Merged Two Mosques to be built near Ground Zero

[Region Rat]

Looks like the MAS already responded:



Source.

First:

1) I do not believe the building of the mosque at this location should be treated any differently than and religious structure in any other location.

2) I think the proposed gay bar is a silly and pointless gesture.

However,

I am not saying that the Muslim statement is insincere, but do you think that any statement by the Muslim representatives would say anything other than what they said, given the controversy surrounding the project? They would show very low intelligence to say that the gay bar is being intolerant of Muslim beliefs at this point in time.

It would be extremely funny if the place was filled with straight Muslim men who were not drinking alcohol, and the gay men stayed away. What would Gutfield do then?

 

[MikeMangum]

Curse those extremist bastards and their, uh, respect of the right to free association.

First:I am not saying that the Muslim statement is insincere, but do you think that any statement by the Muslim representatives would say anything other than what they said, given the controversy surrounding the project? They would show very low intelligence to say that the gay bar is being intolerant of Muslim beliefs at this point in time.

One thing that people appeared to miss was the part of the statement about how creating a gay bar close to ground zero showed that the claims of ground zero being 'sacred ground' were false.

It's a free country...if [Gutfield] wanted to do that it would suggest that the idea of this location being some kind of quote-unquote sacred space...is obviously not true."

Obviously, ground zero can't have some important cultural and historical importance to Americans if they are willing to allow a gay bar to be built close to it.

/sarcasm

Even given the context of the release of the statement (in which anything other than complete tolerance and respect for the freedoms of others would make them look hypocritical) they still didn't quite get it, did they?

 

[AvalonXQ]

One thing that people appeared to miss was the part of the statement about how creating a gay bar close to ground zero showed that the claims of ground zero being 'sacred ground' were false.

I agree with him. The number of bars and gentleman's clubs which are already closer to Ground Zero than this cultural center would be, repudiate the notion that it's some sort of hallowed site.
... and also supports the notion that opposition to the center is based on bigotry.

 

[TraneWreck]

I agree with him. The number of bars and gentleman's clubs which are already closer to Ground Zero than this cultural center would be, repudiate the notion that it's some sort of hallowed site.
... and also supports the notion that opposition to the center is based on bigotry.

That makes no sense. What is the connection between gay bars, gentlemen's clubs, and reverence for 9-11? So if someone likes watching naked women dance or consumes alcohol as a homosexual, they're incapable of understanding and appreciating what occured?

"Damnit, I really wish I could respect the sacrifice of first responders on 9-11, but I just love titties too much." It's an either/or thing?

If anything, the exact opposite is true. Bars and gay clubs are the perfect thing to put in an area destroyed by people who hate bars and gay clubs. Allowing homosexuals to enjoy themselves near ground zero shows that ignorant barbarism won't intimidate America out of enjoying a free society. It's an expression or reverence for human rights in an area devestated by people who oppose them.

On another note, here is a good rundown of all the lies, distortions, and generally douche-baggery that went into the coverage of this Mosque:

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/...2010&base_name=nyt_on_the_socalled_ground_zer

 

[Thunder]

Gay bars and sex shops do not offend the holyness of the Ground Zero site.

But moderate Islam mosques do.

fascinating standards there.

 

[A'isha]

I am not saying that the Muslim statement is insincere, but do you think that any statement by the Muslim representatives would say anything other than what they said, given the controversy surrounding the project? They would show very low intelligence to say that the gay bar is being intolerant of Muslim beliefs at this point in time.

Perhaps a clue to their true feelings on the matter can be found in the fact that the MAS isn't (and hasn't been) all that concerned about the three gay bars that already exist within a tenth of a mile of the proposed Cordoba House site.

 

[AvalonXQ]

That makes no sense. What is the connection between gay bars, gentlemen's clubs, and reverence for 9-11?

The exact same as the connection between a cultural center sponsored by a moderate Muslim group and reverance for 9/11: none!

Allowing homosexuals to enjoy themselves near ground zero shows that ignorant barbarism won't intimidate America out of enjoying a free society.

Yes, and allowing peaceful people to enjoy their religion shows the exact same thing.

It's only in the context of denouncing the community center that allowing/supporting any of these other buildings becomes ridiculous. People have called it "building on a graveyard." I could understand that sentiment if the outrage was generally against any non-memorial buildings being built nearby. But if all you're really saying is "everything is acceptable here except Muslims" -- that's bigotry, plain and simple.

 

[TraneWreck]

The exact same as the connection between a cultural center sponsored by a moderate Muslim group and reverance for 9/11: none!

Yes, and allowing peaceful people to enjoy their religion shows the exact same thing.

It's only in the context of denouncing the community center that allowing/supporting any of these other buildings becomes ridiculous. People have called it "building on a graveyard." I could understand that sentiment if the outrage was generally against any non-memorial buildings being built nearby. But if all you're really saying is "everything is acceptable here except Muslims" -- that's bigotry, plain and simple.

I misunderstood your post, then, apologies.

I still think it's possible to argue that Muslims should be specially denied privelages to build in the area because Muslims brought down the buildings (note: "possible" doesn't imply "correct" or "decent"). Doing so, of course, reveals blatant bigotry--identifying all Muslims with the 19 attackers, which is exactly like denying all Catholics jobs at schools because of the pedophile priests--so they try to disguise the bigotry behind vague principles. Doing so, as you've pointed out, makes them incoherent hypocrites.

That's why the debate quickly devolved into false stories about the Mosque's funding and trying to smear the leaders as jew-hating radicals. It was all distraction from the base, bigoted reaction to the Muslim community center.

 

[MikeMangum]

I agree with him. The number of bars and gentleman's clubs which are already closer to Ground Zero than this cultural center would be, repudiate the notion that it's some sort of hallowed site.
... and also supports the notion that opposition to the center is based on bigotry.

That just went right over your head didn't it? In a statement talking about tolerance and respect for other people's rights, this guy says that ground zero obviously isn't 'sacred ground' because we let those filthy homos close to it.

 

[MikeMangum]

The exact same as the connection between a cultural center sponsored by a moderate Muslim group and reverance for 9/11: none!

If the towers had been brought down by both Al Qaeda AND the 'Rainbow Warriors' (a hypothetical violent ideological group of extremist gays whose goal is to subjugate all "breeders"), then you would have a point. In that case, opening a massive "gay center" right next to ground zero would be tasteless - it would be well within their rights, but still tasteless.

The fact of the matter is that the towers weren't brought down by a group of violent gays using some specific gay ideology (if there is such a thing) as justification for doing so.

 

[Thunder]

I
That's why the debate quickly devolved into false stories about the Mosque's funding and trying to smear the leaders as jew-hating radicals. It was all distraction from the base, bigoted reaction to the Muslim community center.

u got it.

 

[A Lurker]

If the towers had been brought down by both Al Qaeda AND the 'Rainbow Warriors' (a hypothetical violent ideological group of extremist gays whose goal is to subjugate all "breeders"), then you would have a point. In that case, opening a massive "gay center" right next to ground zero would be tasteless - it would be well within their rights, but still tasteless.

The fact of the matter is that the towers weren't brought down by a group of violent gays using some specific gay ideology (if there is such a thing) as justification for doing so.

No, it was brought down by Al Qaeda alone, who want you to react like anti-Muslim bigots, so that America looks like an intolerant nation that no Muslims will ever feel it's worth living alongside or amongst you, because they'll all be tarred with the same hateful brush. In fact, the whole point of Terrorism, getting your enemy to react in fear and loathing and create a massively disproportionate response, especially a binary "Us or Them" response which drives support away from your side and towards the terrorists, just flies over your head, doesn't it...?

And do you know what is really disrespectful to the dead of 9/11? To every Muslim, Christian, Atheist and Jew, gay or straight who were living and working in New York City together, and killed en-masse for a cause none of them choose? It's using the place where they were killed to give Bin Laden exactly what he wanted when he tried to start a war of cultures with that atrocity.

And before you answer that point, just answer this one first; Are you honest enough to accept that it is an objective fact that there will not be two "Mosques", so there can't be any numerical triumphalism intended? And that the single "Mosque" is in fact a community centre which merely includes a place where Muslims can pray? And it won't have overt Islamic artwork outside, despite what you've been told? And it's not visible from Ground Zero, nor was it ever planned to be opened on September the 11th? They aren't even part of the same sect as Al Qaeda, nor did they find it impossible to make a public and tolerant statement about homosexuality like the lying, bigoted rabble rousers were hoping they couldn't ... just answer this; when everything you've been incensed by is a lie, just what will it take for you to open your eyes, and not willingly divide yourself from your fellow Americans, who simply happen to be of the Muslim faith? E pluribus unum remember? Or do you no longer believe in the United States?

 

[Thunder]

No, it was brought down by Al Qaeda alone, who want you to react like anti-Muslim bigots, so that America looks like an intolerant nation that no Muslims will ever feel it's worth living alongside or amongst you, because they'll all be tarred with the same hateful brush.

the haters of this Mosque want America to be at war with Islam and Muslims.

this is EXACTLY what the terrorists want.

if we prevent this and other mosques from being built in the USA, then Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups will have been vindicated, when that say that America is an enemy of Islam.

 

[RedRatSnake]

I don't feel that putting a mosque there will change the way people think about muslims at all, it is just going to fuel a fire that needs not be started right now, you can't shove something down peoples throats and expect them not to react no matter what the cause or purpose, i see trouble ahead if it happens

 

[Thunder]

I don't feel that putting a mosque there will change the way people think about muslims at all, it is just going to fuel a fire that needs not be started right now, you can't shove something down peoples throats and expect them not to react no matter what the cause or purpose, i see trouble ahead if it happens

i expect violence.

violence by those who hate freedom, liberty, and equality.

and no...I do not mean Al Qaeda.

 

[RedRatSnake]

I won't go as far as to say " violence by those who hate freedom, liberty, and equality " cause there are too many things that fit in between those words, bottom line is if you open the door to everything then everything will come in and that is a recipe for things to get out of hand, maybe it is time we as American citizens should be able to vote on if we want this or not.

 

[Thunder]

maybe it is time we as American citizens should be able to vote on if we want this or not.

"who here wants to end slavery??? who wants to give women the right to vote? who wants to let Jews live in New York?????"



by the way, this is New York City. the rest of the country needs to mind their damn business.

 

[RedRatSnake]

take it easy there were just talking here, ain't like we are going to solve any major issues on this forum

 

[Thunder]

the day American citizens get to vote on whether a religion gets to build a house of worship on private property that they legally own, is the day Democracy goes down the tubes.

 

[RedRatSnake]

Thats better thank you if they own it then sure they have a right to do what they want as long as it is legal, ain't going to stop folks from trying to block it, personally i can't support it cause it just don't seem like the right thing to do with the land.