• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Who is funding Park 51 "Ground-Zero Mosque?"

The Painter said:
He's part owner of a lot of things. Should we investigate Citibank? Disney?
Click to expand...

That's beside the point, even though Citibank is part of the octopus that has nearly strangled our ecconomy and Disney is contributing to the cheapening and dumbing-down of our creative community.

I own share in some Chinese companies, does that make me a commie?
Click to expand...

No. It means you are profiting from the destruction of our industrial base.
 
I care about this issue for a few reasons.

1. Freedom of religion, even minority religions is a general principle we all believe in. I am not going to retreat from that principle to make bigots feel better.

2. The radical islamic terrorist agencies are LOVING this debate as they can cast Americans as anti-Muslim. I do not think that is good startegically.

3. I think the cultural center being there would be an outreach from the muslim community. AS people see that no harm is done they might be more warm and fuzzy towards that faith.

4. I support Rauf and his moderate muslim message and would rather have him speaking to American muslims than some unknown imam in a smaller, less public mosque.
 
I totally endorse what Lurker has posted here.

I would add that to withdraw from the plan would be to grant a victory to groups more dangerous to our country than all the wild-eyed radicals of al Qaeda. To shrug and let the fundies and xenophobes win this one would be to surrender to an enemy that looks like us.

(Hardest enemy in the world to fight.)
 
Lurker said:
2. The radical islamic terrorist agencies are LOVING this debate as they can cast Americans as anti-Muslim. I do not think that is good startegically..
Click to expand...

I want to reiterate this one.

People ask, "What kind of message will it send if we allow it to be built?"

I ask, "What kind of message will it send if we PREVENT it from being built. I mean, aside from the obvious, "You were right! Those americans really are fascists pigs who hate muslims""
 
I said it before, and I'll say it again. Once this Mosque gets built, and lets women walk around with uncovered hair, has inter-faith events with Jews, Hindus, and Christians, and has a 9-11 memorial honoring the victims, Al-Qaeda is condemn this building as capitulation to "Infidels, Zionists, and Crusaders".
 
Honestly, I just don't have the amount of 'free time' necessary to discuss line by line, post by post, how superior/inferior your 'righteousness' (or delusions) is/are. So I'll leave it and you mostly as it is with just a few more thoughts.

Lefty, you need to get a dictionary and study it son. Those words that come after the main word? Those are part of what's called a 'definition'. Please try to grasp that concept.

Thaiboxerken, you guessed but two simple things and yet only got one right. I'm white. If it helps your understanding, which I doubt, I'm agnostic atheist if anything.

Dc1971, you're just being rude doing a drive-by whilst barely considering your own <gulp> thought. At least I respect the forum enough to be (and want to be) thoughtful in my posts/responses. And I'm beyond confident you have absolutely no idea what the term 'thought process' actually means.

Lurker, thank you for answering my question straight and thoughtfully. I just wanted to know, simply, why there's so much seeming 'venomous emotion' attached to this by 'proponents' who have literally no stake in its outcome and/or where it's real consequence (if any) isn't something we'll likely be thinking about 6 months from now anyway. While I do believe this is a case of 'political correctness' gone awry for many here, I do not believe that is the case for you.

Personally, I really don't care either way, build it, don't build it, I can't see it from my house in either case. And as much as any of you wish and hope otherwise, this issue isn't about 'religious freedom'. All the talk of such is a little confusing in that I'd bet many of you have no serious adherence to any religious doctrine.

Regardless, nobody's 'religious freedom' is being infringed upon nor taken away. This is simply a case of its 'suitability' (due to previous, ummm, circumstances) to that particular location. Sorry, the 'constitution' isn't being infringed upon no matter how you spin it. Put another way, this project getting built or not won't have anything to do with 'constitutional rights'. You'll see.
 
HarryHenderson said:
Personally, I really don't care either way, build it, don't build it, I can't see it from my house in either case. And as much as any of you wish and hope otherwise, this issue isn't about 'religious freedom'.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. And about whether or not a mob of sociuopaths is to be allowed to cleanse a community of fasiths they do not like. It is also about suppressing a movement that the white nationalists (no friends of religious belief, those turds) can use to recruit new members in anticipation of the RaHoWa.

All the talk of such is a little confusing in that I'd bet many of you have no serious adherence to any religious doctrine.
Click to expand...

Bull flops. I am not a member of any community of faith, but in most regards, especially in my view of the nature of God, am pretty well in accordance with the Baha'i Taith.

Regardless, nobody's 'religious freedom' is being infringed upon nor taken away. This is simply a case of its 'suitability' (due to previous, ummm, circumstances) to that particular location. Sorry, the 'constitution' isn't being infringed upon no matter how you spin it. Put another way, this project getting built or not won't have anything to do with 'constitutional rights'. You'll see.
Click to expand...

This is how it starts. If the turds protesting in front of the center drive the Muslims out of Manhattan, hoiw much easier is it to drive them out of any other city where they do not have significant numbers.

Then who is the next target of the ranting lunatics?

Best defense of religious liberty (including the right not to worship at all) is to show these shrieking monkeys that they do not matter to rational people other than as a nuisance.
 
Personally, I can't wait for Fox News to turn its sights on atheists when immigrants, Muslims, and gays no longer serve the purpose of whipping up the GOP base to head to the polls. With the population of the non-religious heading towards 20% in the near future, this should really play into "they're here, all around us, and they're taking over" kind of rightwing paranoia.

Maybe then some of the people posting here will understand the danger of this kind of demagoguery - you know, when it bites them in the ass.
 
Darat said:
So one of the owners of Fox are funding this development?
Click to expand...

Yup - linky

The irony is so thick you could cut it with a knife. The commentators on Fox News even mention the guy (not by name)!

Wow, truth is stranger than fiction :rolleyes:

ETA: Sorry, someone already posted the link.
 
Last edited:
HarryHenderson said:
Dc1971, you're just being rude doing a drive-by whilst barely considering your own <gulp> thought. At least I respect the forum enough to be (and want to be) thoughtful in my posts/responses. And I'm beyond confident you have absolutely no idea what the term 'thought process' actually means.
Click to expand...

Okay! Maybe you could enlighten me?
 
MattusMaximus said:
Personally, I can't wait for Fox News to turn its sights on atheists when immigrants, Muslims, and gays no longer serve the purpose of whipping up the GOP base to head to the polls. With the population of the non-religious heading towards 20% in the near future, this should really play into "they're here, all around us, and they're taking over" kind of rightwing paranoia.
Click to expand...

Haven't you heard OReilly and Hannity banging on about the "left-wing war on Christmas?" They play that song and dance every year from the first of Novemebr to the end of December. They're already out to get you, man.
 
Cicero said:
Yeah, if only we just had a socialist coalition government.
Click to expand...

I would be for such a situation democratically happening, as in a more Social Democrat based coalition Congress done by some form of proportional representation while maintaining the separation of presidential powers. However, I would be against mandating that those who work for the government or campaign for office must be socialist in bent. Let libertarian ideas compete in the market place of politics as I would prefer my horse to actually win a fair race by being (in my opinion) the better choice. Single party systems of any political bent run into issues that I find further from acceptable than our current situation.

I do agree with Safekeeper that I find the outcome of US politics to fall into a left/right dynamic to be annoying. I would prefer a much more nuanced approach in general.
 
Cicero said:
By your own rubric, the only person who hopes for a one-ultra liberal party state is.....you.
Click to expand...

Ooooh. So sorry. But we have a lovely version of the home game for you.

Feel free to point out where I call conservatives 'neocons'.

You just keep clinging to your dream of a one party state, after all, all you do is complain about the evil 'libs'.
 
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