Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Ground Zero Mosque


Karlis
 Share

Shold the mosque be approved? Or not approved?  

87 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the building of a mosque be approved?



Recommended Posts

There are millions of people who believe he is a Muslim, so we can use the same claim you are making to him. That because he's a Muslim he's got to encourage terrorists.

I disagree. Of course there are whack jobs out there who will believe anything. But I don't think people would see the erection of a mosque there in the same light that they see Obama. Everyone who is a Muslim knows that he isn't one, because they know the specifics of their religious tradition and know he doesn't conform. The only people who think Obama is a Muslim are people who don't know anything about Islam (it's their equivalent of saying he has cooties).

The claim that I'm worried about would have more observable fact to back it up. 1. the terrorists perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. 2. everything was destroyed there and the area was cleaned out. 3. they built a mosque on the site. I honestly think it would project a weird message. The destruction of the twin towers resulted in the erection of a mosque in it's place.

BTW- I'm feeling a lot more ambivalent about this now. I'm not into fundamentalist Christianity and I've used the facilities at various YM&YWCA's. I've taken classes at YM&YWHA's too (Young Men's Hebrew Association). An Islamic version of this would probably be pretty much the same.

But it would be SO EASY to build it in a place that wouldn't send a "congratulations terrorists" message. This still seems very stupid to me. We might as well make a cash donation to Osama bin Laden's suicide bomber recruitment agency.

Edited by Siara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 636
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ninjadude

    61

  • Agent X

    39

  • Mainpoint

    51

  • Leah G.

    43

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I believe I already made the case. There are lots of things the amendments don't "specifically" state. That is why we have courts to interpret the constitution. It is ridiculous to expect that the constitution would specifically enumerate the circumstances of this particular case.

God help us. This is exactly the type of fuzzy thinking and court-o-philia that has created the horrid state of affairs we're in. The courts took it upon themselves to become the high priests of the Constitution. That is not a power ever granted them in the Const. itself and the idea that we somehow "need" them to "interpret" what is perfectly clear to the average educated person is insulting and superstitious. It's no different from the clergy who have convinced Christians or Muslims that they "need" them to interpret the Bible of the Koran. You are being just as willingly blind as the religious fanatics you have no respect for. You don't need to enumerate the circumstances of this case to get to the constitutional principles it raises. This case is not unique or even interesting from a con law POV. Probably why the SC won't end up involved. The const principles that are involved, tho, are NOT what you and your compadres keep saying they are. If you don't understand the Const, then maybe you're comfortable leaving it to judges (I doubt you like it when they find against your political bias, tho). If you want to understand it-- and it really isn't THAT hard, then pay some attention to sources outside "journalism"-- which is willfully ignorant of legal matters, and the ACLU who actively seek to corrupt the const order for their own purposes.

I hate to say exactly what I said before, but you seem to think it's okay to treat religions differently depending on the biases of the neighborhood in which their facilities exist. Again, if you would allow a church or other house of worship you must allow the building of a mosque (or in this case Islamic community center). Otherwise you are violating the first amendment as it has been interpreted by the courts.

For the 23rd time, this is NOT a matter of freedom of religion. It has nothing to do with the first amendment-- as interpreted by the courts or otherwise. So would you PLEASE stop regurgitating that? Prohibiting a mosque from being built on any specific site DOES NOT VIOLATE ANYONE'S FREEDOM OF RELIGION. They can still exercise their religion-- meet, preach, pray to Mecca, curse the West, spit on women, threaten each other-- whatever their religion has them do. THAT is freedom of religion. That is why that part of the first amendment is called the Free Exzercise Clause. Not the Freedom of Location Clause or the Free Building Clause. What this IS a matter of is called EQUAL PROTECTION. Part of the 14th, not the 1st, amd that says all groups have to be treated equally by the law. So, if you don't let them build the mosque there, at this point, then their equal protection rights are being violated. Unless you tell them that mosques can't be built anywhere, or that they can't do their Muslim things at all, then there is no freedom of religion issue. So yes, they have a constititutional protection. But it is NOT freedom of religion. That is a completely different doctrine. Can we AT LEAST get that straight?

This whole debate stems from the fear of Islamization and the irrational belief that the religion of Islam is fundamentally evil. In this country we do not view Christiantity in the same way as Islam. We are able to separate Christian extremists from average christians. Why can we not do this for muslims?

How irrational the fear of Islammization is is a debatable issue. Ask the residents of Londonistan or outer Paris for their opinions. Whether not is it is fundamentally evil is questionable too. There certainly is evidence to suggest that. But, OF COURSE we don't treat Christianity and Islam the same way. Not SOCIALLY. Society doesn't function by the standards of the courtroom or rigid legal formalities. We are a Christian country-- meaning that the majority of people here are Christians and almost all the people here are products of Christian (Western) culture-- whether they are religious or not. Islam, OTOH, is completely alien to nearly all Americans-- religiously, philosophically, culturally. So of course it is going to be viewed very differently. While Christian extremists may be hard to deal with, Muslim extremists presents a qualitatively different kind of problem. Regular, moderate Muslims are difficult enough for Westerners to deal with. Why should this be surprising?

Edited by venqax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most people forget that many Muslims died in the 9/11 tragedy, it was a world trade centre consisting of all nationilities and creeds. As for those who did the act are allegedly Muslims, I say allegedly because there are many holes in the 9/11 report but that's another discussion.

I think a mosque would be a good idea and a slap in the face of those who oppose America and the west. Why? Well we are showing them that their actions were to cause a rift between Islam and the west and Muslims and non Muslims. By building the mosque we show tolerance, mercy and moral backbone. By not building it or opposing it, creates the perfect situation for recruitment for terrorists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an addendum-- it is not just the defenders of the mosque that keep screwing this up. The opponents correctly point out that it is not a freedom of religion question, and seem to think that ends that matter constitutionally speaking. They simply ignore the equal protection issue. And, for the record, I oppose the mosque being built there, but don't see any legal-constitutional way to stop it now. So I'm not simply justifying my own preference. And I didn't need a court to "interpret" this for me. I DO think there are perfectly constitutional things that could be done to avoid these issues in general. Next time.

Edited by venqax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most people forget that many Muslims died in the 9/11 tragedy, it was a world trade centre consisting of all nationilities and creeds. As for those who did the act are allegedly Muslims, I say allegedly because there are many holes in the 9/11 report but that's another discussion.

I think a mosque would be a good idea and a slap in the face of those who oppose America and the west. Why? Well we are showing them that their actions were to cause a rift between Islam and the west and Muslims and non Muslims. By building the mosque we show tolerance, mercy and moral backbone. By not building it or opposing it, creates the perfect situation for recruitment for terrorists.

That might be true. My main concern about the project at this point is that the political message that it would send might help the terrorists. The funding seems questionable too but it's so difficult to separate information from political spin that I feel confused on this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. everything was destroyed there and the area was cleaned out. 3. they built a mosque on the site. I honestly think it would project a weird message. The destruction of the twin towers resulted in the erection of a mosque in it's place.BTW- I'm feeling a lot more ambivalent about this now. I'm not into fundamentalist Christianity and I've used the facilities at various YM&YWCA's. I've taken classes at YM&YWHA's too (Young Men's Hebrew Association). An Islamic version of this would probably be pretty much the same.But it would be SO EASY to build it in a place that wouldn't send a "congratulations terrorists" message. This still seems very stupid to me. We might as well make a cash donation to Osama bin Laden's suicide bomber recruitment agency.

First, there's a difference between building a mosque "in it's (the WTC) place" and building it 2 blocks away.

Second, it's not a mosque, it's an Islamic center that happens to contain a mosque.

Third, if two blocks away isn't far enough, what is? Where is the line drawn? 3 blocks? 4 blocks? 5 blocks? Who gets to decide where that line is drawn? The Islamaphobes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

those who did the act are allegedly Muslims, I say allegedly because there are many holes in the 9/11 report but that's another discussion.

Yeah. That's a discussion for the therapists' office.

Well we are showing them that their actions were to cause a rift between Islam and the west and Muslims and non Muslims. By building the mosque we show tolerance, mercy and moral backbone. By not building it or opposing it, creates the perfect situation for recruitment for terrorists.

There is absolutely nothing close to the most microscopic evidence that these people are impressed by tolerance, mercy, or moral backbone. All they know is violence, and that doesn't scare them much. This is a lot like trying to rid your house of roaches. There is no psychological strategy to achieve that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

like I posted on another article dealing with this topic. It would be like the United States building a musuem to honor nuclear power and show how nuclear energy has been used, in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. Then when you walk into the musuem you see a picture of the devistation of the nuclear bombs fat man and little boy. Or better yet, how do you think the people of Jeurusaluem, Israel would feel if someone decided to build a musuem there in site of the holocaust and then you walk in to see a Nazi German symbol and then as you walked through the musuem you saw pictures of people getting tortured and killed that was all Jews.

Just a couple of thoughts on the Ground Zero Mosque. So pretty much you can see why I voted NO on building the mosque at Ground Zero. It would be as if people was spitting on dozens of graves of innocent people murdered. and it would condeem the souls of those lost on that tradegic day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not being built on ground zero, it's being built nearly a mile away.

That's an extremely large radius from ground zero.

By that reasoning, we should get rid of all buildings because they're built on people's graves.

It's a convenient excuse.

Lower Manhattan must be the largest cemetery in the world. Who cares about the strip clubs who're violating peoples' graves, right? I mean isn't that supposed to be the gravest sin there is to have sexual acts on people's graves?

Of course not.

Just Muslims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not being built on ground zero, it's being built nearly a mile away.

Would that that were true.

Looking it up on Google Map shows that 51 Park Place is only 500 FEET from the edge of the Ground Zero zone. There's 5280 feet in a mile, so even if you take West Broadway north and then scoot over down Park Place, it is WAY LESS then a fifth of a mile. Even if you measure from the center of ground zero it is less then half a mile.

post-26883-097566400 1282525451_thumb.jp

500 feet is a little LESS then TWO football fields.

As long as the money for the Project is Clean then I say go ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The very fact that the Developers changed the name from Cordoba House to Park 51 means they understand that the whole thing is seen as being a statement of approval of the 9-11 attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i voted no. i dont care what is politically correct or whatever else of excuse you may choose. its just not right.

Lets have a Pro-Nazi Memorial Museum/School/Church in Isreal. What would be wrong with this? I suppose everything since it wasnt Americans being slaughtered then. IF Americans, then i suppose it would be ok then.

To me its an insult. An insult to all those families. But this IS America, and you cant officially have a vote on anything anyways. So, if HE wants it, i guess its gonna happen. Since when has any other policy or plan been detoured because of the voice of dislike of some Americans? Not in the recent future the last time i checked.

Unless i dont know if they do exist or not:

Would ALL Middle Eastern/MUSLIM countries let us put up churches for ALL our various religions? ...and then respect that religion and culture?... with peaceful existence?..... no, i think not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would that that were true.

Looking it up on Google Map shows that 51 Park Place is only 500 FEET from the edge of the Ground Zero zone. There's 5280 feet in a mile, so even if you take West Broadway north and then scoot over down Park Place, it is WAY LESS then a fifth of a mile. Even if you measure from the center of ground zero it is less then half a mile.

post-26883-097566400 1282525451_thumb.jp

500 feet is a little LESS then TWO football fields.

As long as the money for the Project is Clean then I say go ahead.

Thanks for the info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would ALL Middle Eastern/MUSLIM countries let us put up churches for ALL our various religions? ...and then respect that religion and culture?... with peaceful existence?..... no, i think not.

To be frank though, the United States IS NOT those countries.

When it comes to U.S. policy, I don't care how affairs are conducted, I care only about how we should be conducting based off of our own system of laws.

To me its an insult. An insult to all those families.

Even the ones who've stated that they take no issue with the Center being built?

And what of the Muslim families who lost loved ones, no, not the families of the terrorists, but the families of those that worked in the Towers as well eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The very fact that the Developers changed the name from Cordoba House to Park 51 means they understand that the whole thing is seen as being a statement of approval of the 9-11 attacks.

I don't understand the significance of the name change. Is Park 51 a reference to some aspect of 9/11?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the significance of the name change. Is Park 51 a reference to some aspect of 9/11?

The building is located on Park Place, block 5 first building, therefore Park 51. The name is given because it leads to City Hall Park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the significance of the name change. Is Park 51 a reference to some aspect of 9/11?

Aquatus and everyone, the significance is in the name 'Cordoba'. That's brought out in this video from the OP (copied below). Propaganda can be quite subtle, and imo that original name, 'Cordoba House' [now changed by the proposed builders] alone is a good enough reason why any mosque should not be built so close to Ground Zero. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the proposed building has met the required approval standards, but is in very bad taste.

Karlis

The Center for Security Policy unveiled a powerful 1-minute video opposing the construction of a 13-story, $100 million mega-mosque near the hallowed ground of the World Trade Center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aquatus and everyone, the significance is in the name 'Cordoba'. That's brought out in this video from the OP (copied below). Propaganda can be quite subtle, and imo that original name, 'Cordoba House' [now changed by the proposed builders] alone is a good enough reason why any mosque should not be built so close to Ground Zero. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the proposed building has met the required approval standards, but is in very bad taste.

Karlis

The Center for Security Policy unveiled a powerful 1-minute video opposing the construction of a 13-story, $100 million mega-mosque near the hallowed ground of the World Trade Center.

I don't know where they all get it from, The Cordoba period of Islam refers to the time of the Umayyad caliphs, when the practiced Islam was the most liberal, world open and tolerant ever to exist.

This is about Islamophobia, nothing else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know where they all get it from, The Cordoba period of Islam refers to the time of the Umayyad caliphs, when the practiced Islam was the most liberal, world open and tolerant ever to exist.

This is about Islamophobia, nothing else.

Or -- it could be "in the eye of the beholder". Tell me; why do these mosque proponents insist on building so close to Ground Zero? Why do they refuse the offer of financial help to locate such the building complex at a further distance from Ground Zero, thus avoiding the existing conflict?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or -- it could be "in the eye of the beholder". Tell me; why do these mosque proponents insist on building so close to Ground Zero? Why do they refuse the offer of financial help to locate such the building complex at a further distance from Ground Zero, thus avoiding the existing conflict?

Could it be because there already was a community center (including prayer room, ergo mosque)there that got damaged during the attacks and is being replaced by a new one? Did anybody volunteer to exchange the grounds of the Cordoba community for another further away yet?

And here comes the next good question: If it was such a sacrilege to have it near Ground Zero: Why was it not torn down 9 tears ago? Because it is not like there was no mosque before.

One word: Islamophobia. And the reactionaries jumping on the bandwagon does not exactly help either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could it be because there already was a community center (including prayer room, ergo mosque)there that got damaged during the attacks and is being replaced by a new one? Did anybody volunteer to exchange the grounds of the Cordoba community for another further away yet?

And here comes the next good question: If it was such a sacrilege to have it near Ground Zero: Why was it not torn down 9 tears ago? Because it is not like there was no mosque before.

One word: Islamophobia. And the reactionaries jumping on the bandwagon does not exactly help either.

A prayer room is not a mosque. As far as I understand it, there are no objections to an Islamic-based community centre being built at that site *if* no mosque is built within the complex. By all means, build a room or rooms in the proposed community complex large enough to accommodate any number of Muslims who wish to have their prayers there. No Islamophobia involved at all -- just simple common sense that would not cause antagonism.

Regards,

Karlis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A prayer room is not a mosque. As far as I understand it, there are no objections to an Islamic-based community centre being built at that site *if* no mosque is built within the complex. By allSource means, build a room or rooms in the proposed community complex large enough to accommodate any number of Muslims who wish to have their prayers there. No Islamophobia involved at all -- just simple common sense that would not cause antagonism.

Regards,

Karlis

Well, then evidently some people do not know the meaning of the word mosque:

Definition of MOSQUE

: a building used for public worship by Muslims

Source: Meriam Webster

and that includes a prayer room in a community center.

One word: Islamophobia, very ill informed Islamophobia at that, because everybody is throwing words and concepts around without knowing their meanings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

these little events Obama being voted in as president - a building of a mosque at/near ground zero when looked back on in time will be seen as the collective events when America went soft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, then evidently some people do not know the meaning of the word mosque:

Definition of MOSQUE

: a building used for public worship by Muslims

Source: Meriam Webster

and that includes a prayer room in a community center.

Yes, "mosque" as a generic name is exactly as your definition says it, Questionmark. In fact, >at this site is a very good description of "generic mosques".

One word: Islamophobia, very ill informed Islamophobia at that, because everybody is throwing words and concepts around without knowing their meanings.

Trouble is, you are confusing the "generic mosque" with the proposed mosque, which is to be far more than a prayer room. An elaborate mosque is what is proposed for the one near Ground Zero. There is a difference between prayer rooms and elaborate mosques, complete with a minaret, etc.

You may or may not appreciate the feelings and emotions engendered by something similar to this illustration for the 'Ground Zero' mosque.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.