Mosque at Ground Zero

[Satenza]

This so called "hallowed ground" that Palin keeps talking about also features a gentlemen's club.

 

Regardless, her argument doesn't even make sense.

[noble_aloof]

i wonder if we built churches 10 years after we bombed hiroshima

[Alg]

This so called "hallowed ground" that Palin keeps talking about also features a gentlemen's club.

That's different. We Americans may be racist and only slightly civilised, but the only thing that comes close to competing with our mighty flag for our country's love is a fine pair of breasts. God bless their magnificent form.

 

That joke took me a lot longer to come up with than I would admit to. And the fact that I made a boobs joke in a 9/11 based thread guarantees me a spot in whatever Hell(s) exist.

[Saru Inc]

[/thread]

 

This. Nothing else should matter.

 

 

 

And yet, other things do matter.

 

 

What I want to know is, would people complain if someone built a church over the grounds of where an abortion clinic was blown up. y/n

 

That being said, this is a very atheistic and liberal forum, so we already know the entire forum is going to agree with the mosque being built.

 

I don't want it built there.

 

 

 

i wonder if we built churches 10 years after we bombed hiroshima

 

What?

[Hamtaro]

I dislike the idea of "supporting" the building of it in the first place. I mean, what does that even mean? Do I think they should move? No. Do I think they should build it? Well, being as I don't really like religion at all, my opinion would be no lol. However, I would like it if less religious things were erected altogether, not just this. So really it's a stupid question. "Do you support them building it or don't you?" Frankly, I don't care. It's their property, they've made their choice, so that means that I do support their building it; and I'm not going to be terrorized with stupid right-wing ploys, lies, and racial/religious bigotry.

 

This is just so [bleep]ing stupid, and it pisses me off that it reaches the national scene because of some far-right fascist named Pam who is paged regularly by Murdoch and Roger Ailes for their next controversy and ginned up "scare white people" story. That wasn't political rhetoric, either; the woman who ginned this story up is literally a fascist who speaks at neo-Nazi rallies.

 

Hey, guys, unemployment is like 9.5% and it's the Republicans' fault; hey, guys, Pakistan is underwater, why isn't there as large of a response as there was to Haiti (which probably still hasn't gotten even 10% of the promised donations); hey, guys, Moscow is burning and people are literally being evacuated due to the smog. All of these issues, and we're talking about a god damned mosque in NY City.

 

It's nothing but bigotry towards the other.

 

They call Obama a Muslim -- and are quite suddenly lashing out at "his people" almost a decade after 9/11--- simply because they aren't allowed to call him what they want to call him. Sure, they don't think Muslims are American. They also don't think liberals are American, blacks are American, Mexicans are American, gays are American, atheists are American or anyone else who doesn't identify themselves explicitly with them are American. They are, you see, Real America. Everyone else is not.

 

If the right wing plays its cards right, the Democratic congress will end up passing a resolution declaring Obama a Muslim and outlawing mosques within a hundred miles of a military base, after which the Republicans will take to the airwaves protesting that the government wasted taxpayers money while desperate Americans are denied unemployment insurance.

No, actually. There's plenty of blame to go around for the economy. Both parties, the collapse of housing market, giving loans out to anyone, and Americans making bad decisions all led to the poor economy. Also, I bet you hate the Republicans that go around saying "lol ur a communist/socialist." You know how you laugh and call them stupid? I did the same thing when I read your "fascist/neo-nazi" bull[cabbage].

 

I'm a Moderate-Conservative and I support the community center being built (it's not a Mosque, but I would still support it regardless). I hate extremists like you regardless of which side of the spectrum it comes from. Contrary to what you may believe, uneducated, creationist rednecks and conceited, hippy douches suck equally. I'm not defending those that are bigots (I know they exist), but if you label us all as the same, you're no better than when they say all Muslims are terrorists. From my own experience, Muslims are the nicest group of people around (it's also nice when they don't shove "their is no god" or "ur goin 2 hell" [again both equally annoying] in your face).

 

By the way, since you apparently have never heard of Michigan, you shouldn't say anything about high unemployment (we would gladly take 9.5% over 14.5%). We got NO help at all from our Democratic state congress, nor our Democratic governor (who is, imo, the worst governor of all time). You know who the first to help us was? Bush. You know who helped after him? Obama (more than Bush, I will admit). You know who hurt us (as in Michigan/the Automotive Industry)? Hippies who only buy foreign cars because they get .01 better gas mileage and rednecks who buy foreign because they hate supporting our lethargic auto unions. I would go so far as to say that the automotive industry is the backbone of the United States economy, and by buying foreign, you may as well quit your job and cut out the middleman.

 

This is the part where you say "lol ur only 16 u just listen to ur parents and u cant vote" and where I tell you my parents are hardcore Republicans (whom I disagree with on all but maybe 3-4 issues). I think for myself. My opinions are what I believe, not what's "cool" or what your "super smart" college professor told you.

 

Tl;dr: Freedom of religion, politics is all BS, political parties mean nothing, people are allowed to their own opinions, and all politicians are idiots.

[Silvertaler]

It's true that muslims shouldn't be judged solely on the actions of fanatic terrorists 10 years ago, and therefore should be allowed to build whatever they are planning to build near Ground Zero. But still, people need to understand that not everyone thinks the same, some families may still be under the shock of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and they will take this construction as offensive no matter what you tell them. I believe they should be allowed to build that Mosque, but not yet. It's still too early for it, people need time to forget about the terrorist attacks and start accepting muslims more.

[magekillr]

And yet, other things do matter.

 

Bzzzt, wrong, they don't.

 

What I want to know is, would people complain if someone built a church over the grounds of where an abortion clinic was blown up.

 

Why not take another example of the NRA holding their convention in Denver, Colorado right after Columbine? And I do mean right after; Columbine occurred April 20th, 1999 and this meeting happened April 29th, 1999. That happened, and there was people throwing a [cabbage]-fit. Guess what? They were wrong, too, as Heston will tell you:

 

Tragedy has been and always will be with us. Somewhere right now evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists, to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us. America must stop this predictable pattern of reaction. When an isolated, terrible event occurs, our phones ring, demanding that the NRA explain the inexplicable. Why us? Because the story needs a villain. That is not our role in American society and we will not be forced to play it. If you disagree that's your right, I respect that. But we will not relinquish it, or be silenced about it, or be told do not come here, you are unwelcome in your own land.

 

However, unlike the mosque, it wasn't masked in xenophobia and racism.

 

I don't want it built there.

 

Calling this a mosque is like calling a casino in Las Vegas a cathedral because it has a wedding chapel. What about the mosque that's already closer? Should they leave? It was there before the WTC was even built.

[fakeitormakeit2]

[/thread]

 

This. Nothing else should matter.

 

 

 

And yet, other things do matter.

 

 

What I want to know is, would people complain if someone built a church over the grounds of where an abortion clinic was blown up. y/n

 

That being said, this is a very atheistic and liberal forum, so we already know the entire forum is going to agree with the mosque being built.

I don't want it built there.

 

 

 

i wonder if we built churches 10 years after we bombed hiroshima

 

What?

I'm a religious Maronite and a conservative and I'd rather see it built then not. Labeling by such stupidities as liberal/conservative and atheist/religious and then stereotyping based upon those labels is exactly why the American government is so polarized and such situations breed bigotry, contempt for the unknown and xenophobia.

[magekillr]

No, actually. There's plenty of blame to go around for the economy. Both parties, the collapse of housing market, giving loans out to anyone, and Americans making bad decisions all led to the poor economy. Also, I bet you hate the Republicans that go around saying "lol ur a communist/socialist." You know how you laugh and call them stupid? I did the same thing when I read your "fascist/neo-nazi" bull[cabbage].

 

Americans certainly did make bad decisions, and that started with the election of Ronald Reagan and his era of deregulation. I don't mistake the poor choices made by some Democrats, such as Bill Clinton and his band of Rubinites and their Third Way economic Wall Street coddling with the repeal of Glass-Steagall (although had it been in place there still would have been a crisis, as it would not have prevented Bear Stearns or Lehman from collapsing), but do not try and get away from accepting the blame with a faux-attempt at sounding reasonable by passing the blame along. Moreover, it has been the Republicans actively preventing the government from working properly in order to root for economic failure. Why would they do this? Well, because they're [wagon], but more to the point it's because most elections hinge on the economy. If it's doing good, the president has good approval; if it's bad, the president has bad approval. They know this, and they know that by preventing more stimulus from flowing--just as most economists are calling for, including some libertarian ones--that unemployment will remain high.

 

About the fascism, I was referring to Pamela Geller who started this non-story. I told you, it's not political rhetoric. It is LITERALLY what she is:

 

Pamela Geller of “Atlas Shrugs” and Paul Belien of “Brussels Journal” have been announced as speakers at a German far right event organized by a group called “Pro Köln” — a successor to the notorious fascist group “Deutsche Liga für Volk und Heimat” (the “German League for People and Homeland”).

 

The “Pro Köln” group is under observation by the German inland secret service.

 

According to the website pi-news.net, Robert Spencer has also been invited: Translated version of “Israel Friends in the anti-Islamisierungskongress”.

 

One of the main organizers of “Pro Köln” is Manfred Rouhs. Here are two photos of Rous with hardcore neo-Nazi activist Axel Reitz, who the local media call “the Hitler of Cologne.”

 

 

And here’s a really charming photo of Axel Reitz in full Hitler regalia (at center):

 

 

Source (hint, it's little green footballs, the same blog founded by Charles Johnson (who is a conservative, btw).

 

There's other examples of this, too, when she said that there is a genocide of white South Africans going on.

 

See, the right's attempt to find an equivalent to their extremists on the left is always hallow because there simply isn't one. Sorry, sparky.

 

I'm a Moderate-Conservative and I support the community center being built (it's not a Mosque, but I would still support it regardless). I hate extremists like you regardless of which side of the spectrum it comes from.

 

When one side promotes peace and the other promotes genocide, being moderate isn't a virtue. That's the problem that I have with "moderates". They think that being moderate automatically means that they're juuuust right. I'm partisan, but I'm a partisan liberal, not partisan for a party. The Democrats are full of the worst example of what you described as being "moderate" by calling themselves the Blue Dogs. They're nothing but wannabe Republicans and corporate shills. As a matter of fact, 80-90% of the Democrats who will lose this fall are Blue Dogs, and I'm not going to cry when they do; I might even celebrate. At least then I know we can stop negotiating within the party and might force the GOP along rather than pretending they're good-faith negotiators.

 

Unlike the tea party, I don't mind negotiating a bill because that's what politics is. If you made me dictator I would of course enforce what I want full-stop, but that's not how things work. So if I can't have single-payer health care, arguably the best way to give health care to the citizens of a country in both cost and care, then I will accept something weaker such as a very weak public option. I didn't even get that, or anything close to that, though. What I was forced to accept was a health care bill that looks exactly like the Republican plan of 1994 written by the Heritage Foundation. And now THAT, a bill written by the freaking Heritage Foundation, is called a far-leftist plot and is disowned by...the Heritage Foundation. Why? Because they're hacks, that's why.

 

Contrary to what you may believe, uneducated, creationist rednecks and conceited, hippy douches suck equally.

 

I don't agree with the DFH on every issue; in fact they're horribly wrong on some economic issues and I know this because I am educated in the field (their ignorance of the Federal Reserve particularly sticks out in my mind). However, if I ever don't know anything about an issue, it's safe to assume that the DFH are right and others are wrong. They have been consistently right about nearly everything in this country since the Progressive Era starting with Teddy Roosevelt. Sorry if you think that means they're conceited, but typically you grow an ego after 100 years of being right on 75-80% of the issues.

 

I'm not defending those that are bigots (I know they exist), but if you label us all as the same, you're no better than when they say all Muslims are terrorists. From my own experience, Muslims are the nicest group of people around (it's also nice when they don't shove "their is no god" or "ur goin 2 hell" [again both equally annoying] in your face).

 

I didn't label you as the same, did I? I specifically called out Pamela, and you took that to mean a label on yourself and your tribe. I think that's a little telling, don't you think?

 

Moreover, sorry, but I can respect my differences with conservatives, but I cannot respect anyone who is a Republican in the present era. Not one. Here's Bruce Bartlett, economic advisor to Ronald Reagan, telling the story:

 

On the question of where I place myself on the political spectrum, I will have more to say as time goes on. In my own mind, I have the same political philosophy I've always had--basically libertarian but tempered by Burkean small-C conservatism. But I am no longer a member of the Republican Party and no longer consider myself part of the "conservative movement." That's not because I changed, but because I believe that they have. The Republican Party of today is not the party of Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan that I was once a member of; it stands for nothing except the pursuit of power as an end in itself, with no concern whatsoever for what is right for the country. In a recent interview with The Economist magazine, I characterized the Republicans as the greedy, sociopathic party. I stand by that.

 

Source.

 

By the way, since you apparently have never heard of Michigan, you shouldn't say anything about high unemployment (we would gladly take 9.5% over 14.5%). We got NO help at all from our Democratic state congress, nor our Democratic governor (who is, imo, the worst governor of all time).

 

It's kind of hard to lend a hand when your Constitution demands a balanced budget ;). This is why it's the job of the federal government to intervene. I mean, if stupid conservatives hadn't demanded that we have balanced budget amendments, this wouldn't be a problem. However, I guess Obama should have just allowed GM to fall just as the Republicans demanded rather than be a socialist commie and rescue it; I'm sure your unemployment would be much better.

 

You know who the first to help us was? Bush. You know who helped after him? Obama (more than Bush, I will admit).

 

Ah, so nice to hear credit where credit is due.

 

You know who hurt us (as in Michigan/the Automotive Industry)? Hippies who only buy foreign cars because they get .01 better gas mileage and rednecks who buy foreign because they hate supporting our lethargic auto unions.

 

I'm sorry that you like to place the blame on people who buy better made cars that are environmentally friendly without breaking down after the first 10,000 miles, rather than the corporations who seek to fulfill a need (as in the "rednecks" who buy the big cars and trucks). They just respond to the market. The people of America like bigger, so that's what happened. They have demand, they fulfill it with supply. If Americans were like the hippies, the corporations would seek to fulfill that demand and only make smaller, more environmentally friendly cars.

 

I would go so far as to say that the automotive industry is the backbone of the United States economy, and by buying foreign, you may as well quit your job and cut out the middleman.

 

And now you've found out where I disagree with the left on economic issues. Protectionism is stupid and hurts everyone. Ah, the beauty of a free market. This is nationalistic jingoism, and I don't particularly care about Americans more than other people. This is what happens in the globalization process, and it's why people like Michael Moore are opposed to globalization. American jobs, American ingenuity, American exceptionalism. This will be more balanced when China and India have their own progressive revolution, so to speak. It was the unions who fought back for workplace safety, weekends, sane hours, and a decent wage; so when they have that realization and end the child and slave labor for [cabbage] wages, it will even out. It's just the way of the world.

 

Tl;dr: Freedom of religion, politics is all BS, political parties mean nothing, people are allowed to their own opinions, and all politicians are idiots.

 

This I can agree with. Pols are pols and they do what they do.

[Alg]

It doesn't even take atheism/liberalism to agree with it. It's an abandoned suit store being turned into a community center, if they called it that instead of a mosque the only people who wouldn't want it are... I'm not sure. The people who wanted to buy it to turn it into something else? Some homeless guy that moved in? A masked superhero whose parents were killed by the youth that frequent community centers and who swore revenge against them?

People love community centers, they're supposed to be the thing that keeps kids off the streets and all that. Even if you call it a Muslim community center, it means that it's aimed at kids in that community.

 

Better that than an abandoned building, yes?

[magekillr]

I'm a religious Maronite and a conservative and I'd rather see it built then not. Labeling by such stupidities as liberal/conservative and atheist/religious and then stereotyping based upon those labels is exactly why the American government is so polarized and such situations breed bigotry, contempt for the unknown and xenophobia.

 

And this is where the downfall of the GOP is imminent. It might not happen in 2010; it might not happen in 2012; but it will happen if they keep it up. Non-whites should not be considered automatic Democrats. Muslims and Latinos come from religious traditions that align nicely with many of the socially conservative values that Republicans espouse. Indians and Koreans are famous for their entrepreneurial initiative, and share all the concerns that white small business owners have about governmental red-tape. But none of these groups can consider themselves welcome in Red America.

 

And, since most Republicans can't tell Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs apart, almost no one of color can avoid the sensation that Republicans are "going after" them.

 

This creates a self-fulfilling problem for the Republicans. Their racism is driving away some of the immigrants that might vote with them on economic issues, which accelerates the blueing of America, which makes some forms of socialism more likely to take root here in the United States.

 

To go over this once more for clarity, the Republicans fear that people of color don't share their values on both religious and economic issues, so they are panicking at the browning of America. But many people of color actually do share many of their values on both cultural and economic matters, and they're being to driven to vote against the Republicans anyway. The more non-whites are inclined to vote with the Democrats, the more non-white immigration can be seen as a kind of Democratic voter-drive. And the more that conservatives see immigration as a straight-up threat to their political prospects, the more they alienate new immigrants with their toxic rhetoric.

[SeanyTheSailor]

Why build any kind of place of worship, in any form on it? My feelings about it are much stronger than this but would only lead to much argument and not resolve anything. It's been 9 years since the towers fell and all we have is a crater. We should be quite pissed at the government for their failure to erect a proper monument already. I personally think a community center wouldn't even be a good idea to put there, i think something more fitting to what happened there should be built. As I understand it they originally wanted to call it the Cordoba House. Cordoba was a(possibly the first?) city conquered by Moorish invaders of Spain. Call it coincidence if you like but i don't believe in coincidences like that. People say some Muslims just want to show the peaceful, true part of their religion, Why don't they help/ build their own memorial? I don't think it will ever be built because I don't think any construction company would risk it. And if it is, good luck to them i say because they are going to have a lot of angry New Yorkers on their hands.

 

Also looking back, this may have been brought to the attention of the public by a bigot, but that doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

 

Also magekillr, I have an Idea, why don't you lump all Republicans together and call us racists? I mean of course I spend all day thinking about how I can get my representative to pass legislature to harm the minorities of America. You know i don't think you talk to many Republicans, because the ones I talk to on the subject of immigration, they/ we don't care how many people come into America, or what color they are. Just do it legally, that's all we ask.

 

i don't even know why I post in OT anymore, it's all [cabbage].

[Spiffeh]

I personally think a community center wouldn't even be a good idea to put there, i think something more fitting to what happened there should be built.

 

It's two blocks away.

 

As I understand it they originally wanted to call it the Cordoba House. Cordoba was a(possibly the first?) city conquered by Moorish invaders of Spain. Call it coincidence if you like but i don't believe in coincidences like that.

Imam Rauf, the guy who's building this community center, actually worked during the Bush administration, going to the middle east and speaking out against anti-american sentiment. He's seen as a very moderate muslim. Do you think he has some master plan to conquer the United States or something? also this is just a talking point made up by Newt Gingrich

[Hamtaro]

[spoiler=Long Quote]

No, actually. There's plenty of blame to go around for the economy. Both parties, the collapse of housing market, giving loans out to anyone, and Americans making bad decisions all led to the poor economy. Also, I bet you hate the Republicans that go around saying "lol ur a communist/socialist." You know how you laugh and call them stupid? I did the same thing when I read your "fascist/neo-nazi" bull[cabbage].

 

Americans certainly did make bad decisions, and that started with the election of Ronald Reagan and his era of deregulation. I don't mistake the poor choices made by some Democrats, such as Bill Clinton and his band of Rubinites and their Third Way economic Wall Street coddling with the repeal of Glass-Steagall (although had it been in place there still would have been a crisis, as it would not have prevented Bear Stearns or Lehman from collapsing), but do not try and get away from accepting the blame with a faux-attempt at sounding reasonable by passing the blame along. Moreover, it has been the Republicans actively preventing the government from working properly in order to root for economic failure. Why would they do this? Well, because they're [wagon], but more to the point it's because most elections hinge on the economy. If it's doing good, the president has good approval; if it's bad, the president has bad approval. They know this, and they know that by preventing more stimulus from flowing--just as most economists are calling for, including some libertarian ones--that unemployment will remain high.

 

About the fascism, I was referring to Pamela Geller who started this non-story. I told you, it's not political rhetoric. It is LITERALLY what she is:

 

Pamela Geller of “Atlas Shrugs” and Paul Belien of “Brussels Journal” have been announced as speakers at a German far right event organized by a group called “Pro Köln” — a successor to the notorious fascist group “Deutsche Liga für Volk und Heimat” (the “German League for People and Homeland”).

 

The “Pro Köln” group is under observation by the German inland secret service.

 

According to the website pi-news.net, Robert Spencer has also been invited: Translated version of “Israel Friends in the anti-Islamisierungskongress”.

 

One of the main organizers of “Pro Köln” is Manfred Rouhs. Here are two photos of Rous with hardcore neo-Nazi activist Axel Reitz, who the local media call “the Hitler of Cologne.”

 

 

And here’s a really charming photo of Axel Reitz in full Hitler regalia (at center):

 

 

Source (hint, it's little green footballs, the same blog founded by Charles Johnson (who is a conservative, btw).

 

There's other examples of this, too, when she said that there is a genocide of white South Africans going on.

 

See, the right's attempt to find an equivalent to their extremists on the left is always hallow because there simply isn't one. Sorry, sparky.

 

I'm a Moderate-Conservative and I support the community center being built (it's not a Mosque, but I would still support it regardless). I hate extremists like you regardless of which side of the spectrum it comes from.

 

When one side promotes peace and the other promotes genocide, being moderate isn't a virtue. That's the problem that I have with "moderates". They think that being moderate automatically means that they're juuuust right. I'm partisan, but I'm a partisan liberal, not partisan for a party. The Democrats are full of the worst example of what you described as being "moderate" by calling themselves the Blue Dogs. They're nothing but wannabe Republicans and corporate shills. As a matter of fact, 80-90% of the Democrats who will lose this fall are Blue Dogs, and I'm not going to cry when they do; I might even celebrate. At least then I know we can stop negotiating within the party and might force the GOP along rather than pretending they're good-faith negotiators.

 

Unlike the tea party, I don't mind negotiating a bill because that's what politics is. If you made me dictator I would of course enforce what I want full-stop, but that's not how things work. So if I can't have single-payer health care, arguably the best way to give health care to the citizens of a country in both cost and care, then I will accept something weaker such as a very weak public option. I didn't even get that, or anything close to that, though. What I was forced to accept was a health care bill that looks exactly like the Republican plan of 1994 written by the Heritage Foundation. And now THAT, a bill written by the freaking Heritage Foundation, is called a far-leftist plot and is disowned by...the Heritage Foundation. Why? Because they're hacks, that's why.

 

Contrary to what you may believe, uneducated, creationist rednecks and conceited, hippy douches suck equally.

 

I don't agree with the DFH on every issue; in fact they're horribly wrong on some economic issues and I know this because I am educated in the field (their ignorance of the Federal Reserve particularly sticks out in my mind). However, if I ever don't know anything about an issue, it's safe to assume that the DFH are right and others are wrong. They have been consistently right about nearly everything in this country since the Progressive Era starting with Teddy Roosevelt. Sorry if you think that means they're conceited, but typically you grow an ego after 100 years of being right on 75-80% of the issues.

 

I'm not defending those that are bigots (I know they exist), but if you label us all as the same, you're no better than when they say all Muslims are terrorists. From my own experience, Muslims are the nicest group of people around (it's also nice when they don't shove "their is no god" or "ur goin 2 hell" [again both equally annoying] in your face).

 

I didn't label you as the same, did I? I specifically called out Pamela, and you took that to mean a label on yourself and your tribe. I think that's a little telling, don't you think?

 

Moreover, sorry, but I can respect my differences with conservatives, but I cannot respect anyone who is a Republican in the present era. Not one. Here's Bruce Bartlett, economic advisor to Ronald Reagan, telling the story:

 

On the question of where I place myself on the political spectrum, I will have more to say as time goes on. In my own mind, I have the same political philosophy I've always had--basically libertarian but tempered by Burkean small-C conservatism. But I am no longer a member of the Republican Party and no longer consider myself part of the "conservative movement." That's not because I changed, but because I believe that they have. The Republican Party of today is not the party of Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan that I was once a member of; it stands for nothing except the pursuit of power as an end in itself, with no concern whatsoever for what is right for the country. In a recent interview with The Economist magazine, I characterized the Republicans as the greedy, sociopathic party. I stand by that.

 

Source.

 

By the way, since you apparently have never heard of Michigan, you shouldn't say anything about high unemployment (we would gladly take 9.5% over 14.5%). We got NO help at all from our Democratic state congress, nor our Democratic governor (who is, imo, the worst governor of all time).

 

It's kind of hard to lend a hand when your Constitution demands a balanced budget ;). This is why it's the job of the federal government to intervene. I mean, if stupid conservatives hadn't demanded that we have balanced budget amendments, this wouldn't be a problem. However, I guess Obama should have just allowed GM to fall just as the Republicans demanded rather than be a socialist commie and rescue it; I'm sure your unemployment would be much better.

 

You know who the first to help us was? Bush. You know who helped after him? Obama (more than Bush, I will admit).

 

Ah, so nice to hear credit where credit is due.

 

You know who hurt us (as in Michigan/the Automotive Industry)? Hippies who only buy foreign cars because they get .01 better gas mileage and rednecks who buy foreign because they hate supporting our lethargic auto unions.

 

I'm sorry that you like to place the blame on people who buy better made cars that are environmentally friendly without breaking down after the first 10,000 miles, rather than the corporations who seek to fulfill a need (as in the "rednecks" who buy the big cars and trucks). They just respond to the market. The people of America like bigger, so that's what happened. They have demand, they fulfill it with supply. If Americans were like the hippies, the corporations would seek to fulfill that demand and only make smaller, more environmentally friendly cars.

 

I would go so far as to say that the automotive industry is the backbone of the United States economy, and by buying foreign, you may as well quit your job and cut out the middleman.

 

And now you've found out where I disagree with the left on economic issues. Protectionism is stupid and hurts everyone. Ah, the beauty of a free market. This is nationalistic jingoism, and I don't particularly care about Americans more than other people. This is what happens in the globalization process, and it's why people like Michael Moore are opposed to globalization. American jobs, American ingenuity, American exceptionalism. This will be more balanced when China and India have their own progressive revolution, so to speak. It was the unions who fought back for workplace safety, weekends, sane hours, and a decent wage; so when they have that realization and end the child and slave labor for [cabbage] wages, it will even out. It's just the way of the world.

 

Tl;dr: Freedom of religion, politics is all BS, political parties mean nothing, people are allowed to their own opinions, and all politicians are idiots.

 

This I can agree with. Pols are pols and they do what they do.

 

You raise many good points and I can agree with you for the most part about what you said. However, there are several things I would like to add.

 

Bush warned the "Big 3" (Ford, GM, Chrysler) to stop being so arrogant back in 2001. Ford listened, GM and Chrysler did not. Seven years later, Bush sent some temporary assistance to GM and Chrysler, and later Obama followed suite. Ford came out on top because they listened. They made the necessary cuts, lay-offs, etc, before Gm going under was even a reasonable thought. Ford's Fiesta, Fusion, and Focus all beat any foreign car by a long shot. You get great gas mileage along with amazing quality and safety, where as with Toyota, you get a piece of [cabbage], deathtrap to drive with good gas mileage. Plus, the Fusion and Fiesta aren't even made by unions! Everyone wins!

 

Having a (D) or (R ) next to one's name on a ballot means.... literally nothing! (D) stands for Distortion and (R ) stands for Revilement, but both simply mean lying. You get the same BS packaged in different suites. I hate people who identify themselves with a party (I know you said you didn't). Tea party "activists" and DFH are equally ignorant and clueless.

 

Also, by extremists, I'm not referring to genocide or anything along those lines (what does that have to do with this...?), but rather political extremists:

The FAR left: Olbermann, Pelosi, H. Clinton, Richard Dawkins, CNN/MSNBC, hippies, California, attention-seeking pseudo gays (only the fake ones)

The FAR right: Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, O'Reily, Fox News, creationists, KKK/skin-heads, Texas, tea-party "activists"

All of whom are the most clueless, elitist (so they believe), out of touch entities in existence. I hate each and every one of those I mentioned (not as people necessarily, but rather what they believe/support).

 

I liked Bush to begin with, but that went downhill. I hated Obama to begin with, but he's done a decent job so far (probably better than McCain/Palin). Only thing he's done that I really disagree with is the health care bill, but that's a different story. At least we're finally out of Iraq (I recall him saying within 6 months, and it's been 20). The point I'm trying to convey is that Republicans and Democrats are the same. I don't choose what I believe in based on what most conservatives support, but rather what I think is right or wrong. For instance, I believe abortion is the most disgusting thing in existence, but at the same time I support same-sex marriage. I believe in God, yet I understand the science behind evolution (which don't contradict each other by Catholic teachings). What I CAN'T stand is when someone bases their political opinions based on what they're "supposed to" believe in or the people who vote straight Republican (like my parents) or straight Democrat on their ballots. I know I don't consider myself a Republican (I hate the idea of political parties), but I do like reasonable Conservatives and Liberals.

 

To stay on topic, the community center is a way for kids to get off the streets just like the Young Men's Christian Association (hmm, no one seems to have a problem with that). I guarantee if they put up a Y in the same place, no one would even be talking about this. Just more rhetoric, I suppose. Nothing new.

[Saru Inc]

And yet, other things do matter.

 

Bzzzt, wrong, they don't.

 

What I want to know is, would people complain if someone built a church over the grounds of where an abortion clinic was blown up.

 

Why not take another example of the NRA holding their convention in Denver, Colorado right after Columbine? And I do mean right after; Columbine occurred April 20th, 1999 and this meeting happened April 29th, 1999. That happened, and there was people throwing a [cabbage]-fit. Guess what? They were wrong, too, as Heston will tell you:

 

Tragedy has been and always will be with us. Somewhere right now evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists, to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us. America must stop this predictable pattern of reaction. When an isolated, terrible event occurs, our phones ring, demanding that the NRA explain the inexplicable. Why us? Because the story needs a villain. That is not our role in American society and we will not be forced to play it. If you disagree that's your right, I respect that. But we will not relinquish it, or be silenced about it, or be told do not come here, you are unwelcome in your own land.

 

However, unlike the mosque, it wasn't masked in xenophobia and racism.

 

I don't want it built there.

 

Calling this a mosque is like calling a casino in Las Vegas a cathedral because it has a wedding chapel. What about the mosque that's already closer? Should they leave? It was there before the WTC was even built.

 

 

Oh good grief, do you honestly say this [cabbage] to bug people.

 

1) You missed my point, point being that I understand its the first amendment that only matters, but the majority of people aren't going to care.

 

2) Stop bringing up racism is every post you make, I never mentioned any race at all.

2.5) I am perfectly aware of the NRA meeting, I know quite a hefty bit about columbine.

2.75) What I was saying about the Church/abortion is it's not a matter of religious freedom/freedom of speech. The problem here is not that they are muslim, nor as it even the building that was destroyed. The point I was "arguing," was that 9/11 was the first time in a while where the American people stepped up as one to help each other out. And let's just face it, the people who bombed were Islamic extremists. They were Muslim. So I simply see it as a sign of disrespect. Am I saying all the Muslims there are terrorists/extremists? Of course not, nor am I implying that they are in any way involved with 9/11. Also, (this is 3) as well) I know all about the situation, (in fact I was gonna post this topic on Monday if no one had posted it yet) and I'm perfectly aware that it is a community center, with a mosque. Should there technically be allowed to build there due to free speech etc? Yes. But would anyone complain if a church tried to build over the site of an abortion center Christians blew up; and were denied permission? YES! The "fundamentalist" Christians would complain. And surprise, I'd bet my salary (though I know you won't admit it) you wouldn't care at all. Thats life, they can build somewhere else. What if there was a Muslim on the city board? Racist? No, ofc not... Muslims can't be racist... right?

 

 

Again, I do not want it built there. However, if I were to vote, I would vote for it, because the constitution stands whether or not I agree with this certain scenario. I'm merely posting my opinion, and while I rarely ever accuse anyone of trolling, I'm starting to think this whole racist spiel is trolling. Since whenever anyone disagrees with any "racial" policies you have, you label them a xenophobic racist. And that's obnoxious.

 

 

@ Fakeit2makeit

 

I'm quite aware you're a Maronite *it's in your sig ;)* and I'm also aware you're a conservative, as you make it evident in every post you make. (Nothing wrong with that, simply stating.)

 

And no, not everyone here is a liberal, or atheist. I never said that, I said this is a liberal and atheistic forum. That means the majority is. Just like if there was a white/black/spanish/just not arab person living in an arab community, it would be known as arab, despite people in there who are not Arab. While I did say "the entire forum" I meant the vast majority, which is what most people mean when they speak of vast audiences. (The entire state of california voted for Obama. Does that mean every single person did? Nope, but the numbers that didn't are just too small to count.) The rest of the post just doesn't matter, since I don't work for the government. Nor do I assume every "colored" person is liberal, not sure why I would.

[Spiffeh]

But would anyone complain if a church tried to build over the site of an abortion center Christians blew up

2 blocks away.

 

 

 

There are over 1.5 billion muslims in the world, there were 19 hijackers.

People who are building this community center have absolutely nothing to do with terrorists, and have every right to build it where ever they want.

[Satenza]

What I was saying about the Church/abortion is it's not a matter of religious freedom/freedom of speech. The problem here is not that they are muslim, nor as it even the building that was destroyed. The point I was "arguing," was that 9/11 was the first time in a while where the American people stepped up as one to help each other out. And let's just face it, the people who bombed were Islamic extremists. They were Muslim. So I simply see it as a sign of disrespect. Am I saying all the Muslims there are terrorists/extremists? Of course not, nor am I implying that they are in any way involved with 9/11. Also, (this is 3) as well) I know all about the situation, (in fact I was gonna post this topic on Monday if no one had posted it yet) and I'm perfectly aware that it is a community center, with a mosque. Should there technically be allowed to build there due to free speech etc? Yes. But would anyone complain if a church tried to build over the site of an abortion center Christians blew up; and were denied permission? YES! The "fundamentalist" Christians would complain. And surprise, I'd bet my salary (though I know you won't admit it) you wouldn't care at all. Thats life, they can build somewhere else. What if there was a Muslim on the city board? Racist? No, ofc not... Muslims can't be racist... right?

 

You begin by arguing that the point isn't that the 9/11 terrorists are Muslim, yet your whole argument relies upon the fact that they were.

 

Your other point, I'm not sure how it is connected, was that 9/11 showed a time when New Yorkers joined together to overcome the attack. What has this got to do with the discussion? Im sure many of the people who joined together to overcome the disaster were also Muslim.

 

What you say might make sense if you believed that Islam was the undoubted perpetrator of the attacks, but this is silly, as you'd probably admit. Unless it is Islam and not the 10 men that committed the destruction of the towers then you have no reason to suggest that it is a religion to blame and not the criminals. All you do is insult the religion and reduce the blame that should rightly fall on the men.

[Low C]

I think its insensitive there is plenty of real estate why not build it somewhere else? I'm not going to compare this to something else because in all reality if the majority of american's dislike the idea then 9 years hasn't been enough time for 9/11 to be out of peoples minds.

[Spiffeh]

I think its insensitive there is plenty of real estate why not build it somewhere else? I'm not going to compare this to something else because in all reality if the majority of american's dislike the idea then 9 years hasn't been enough time for 9/11 to be out of peoples minds.

But these people have done nothing wrong. They arent responsible for the actions of 19 people who happen to be the same religion as them.

[Zilla]

I think its insensitive there is plenty of real estate why not build it somewhere else? I'm not going to compare this to something else because in all reality if the majority of american's dislike the idea then 9 years hasn't been enough time for 9/11 to be out of peoples minds.

But these people have done nothing wrong. They arent responsible for the actions of 19 people who happen to be the same religion as them.

 

Exactly, it bothers me when people such as my neighbor's believe that all Muslim's are the enemy when a few extremist attack. I asked my Mother, "Because of the Westboro Baptist Church, does that mean all Christian's are Homophobes that protest at every military funeral they can?" She then proceeded to say I'm wrong and brought up a slightly racist comment involving Middle Eastern people. :wall: Sadly it seems a lot of people have an Ideology like that.

[Giordano]

Europeans are building suburbs on the battlefields of WW1 and WW2. THAT IS AN OUTRAGE AND WE MUST STOP THE HEATHENS!

[Nadril]

I think its insensitive there is plenty of real estate why not build it somewhere else? I'm not going to compare this to something else because in all reality if the majority of american's dislike the idea then 9 years hasn't been enough time for 9/11 to be out of peoples minds.

 

Why is everyone trying to say "oh it's insensitive"? I mean, you realize that there were plenty of muslims who were in the world trade center when the attacks happened, right? This isn't like the Islam religion all of the sudden decided to wage an all out war on the US and then build its churches in the smoldering ruins; yet so many of you seem to act like it is that way.

 

 

They are building a community center two blocks away. There is already a "mosque" closer to ground zero. There is a strip club (ahem *gentleman's club*) near by to ground zero. The blocks around it are not hollowed ground nor should anyone make them out to be.

 

 

 

Again I really think people are just using all this as an excuse for simply not wanting something Muslim built.

[Saru Inc]

What I was saying about the Church/abortion is it's not a matter of religious freedom/freedom of speech. The problem here is not that they are muslim, nor as it even the building that was destroyed. The point I was "arguing," was that 9/11 was the first time in a while where the American people stepped up as one to help each other out. And let's just face it, the people who bombed were Islamic extremists. They were Muslim. So I simply see it as a sign of disrespect. Am I saying all the Muslims there are terrorists/extremists? Of course not, nor am I implying that they are in any way involved with 9/11. Also, (this is 3) as well) I know all about the situation, (in fact I was gonna post this topic on Monday if no one had posted it yet) and I'm perfectly aware that it is a community center, with a mosque. Should there technically be allowed to build there due to free speech etc? Yes. But would anyone complain if a church tried to build over the site of an abortion center Christians blew up; and were denied permission? YES! The "fundamentalist" Christians would complain. And surprise, I'd bet my salary (though I know you won't admit it) you wouldn't care at all. Thats life, they can build somewhere else. What if there was a Muslim on the city board? Racist? No, ofc not... Muslims can't be racist... right?

 

You begin by arguing that the point isn't that the 9/11 terrorists are Muslim, yet your whole argument relies upon the fact that they were.

 

Your other point, I'm not sure how it is connected, was that 9/11 showed a time when New Yorkers joined together to overcome the attack. What has this got to do with the discussion? Im sure many of the people who joined together to overcome the disaster were also Muslim.

 

What you say might make sense if you believed that Islam was the undoubted perpetrator of the attacks, but this is silly, as you'd probably admit. Unless it is Islam and not the 10 men that committed the destruction of the towers then you have no reason to suggest that it is a religion to blame and not the criminals. All you do is insult the religion and reduce the blame that should rightly fall on the men.

 

 

Yeah I see why thats confusing. What I meant was ehh... I'll use an example.

 

 

Sect of religion destroys a monument (which is what those two buildings effectively were), now different part of religion wants to build something there. This scenario, which I tried to supplement with the Christian part, is not the fact that they are specifically Islam. It's the fact that it's deemed disrespectful to build something *near* a place that the other part of religion destroyed.

[Spiffeh]

Crazy group of people who perverted a religion destroy buildings.

Guy who is a very moderate muslim, speaks out against anti-american sentiment, says terrorism is un-islamic, and who's stated goal is to improve relations between the west and the muslim world wants to build a community center two blocks away from said ruins.

 

Imam Rauf has nothing to do with the extremists who did 9/11, all muslims are not responsible for the acts of a few.

[Low C]

It's just my opinion that they shouldn't I understand not all muslims are terrorists, I just think that they should listen to peoples feelings on the subject and find a different place to build this thing.