or did they simply not know?

I guess we will have to wait until a terrorist act on the U.S. is committed in the name of the RCC, and then see if there is a priest who wishes to build a church on a site where debris from a commercial airliner landed, and then wait to see if anyone protests the decision.

We already have an RCC which was complicit in a very large number of crimes - child abuse, to be precise - and a public which does NOT wish to punish Catholics, much less other Christians, for that.

 

[Shalamar]

Which is more important?

The 'court of public opinion', or the laws and constitution of the land?

 

[Cicero]

Which is more important?

The 'court of public opinion', or the laws and constitution of the land?

They are not in conflict with one another. One without the other wouldn't be America.

 

[Shalamar]

They are not in conflict with one another. One without the other wouldn't be America.

Then why are you pushing the 'court of public opinion' as a reason why the community center should not be built?

 

[johnny karate]

I guess we will have to wait until a terrorist act on the U.S. is committed in the name of the RCC, and then see if there is a priest who wishes to build a church on a site where debris from a commercial airliner landed, and then wait to see if anyone protests the decision.

Violent Christian extremists have engaged in several acts of terrorism over the last twenty years. Can you proved an example of the construction of a Christian church being so fervently protested as a result? Of course you can't.

Cicero, you keep dodging the central question. You claim Park51 would be an insult to 9/11 victims as a supposed non-bigoted reason to oppose it, but refuse to explain why it would be an insult.

How specifically is Park51 an insult to the victims of 9/11?

 

[johnny karate]

Which is more important?

The 'court of public opinion', or the laws and constitution of the land?

They are not in conflict with one another. One without the other wouldn't be America.

Civil Rights activists of the 50s and 60s would disagree with you. So would anyone who has the slightest idea how the American legal system works.

 

[Cicero]

[Cicero, you keep dodging the central question. You claim Park51 would be an insult to 9/11 victims as a supposed non-bigoted reason to oppose it, but refuse to explain why it would be an insult.

How specifically is Park51 an insult to the victims of 9/11?

That is how TIME phrased the question. Now you tell me where is the "bigotry" you claim in those who answered in the affirmative?

 

[Cicero]

Civil Rights activists of the 50s and 60s would disagree with you. So would anyone who has the slightest idea how the American legal system works.

Now all you need to do is actually provide some explanation how you arrived at these bizarre conclusions.

 

[johnny karate]

That is how TIME phrased the question. Now you tell me where is the "bigotry" you claim in those who answered in the affirmative?

Don't cowardly shift responsibility to Time and their phrasing of the question. You were asked to provide a non-bigoted reason to oppose Park51, and you provided the poll question as an answer. Now it is your responsibility to clarify the answer.

How specifically is Park51 an insult to the victims of 9/11?

 

[johnny karate]

Now all you need to do is actually provide some explanation how you arrived at these bizarre conclusions.

Look everyone, now Cicero is demanding someone else clarify and substantiate a claim!

How adorable.

 

[Chaos]

That is how TIME phrased the question. Now you tell me where is the "bigotry" you claim in those who answered in the affirmative?

It is very simple.

The people who want to build this community center had nothing to do with the WTC attack.

The community center has nothing to do with the WTC attack.

Therefore, there is no non-bigotted reason to consider the community center an insult against the victims of the WTC attack.

 

[Crunkus]

It is very simple.

The people who want to build this community center had nothing to do with the WTC attack.

The community center has nothing to do with the WTC attack.

Therefore, there is no non-bigotted reason to consider the community center an insult against the victims of the WTC attack.

Don't forget the possibility of being insufficiently informed on the subject. There are a great number of people drumming up controversy for political or economic motives. Everyone who has become ill-informed about the issue can't be a bigot.

 

[johnny karate]

Don't forget the possibility of being insufficiently informed on the subject. There are a great number of people drumming up controversy for political or economic motives.

The fact that it's referred to as the "Ground Zero mosque" when it is fact not a mosque nor being built at Ground Zero is proof of that.

Everyone who has become ill-informed about the issue can't be a bigot.

But if they oppose Park51, they're still expressing an ignorant opinion.

 

[Chaos]

Don't forget the possibility of being insufficiently informed on the subject. There are a great number of people drumming up controversy for political or economic motives. Everyone who has become ill-informed about the issue can't be a bigot.

The information is there, if they´re interested. Not wanting to get it is no excuse.

 

[Neally]

The information is there, if they´re interested. Not wanting to get it is no excuse.

And ignorance of the law is no excuse, or defense. On the other hand the fact remains that everyone doesn't and can't be expected to read and understand the thousands of pages of laws and regulations in our life. Likewise, people often hear sound bites and form opinions without knowing or researching all the facts. Random polls catch people that haven't bothered to get all the facts and have an opinion based on partial or inaccurate information. Thus their response could legitimately based on ignorance and not necessarily outright bigotry.

 

[Praktik]

And ignorance of the law is no excuse, or defense. On the other hand the fact remains that everyone doesn't and can't be expected to read and understand the thousands of pages of laws and regulations in our life. Likewise, people often hear sound bites and form opinions without knowing or researching all the facts. Random polls catch people that haven't bothered to get all the facts and have an opinion based on partial or inaccurate information. Thus their response could legitimately based on ignorance and not necessarily outright bigotry.

This.

Fact is people didn't become insulted until they were given an excuse to feel insulted by people on TV and in print and online who gave everybody an angle on the story TO that allowed them to feel that way. When the story was a feel-good front pager, last year no one cried foul.

So what we have here is a donut of ignorance with a creamy center of bigotry, with sprinkles of people like Cicero and BAC who just reflexively line up where the coach tells them.