Help me articulate why this rant vs. NY Mosque is wrong

[Anonymous]

Part of the plane fell on the planned mosque site. I think that qualifies as close.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Part of the plane fell on the planned mosque site. I think that qualifies as close.

Source?

[Anonymous]

You know what... I don't give a crap what they build there. Too much of the conversation has focused on, "But these are the GOOD Muslims." Who cares. Even if they preach outright hatred, they are entitled to their beliefs and their places of worship as guaranteed by the Constitution. Obviously, I would denounce such beliefs, but they are free to build their structures as they see fit, so long as they follow existing codes and rules.

Satanists, Scientologist, homophobic Christians, radial Muslims... they are all guaranteed the same Constitutional protections of their beliefs as the rest of us. We are free to denounce and criticize their beliefs if we see fit (by the very same document), but anyone arguing that they should be prohibited from building where they see fit is a bigger threat to our "way of life" than any terrorist.

Now, as to whether or not this specific group deserves any criticism or derision, I just don't see it. They're building a community center in a densely populated city with a large Muslim population. There is nothing "offensive" or disrespectful about them doing so within a few blocks of the World Trade Center. Hell, they're building new giant office buildings on the WTC site... how sacred can it be? Are we also going to chase of the Halal street vendors (by far the tastiest street fare in the city) off the property?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's another Muslim American voice against the site of the proposed mosque. Sorry, I don't think you get to say it's all "Muslim Hating Right Wingers" (as if the two go hand in hand--grow up!). There are many reasonable voices in opposition; rational people for whom this project gives pause. It's OK to actually be contemplative you know.

"The Muslims in our family living here in the United States have never been prevented from practicing their religion in any way. Yet those of us who question the construction of a mosque and Muslim community center in the shadow of Ground Zero are called religious bigots or intolerant. This is ridiculous."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/08/AR2010080802475.html?sub=AR

Finding a smattering of Muslims to support your point of view does not make you, or them right. I can provide names of African Americans who vocally supported David Duke, a Klansman, in his run for Governor of Louisiana. I do not believe that nullified the preponderance of opinion that David Duke was, and is a racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Part of the plane fell on the planned mosque site. I think that qualifies as close.

Well they aren't building a memorial on Park Place, so it can't be that close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's another Muslim American voice against the site of the proposed mosque. Sorry, I don't think you get to say it's all "Muslim Hating Right Wingers" (as if the two go hand in hand--grow up!). There are many reasonable voices in opposition; rational people for whom this project gives pause. It's OK to actually be contemplative you know.

"The Muslims in our family living here in the United States have never been prevented from practicing their religion in any way. Yet those of us who question the construction of a mosque and Muslim community center in the shadow of Ground Zero are called religious bigots or intolerant. This is ridiculous."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/08/AR2010080802475.html?sub=AR

Finding a smattering of Muslims to support your point of view does not make you, or them right. I can provide names of African Americans who vocally supported David Duke, a Klansman, in his run for Governor of Louisiana. I do not believe that nullified the preponderance of opinion that David Duke was, and is a racist.

I am not personally against the mosque. I am against characterizing every single person who questions it as a 'right wing racist'. That is intellectually feeble. There are many people whose concerns and opinions that may not equate to yours, and they have a right to them (when thoughtfully presented) without being maligned. Use reason to make YOUR case, not insult.

Finally, I do think our country has a weird tension btwn PC police on the one hand and free speechers on the other. Hence we get situations where a Mayoral aide is run out of office in DC for using the word 'niggardly' properly, but insane hate protestors are allowed to shout outside of private funerals of fallen soldiers about how this is 'what they get'. There is a problem here for me.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
I am not personally against the mosque. I am against characterizing every single person who questions it as a 'right wing racist'. That is intellectually feeble. There are many people whose concerns and opinions that may not equate to yours, and they have a right to them (when thoughtfully presented) without being maligned. Use reason to make YOUR case, not insult.

Can you show me where anyone has said that every single person who questions the building of the Islamic center is a "right wing racist"? I believe you are wasting your effort opposing such a thing because it is just not happening.

On the other hand, this controversy is undeniably be pushed primarily by right-wingers, the great majority of whom do not live in NYC. If you do not believe that to be the case, then please take your own advice and "use reason to make YOUR case".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's another Muslim American voice against the site of the proposed mosque. Sorry, I don't think you get to say it's all "Muslim Hating Right Wingers" (as if the two go hand in hand--grow up!). There are many reasonable voices in opposition; rational people for whom this project gives pause. It's OK to actually be contemplative you know.

"The Muslims in our family living here in the United States have never been prevented from practicing their religion in any way. Yet those of us who question the construction of a mosque and Muslim community center in the shadow of Ground Zero are called religious bigots or intolerant. This is ridiculous."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/08/AR2010080802475.html?sub=AR

Finding a smattering of Muslims to support your point of view does not make you, or them right. I can provide names of African Americans who vocally supported David Duke, a Klansman, in his run for Governor of Louisiana. I do not believe that nullified the preponderance of opinion that David Duke was, and is a racist.

I am not personally against the mosque. I am against characterizing every single person who questions it as a 'right wing racist'. That is intellectually feeble. There are many people whose concerns and opinions that may not equate to yours, and they have a right to them (when thoughtfully presented) without being maligned. Use reason to make YOUR case, not insult.

Finally, I do think our country has a weird tension btwn PC police on the one hand and free speechers on the other. Hence we get situations where a Mayoral aide is run out of office in DC for using the word 'niggardly' properly, but insane hate protestors are allowed to shout outside of private funerals of fallen soldiers about how this is 'what they get'. There is a problem here for me.

This is intellectually feeble. I have not seen that assertion anywhere on this thread. If you would care to point it out, I would be very interested to improve my understanding.

My only point is that you cannot prove the rightness of your point of view by finding a muslim who agrees with you. And I have no idea what you are talking about re: the use off the word 'niggardly', but it sounds to me like you are conflating two completely separate issues because you believe that both are backed by some unified PC movement. I think this whining about where a church can or can't be built is just a different kind of PC, and just as lame.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:The Auschwitz example is a red herring and another example of how right wing blogs are now driving nearly the entire political discourse of this country. The building in Auschwitz was not two blocks away, it was right outside the gate. It had actually been used as part of the camp operations; poison gas had actually been stored there.

The fact is that this is a right wing political issue. The people of New York largely support building the Islamic Center at that location. As a resident of DC, I hate having outsiders telling us how to run our city. I am sure New Yorkers hate it just as much. Why a bunch of right wingers want to do Usama Bin Laden's work for him and create a war of civilizations between the West and Islam is something I don't understand. Well, I guess I do understand the politicians -- they just want votes. But, the rest should really give it a break.

Um, this kind of gross and savage language does not seem to apply to some nice lady writing about how she disagrees with the mosque construction near the site of her mom's murder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's another Muslim American voice against the site of the proposed mosque. Sorry, I don't think you get to say it's all "Muslim Hating Right Wingers" (as if the two go hand in hand--grow up!). There are many reasonable voices in opposition; rational people for whom this project gives pause. It's OK to actually be contemplative you know.

"The Muslims in our family living here in the United States have never been prevented from practicing their religion in any way. Yet those of us who question the construction of a mosque and Muslim community center in the shadow of Ground Zero are called religious bigots or intolerant. This is ridiculous."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/08/AR2010080802475.html?sub=AR

Finding a smattering of Muslims to support your point of view does not make you, or them right. I can provide names of African Americans who vocally supported David Duke, a Klansman, in his run for Governor of Louisiana. I do not believe that nullified the preponderance of opinion that David Duke was, and is a racist.

I am not personally against the mosque. I am against characterizing every single person who questions it as a 'right wing racist'. That is intellectually feeble. There are many people whose concerns and opinions that may not equate to yours, and they have a right to them (when thoughtfully presented) without being maligned. Use reason to make YOUR case, not insult.

Finally, I do think our country has a weird tension btwn PC police on the one hand and free speechers on the other. Hence we get situations where a Mayoral aide is run out of office in DC for using the word 'niggardly' properly, but insane hate protestors are allowed to shout outside of private funerals of fallen soldiers about how this is 'what they get'. There is a problem here for me.

This is intellectually feeble. I have not seen that assertion anywhere on this thread. If you would care to point it out, I would be very interested to improve my understanding.

My only point is that you cannot prove the rightness of your point of view by finding a muslim who agrees with you. And I have no idea what you are talking about re: the use off the word 'niggardly', but it sounds to me like you are conflating two completely separate issues because you believe that both are backed by some unified PC movement. I think this whining about where a church can or can't be built is just a different kind of PC, and just as lame.

I am sorry you have zero ability to form cultural cross-references. You must not be from around here or read the newspaper much? Many defenders of the mosque have brought up the view that the construction of the mosque is a free speech issue. I pointed out a situation where the PC police in DC ironically trampled someone's rights when they properly used the term 'niggardly' (a Mayoral aide was fired--look it up); I pointed out another situation where free speech comes up against the right to privately grieve seen outside military funerals. There are issues of free speech in this country in which people a) pick and choose what to defend and b) there is zero limitation that has to do with reason or human dignity. Two extremes.

[Anonymous]

People are free to protest all they want. Scream to the high heavens if you want. But if it becomes clear that your protest is based in hatred, I will scream right back at you. That is not to say that all opposition to the mosque is grounded in hate, but a lot that I personally have seen is.

The moment people advocate (which some are) that the government step in and prohibit the building of this mosque is when a line is crossed and when we start to see our Constitution eroded. And many of the people who make such appeals do so on the grounds that terrorists are trying to destroy our freedoms, when they are the ones ultimately tearing it to shreds.

I do think there is room for reasonable people to disagree on the impact that a mosque in this area will have. This is an emotionally charged situation and people are going to feel very strongly in some instances. However, I would challenge those who do oppose the mosque on the grounds that it will somehow interfere with the grieving to truly look at the facts of the matter, including the actual location of the mosque (not at ground zero), the true intent of the mosque (as a community center meant to bring peoples together), the trouble with equating and thus condemning all Muslims because of the actions of a few, and the many other ways that the areas in and around ground zero have already had their 'hallowness' compromised.

No one here is saying the protesters have no right to protest. Only that they are wrong. But we are just entitled to that belief as they are to theirs. And, in this case, the Constitution is on our side in terms of what the government's response should be, namely, that it shouldn't have one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's another Muslim American voice against the site of the proposed mosque. Sorry, I don't think you get to say it's all "Muslim Hating Right Wingers" (as if the two go hand in hand--grow up!). There are many reasonable voices in opposition; rational people for whom this project gives pause. It's OK to actually be contemplative you know.

"The Muslims in our family living here in the United States have never been prevented from practicing their religion in any way. Yet those of us who question the construction of a mosque and Muslim community center in the shadow of Ground Zero are called religious bigots or intolerant. This is ridiculous."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/08/AR2010080802475.html?sub=AR

Finding a smattering of Muslims to support your point of view does not make you, or them right. I can provide names of African Americans who vocally supported David Duke, a Klansman, in his run for Governor of Louisiana. I do not believe that nullified the preponderance of opinion that David Duke was, and is a racist.

I am not personally against the mosque. I am against characterizing every single person who questions it as a 'right wing racist'. That is intellectually feeble. There are many people whose concerns and opinions that may not equate to yours, and they have a right to them (when thoughtfully presented) without being maligned. Use reason to make YOUR case, not insult.

Finally, I do think our country has a weird tension btwn PC police on the one hand and free speechers on the other. Hence we get situations where a Mayoral aide is run out of office in DC for using the word 'niggardly' properly, but insane hate protestors are allowed to shout outside of private funerals of fallen soldiers about how this is 'what they get'. There is a problem here for me.

This is intellectually feeble. I have not seen that assertion anywhere on this thread. If you would care to point it out, I would be very interested to improve my understanding.

My only point is that you cannot prove the rightness of your point of view by finding a muslim who agrees with you. And I have no idea what you are talking about re: the use off the word 'niggardly', but it sounds to me like you are conflating two completely separate issues because you believe that both are backed by some unified PC movement. I think this whining about where a church can or can't be built is just a different kind of PC, and just as lame.

I am sorry you have zero ability to form cultural cross-references. You must not be from around here or read the newspaper much? Many defenders of the mosque have brought up the view that the construction of the mosque is a free speech issue. I pointed out a situation where the PC police in DC ironically trampled someone's rights when they properly used the term 'niggardly' (a Mayoral aide was fired--look it up); I pointed out another situation where free speech comes up against the right to privately grieve seen outside military funerals. There are issues of free speech in this country in which people a) pick and choose what to defend and b) there is zero limitation that has to do with reason or human dignity. Two extremes.

I never said anything about "Muslim Hating Right Wingers". And I have no problem with their freedom to protest this mosque. I just disagree with them, and I don't think that finding muslim supporters makes their arguments better.

Also, I do not feel like I should defend someone who fired someone else because they don't understand the definition of 'niggardly'.

I don't like protesters disrupting military funerals, but I accept their right to do it as long as they are back at a distance established by the police or the courts.

In short, I am not picking and choosing which speech to defend and which to ban.

So now that I am firmly and consistently a supporter of the First Amendment, I believe the mosque has a clear first amendment right to place a mosque on 45 Park Place, NY NY. What do you believe?

[Anonymous]

One fact that I have not seen mentioned is that the site is in the middle of a cross street, so it and Ground Zero should not be in sight of each other.

That probably will not change anyone's mind, but it seems to me that it should be of some comfort to those who object to it that they will not be staring at it as they pay their respects to the victims.

[jsteele]

Two things that shed a lot of light on this controversy:

1) Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the guy behind the Islamic Center, has been sent on US Government-sponsored tours of the Middle East to explain to Muslims abroad what it's like to be a Muslim in the US. These trips have been sponsored by both the Bush and Obama administration. The goal was to build understanding and improve the image of the US. Obviously, the current vitriol being cast against this gentleman may have clouded his views somewhat;

2) Bryan Fischer, the Director of Issues Analysis for the American Family Association recently posted an article on the AFA's website calling for "no more mosques, period" in the US.

Many of those opposing the Islamic Center may well have the best intentions. But, I think it is quite clear that many don't. Moreover, regardless of one's intentions, it is quite clear that they are contributing to increasing enmity among Muslims both at home and abroad (and, hence, contributing to Usama Bin Laden's cause).

[Anonymous]

The President finally came out in favor of the first amendment. A bit late, but at least he is unequivocal: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/08/obama_offers_support_to_islamic_center_near_ground.php?ref=fpblg