House Of Evil / Seed Of Peace

[diamond]

Here's a question that could change a person's paradigm:

If a bunch of radical, demented Jehoval Witnesses were the the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Kingdom Hall being built at that site 9 yrs later?


Thank u,
<>

 

[BoMac]

Here's a question that could change a person's paradigm:

If a bunch of radical, demented Jehoval Witnesses were the the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Kingdom Hall being built at that site 9 yrs later?


Thank u,
<>

How would that change someone's perception on the issue? What are you trying to say, that Muslims are intentionally stirring the pot by building a mosque near the WTC and that other religions would not? How do you know for sure? Why doesn't that sound discriminatory to you?

Also, just because a few Jehovah's Witnesses or any one else commits an act in the name of whatever religion they ascribe to, DOES NOT MEAN THAT EVERYONE IS GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION.

 

[diamond]

So we know BoMac's stance w/o even addressing the question asked.

 

[BoMac]

So we know BoMac's stance w/o even addressing the question asked.

I know how a "debate" goes with you, so I won't even bother.

But, against my better judgment, I will say this: How would I be able to address the question asked when I do not know with 100% certainty what actions one person, much less an entire group of people will do? What are the chances that Jehovah's Witnesses would build a Kingdom Hall near the WTC? I don't know because I have no idea what they would do.

And why would I answer a question that's clearly discriminatory to begin with?

 

[Pearl]

Understand that we should unfairly treat innocent people because some nutjobs who claim the same religion did something bad? That we should single out one religion above others as not worthy of the same kinds of religious freedoms we're supposed to be fighting for? That we should, as the above posted article says, perpetuate the incredibly harmful perception that we're in a war against Muslims and not just those who actually committed crimes against us?

I've done some thinking since I last discussed this issue. On one hand, I do think the mosque should go up. After all, there were Muslims who were killed on 9/11. One of them was the father of the first child to be born after the attacks.

But on the other hand, I still feel uncomfortable, because I am wondering who is behind this mosque. Is it the Saudis? If so, then there's a chance that the mosque would be preaching hatred and terrorism because Saudi Arabia follows Wahhabi Islam, which promotes the aforementioned. There have been many articles saying Saudi Arabia is funding mosques all over the world that preach Wahhabism. So if the Saudis are behind this mosque, then I am against it because it won't be about religious tolerance; the mosque would be about the opposite.

 

[BVS]

Here's a question that could change a person's paradigm:

If a bunch of radical, demented Jehoval Witnesses were the the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Kingdom Hall being built at that site 9 yrs later?


Thank u,
<>

It wouldn't be any different. This post doesn't even make any sense. Your understanding of this issue needs a lot of help.

 

[Diemen]

Here's a question that could change a person's paradigm:

If a bunch of radical, demented Jehoval Witnesses were the the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Kingdom Hall being built at that site 9 yrs later?


Thank u,
<>

Let's rephrase this even further to see if this shifts anyone's paradigm:

If a bunch of radical, demented Mormons were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Mormon Temple being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

Scenario 2:
If a bunch of radical, demented Protestants were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Protestant church being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

Scenario 3:
If a bunch of radical demented Catholics were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Catholic church being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

The answer to these is most definitely not "not good, because Mormons/Protestants/Catholics aren't that insensitive." It's "just fine, because most Americans don't have such an irrational prejudice against the entirety of Mormons/Protestants/Catholics because of the actions of a decidedly fringe, minority element that they would try to paint the building of a community place of worship as a radical act."

 

[financeguy]

Seemingly Jon Stewart was saying, and produced video evidence on his show, that there is already a mosque that is as close to Ground Zero as the new mosque - and has been there for many years.

 

[financeguy]

Let's rephrase this even further to see if this shifts anyone's paradigm:

If a bunch of radical, demented Mormons were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Mormon Temple being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

Scenario 2:
If a bunch of radical, demented Protestants were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Protestant church being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

Scenario 3:
If a bunch of radical demented Catholics were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Catholic church being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

The answer to these is most definitely not "not good, because Mormons/Protestants/Catholics aren't that insensitive." It's "just fine, because most Americans don't have such an irrational prejudice against the entirety of Mormons/Protestants/Catholics because of the actions of a decidedly fringe, minority element that they would try to paint the building of a community place of worship as a radical act."

Yes and there are problems between Catholic and Protestant communities in Northern Ireland, but mainstream politician or serious commentators generally don't suggest that a new Protestant church should not be built in a mainly Catholic area or vice versa (granted, 9/11 was on a different scale to acts of terrorism that occured in Northern Ireland).

Mike Bloomberg has quite rightly defended the mosque, or more accurately, defended the separation of Church and state that is an intrinsic part of living in a republic.

By contrast Obama has dithered and copped out, but really, given that he is a smart sharp lawyer that is a million miles away from being a statesman, I guess I'm not surprised.

 

[maycocksean]

Let's rephrase this even further to see if this shifts anyone's paradigm:

If a bunch of radical, demented Mormons were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Mormon Temple being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

Scenario 2:
If a bunch of radical, demented Protestants were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Protestant church being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

Scenario 3:
If a bunch of radical demented Catholics were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Catholic church being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

The answer to these is most definitely not "not good, because Mormons/Protestants/Catholics aren't that insensitive." It's "just fine, because most Americans don't have such an irrational prejudice against the entirety of Mormons/Protestants/Catholics because of the actions of a decidedly fringe, minority element that they would try to paint the building of a community place of worship as a radical act."

You beat me to it, Diemen.

Interesting that he chose the Jehovahs Witnesses, another group that people tend to have a negative feeling about. Why not the Mormons? They also tend to be misunderstood by non-Mormons. Or maybe that would be striking too close to home?

 

[A_Wanderer]

This mosque deserves the same treatment as the other faith-based constructions and should be permitted.

 

[financeguy]

This mosque deserves the same treatment as the other faith-based constructions and should be permitted.

Yes. But recently I was pondering about certain other faith-based contructions.

The skyscrapers in Manhattan, or for that matter, anywhere else, are largely faith-based constructions - in effect, monuments to a system which came within approximately 180 minutes of systemic meltdown in September 2008.

The One Jaw Dropping Video that Every Fool Must See

Marx said religion was the opium of the masses, now we have the new opium of credit.

 

[A_Wanderer]

The context of the quote may reinforce the analogy

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

This whole critique may extend to consumerism.

 

[Diemen]

Seemingly Jon Stewart was saying, and produced video evidence on his show, that there is already a mosque that is as close to Ground Zero as the new mosque - and has been there for many years.

Yes, I saw that too. I believe that mosque is 4 blocks away (rather than the 2 blocks for the proposed one). But of course it's a lot harder for people to argue for tearing down an existing mosque.

 

[financeguy]

Ok, so in the space that religion used to occupy, we now have booze, drugs, pop music, gambling, the Premier League and - most importantly - shopping centres - and it surely cannot be coincidence that the most irreligious societies on earth are largely also the most globalist (with the possible exception of the US, but really religion there is largely just another form of consumerism).

It is not a perfect system but it seems to work up to a point, barring enviromental catastrophe - possibly, Huxley was a better predictor even than Marx.

 

[diamond]

Why not the Mormons? They also tend to be misunderstood by non-Mormons. Or maybe that would be striking too close to home?

I thought about it, and no -you're incorrect Sean.
I will pardon your attempted swipe at my Faith, w/o you even asking.

I know for a fact that if anything the LDS Church wouldn't even suggest building a structure there, Temple or meeting house- they would be apt to build a memorial or monument in memory of the victims, and have done so when fringe elements affiliated w the Faith have killed innocents.


Mountain Meadow Massacre Memorial



<>

 

[diamond]

Yes, I saw that too. I believe that mosque is 4 blocks away (rather than the 2 blocks for the proposed one). But of course it's a lot harder for people to argue for tearing down an existing mosque.

The more appropriate question is-why can't Muslims be satisfied to walk 2 extra blocks to a functioning Mosque as they've been doing already?

Adding another would appear to only be over kill, no pun.

<>

 

[diamond]

Let's rephrase this even further to see if this shifts anyone's paradigm:

If a bunch of radical, demented Mormons were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Mormon Temple being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

Scenario 2:
If a bunch of radical, demented Protestants were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Protestant church being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

Scenario 3:
If a bunch of radical demented Catholics were the terrorists that flew the planes into the towers that day, what would be the chances of a Catholic church being built a couple blocks away from the site 9 years later?

The answer to these is most definitely not "not good, because Mormons/Protestants/Catholics aren't that insensitive." It's "just fine, because most Americans don't have such an irrational prejudice against the entirety of Mormons/Protestants/Catholics because of the actions of a decidedly fringe, minority element that they would try to paint the building of a community place of worship as a radical act."

And in an answer to your rhetorical scenarios & questions:

The Catholic Church, Protestants would not lobby to build a structure of their Faiths at that spot if some whack jobs affiliated with them destroyed the Towers, murdering thousands, nor would the LDS Church due to the sensitivity of the circumstances at hand, btw there are already and plenty of LDS Churches and a beautiful Temple in Manhattan-thank you.

Therein lies the difference between Christianity and Islam.
One is sensitive and empathic to innocents-the other not as much, often labeling innocents found at the wrong place and the wrong time as "Infidels"-plus they are bent on besmirching the memory of the innocent lives lost, by building a structure and symbol further insulting the memory of innocents.

In the end, I would be ok with a monument being built by those of the Islamic Faith at that location, as most New Yorkers, US citizens, many moderate Muslims and some Democrats are starting to all agree on.

Thank u,

<>

 

[A_Wanderer]

Were Jews killed in Pogroms innocent to the Christians who killed them?

 

[coolian2]

Adding another would appear to only be over kill, no pun.

pathetic.

 

[diamond]

Were Jews killed in Pogroms innocent to the Christians who killed them?

First of all try sticking to/with the same continent, ok?
Btw, was it the Church of Romania that killed the Jews?

thank u,

<>

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Therein lies the difference between Christianity and Islam.
One is sensitive and empathic to innocents-the other not as much

...really?

I don't see why what continent the violence occurred on matters. The fact is Christianity has been just as guilty of violence and murder and subjugation as any other faith. Ask the Native Americans about that, since you're so picky about getting the continent right.

I honestly don't give a damn what the religion is, I'd gladly fight for their right to put a building up for their particular faith if they so please. And this is coming from someone whose religious practice and beliefs are about as minimal as they come. And as I understand it, this mosque will also have an art center and a recreational area with a pool. Sorry if I find it a bit hard to get all scared of a place that wants a few pictures and a swimming pool added in. That sounds really threatening, yeah.

As I said way back at the beginning of this thread, the people who are making a big fuss are the ones who are going to be responsible for any problems that do arise. Notice nobody from the Muslim side, nobody involved with this center, has started anything, has stirred up any controversy. They've generally been very quiet in their statements regarding this issue. I'm mainly hearing from the people who are getting all up in arms about the idea. I just wish to ask this of those who are so bothered: What if the mosque does get built? What are you going to do then? You're going to have to work out your issues about it eventually. If it's not this mosque, it'll be another one somewhere in town, somewhere in the vicinity.

The Muslims are here. They've always been here, they're always going to be here. They're not going anywhere, and most of them are pretty decent people who were just as appalled at and just as devastated by what happened on 9/11 as anyone else. Let them have their mosque, for crying out loud. If any problems do arise down the line, THEN we can deal with them as they come. Until then, let's not panic about something we can't even predict an outcome from yet. I mean absolutely no disrespect to anyone who was personally affected on 9/11, none whatsoever, I get what you're saying with your feelings on this, but I'm sorry, I don't see how stopping the mosque from being built is going to help matters.

Angela

 

[BVS]

And in an answer to your rhetorical scenarios & questions:

The Catholic Church, Protestants would not lobby to build a structure of their Faiths at that spot if some whack jobs affiliated with them destroyed the Towers, murdering thousands, nor would the LDS Church due to the sensitivity of the circumstances at hand, btw there are already and plenty of LDS Churches and a beautiful Temple in Manhattan-thank you.

Therein lies the difference between Christianity and Islam.
One is sensitive and empathic to innocents-the other not as much, often labeling innocents found at the wrong place and the wrong time as "Infidels"-plus they are bent on besmirching the memory of the innocent lives lost, by building a structure and symbol further insulting the memory of innocents.

In the end, I would be ok with a monument being built by those of the Islamic Faith at that location, as most New Yorkers, US citizens, many moderate Muslims and some Democrats are starting to all agree on.

Thank u,

<>

Did you learn how to read hearts from that really crappy dictionary of yours?

<>, your posts have been pretty sad as of late, almost as if you're become even more closed minded with age. I hope all is well...

 

[Diemen]

The more appropriate question is-why can't Muslims be satisfied to walk 2 extra blocks to a functioning Mosque as they've been doing already?

Adding another would appear to only be over kill, no pun.

<>

The proposed mosque is actually more of a community center, with proposed recreational facilities, gathering spaces and classrooms.

As to your assertion that Protestants, Catholics and Mormons would not build a community center 2 blocks away from a site where whackjobs who claimed their faith committed an atrocity, I disagree.

At the end of the day, it comes down to this: are we a country of religious freedom or not? Do we allow every atrocity against us to chip away at that freedom, or do we stand up in its face, dust ourselves off and decry that we stand by our values in good times and in bad?

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I thought about it, and no -you're incorrect Sean.
I will pardon your attempted swipe at my Faith, w/o you even asking.

It wasn't any kind of "swipe", he's the last person here who would do such a thing. He was just trying to make a point and rather than address it you resort to your usual defensiveness/paranoia that people here are knocking your faith.

 

[Diemen]

I wouldn't call it paranoia, I would call it jumping at the opportunity to act holier than thou.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

That too

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

WASHINGTON -- The Senate's top Democrat yesterday broke with President Obama and came out against the mosque near Ground Zero, as the divisive issue roiled congressional campaigns across the country.

"The First Amendment protects freedom of religion," said the spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. "Senator Reid respects that, but thinks that the mosque should be built someplace else."

Reid's statement came just hours after his Republican challenger, Sharron Angle, called on him to take a stand, charging that Obama had "ignored the wishes of the American people."

Read more: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid comes out against Ground Zero mosque - NYPOST.com

 

[Diemen]

I'm getting really tired of people trotting out "the wishes of the American people" as if that trumps everything else.

 

[BVS]

You either like the constitution or you don't... I'm sick and tired of all these people who scream this and that is unconstitutional, but then turn around and support limits on freedom of religion.