Bigots oppose another NYC mosque

[Malerin]

And what do packages containing explosives sent from Yemen have to do with mosques in Tennessee, Brooklyn, and Staten Island?

You're not getting it: people don't like Muslims. They don't like them because the people trying to blow us up for the last 20 years have almost all been Muslims, and on one day they managed to get over 3,000 of us. Right or wrong, this is the reality of the situation. If people don't like Muslims, they sure as hell won't like mosques, will they?

 

[A'isha]

And why should I go to all the trouble of providing you all that unnecessary information? I haven't even mentioned those mosques. They're not an issue of importance to me, nor is the opposition to them an issue of burning import. It will all be worked out according to the law. And if not, you'll all have an excuse to screech for years about it, like you do about everything else that displeases you.

And yet you felt the need to come into a thread started specifically about the mosque protests in Brooklyn.

]And particularly, why should I speculate on what aspects of Islamic ideology the protesters are opposed to? I know what I'm opposed to. I'm opposed to the entire concept of an invisible, mute, logically impossible creator-god who can only be communicated with through his self-appointed spokesmen, who must be worshipped and given money on pain of eternal torture. I find the entire concept deeply, disgustingly suspect.

Which is why, all those times the reconstruction of the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, which (unlike Park51) is actually on the Ground Zero site and is is using Port Authority money, you've made posts ranting about wasting funds on an edifice dedicated to "an invisible, mute, logically impossible creator-god who can only be communicated with through his self-appointed spokesmen, who must be worshipped and given money on pain of eternal torture." Right?

Or is your vitriol only reserved for Muslims? You do seem awfully angry about "the left's" attacks on Christianity, after all.

I've scoffed at the atheist left for it's sudden, newfound concern for religious rights, and found it deeply, disgustingly suspect.

I support the reconstruction of St. Nicholas, as well as the construction of Park51. You oppose Park51, and if you were consistent in your claims you'd oppose St. Nicholas with equal ire.

It seems it's my side that's for religious rights for everyone, while you seek to deny them, and so far deny them inconsistently.

And it is at least equally sensible for Christians to categorically reject another religious creed which demands that Christians must either convert or face hell fire. Convert, after all that tithing and innumerable hours spent in uncomfortable pews, getting right with the Christian god? Surely the Muslims jest. They cannot be serious. Can they?

In light of your claims to be against all religious nonsense, I find the above interesting. You do realize that if you simply swap "Muslims" and "Christians" in that paragraph, it's just as true?

And yet for some reason you seem only concerned about Christians not wanting to become Muslims, and opposing the construction of mosques on those grounds. If it were Muslims seeking to block the construction of Churches in America, via protests, legal means, and attempts at arson and bombings (like there have been for these mosques), I doubt you'd be quite so reasonable in justifying that by saying they simply and sensibly are rejecting a rival religious creed that seeks to make them convert.

Which, again, makes your claims of hypocrisy in religious matters on the part of your opponents (who aren't looking to block anyone from building a religions edifice) seem ever more like projection.

And, when adherents of some fire-and-brimstone religious creed have slaughtered thousands for no discernable just cause, it is even less likely that an imposing edifice of the submission-demanding creed will be happily invited to cast it's presumptuous shadow on the graves of the dead. In fact, the stubborn desire to cast that shadow is, in itself, deeply, disgustingly suspect.

So, you think all Muslims bear responsibility for 9/11?

And worse still, to condemn most of a nation as bigots for not meekly granting that level of tolerance, is nuts. And deeply, disgustingly suspect.

The Muslims of Park51 had nothing to do with 9/11. They didn't plan it. they didn't carry it out. They didn't support it. They didn't even know about it. They are considered heretics among the kinds of Muslims who carried out 9/11, and would have been just as eagerly killed by those terrorists (as their fellows are in suicide bombings in places like Pakistan even today). They condemned 9/11, horrified, after it happened.

Given all those facts, opposing Park51 on any grounds relating to 9/11 is absolutely, 100% bigotry.

And to go on and on and on about it, hour after hour, writing up all kinds of rationales, struggling to make 70% of Americans out to be bigots, is itself bigoted.

No, calling people out for things they actually say and do is pretty much the opposite of bigotry.

But as for those 3 proposed mosques, they are local issues, probably catalyzed by the GZ mosque issue, and dredged up here to serve as a Trojan horse for yet another leftist attack on Americans.

If you don't want people to be called bigots, maybe it would help if they stopped acting like bigots. Stop blaming people for things that they have absolutely zero responsibility for and connection to for superficial reasons.

 

[A'isha]

You're not getting it: people don't like Muslims. They don't like them because the people trying to blow us up for the last 20 years have almost all been Muslims, and on one day they managed to get over 3,000 of us. Right or wrong, this is the reality of the situation. If people don't like Muslims, they sure as hell won't like mosques, will they?

And disliking all Muslims because some of them (that don't share the same beliefs, creed, or ideas about tolerance and peaceful coexistence) have attacked and killed Americans is not bigotry...because?

 

[Malerin]

And disliking all Muslims because some of them (that don't share the same beliefs, creed, or ideas about tolerance and peaceful coexistence) have attacked and killed Americans is not bigotry...because?

I never said it wasn't bigotry. That's not relevant. It's a natural reaction when a group of people are attacked by the same group over and over again.

The muslim world needs to understand that groups like Al Queda aren't doing them any favors. Nor are leaders of countries that deny the holocaust and vow to wipe other countries off the map. Nor is stoning women because their ankles are showing. Nor is issung fatwahs over cartoons, etc.

 

[kerikiwi]

I never said it wasn't bigotry. That's not relevant.

Not relevant? I thought that bigotry was the whole point of this discussion.

 

[kerikiwi]

It's a natural reaction when a group of people are attacked by the same group over and over again.

Blaming people who are not in the attacking group is a natural reaction? Not really, unless you think that those of us who don't blame an unconnected group are unnatural.

 

[Toontown]

And yet you felt the need to come into a thread started specifically about the mosque protests in Brooklyn..

And?

I "felt the need" to ridicule transparent leftist hypocrical posturing. So sue me.

What's the deal here? Youse want a piece a me, or what?

Which is why, all those times the reconstruction of the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, which (unlike Park51) is actually on the Ground Zero site and is is using Port Authority money, you've made posts ranting about wasting funds on an edifice dedicated to "an invisible, mute, logically impossible creator-god who can only be communicated with through his self-appointed spokesmen, who must be worshipped and given money on pain of eternal torture." Right?.

Wrong. I didn't even know about any Greek Orthodox Church. However, I have, in this thread, bemoaned the raising of a church near where I live.

More and more, it seems that understanding my position is beyond the capability of your simple, accusatory thought processes.

Or is your vitriol only reserved for Muslims? You do seem awfully angry about "the left's" attacks on Christianity, after all.

No. I've bashed Christianity plenty, including members of my own family. I've called them "Christo-nazis" for talking about hell.

Let's just get this straight once and for all. I don't give a rat's ass what your idiotic religion says. If you start talking about burning people in hell for not knuckling under to your false creed, you are, in my book, a nazi, indistinguishable from the nazis who gassed and burned Jews.

I support the reconstruction of St. Nicholas, as well as the construction of Park51. You oppose Park51, and if you were consistent in your claims you'd oppose St. Nicholas with equal ire.

Well, pin a medal on you. You're a good tool. That doesn't mean I have to walk in your footprints.

Does that obscure sect believe in burning atheists in hell? If so, they can kiss my fuzzy white ass. But I will let them live, as long as they don't try to hurry me on my way to hell. In which case it will be kill or be killed.

Now, that is tolerance. There is no greater tolerance than to be willing to tolerate the existence of people who want to see me tortured forever for not believing in their Sky Monkey.

Don't even think about demanding more tolerance than that from me.

It seems it's my side that's for religious rights for everyone, while you seek to deny them, and so far deny them inconsistently.

Yes, it would seem that way, superficially. But an astute 5-year-old could see that your real agenda is to bash teabaggers for political purposes.

Who do you think you're kidding?

In light of your claims to be against all religious nonsense, I find the above interesting. You do realize that if you simply swap "Muslims" and "Christians" in that paragraph, it's just as true?

That is glaringly obvious. And?

That's why I've been generally unrelentingly harsh on Christianity. Just not much in this particular thread.

And yet for some reason you seem only concerned about Christians not wanting to become Muslims, and opposing the construction of mosques on those grounds. If it were Muslims seeking to block the construction of Churches in America, via protests, legal means, and attempts at arson and bombings (like there have been for these mosques), I doubt you'd be quite so reasonable in justifying that by saying they simply and sensibly are rejecting a rival religious creed that seeks to make them convert.

Oh, great. Rebuttal by mind reading. You've sunk to a new low.

I might not like it, but I recognise the right to protest and resort to legal means for redress of grievances. I don't know anything about your purported suspicious "attempts" at arson and bombing. For all I know, you just made that up. Equally likely, it may have been an inside job, if it even happened. The Christian terrorists or whatever couldn't even manage to start a fire or set off a bomb? A likely story.

Well. I'll start worrying about Christian terrorists when they learn how to start fires and set off bombs, and start killing thousands of people.

Which, again, makes your claims of hypocrisy in religious matters on the part of your opponents (who aren't looking to block anyone from building a religions edifice) seem ever more like projection.

No, actually, you trying to smear 70% of Americans as bigots is just plain bigoted, and you are trying to divert attention from your bald bigotry by accusing me.

So, you think all Muslims bear responsibility for 9/11?

That's a pointless question.

All Muslims bear full responsibility for their adherence to a false, brutish creed which demands the submission of all on pain of death and eternal torture.

9/11 was a symptom of the disease that is Islam.

The Muslims of Park51 had nothing to do with 9/11. They didn't plan it. they didn't carry it out. They didn't support it. They didn't even know about it. They are considered heretics among the kinds of Muslims who carried out 9/11, and would have been just as eagerly killed by those terrorists (as their fellows are in suicide bombings in places like Pakistan even today). They condemned 9/11, horrified, after it happened.

And then Faisal Abdul Rauf hastened added that the Americans were partly responsible for being attacked. Because of some buttheaded rationale he dreamed up. It's a recurring psycho phenomenon.

But now that the finger of blame is being pointed at them...well, that's all different, isn't it.

Furthermore, It is unlikely that these people did not know how Americans would react to them building a mosque 600 feet from the pit. They knew, all right. Their stubborn fixation on putting a mosque in that particular location is transparently suspect. It looks like willful, premeditated provocation.

If you don't want people to be called bigots, maybe it would help if they stopped acting like bigots. Stop blaming people for things that they have absolutely zero responsibility for and connection to for superficial reasons.

Blind adherence to a false, brutish, oppressive religion is not "superficial" in my book. I hold everyone who adheres to such false creeds fully responsible for their choices.

 

[kerikiwi]

The muslim world needs to understand that groups like Al Queda aren't doing them any favors. Nor are leaders of countries that deny the holocaust and vow to wipe other countries off the map. Nor is stoning women because their ankles are showing. Nor is issung fatwahs over cartoons, etc.

There is no 'muslim world' as you seem to understand it.
Al Queda is not the muslim world.
Which countries have you in mind?
Where are women stoned for showing their ankles?
Would a fatwah against violence satisfy you?

 

[Toontown]

Romans 13.

How convenient for the opiate of the masses pushers: concoct a god, write down a lot of stuff, claim He wrote it or commissioned it, and then demand absolute submission to the false god.

 

[leftysergeant]

The slimebaslls who started the lies about Park 51, and who fan the hatred against Muslims, supposedly act as they do in God's cause. (At least to the degree to which guter-dwellers like Breitbart and Geller can see it.) Religious arguments against the positions that these vermin espouse are legitimate.

Whether you believe in God or not, they have something unpleasant coming for being such nasty little schmucks.

 

[154]

The slimebaslls.. lies.. fan the hatred against Muslims.. in God's cause.. guter-dwellers like Breitbart and Geller.. vermin.. nasty little schmucks.

...

 

[Cobalt]

The slimebaslls who started the lies about Park 51, and who fan the hatred against Muslims, supposedly act as they do in God's cause. (At least to the degree to which guter-dwellers like Breitbart and Geller can see it.) Religious arguments against the positions that these vermin espouse are legitimate.

Whether you believe in God or not, they have something unpleasant coming for being such nasty little schmucks.

And God's gonna give you a right pat on the back for your classifications of these folks?

 

[leftysergeant]

And God's gonna give you a right pat on the back for your classifications of these folks?

They are deliberately harming the country and their fellow citizens. I am in no way obligated to show them any respect outside of the fact that it is illegal to address them with a baseball bat upside their heads.

 

[applecorped]

They are deliberately harming the country and their fellow citizens. I am in no way obligated to show them any respect outside of the fact that it is illegal to address them with a baseball bat upside their heads.

So, you have the urge to hit people in the head with baseball bats because of their beliefs and opinions? Hmmmmm...

 

[Thunder]

It's a natural reaction when a group of people are attacked by the same group over and over again.

This is the exact same excuse Hitler used against the Jews, and Neo-Nazis still use today.

 

[leftysergeant]

So, you have the urge to hit people in the head with baseball bats because of their beliefs and opinions? Hmmmmm...

No. Because they are enemies of civilization.

Nie wieder!

 

[leftysergeant]

...

Would you care to make a case that those little creeps make a positive contribution to the species?

 

[applecorped]

No. Because they are enemies of civilization.

Nie wieder!

You determine who is an enemy of civilization? Congrats! What are the hours?

Spülen wiederholen!

 

[Cobalt]

They are deliberately harming the country and their fellow citizens. I am in no way obligated to show them any respect outside of the fact that it is illegal to address them with a baseball bat upside their heads.

I find people like you harm the country far more than they ever could.

 

[leftysergeant]

I find people like you harm the country far more than they ever could.

I, at least, stop short of taking a baseball bat to ehir heads. Can you claim that the dirtbags who think that those two are decent humans stop short of violence?

(Don't kid yourself.)