Another 'Religion of Peace' moment, brought to you by.....yep, ISLAM!
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 15:05
VIEWED: 23038
PAGE 22 of 25
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
"respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built some place else"
Hello,
So, I am afraid that an atmosphere of persecution will lead to an observance of 'rights by convenience.'
What emotion is driving you?
Did you see my earlier answer to this?
quote: Thanks for asking Anthony and not assuming.
Emotion? Shouldn't that be kept out of politics?
"I'm afraid of creating an atmosphere of persecution that may lead to a practice of 'rights by convenience.' "
I'm not afraid of that - I think we're too loud and opinionated of a society for us to fall into that. But I guess that's all in the eye of the beholder. /quote
Maybe I'm just not understanding what you are looking for - try asking another way??
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
I have been blind to an argument against the Mosque that is disconnected from emotion.
Open my eyes.
--Anthony
Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, Pizmo, I agree with what you wrote most recently to a degree. Shocking, isn't it? But what you wrote was clear and you stated your position in a way I could understand.
Not with the moving of the COMMUNITY CENTER; on that I'm afraid I'm convinced that property rights, civil rights and freedom of religion should trump any visceral arguments. I will concede that my FEELINGS about these things are pretty strong, but it has similarities to the papers-please law, in that it singles out one segment of the citizenry.
But as to the rest:
What Cav (and Anthony) mean by “reasoned response” is that we don’t consider the objections provided thus far by the COMMUNITY CENTER’s opponents as “reasonable”:
It’s going to be a terrorist hub.
They’re doing it to give us the thumb.
Muslims always build mosques to celebrate conquest.
It’s insensitive to the families of those who died in 9/11.
If I’ve missed any, please add them. We don’t consider those reasoned objections; we consider those drummed-up excuses to fire up the base. None of them are true. The only reasoned response I can think of is: “It will be a dangerous thing to do because of the anti-Muslim sentiment which may destroy it, and it will remain a point of contention for a long time to come.” That’s valid, I think it’s some of what you’ve expressed, and the only objection I would make, but again, to me their rights, like everyone’s, should trump whatever opposition there might be to what THEY decide to do.
I disagree with Cav I that I think that your opinion is “eccentric” and that the difference between thinking it’s a bad idea and opposing it are a matter of conviction. I am in favor of respecting their rights; at the same time, I don’t think it’s a good idea, admittedly. I think there’s a stubborn desire to stand up for their rights involved, and while I HATE the idea they could be forced to build elsewhere, it’s somewhat a reflection of the emotions on THEIR side.Quote:
THAT makes me furious; the bottom line is that this wasn’t an issue until Geller got attention about it, and now the right is running rampant with it.
opposition to the building would have ZERO TRACTION if not for the rabid anti-Islamic sentiment that's swept across this nation in the last month
Quoting others giving their reasons doesn’t mean their arguments are “reasoned”...and I don’t want to go back up and hunt them up, may I respectfully ask that you list them, as I did above? It would help me understand. I do understand, if that’s your entire position, that "The First Amendment protects freedom of religion," Manley said. "Sen. Reid respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built some place else." I actually agree, but am not willing to MAKE them do it, or stand with those who oppose it. MY reason is merely that, by creating a furor, Geller and Co. have made it so that the COMMUNITY CENTER is now a focus and will probably be attacked in one way or another. I wish they would CHOOSE to build elsewhere; if they don’t, I support them entirely.
I agree about what would have been the best way for Bloomberg to handle it 100%.
As to the rabid anti-Muslim sentiment currently existing, it doesn’t have to be quantified. Of COURSE there are people standing behind the Constitution...tho’ polls have shown they’re in the minority...but the denial of permits to build an actual mosque, the attacks on mosques...which things are happening across the country...indicate strong feelings which have nothing to do with 9/11 and everything to do with anti-Muslim emotions. I get that from the NEWS, several kinds of news, not just TV, and from the inflammatory rhetoric I hear average Americans giving out. It doesn’t need to be a majority acting out; they, the actions of some and the polls represent what’s happening.
As to your Gergen quote, I think he nailed it. Tho’ “Americans by and large may be tolerant”, I would say “MOST” Americans are tolerant...an awful lot of them have shown they’re the opposite, not just o
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
" we consider those drummed-up excuses to fire up the base. None of them are true."
Hello,
If we don't make decisions based on emotion, the truth of these things is of questionable importance.
"They seem quite logical to me, insofar as they make sense but for the denial of rights to one segment of the population. I can certainly understand how you can hold them without any emotion whatsoever being involved."
I am still not clear on what the argument is, absent of emotion, against the center.
--Anthony
Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,
I have been blind to an argument against the Mosque that is disconnected from emotion.
Me too - that is of course why we have laws and why I expect this to be decided by the rule of law.
Have you watched The Wire?
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
The Wire... I don't think I have.
--Anthony
Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,
The Wire... I don't think I have.
--Anthony
Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.
I highly recommend it, some of the best tv I've ever seen. It is in the end depressing as hell. It was written by an ex Baltimore Sun reporter about the life blood of Baltimore, the Mayor, the streets, the cops, really hard to describe it well. It shows what a cluster f*ck city politics is and how sometimes the rule of law works for us and sometimes against us. It has a very real feel to it.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
I enjoy a show that expresses multiple angles on reality. It's one of the things that attracted me to a show like Deadwood. Orderly Law and Anarchy all take turns at playing the Hero or the Villain, and best intentions share intimate dances with selfish desires, spawning results than span the gamut of dastardly and delightful.
I will see if Netflix has The Wire for live streaming.
--Anthony
Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Thanks for the reply, Pizmo, but y'know as Niki points out, quoting people doesn't make YOUR argument reasoned. You bringing up what folk say in the nytimes doesn't refute my arguments in the least. If I'd said, f'rinstance, "Everyone who opposes the mosque hates Muslims," as you seem to suggest over and over that I have, then yes, indeed, pointing out that some Muslims oppose the "mosque" would be cogent. But I never did.
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
I actually made plenty of reasoned refutations against it, even quoted the nytimes quoting muslims from around the globe making reasoned comments against it, but you SEEM stuck on the extremists opposition view only.
In my last post, also, I took pains (and oh yes, it was bloody painful to listen to that jackhole and transcribe his hysteria) to listen to that British crackpot and refuted his claims, demanded substantiation, called him out on his obvious fabrications, and what do I get from you by way of discussion or defense???
Quote:See, this is what's soooooo frustrating. You say "I don't agree with everything he says" but you don't say word one as to what you DO agree with and what you don't. I'd say 90% of his screed is specious. I assume you agree with something more than 10%, so we have a disagreement here, but only by inference. You won't reason it out (and, y'know, that's your right, I'm sick of that guy and his nonsense anyway, happy not to talk about him any further, but, again, you're not presenting reasoned argument this way). I feel like an idiot for answering his absurd claims now. You say, "it would be a long time checking all his claims," well, dang, how's about you check one or two? Or respond to my objections in any way other than to say, "whoops, sorry, you weren't supposed to take him seriously--it's just a YouTube video."
As far as this guy... he's on youtube so you have to take everything he says with a grain of salt (just like the media) because there's tons of money to be made with popular youtube videos. FOR THE RECORD: I don't agree with everything he says, I don't know how anyone could because it would be a long time checking his all of his claims, but I LOVE the fact that he's saying it. I don't think any religion should be untouchable (which Islam seems to think it should be) - I think all religions should be similarly challenged.
That is frustrating.
Quote:I see that I stung you with the use of the word "conviction." Saying your argument lacked conviction. Poor word choice then. But you were the one who had to quibble about not being "opposed" to the mosque. I thought you were opposed and you said no, and I got all manner of confused by your double message. At this point, I would say you indeed have conviction about this case and you oppose the mosque. No clue really what hair you were spl
I have absolute conviction that building the community center is a bad idea for muslims and non-muslims.
My first post on the subject:
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=44879
quote:
"The First Amendment protects freedom of religion," Manley said. "Sen. Reid respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built some place else."
That sums it up for me.
I was surprised that O. said anything on this now - let New York and Bloomberg fight it out - but I guess considering the occasion of the dinner he had to say something, and of course the repubs would whine about anything he'd say.
I can't help but think a better solution would have been for him to "appeal" to the people that want to build the mosque to build it elsewhere ("with all due respect, it would be better for all muslims in the US if you do"), try and make both sides happy, come out an undisputed hero all the way around, and win some votes in Nov. If they refused the onus would be on them, "I tried... but our constitution is clear on this..." which he said except for the I tried part.
That place will be a target either way, I'd stay clear on the day that there aren't protestors out front."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Umm, HKCav ?
Quote:
And I am profoundly offended that people in this country cannot see Islam as a religion like any other. I don't think such people should be given the time of day in this country. They are anti-American, in my view, and must be educated, not placated.
You DO realize you are speaking of a group of people who are, as a whole, extremely hostile to even the *idea* of education, even the concept, cause it might impinge on their preciously treasured ignorance - and isn't that a laugh, they celebrate ignorance, and then pretend to know things!
People, the beginning of wisdom is when you start to realize just how damn little we truly KNOW, about any bloody thing at all.
And part of that is also cause they'd have to face up to some damn ugly truths about themselves, about their lives, if they ever did somehow stifle their prejudices long enough to learn, and the few times I've ever seen that done they have a total freakout, run right back to their chosen pundit and drown out that knowledge as hard and as fast as they can.
So, if you got any ideas on *HOW* to educate those people, which do not involve force, I would damned sure like to hear em - that ain't snark, mind you, it's just that I've no idea how to educate folk who are hostile to the entire concept of it and will resist it up to and including violence.
Ergo, I'm open to ideas, here.
Quote:
Half the country believes in the boogeyman, they want to outlaw turning out the lights when we go to bed, so let's try to find a workable compromise. There is no such compromise. Either you believe in the boogeyman or you do not.
Ahem, there's a third route, if only you can get the damn fools to see it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granny_Weatherwax#Headology
Quote:
It has been said that the difference between headology and psychiatry is that, were you to approach either with a belief that you were being chased by a monster, a psychiatrist will convince you that there are no monsters coming after you, whereas a headologist will hand you a bat and a chair to stand on. The Headology approach is also very similar to Susan Sto Helit's practical approach to children's problems; since the child already believes in a Bogeymen then you may as well go along with it and teach them that they can also, very firmly, believe in the fireplace poker too.
Our "Fireplace Poker" here, is the US Constitution, which they purport to believe in (till, yanno, it gets in the way) and THAT protects them, us, and every damn body else from the predations of ANY religion, in theory - I've already said my piece about what an illusion that is regarding christianity, but of that they won't care cause the folk opposing this are damn near universally christian and would see that as a good thing, unaware of the hypocrisy.
Quote:
When it comes right down to it, I'm not defending the Muslims who proposed this community center a year ago and were unanimously approved by the city of New York, they don't need defending. But it would appear that the Constitution of this country and what it means are in serious need of defense just now.
Indeed, and what a damn shame that often enough, it's the freakin ANARCHISTS, and in my case, an Antifederalist besides, who wind up standing for the rule of law they don't even care for, that's like Sauron stepping in front of a lynch mob saying "Stop! this is wrong!" - yanno, is there NO ONE ELSE better qualified with the fucking balls to stand and deliver ?
Maybe it's that such people don't take the rule of law for granted and can see it externally, versus folk who take it every bit as granted as the light coming on when you flip the switch without an ounce of knowledge of the mechanics by which that little miracle happens...
Maybe, but I think it's a lack of guts, which is the same problem with BOTH sides - one NEEDS to fight, in order to avoid admission that their entire sociopolitical basis is a cheap fiction, the other CANT fight, they've no idea how, and the whole issue of conflict gives them
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME