Another 'Religion of Peace' moment, brought to you by.....yep, ISLAM!
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Wednesday, February 12, 2025 15:05
VIEWED: 23038
PAGE 11 of 25
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
The city council already voted unanimously to allow it. This issue was over as far as the locals were concerned, a year ago.
Not when they are not representing the will of the locals. Put it to referendum in the city. End of story.
In other words, when you don't like the outcome of the game, change the rules.
No. Elect people that represent and vote the will of the people. When the overwhelming majority are against something local it should be honored. Don't get me wrong I have my reservations about this whole debate. I believe in property rights. And I understand that we can't legislate good behavior and wisdom. People are free to do dumb shit. This mosque at this time in this spot is dumb. I also believe there is something a bit sinister about their reluctance to build it elsewhere knowing the pain it is causing so many. Especially considering the whole bridge building thing. Just my hunch.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:Quote:
You've attributed #2 with the Christians. "It aims for world conquest". Really? In fairness, I have to ask are you talking about the crusades hundreds of years ago when using the word conquest? I'm sure that's what you meant, seeing you are my soulmate,
No, though I guess I could've been less controversial with my choice of words. Islam and Christianity both have world missions - the aim of spreading themselves to every corner of the world. Not every religion does. The difference with christianity I think is that it isn't inherently political like Islam, so when it talks about 'onward christian soldiers, marching as to war', it's talking about spiritual conquest of the world, not physical/political.
Another thing, I don't think Islam has a doctrine of free will - another thing that might make it inherently more controlling over the individual.Quote:
I would also ask you to retract your statement about scale and balance.What don't you like about the scales statement?
It's not personal. It's just war.
I see Christians as being noble in their desire to spread the greatness of their god(again as silly as that is). I see one trying to demand acceptance of their god under the threat of beheading and the other trying to guide you to god with really annoying pamphlets and tactless unannounced home visits by strange young adults in black ties and smiles....It's all in the scale KPO.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Right on, Mike.
Ron Paul makes me think the founding fathers would have supported a community center near ground zero.
No wonder the tea parties and the conservatives hate him so much.Quote:
I agree, Anthony. I don’t LIKE it, because I think there is more of a useful role government can play, and I would have disagreed with Ron Paul on a number of other things, but I’m willing to compromise on some of them, and it would be an improvement over what we’ve GOT!
The ONLY role of government in regards to this Community Center is to get out of its way. It's not the place of government or government officials to impede such a project, or to incite public furor about it. The rights to build are not in question, and the question of rights is government's primary purpose.
I also agree the founding fathers might not have been all that tolerant...even tho’ they came to get away from religious tolerance, I didn’t see a lot of evidence of it in our early history. Nonetheless, I think there’s a strong possibility they’d have viewed it as the COMMUNITY CENTER it’s intended, rather than gotten all head up about a prayer room within a community center!
Shiny, whatever our individual beliefs on abortion, I agree with everything else you said, ESPECIALLY:Quote:
and
Extremists exist in every religion, since man first walked upright. Muslims, Christians and Roman Catholics do not have the market cornered. Quote:
Mike, you’re right; this issue was decided back in December, and as we keep reminding people, Fox News, Ingrahm and Beck all approved BACK THEN. It’s a non-issue-created-issue by one of the most extreme anti-Islamists around, Geller. Until she got ahold of it, nobody gave a damn.
It is man and the thirst for power and control that feeds that extremism.
Anthony: Quote:
Damned straight and right on. Imagine the furor that would have resulted if it were opposed as what it WAS, a planned Community Center with a room for prayer, rather than what it’s been made out to be!
Not only that, but had they *wanted* to object, they'd have been forced to find some reason other than the religious affiliation
Mincing, yes, the scales don’t equate TODAY. But if you want to look at history, they do. Again: we’ve only been here 200 years, so saying “what’s now and what affects us is ALL” is a very short-sighted point of view. Another century, it was/will be another race, religion, nationality, whatever.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Mike, you’re right; this issue was decided back in December, and as we keep reminding people, Fox News, Ingrahm and Beck all approved BACK THEN. It’s a non-issue-created-issue by one of the most extreme anti-Islamists around, Geller. Until she got ahold of it, nobody gave a damn.
Exactly, NOBODY gave a damn, INCLUDING the locals, who were invited to the council meeting, which was open to the public, and voiced no concerns. In fact, so little concern was raised AT THE LOCAL LEVEL that the approval of the council was unanimous, with not one single "No" vote.
This WAS decided at the local level, by the locals. Now, after the fact (nearly a YEAR after the fact), some small-minded bigots have decided that they don't like what was decided, so they want to get people worked up and call for a fresh vote on what's already been decided.
AURaptor's Greatest Hits:
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.
Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If Islam doesn't = terrorist, then what in god's name is the problem with an Islamic Center ANYWHERE? And Pizmo, you may have some terribly eccentric and personal reason for opposing this building, but if you look at Kaneman's "face of the GOP" the reason is clear as summer rain: Islam = terrorist.
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
Do you think all opposition to it is based on people thinking Islam=Terrorists?
I'm also curious about the message this sends to the world... certainly it's many messages depending on what part of the world. Some say it shows our strength and our faith in our constitution and Freedom and The American Way, but how would it play in China? France? Taliban? I wonder how Islamic extremists would view the mosque/C-Center going up there?
I'm sorry, but the grief argument carries no wait in this context. No one's grief gives them the right to hold people hostage or deny people their fundamental rights. The local government, the people of NYC have already signed off on this.
And there is grave, grave danger in fetishizing "grief," enshrining it and turning it into a permanent justification for hatred which is EXACTLY what the neo-cons want.
Why hasn't ANYTHING been built at ground zero, leaving this gaping wound in NYC, festering with all our nation's vengeful madness, instead of allowing the wound to heal?
And the message it sends if we allow them to build the Community Center? I would say anything but letting them go ahead with the building paints us as insane, but that's just how I see it. You wanna control "the message," good luck. In this life, we have to do the right thing, and let the world draw its own conclusions. Why should we continue to measure our own actions by the actions of madmen? Let some cave-dwellers determine public policy?
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
KPO, I agree with some of what you wrote and disagree with some. I definitely agree with the fallacy of trying to balance out the scales and find a “winner”. That’s the perspective I’ve been trying to bring to the discussion.
I view Islam differently, however:Quote:
I think Christianity has #3—we had the original Crusades, and if you recall, Bush called it a Crusade more than once. If you want to argue just New Testament, I think THAT is a fallacy; it says that because Christianity “revised” its tenants, that absolves it of previous tenants. Doesn’t work for me. I believe I pointed out a few times in Christian history where they wiped out entire populations, which comes close enough to “crusade” for me.
1) It's political in nature (christianity is much more apolitical)
2) It aims for world conquest (so does christianity, but not in a political way as much)
3) It has a doctrine of holy war (no such doctrine in new testament christianity)
Also, I don’t see Islam as “political in nature”. While I accept that it has far less secularism at this time, I think Christianity has been quite political in the past, and certainly has it’s political aspects even today. “In nature” is something I think is open to debate.Quote:
I don’t think anyone is saying “to the same extent”. Historically one or the other has done so to a greater or lesser degree; certainly CURRENTLY Islam gets the prize for that, but to me it’s just the same as those scales; taking all of history into account, all religions HAVE inspired humans to evil at one time or another. How that fits on scales I don’t think we can ever determine.
People that believe all religions inspire humans to evil to the same extent (including Buddhism?), how do you explain this idea?
And I don’t think it’s the religion that inspires humans to evil, rather to me it’s those in AUTHORITY in each religion who do so, humans deciding what to accent to gain their own agenda, even if that agenda is subconscious to them and they think they are doing right. Definitely “god on our side” is a big baddie and excuses all kinds of horrible things, but ALL religions, in their purest form, push peace, tolerance and equality.
Cav, I think you gave us a very eloquent thesis on religions and I think theocracy IS the major difficulty both we have in tolerating Muslim theocracies and they have tolerating democracy. I don’t think anyone’s touched on it in that way, and it’s a really good point.Quote:
Exactly what I’ve been trying to say for a while; the extremists of Islam are WINNING by our intolerance and fear endangering the very foundation of our moral values. The more we fear and hate them, the more we show to the world that who we say we are is not WHAT we are, and we concede to the extremists what they claim about us. They win by default because we failed OURSELVES.
But our values are being eroded by this continued despicable opposition to it.
Traveler, beautifully said on the same point:Quote:
How on EARTH do we get the American people to SEE THIS?!\
We lose our freedom by throwing it away with hate and bigotry. Hate is the religion we need to fight. Some may give it a formal name, but that is just a cover. The god that destroyed the Twin Towers was hate, power, or greed; the Islam faith had nothing to do with it.
Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
For the record, I do not advocate arithmetic and scale-balancing as a method for determining evil, though I do demand that ya'll wish in one hand and shit in the other. This math and weight is, a serviceable metaphor in answer to the worthless proposition that "extremists come from ALL faiths!"
There are extremists of all faiths, yes, and so what? There is no arguing that while Islam has no monopoly on violent extremists, it currently has the best brand. This popular brand of violent extremism is not inconsistent with Islamic theology, or history; it is however, with our happy pluralistic notions of how the world out to work. And that stings.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
Don't forget the Pirates. I don't consider them to be in the same category as 'violent extremists' because they're out to steal stuff. And they're dashing. I saw a movie about it.
So: Islam. The most violent extremists AND the most Pirates.
If I join the local mosque, do you think they'll give me a boat?
--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
You're not dark enough; the salient point about Somalian pirates isn't that they're Muslim, but rather....African.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I mean, people would assume that you were a hostage, even if you had a turban, an eye patch, and a hook for a hand. And they would try to free you, even if you came at them with a cutlass.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME