Ground Zero Mosque

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Well, I hope I am not opening a huge can of worms here, but I would like to hear others' thoughts about this. Please try to be respectful of others when making your responses.

I'll start by saying that I am very concerned about this. I am afraid of the backlash that something like this may spawn. There are many people who would find this VERY offensive, no matter whether that is right or wrong. I am afraid of how a radical Christian (group or individual) might react to this, and the potential damage that could happen. Personally, I feel like it is unnecessary. While the Muslim community have a right to build a mosque at this location, I think that it is unsensitive, and at the very least unwise. I don't think that they should be prevented from builing one there, but I hope that they would reconsider before something terrible happens.

Anyway, what do you guys think?

[Brice]

I don't think I have any issues with them building a mosque there. What happened wasn't done by Muslims, but by Muslim extremists. Extremist's actions/reactions are not dictated by anything grounded in reality, but by their own psychopathic devotion to their delusions. In short extremists are always bad be they Christian, Muslim, or whatever. If we base any of our decisions/actions on things they might do, they win. I don't think it's insensitive on behalf of the Muslim community to wish to build a mosque there, conversely I think it's quite sensitive.

[lophophoras]

Personally, I do not think it is a good idea. Look at the problems it is causing already, it will only get worse.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I don't think I have any issues with them building a mosque there. What happened wasn't done by Muslims, but by Muslim extremists. Extremist's actions/reactions are not dictated by anything grounded in reality, but by their own psychopathic devotion to their delusions. In short extremists are always bad be they Christian, Muslim, or whatever. If we base any of our decisions/actions on things they might do, they win. I don't think it's insensitive on behalf of the Muslim community to wish to build a mosque there, conversely I think it's quite sensitive.

Brice, please don't missunderstand my concern. I think that they have the right to build there. And if the world were a eutopia filled with tolerant people, I would have no concerns, but I'm sure that you can understand that this is not the case. There are as many radical Christian groups as Muslim, and they are just as dangerous. Just look at the KKK for example. I am afraid of the world's reaction to the potential situation where some backwoods redneck racist fuckhead goes and blows up this mosque, which I view as an unfortunately very real possibility. It would be like 9/11 all over again, probably spawning another huge war....or another extension on our present war.

[Jean]

I don't think I have any issues with them building a mosque there. What happened wasn't done by Muslims, but by Muslim extremists. Extremist's actions/reactions are not dictated by anything grounded in reality, but by their own psychopathic devotion to their delusions. In short extremists are always bad be they Christian, Muslim, or whatever. If we base any of our decisions/actions on things they might do, they win. I don't think it's insensitive on behalf of the Muslim community to wish to build a mosque there, conversely I think it's quite sensitive.
This.
I personally think that all parties involved could benefit from a better understanding of traditional Islam, and every step towards this end is very welcome.

[ladysai]

I think some of the public debate on this subject is misleading.
The mosque is being built in NYC, near to the ground zero site, not on the actual site of the tragedy. I think that makes a big difference.
To me, the ground where all those people died on 9/11 is, in its way, sacred to those who lost loved ones there. I can see why some would be offended by the building of a mosque on that ground. (I personally feel the actual site of the tragedy should be a place of remembrance and memorial only)
But, NYC is full of many kinds of people, and among them are Muslims who can use a mosque to worship in. Let them worship in their mosque, and people will see them as the common faithful that they are. Not all Muslim people are terrorists; they get the bad reputation from the few who are.

[lophophoras]

I think some of the public debate on this subject is misleading.
The mosque is being built in NYC, near to the ground zero site, not on the actual site of the tragedy. I think that makes a big difference.
To me, the ground where all those people died on 9/11 is, in its way, sacred to those who lost loved ones there. I can see why some would be offended by the building of a mosque on that ground. (I personally feel the actual site of the tragedy should be a place of remembrance and memorial only)
But, NYC is full of many kinds of people, and among them are Muslims who can use a mosque to worship in. Let them worship in their mosque, and people will see them as the common faithful that they are. Not all Muslim people are terrorists; they get the bad reputation from the few who are.

Good point. I read somewhere that the site for the new mosque is two blocks away from ground zero.

[alkanto]

While I personal respect all religions, I am completely aware of Muslim extremists being in the rare, etc., there are just certain reasons this shouldn't happen.
It is incredibly insensitive to not only the memories of those who were killed on Ground Zero, but to there families and those strongly affected by the actions of 9/11. They can build a mosque - that I don't care. Just...pick a different spot. As I type, I am watching a program discussing this exact issue and a guy had a good quote. "Just because you have the rights to do something, doesn't mean it is the right thing to do."

People like to argue about understanding and accepting Islam - I think Islamic leaders realizing the sensitivity and they themselves understanding the reasons for our concerns will make it easier for us to accept and maintain a respectful relationship with them. Both sides have to come to an agreement that all are okay with. That is the only way for this situation to be resolved well.

[Bev Vincent]

Just How 'Hallowed' is the Ground Near Ground Zero? (http://newsfeed.time.com/2010/08/17/just-how-hallowed-is-the-ground-near-ground-zero/)

Mosque near Ground Zero just 686 Feet Closer Than Existing Mosque (http://indyposted.com/37871/mosque-near-ground-zero-just-686-feet-closer-than-existing-mosque/)

[alinda]

We alledgedly founded a country where freedom of relgion exsists.
The muslims have as much right to build as anyone. It is IMO quite
wrong to judge everyone for the crimes of GWB. :ninja:

[alkanto]

We alledgedly founded a country where freedom of relgion exsists.
The muslims have as much right to build as anyone. It is IMO quite
wrong to judge everyone for the crimes of GWB. :ninja:

Please don't try and label me a radical anything, but what?

GWB had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. Yes, he started the situation/war/whatever with the Middle East. I'm not condoning that. But we are talking about a blatant act of terrorism on US soil. How is that a crime of a former president?

Also, I have not heard anyone saying that the Muslims do not have the right to build wherever the Hell they want. But just because they have that right doesn't necessarily mean that they should build there.

(sorry if I am getting a little heated....I usually don't get involved in conversations of this nature for this exact reason...I get passionate, I guess)

[Jean]

Living so far away from you, I don't really know, but I thought it was rather a symbolical gesture, like a hand extended - like, they wanted to emphasize it they don't want anything to do with the extremists who operate under Islamic slogans, like, they offer peace and prayers for the dead. I may be wrong, but that's what I thought.

[Ricky]

The mosque is being built in NYC, near to the ground zero site, not on the actual site of the tragedy. I think that makes a big difference.


I agree. There seems to be a lot of misunderstandings as to where exactly it's going to be built. As long as it's not physically on the Ground Zero site, and is far enough so as to be unaffiliated with it, then I don't see the problem.

If it were a Church, or chapel, or another worship gathering place for another religion, there wouldn't be an issue. Just because Muslims were part of 9/11, doesn't mean they're all like that. They have a religion, let them practice it.

Just my two cents.

[alinda]

:clap:

[Darkthoughts]

Read Bev's links. The first one pretty much sums up my opinion :)

[Bev Vincent]

This is worth a listen, too:

Keith Olbermann Special Comment: There Is No 'Ground Zero Mosque' (http://vodpod.com/watch/4246079-keith-olbermann-special-comment-there-is-no-ground-zero-mosque-081610)

[John_and_Yoko]

I wasn't even aware that the intended site for the mosque was only NEAR "Ground Zero" and not on it, but that being the case I have no idea what the fuss is about at all.

Quite frankly, I think that allowing the mosque to be built would be a great way to SAVE face, not lose it. After all, since it was supposedly Islamic terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center, theoretically they have every incentive NOT to allow a Muslim house of worship to be built anywhere near there--

--BUT the whole point of the American way of life is that we were built on a foundation of tolerance and respect for different ways of being, including different religions. The time once was when "freedom of religion" was restricted to Christian denominations and branches of Judaism. Anything else would have engineered a reaction along the lines of "Yes, I know we have freedom of religion as a First Amendment right, but COME ON!"

That being the case, the controversy involved is precisely what makes it an act of courage and boldness, not to mention kindness and love, to allow the mosque to be built--it would be a symbol of American tolerance for GENUINE religions of all kinds, a way of saying "Yes, people professing this faith destroyed these buildings and killed these people, but we will NOT allow that to make us hateful or intolerant of ALL people who profess this faith."

As for the fear of the mosque itself being attacked, that's what protection is for. Why do churches, synagogues, and temples deserve protection from such terrorism, but not mosques?

[Woofer]

Two quotes from Bev's first link:


The controversy keeps rolling in about the proposed Islamic mosque in Lower Manhattan and the big complaint is that building sits near where the World Trade Center stood before terrorists destroyed it, thus making it hallowed ground.


And most noticeable of anything you could see around this untouchable area are the dozens of street vendors who sit a stone's throw away from Ground Zero capitalizing on the fact that it is one of New York's most visited tourist attractions. Possibly millions of dollars change hands every weekend all in the name of capitalist gain and certainly not any reverence for the 2,700 who died in the space right behind them.

Some background on the WTC:


Plans to build the World Trade Center were controversial. The site for the World Trade Center was the location of Radio Row, home to hundreds of commercial and industrial tenants, property owners, small businesses, and approximately 100 residents, many of whom fiercely resisted forced relocation. A group of small businesses affected filed an injunction challenging the Port Authority's power of eminent domain. The case made its way through the court system to the United States Supreme Court; the Court refused to accept the case.

Thus, the vendors at Ground Zero are obviously honoring the spirit of World Trade Center and that in which it was built. What better way to honor a building that displaced countless people in the name of human greed than exploiting its ruins in the name of profit?

Clearly places of worship are wildly out of place on holy ground dedicated to capitalism and exploitation of the people.

BTW, since we know the Number of the Beast was miscalculated, the move 686 feet closer (as noted in Bev's second link) probably corresponds to the true Number of the Beast, thus demonstrating the diabolical nature of the mosque. :panic:

Need I point out my sarcasm in the # of the Beast "observation"?

[mae]

I wanted to post a couple links like Bev's, like this one: http://daryllang.com/blog/4421. Personally, I think this is overblown, but I can see why people are upset. On the other hand, most probably don't realize there's already a mosque near there.

In the end, I'm all for freedom of religion, but as an anti-religious person, my dream is that one day all mosques, synagogues, churches, and various other temples will no longer be required :)

[jhanic]

I seriously try to avoid any public discussions of this and other controversial topics, mainly because they tend to attract extremists on both sides, but I feel strongly about this one.

There is absolutely NO legal reason to deny the Muslims the right to build this mosque where they want to.

Unfortunately, just because they have the right to build it doesn't mean that they SHOULD build it there. To build a mosque that close to this sacred ground is ignorant of the sensitivities of the vast majority of the American people.

Would the Saudis allow the building of a Christian church in Mecca? Even if they had laws allowing such an action (and I doubt they do), this would be a similar "slap in the face" to the Muslim religion.

Just my two bits.

John

[Jean]

I don't see how Mecca fits here. I thought it was place of an immense tragedy, one where a lot of people died, not a religious place. I suppose there were Christians, atheists, Jews, agnostics, - and Muslims, too, among them. As for it being insensitive, I feel exactly the opposite; but I am not an American. I personally would only welcome it if Germans built a church at any of the many places where they killed Soviet people - Russians, Jews, Ukranians, Orthodox, Catholics, Muslims, Atheists, Communists, - and prayed for our souls and the sins of their ancestors.

[John_and_Yoko]

I'm with bears there--sorry, jhanic, but that analogy doesn't make any sense.

I don't consider it "sacred ground", not in the sense of it being a holy site of Christianity, say. No insensitivity intended, but that's ridiculous.

It would be a better analogy to ask, what if Christian terrorists destroyed an economic landmark in a country with a Muslim majority (but for which Islam was not the state religion--is there such a country?), and then what if moderate Christians wanted to build a church near there? Would people consider that country to be justified in denying them that? Would people not cry "religious intolerance"?

This is not a religious war, no matter how much people try to make it out to be.

[alinda]

That was enlightening, I wish that more people would take the time to learn facts before spouting off with more judgements and hate. Thanks for posting Bev.:thumbsup:

[jhanic]

You all are right. It was a poor analogy. My apologies.

John

[mae]

This is worth a listen, too:

Keith Olbermann Special Comment: There Is No 'Ground Zero Mosque' (http://vodpod.com/watch/4246079-keith-olbermann-special-comment-there-is-no-ground-zero-mosque-081610)

Great stuff. Real journalism. Here's a handy Youtube right in here:

YouTube- Keith Olbermann Special Comment: There Is No 'Ground Zero Mosque' - 08/16/10

[John_and_Yoko]

You all are right. It was a poor analogy. My apologies.

John

No hard feelings. You were right in saying that just because someone has the right to do something doesn't automatically mean it's always okay. People should exercise good judgment but they shouldn't be FORCED into it.

[jhanic]

I think a better analogy would be if someone wanted to erect a museum dedicated to the Nazi SS near one of the European concentration camps. Even if they had the right, it would be wrong.

John

[mae]

That's an extremely poor analogy, sorry. If you must compare, it has to be apples to apples.

[Brice]

Yes, it'd be more akin to Germany doing some tribute/monument for the holocaust victims. Even if it were somewhere like Dachau or Auschwitz that would be appropriate and sensitive, imo. Essentially it would be the same as this in my mind.

[Bev Vincent]

Except there already is a mosque in the same area, within a block or so--one that's been there for forty years. And there's a mosque inside the Pentagon, which was also a target on 9/11.

[mae]

Except there already is a mosque in the same area, within a block or so--one that's been there for forty years. And there's a mosque inside the Pentagon, which was also a target on 9/11.

I think that's what most don't realize. And the conservative media is not helping any (of course) by making it sound like it will be built on top of where WTC used to stand.

[jhanic]

I'll shut up now.

John

[Woofer]

They need to build a giant vending machine complex on the site of Ground Zero. That's a much more fitting memorial to what it stood for than anything else. No offense to the dead intended, but TWC was a monument to human greed erected on a location where people had to be forced out - businesses and residents alike - because they did NOT want to leave.

[John_and_Yoko]

Yes, it'd be more akin to Germany doing some tribute/monument for the holocaust victims. Even if it were somewhere like Dachau or Auschwitz that would be appropriate and sensitive, imo. Essentially it would be the same as this in my mind.

There you go. Not quite exact, but certainly a LOT closer than what jhanic said. God Almighty.... :scared:

And jhanic, don't shut up, just think about your analogies before you post them.

[Merlin1958]

They need to build a giant vending machine complex on the site of Ground Zero. That's a much more fitting memorial to what it stood for than anything else. No offense to the dead intended, but TWC was a monument to human greed erected on a location where people had to be forced out - businesses and residents alike - because they did NOT want to leave.

And that bears on the tragedy how? Less than 10 years and how soon we forget. I was there. 3,000 innocent Americans died for what? To make a point in an argument?

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I think I sent the wrong message. I am all for religious freedom. I do not oppose the building of the mosque for any moralistic/idealistic reason. In fact, I don't really oppose the building of the mosque at all....personally. But, I don't feel like the good people of this website represent your average gun-toting, NRA card-carrying, southernfried, racist, Obama-hating, cross-burning redneck. Believe me!!! They are there, and in mass numbers, whether you want to see them or not. My concern is that, because of all of the public debate that has occurred, one of these groups or individuals will most likely do something stupid. If that occurs than all this rhetoric about religious freedom goes out the window, and we are back at square one. That is all I am saying.

[John_and_Yoko]

I think I sent the wrong message. I am all for religious freedom. I do not oppose the building of the mosque for any moralistic/idealistic reason. In fact, I don't really oppose the building of the mosque at all....personally. But, I don't feel like the good people of this website represent your average gun-toting, NRA card-carrying, southernfried, racist, Obama-hating, cross-burning redneck. Believe me!!! They are there, and in mass numbers, whether you want to see them or not. My concern is that, because of all of the public debate that has occurred, one of these groups or individuals will most likely do something stupid. If that occurs than all this rhetoric about religious freedom goes out the window, and we are back at square one. That is all I am saying.

Would Obama be the President now if everyone had that cautionary attitude back in the days of the Civil Rights movement?

That's not a rhetorical question, I'm actually asking.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

You are quite correct. My caution is unwarranted. There is no cause for concern.

[John_and_Yoko]

You are quite correct. My caution is unwarranted. There is no cause for concern.

O...kay....

<.<

>.>

Of course there's cause for concern and caution is warranted....

(Gee whiz....)

[Jean]

BROWNING'S: I am sure everyone got your message right; I know I did. I was arguing only on behalf of adequately thinking people here, and I am fully aware that the reaction of the majority, especially if properly channeled by the media, will be exactly what you fear it to be.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I'm sorry. I am really not trying to be an ass, but a president was assassinated during that civil rights movement too. Right? Albeit, (probably) for unrelated reasons. If that were to happen again, or if something happened to this mosque, it would set us back 75 years. Imagine the backlash, and social upheaval resulting from some white racist shooting the president. Imagine how the worldwide view (which is already pretty low) of Americans would suffer if some radical Christian blew up the mosque. Is it worth the risk?
Look what happened in LA after the Rodney King verdict...now apply that to every major city in the US simultaneously after the first scenario, and all over the world after the second.

[Woofer]

They need to build a giant vending machine complex on the site of Ground Zero. That's a much more fitting memorial to what it stood for than anything else. No offense to the dead intended, but TWC was a monument to human greed erected on a location where people had to be forced out - businesses and residents alike - because they did NOT want to leave.

And that bears on the tragedy how? Less than 10 years and how soon we forget. I was there. 3,000 innocent Americans died for what? To make a point in an argument?

Absolutely none whatsoever - which is exactly the same amount that a mosque close to ground zero bears on the tragedy. Had you read the articles Bev linked, you would've understood the nature of my commentary. The loss of lives was horrible, yes, but let's not act like this was some hallowed spot. It was exactly as I described above. A mosque, on the other hand, IS a hallowed spot.

ETA: The very fact that we're having this discussion, this entire thread, negates your "so soon we forget" scenario. I'll have you know that I worked for a military contractor for the past fifteen years, which obviously includes the time of the tragedy, and it is unlikely that I will EVER forget given firsthand reports I got.

[Jean]

I'm sorry. I am really not trying to be an ass, but a president was assassinated during that civil rights movement too. Right? Albeit, (probably) for unrelated reasons. If that were to happen again, or if something happened to this mosque, it would set us back 75 years. Imagine the backlash, and social upheaval resulting from some white racist shooting the president. Imagine how the worldwide view (which is already pretty low) of Americans would suffer if some radical Christian blew up the mosque. Is it worth the risk?
Maybe it is. I mean, living in a situation where every incautious step (and it's a Mosque we're talking about, not a memorial to terrorists) can set you 75 years back isn't normal. If nothing is done about it, it will only get worse, you'll be brought to a dead end with no way out - everyone hushing up about everything, tiptoeing away from bleeding problems of society, unable to say a word lest it hurt the feelings of this or that group; it's indeed living in a glass house and being afraid first of throwing stones, next to sneeze, next to speak loudly: sooner or later something has to be done about the house itself; it may be too early now, but in the absence of dialog it may soon be too late.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

You are probably right. I am a pessimist in all things, so it's not surprising that I've taken the perspective that I have. From here, I will take the "wait and see" approach.

[Jean]

::sighs::

I am not very much of an optimist myself... yeah, wait and see...

[Brice]

I am a pessimist. I expect the worst and hope for the best...but even if the best comes I still expect the worst. With that said I understand caution and concern, but I'll be damned if I'm gonna' let any sort of fear over what might happen get in my way...nor do I think others should.

BC: I completely understand your hesitations, but if we let our (both real and imagined) worries get in the way because of what might happen then any extremists out there have already "won" by making us scared. I will not be. They will find an excuse or justification for doing whatever they intend to do regardless.

[mae]

I think this whole issue is moot, because the bigger travesty and dare I say sacrilege is the fact that in nine years nothing has been built on that site. No memorial, no museum, no towers. In Dubai, however, they recently erected the world's tallest building, and it took them five years.

[Jean]

I think this whole issue is moot, because the bigger travesty and dare I say sacrilege is the fact that in nine years nothing has been built on that site. No memorial, no museum, no towers.
Agree.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I think this whole issue is moot, because the bigger travesty and dare I say sacrilege is the fact that in nine years nothing has been built on that site. No memorial, no museum, no towers.
Agree.

Pretty magnifescent too. Kinda reminds me offff........well, hell, you know.

http://glasssteelandstone.com/Images/UAE/BurjDubai-A02.jpg

[mae]

That's it being built. It's been finished and it's been opened. It looks beautiful:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2f/Burj_Khalifa_building.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burj_Khalifa


Burj Khalifa is a skyscraper in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and the tallest man-made structure ever built, at 828 m (2,717 ft). Construction began on 21 September 2004, with the exterior of the structure completed on 1 October 2009. The building officially opened on 4 January 2010.

[alinda]

It's beautiful.

[pathoftheturtle]

Now this has got to be the most tranquil thread on this topic anywhere on the internet today.

I'm impressed.

[Matt]

I just read through it and I'm proud of everyone too. There is a scene in the Simpsons where Homer has a really brown crunchy shirt at the fair.

He says...

"See Marge, you said they couldn't deep fry my shirt"

She responds

"I didn't say they couldn't, I said you shouldn't"

That is how I feel about it. I happen to be one of those people that understands there are Mosques all over NYC and even one in the Pentagon as mentioned. I just don't think its necessary and the people building it could probably feel that way if they wanted to but they don't. :)

[Jon]

Sadly; I think this would be an unwise act.

[pathoftheturtle]

I just read through it and I'm proud of everyone too. There is a scene in the Simpsons where Homer has a really brown crunchy shirt at the fair.

He says...

"See Marge, you said they couldn't deep fry my shirt"

She responds

"I didn't say they couldn't, I said you shouldn't"

That is how I feel about it. I happen to be one of those people that understands there are Mosques all over NYC and even one in the Pentagon as mentioned. I just don't think its necessary and the people building it could probably feel that way if they wanted to but they don't. :)I don't think so. What would they say, "Come to think of it, our faith is pretty obnoxious"? You're suggesting that they yield to prejudice. Sounds like a Catch-22 to me. Jam tomorrow and jam yesterday but never jam today.

I understand the concern: we can't encourage terrorism, it's never the right way to advance a cause. However, was the agenda of al-Qaeda for us to submit to mosques in our country? When was that forbidden? Everyone is free to promote beliefs through peaceful channels in America.

The way I see it, they're jealous. They need to believe that we'd drop what we stand for in hard times; to believe that, deep down, we are no better than them, and that there's no shame in dirty dealing when you're the underdog.

I say that we cannot lose if we practice what we preach.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I just read through it and I'm proud of everyone too. There is a scene in the Simpsons where Homer has a really brown crunchy shirt at the fair.

He says...

"See Marge, you said they couldn't deep fry my shirt"

She responds

"I didn't say they couldn't, I said you shouldn't"

That is how I feel about it. I happen to be one of those people that understands there are Mosques all over NYC and even one in the Pentagon as mentioned. I just don't think its necessary and the people building it could probably feel that way if they wanted to but they don't. :)I don't think so. What would they say, "Come to think of it, our faith is pretty obnoxious"? You're suggesting that they yield to prejudice. Sounds like a Catch-22 to me. Jam tomorrow and jam yesterday but never jam today.

I understand the concern: we can't encourage terrorism, it's never the right way to advance a cause. However, was the agenda of al-Qaeda for us to submit to mosques in our country? When was that forbidden? Everyone is free to promote beliefs through peaceful channels in America.

The way I see it, they're jealous. They need to believe that we'd drop what we stand for in hard times; to believe that, deep down, we are no better than them, and that there's no shame in dirty dealing when you're the underdog.

I say that we cannot lose if we practice what we preach.

I think that all religions pretty much expect this of alternative religions.

[John_and_Yoko]

I don't think so. What would they say, "Come to think of it, our faith is pretty obnoxious"? You're suggesting that they yield to prejudice. Sounds like a Catch-22 to me. Jam tomorrow and jam yesterday but never jam today.

I understand the concern: we can't encourage terrorism, it's never the right way to advance a cause. However, was the agenda of al-Qaeda for us to submit to mosques in our country? When was that forbidden? Everyone is free to promote beliefs through peaceful channels in America.

The way I see it, they're jealous. They need to believe that we'd drop what we stand for in hard times; to believe that, deep down, we are no better than them, and that there's no shame in dirty dealing when you're the underdog.

I say that we cannot lose if we practice what we preach.

That sounds like what the Joker was trying to do in The Dark Knight.

[Girlystevedave]

I think it's wrong to hold religion responsible because of something an extremist did. Expecially when the mosque could be built in one location that boasts of it's merging of culture and so on.
But the problem with a lot of organized religion is that everyone is lumped together with every other person of that faith.

[John_and_Yoko]

I think it's wrong to hold religion responsible because of something an extremist did. Expecially when the mosque could be built in one location that boasts of it's merging of culture and so on.
But the problem with a lot of organized religion is that everyone is lumped together with every other person of that faith.

Not to mention that political problems often disguise themselves as religious differences--to demonize the opposition and make them the "enemy" so no one will even CONSIDER their view.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I think it's wrong to hold religion responsible because of something an extremist did. Expecially when the mosque could be built in one location that boasts of it's merging of culture and so on.
But the problem with a lot of organized religion is that everyone is lumped together with every other person of that faith.

While I agree that it is wrong to hold any one religious sect responsible for the actions of a few extremists. I do hold religion (as a whole) responsible for almost all of our worlds problesm, and I am not ashamed of that. Without religion, I think our world would be at peace.

[John_and_Yoko]

I think it's wrong to hold religion responsible because of something an extremist did. Expecially when the mosque could be built in one location that boasts of it's merging of culture and so on.
But the problem with a lot of organized religion is that everyone is lumped together with every other person of that faith.

While I agree that it is wrong to hold any one religious sect responsible for the actions of a few extremists. I do hold religion (as a whole) responsible for almost all of our worlds problesm, and I am not ashamed of that. Without religion, I think our world would be at peace.

I strongly disagree. It's extremism itself that's the problem, and that's not unique to religion. Why not get rid of politics and governments too while we're at it--then will we be at peace? Why not get rid of everything that could even potentially be hijacked by extremists? Then will we be at peace?

The thing about religion is that, ideally, it teaches us how to CONQUER those bestial impulses rather than be enslaved to them. That's a good thing. If religion deserves special mention it's because when the organization in question is specifically supposed to be that good, it's all the more disastrous when it fails to do so. But religion itself is not the problem, and no one will ever convince me otherwise.

[Jean]

what J&Y said

[John Blaze]

I just spent a good while reading this thread and all I can think of is, has everyone here watched the movie Equilibrium? You need to, if you haven't.

BTW, I read a good and funny article on this proposed "mosque". Please check it out.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/3-reasons-the-ground-zero-mosque-debate-makes-no-sense/

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Every war, throughout human history, has religion as its instigating factor. Every one.

[Jean]

Sorry, I thought it was mainly for territory and resources? With religion accompanying it for the obvious reason that it used to be an integral part of every culture?

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

I see religious differences as a stonger driving factor than territory and resources, though those things are undeniably part of the equation. In most cases though, I don't think that these factors can be seperated from each other. I think its some form of manifest destiny where a group believes that they are entitled to all the territory and resources, but their reason for this entitlement is their belief in the "one true god".

[Jean]

I view it differently. I think the main reason of religion ostensibly being the reason of conflicts is that people, throughout history, knew little other ideology but religious, and thus all their disagreements were always clothed in religious terms. I see very few truly religious wars in history (not even the Crusades, to look at them closely); definitely not World Wars 1 and 2.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Well, being a non-religious person, I am not surprised that we should not agree. But that's ok.:grouphug:

[Jean]

just a question... what was the religious cause of the Vietnam war?

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

For me, I think that alot of Christians, particularly American Christians get their ideals mixed up. I think for a lot of American Christians, Democracy and Christianity are connected, and that it is their Christian "duty" to save the world from Communism. I am not saying it is right, but I think it is true. Especially during that time. I think this connection stems from World War 2 and that the Axis powers were wiping out the Jews, and the Allies were "saving the world". I know it is abstract, but I still feel it was an important driving force. I know that many people in the US felt that it was their "Christian duty" to go to Vietnam to fight Communism.

[Jean]

wasn't it what the propaganda wanted it to look like, to be able to promote the war? sounds very much like that to me, and if so, confirms my point

there must be a war thread somewhere (or was it at .net?) - I expect we might confer for ages, to mutual satisfaction, especially on World War 2; but I don't really want to hijack this thread

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Whether or not religion is the source of conflict, people are susceptible to propaganda.

[Jean]

This.

Whether or not the propaganda is religious - or atheist, as in the former Soviet Union, or Cuba, or People's Republic of China (etc, etc, etc).

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

In the US, where I get my perspective, the propaganda always has a religious overtone. I'm sure that this has affected my views even though I try to be unbiased.

[Brice]

I'd say vietnam was never about communism at all.

[Brice]

In the US, where I get my perspective, the propaganda always has a religious overtone. I'm sure that this has affected my views even though I try to be unbiased.

Of course they feed us what we'll eat. If you want to know what any war is about you first have to ask yourself what is to be gained....cause it's all always greed that motivates. Everything else is function to achieve the goal.

[Jean]

That's how bears view it, too.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Though greed is what motivates the leaders, I don't think it is what motivates the soldiers. No soldiers = No war.

[Brice]

Though greed is what motivates the leaders, I don't think it is what motivates the soldiers. No soldiers = No war.

The soldiers and even most officers are just tools for their leaders objectives. There are always soldiers. People love a cause.

[Jean]

but there is a difference between saying, "religion is the cause of all wars" and "in history, soldiers have been often motivated by {religion}"? Substitute any other ideology here.

ETA: what Brice said. People love a cause.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Though that be true, and from this perspective, religious propaganda be only a tool for motivating the masses, without it...there would still be no war.

[Jean]

There are other tools.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Yet nothing enflames the masses like invoking God.

[Jean]

oh, come on. Invokin Marx-Lenin-Stalin-Mao-Fidel, all thorough atheists, invokes masses perfectly well. Let alone Hitler whose mess in the head was the furthest possible from any "organized religion"

I am not sure invoking petrol will be less impressive.

But I completely agree - religion is a tool (not the cause!).

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

All of those leaders motived their soldiers with fear, fear of being killed for not being patriotic. This is indeed a very powerful motivator. However, their opponents were very much motivated by religion.

[Jean]

Oh no, not fear. Very far from it. Ideals and ideas...

But, as I said above, we're moving further off topic...

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Obviously I have no personal experience with this perspective, so I acquiesce.

[Brice]

Yet nothing enflames the masses like invoking God.

Very true! It makes for the BEST cause...because people believe....because people WANT to believe. It is our nature. Take religion out of the equation though and there are no shortage of causes...again because people want to believe. As individuals we want peace, but put three people....ANY three people in a room together and eventually you'll have war. Is there a solution...an end to war? No! Absolutely not because we don't really want it. The problem is our tendency is to divide ourselves into groups. As long as we do this there will be wars. We are determined to think we are different from others and the logical leap from there is that we are better than them and almost all of us think in these terms.

[Brice]

Obviously I have no personal experience with this perspective, so I acquiesce.

I have none either my friend. It's just different ways of looking at things.

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

Aaaaannnnd.....Historically, and presently the most easily definable and most powerful groups that we have divided ourselves into are religious groups.

[Jean]

only if you look from where you are

from where I am - with a personal experience of Communism - it looks very different

[Brice]

Aaaaannnnd.....Historically, and presently the most easily definable and most powerful groups that we have divided ourselves into are religious groups.

Absolutely! But it isn't the group's fault that their beliefs are used to manipulate some of their children.

[Brice]

only if you look from where you are

from where I am - with a personal experience of Communism - it looks very different

...and yet the reality is it's the same. :)

[Jean]

also true

(refers to both posts above)

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

only if you look from where you are

from where I am - with a personal experience of Communism - it looks very different

I realize that this is an important limitation that I have, it is almost impossible, given our respective life histories to see things any other way.

[pathoftheturtle]

I just read through it and I'm proud of everyone too. There is a scene in the Simpsons where Homer has a really brown crunchy shirt at the fair.

He says...

"See Marge, you said they couldn't deep fry my shirt"

She responds

"I didn't say they couldn't, I said you shouldn't"

That is how I feel about it. I happen to be one of those people that understands there are Mosques all over NYC and even one in the Pentagon as mentioned. I just don't think its necessary and the people building it could probably feel that way if they wanted to but they don't. :)I don't think so. What would they say, "Come to think of it, our faith is pretty obnoxious"? You're suggesting that they yield to prejudice. Sounds like a Catch-22 to me. Jam tomorrow and jam yesterday but never jam today.

I understand the concern: we can't encourage terrorism, it's never the right way to advance a cause. However, was the agenda of al-Qaeda for us to submit to mosques in our country? When was that forbidden? Everyone is free to promote beliefs through peaceful channels in America.

The way I see it, they're jealous. They need to believe that we'd drop what we stand for in hard times; to believe that, deep down, we are no better than them, and that there's no shame in dirty dealing when you're the underdog.

I say that we cannot lose if we practice what we preach.

I think that all religions pretty much expect this of alternative religions.Even Bahá'í and Unitarian Universalism?

I don't think so. What would they say, "Come to think of it, our faith is pretty obnoxious"? You're suggesting that they yield to prejudice. Sounds like a Catch-22 to me. Jam tomorrow and jam yesterday but never jam today.

I understand the concern: we can't encourage terrorism, it's never the right way to advance a cause. However, was the agenda of al-Qaeda for us to submit to mosques in our country? When was that forbidden? Everyone is free to promote beliefs through peaceful channels in America.

The way I see it, they're jealous. They need to believe that we'd drop what we stand for in hard times; to believe that, deep down, we are no better than them, and that there's no shame in dirty dealing when you're the underdog.

I say that we cannot lose if we practice what we preach.

That sounds like what the Joker was trying to do in The Dark Knight.:orely: Oh, I see what you mean! Yeah. Or, for an even better example, what he was trying to do in The Killing Joke.

[Girlystevedave]

Aaaaannnnd.....Historically, and presently the most easily definable and most powerful groups that we have divided ourselves into are religious groups.

Absolutely! But it isn't the group's fault that their beliefs are used to manipulate some of their children.

I agree with both of these statements.
And I also believe that a person of one faith can't be held responsible for something that another person has done, just because you worship the same God.
I think too many times, religion is used as a crutch or an excuse for actions. There are extremists on every side who will somehow use religion to gain something for themselves. It's a scary tool, religion. People can turn the most beautiful thing into something so dangerous.

[mae]

Getting back on topic though, since there is a mosque already within four blocks of Ground Zero, and that seems to be okay, why is two blocks away suddenly not okay? At which distance is it okay to have a mosque? Is it three blocks?

[John_and_Yoko]

Exactly--the worst thing about religion is that it's easy for extremists to INVOKE religion in what is really a political situation. Invoke religion = portray your enemies as hell-spawn = dehumanize the enemy = make the masses hate the enemy and refuse to listen to what they have to say.

I don't say that NO WARS EVER have had anything to do with religion, just that a lot fewer wars HAVE been primarily religious in nature than have had religion INVOKED in them, which isn't the same thing.

Case in point, both sides of the US Civil War thought God was on their side, but how was that in any way an actual RELIGIOUS war?

EDIT: Sorry, ninja'd.... Maybe they think the proper distance is to be outside of bombing distance? :angry:

[Bev Vincent]

Getting back on topic though, since there is a mosque already within four blocks of Ground Zero, and that seems to be okay, why is two blocks away suddenly not okay? At which distance is it okay to have a mosque? Is it three blocks?

The Ground Zero Mosque Is Not a Mosque (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anushay-hossain/park-51-the-ground-zero-m_b_686950.html)


This Community Center plans to house a culinary school, an auditorium, a swimming pool, a basketball court, and yes, space for prayer. But it is not a mosque, so we all need to stop calling it that. Calling this Center the "Ground Zero Mosque" not only makes people think up dramatic images of an actual mosque right on the site of Ground Zero, but it also misconstrues the entire debate.

[John_and_Yoko]

O...kay, if it's not a mosque at all, then what is all this controversy about?

I swear, the human race needs to be put in solitary confinement in rubber rooms....

[Jean]

but that's how it works, right? once you call it a Mosque, three quarters of the people will never get this image out of their minds, it's imprinted

[Brice]

End this already!! I happen to be one of those folks who was there. Sorry, but if you weren't it just don't count. Everyone has an opinion and that's fine, but the folks that were there and experienced the attack, and lost Loved ones or business asosciates. or used to "hang out" in the "Sky Bar" this is not cool.

Maybe some folks were in "military" employ. Fine, let it go Its not a good subject. You would know if you had been attacked. But hey, You weren't THERE for the most part...... So until you walk a mile in our shoes........Keep it to yourself!!!!!

Make sense?

I'll get flamed for this for sure, but If you're gonna discuss it then be a participant or silence it no? You really had t be there, to talk about it. IMHO


I have to disagree on this point dude. There is no situation where you have to be there to discuss it. Discussing it is how we as a society get past these things and move on. Without doing so we never will. I'm truly sorry for the personal impact this had on you or anyone else who was there, but I've gotta' question the idea of not discussing the issue at all. I see no good coming from keeping quiet about it. If you can please explain.

[Jean]

what Brice said

(Brice - can I just stalk you around and paste the "what Brice said" line under your posts? It has become a recurrent event)

[Brice]

Certainly! :lol:

[BROWNINGS CHILDE]

What Jean said.

[pathoftheturtle]

End this already!! I happen to be one of those folks who was there. Sorry, but if you weren't it just don't count. Everyone has an opinion and that's fine, but the folks that were there and experienced the attack, and lost Loved ones or business asosciates. or used to "hang out" in the "Sky Bar" this is not cool.

Maybe some folks were in "military" employ. Fine, let it go Its not a good subject. You would know if you had been attacked. But hey, You weren't THERE for the most part...... So until you walk a mile in our shoes........Keep it to yourself!!!!!

Make sense?

I'll get flamed for this for sure, but If you're gonna discuss it then be a participant or silence it no? You really had t be there, to talk about it. IMHO


I have to disagree on this point dude. There is no situation where you have to be there to discuss it. Discussing it is how we as a society get past these things and move on. Without doing so we never will. I'm truly sorry for the personal impact this had on you or anyone else who was there, but I've gotta' question the idea of not discussing the issue at all. I see no good coming from keeping quiet about it. If you can please explain.:clap:
Please don't get the wrong idea, Merlin. I am also American, and we don't want you to feel that you need to be alienated.
O...kay, if it's not a mosque at all, then what is all this controversy about? ...Electing Republicians, of course. <_<
...that's how it works, right? once you call it a Mosque, three quarters of the people will never get this image out of their minds, it's imprintedExactly. :angry:

[John_and_Yoko]

End this already!! I happen to be one of those folks who was there. Sorry, but if you weren't it just don't count. Everyone has an opinion and that's fine, but the folks that were there and experienced the attack, and lost Loved ones or business asosciates. or used to "hang out" in the "Sky Bar" this is not cool.

Maybe some folks were in "military" employ. Fine, let it go Its not a good subject. You would know if you had been attacked. But hey, You weren't THERE for the most part...... So until you walk a mile in our shoes........Keep it to yourself!!!!!

Make sense?

I'll get flamed for this for sure, but If you're gonna discuss it then be a participant or silence it no? You really had t be there, to talk about it. IMHO


I have to disagree on this point dude. There is no situation where you have to be there to discuss it. Discussing it is how we as a society get past these things and move on. Without doing so we never will. I'm truly sorry for the personal impact this had on you or anyone else who was there, but I've gotta' question the idea of not discussing the issue at all. I see no good coming from keeping quiet about it. If you can please explain.

Maybe we shouldn't discuss the Holocaust either--after all, that happened before my parents were born. :unsure:

[Brice]

End this already!! I happen to be one of those folks who was there. Sorry, but if you weren't it just don't count. Everyone has an opinion and that's fine, but the folks that were there and experienced the attack, and lost Loved ones or business asosciates. or used to "hang out" in the "Sky Bar" this is not cool.

Maybe some folks were in "military" employ. Fine, let it go Its not a good subject. You would know if you had been attacked. But hey, You weren't THERE for the most part...... So until you walk a mile in our shoes........Keep it to yourself!!!!!

Make sense?

I'll get flamed for this for sure, but If you're gonna discuss it then be a participant or silence it no? You really had t be there, to talk about it. IMHO


I have to disagree on this point dude. There is no situation where you have to be there to discuss it. Discussing it is how we as a society get past these things and move on. Without doing so we never will. I'm truly sorry for the personal impact this had on you or anyone else who was there, but I've gotta' question the idea of not discussing the issue at all. I see no good coming from keeping quiet about it. If you can please explain.

Maybe we shouldn't discuss the Holocaust either--after all, that happened before my parents were born. :unsure:

Well, I mean I can understand if someone has some level of personal involvement you'd want to be sensitive to that and compassionate, but I really don't see where we've crossed over any major boundaries here. Now I'm just postulating here, but I guess the question becomes how soon is too soon to talk about it....which for some people is gonna' be a sensitive issue in itself and everyone's gonna' have different opinions. If you ask me though it's never too soon. Now I didn't have anyone die in this personally so I guess I can't really say for certain, but I'm sure I've had pretty horrible stuff happen to people I care about and I guess I just feel the healing process begins with talking about things...and it's also never to early for that, imo. Of course this is all just speculation of mine based on what I've seen posted here. I could be completely off base. :unsure:

[Bev Vincent]

There was an interesting storyline on Mad Men this week. The show is set in the 1960s, remember, about 20 years after the end of WW II. One of the partners brings in Honda in an attempt to get their advertising business for their motorcycle line, which is just starting to catch on. Another partner, a WW II veteran, is outraged that the company would consider dealing with a Japanese firm. For the others, 20 years was long enough to say "that's history, we've moved on," but not for him.

[mae]

There's already a Wikipedia article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_Zero_Mosque

[alinda]

We move faster these days.:couple: