Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36
  1. #11
    Plinker
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Cru View Post
    I agree with your analogy.

    I will probably get flamed for this, but I think your analogy shows that the group has the right to put their mosque wherever they want.

    I say as long as they don't use any government funds, then we can't deny them the right to put their building wherever they want (as long as they don't violate any codes, or laws or what not.)

    They should be held to EXACTLY the same laws and rules as everyone else. If they can't see that building there offends people, then in all reality, they are hurting their cause more than helping it. In the end it only harms themselves.
    Agreeing with this. If you deny the building of the mosque based on prejudice then we have agreed to throw away our beliefs because of fear.

  2. #12
    Grandmaster Expat's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    24,041
    Quote Originally Posted by tradertator View Post
    I do not have a problem, nor do I feel that I have the right to stand against the muslim center being built near ground zero. I think the first amendment of our constitution is as important as any of the others. The Oklahoma City bombing was done by Christian terrorist, not christians. I would have no problem with a christian center being built in the same vicinity of where that bombing occurred. Using that same logic, I cannot stand against this mosque being built, simply because I do not agree with their religious views.
    Spread disinformation much?

  3. #13
    Grandmaster mrjarrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Hamilton County
    Posts
    15,867
    Jon Stewart touched on this very issue a week or so ago. In the clip, tho he had a speech from Charleton Heston that really made the point about Columbine and the current situation in NYC. Mr Heston had the right idea.
    Jon Stewart on Protecting Our Rights After a Tragedy | The Agitator
    KYFHO

  4. #14
    Grandmaster ATOMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Plainfield
    Posts
    6,803
    I don't think this is a 1A issue, because this mosque is a monument more than anything else. It's a zoning issue for the local government to decide.

    Until we decide as a country that everyone has soverign right to their property (which they currently do not), then it's up to the locals to decide if this building should be allowed.

    The Federal government has made no law concerning the the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof. Therefore, IMO, this does not run afoul of the 1st amendment.

    Just one man's opinion.

    If these people can build a mosque that honors the "martyrs" of 9/11 then I should be allowed to build whatever the hell I want on my land too. Obviously, I can't, so they can't either.

  5. #15
    Plinker MWCMT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    South
    Posts
    110
    I think one major problem with the mosque is the imam involved and where the funding is coming from. The imam has said many things that are inflammatory. He refuses to denounce Hamas and Hezbollah, known terrorist organizations.

    Do a Google search for “ground zero mosque imam” and read about him.

    He is currently on a “good will” mission to the middle east, funded by our tax dollars. I wonder what the liberals would say if the State Department funded a Christian or Jewish good will mission.

  6. #16
    Grandmaster Expat's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    24,041
    Quote Originally Posted by MWCMT View Post
    He is currently on a “good will” mission to the middle east, funded by our tax dollars. I wonder what the liberals would say if the State Department funded a Christian or Jewish good will mission.
    When have you ever known libtards to be so concerned with religious liberties before this mosque case? When have you ever known them to be unconcerned with issues of the separation of church and state? The Imam Rauf must be really something to be turning them around on these issues. I wonder what it could be...

  7. #17
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    INGO
    Posts
    3,340
    Both are extremely traggic events and I was totally unaware that the NRA was trying to build on the columbine location.
    For every one person who considers the Bull a pain, there are two who will say 'No way!
    purple= sarcasm.

  8. #18
    Plinker
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Beech Grove
    Posts
    160
    I just wanted to point out that people like Michael Moore(on) attacked the NRA because the NRA did not consider the feelings of the people of Columbine. Now Michael Moron is supporting this mosque being built. It's the exact same thing. If Moore believes that the feelings of 1 group are more important than the rights of another group, then why isn't he sticking with that? That was his position over the Columbine thing. Now his position has done a 180 degree turn. Now he is supporting the groups rights over the feelings of another group. He, like all liberals, are hypocrites. It's not just Moore either. It's all of these liberals that are supporting this mosque. Bloomberg tramples all over the rights of the citizens to keep and bear arms but wants to support the rights of the mosque builders.

    It just shows how much these liberals hate America and our traditions and how much comfort they want to give to our enemies. Not that muslims are enemies, but they know damn good and well how happy it will make Osama and the other crazy terrorists to see that mosque built there.

    And the stupid ho wife of the leader of this thing is going to tell us that they are trying to build bridges? Build bridges my ass lady! You're pissing everyone off. How is that going to help you build a bridge? For the record, I think this mosque is a bad bad idea. Go build the damn thing someplace else.

  9. #19
    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Bill of Rights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my wife and the bacon are. Anywhere else is not living, just existing.
    Posts
    13,513
    Quote Originally Posted by MWCMT View Post
    I think one major problem with the mosque is the imam involved and where the funding is coming from. The imam has said many things that are inflammatory. He refuses to denounce Hamas and Hezbollah, known terrorist organizations.

    Do a Google search for “ground zero mosque imam” and read about him.

    He is currently on a “good will” mission to the middle east, funded by our tax dollars. I wonder what the liberals would say if the State Department funded a Christian or Jewish good will mission.
    Just a friendly note: This is beginning to push the envelope on religion which will get this thread locked, not because we're moving to Western religions/beliefs but because the focus would then change from a free speech issue to one centering on religion.

    Thanks for understanding and keeping it on topic.

    Blessings,
    Bill
    Thanks for your help in keeping this a great forum!
    Forum Rules#######Classifieds Rules##############?!?! wait...what?

  10. #20
    Marksman Ramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by ATOMonkey View Post
    I don't think this is a 1A issue, because this mosque is a monument more than anything else. It's a zoning issue for the local government to decide.

    Until we decide as a country that everyone has soverign right to their property (which they currently do not), then it's up to the locals to decide if this building should be allowed.

    The Federal government has made no law concerning the the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof. Therefore, IMO, this does not run afoul of the 1st amendment.

    Just one man's opinion.

    If these people can build a mosque that honors the "martyrs" of 9/11 then I should be allowed to build whatever the hell I want on my land too. Obviously, I can't, so they can't either.
    I heard the "zoning laws" argument yesterday on the radio, that we don't have true property rights anyway, so why should we pick and choose which to enforce?

    I agree that is it wrong to pick and choose where we will apply our anti-property laws and when we won't, but this could be a great time to put a spotlight on the mass infringement government puts on property rights.

    I don't see how fighting tyranny with tyranny is going to get us more liberty.
    いつも祈りに励みなさい

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •