Total Posts:150|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Mosque at ground zero?

brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 7:32:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Why? Because it is a Muslim place of worship and the terrorists that attacked the twin towers were Muslim?

The attackers were also men, so would there be any such objection to a gentlemen's outfitters being opened up in the same vicinity?
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 7:42:28 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Fair enough, no more Christian churches in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Also, http://www.politicalcartoons.com...
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
twsurber
Posts: 505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 7:47:14 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 7:32:45 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Why? Because it is a Muslim place of worship and the terrorists that attacked the twin towers were Muslim?
YES! That's exactly why

The attackers were also men, so would there be any such objection to a gentlemen's outfitters being opened up in the same vicinity?
No objection to a gentlemen's outfitter
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 7:49:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 7:47:14 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:32:45 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Why? Because it is a Muslim place of worship and the terrorists that attacked the twin towers were Muslim?
YES! That's exactly why

The attackers were also men, so would there be any such objection to a gentlemen's outfitters being opened up in the same vicinity?
No objection to a gentlemen's outfitter

then again gentlemen don't carry around a man's handbook which lists different people they ought to kill... whom some of those gentlemen interpreted to mean American people generally.

if they did so.... I might see why people would object to such a gentlemens club at the site of the murders.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
twsurber
Posts: 505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 7:52:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 7:42:28 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Fair enough, no more Christian churches in Iraq or Afghanistan.
: DEAL!

Also, http://www.politicalcartoons.com...
Republicans are just as corrupt and full of bull as the Democrats
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 7:56:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'm not against the govt. funding the 1st responders related health problems...

BUT

http://www.freerepublic.com...

it's a hard thing to not have people take advantage of.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 7:57:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 7:52:15 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:42:28 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Fair enough, no more Christian churches in Iraq or Afghanistan.
: DEAL!

You don't get the point I' making. You can attribute the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan to all of Christianity, in the same way you can't attribute all of Islam to 9/11. Personally, I think an inter-faith centre would be better, but that's just me.

It's really ironic when the government makes laws it's infringing on republicans property but when someone wants to build a Mosque on their property they legally own and the government does nothing they get mad.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
twsurber
Posts: 505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:04:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 7:57:18 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:52:15 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:42:28 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Fair enough, no more Christian churches in Iraq or Afghanistan.
: DEAL!

You don't get the point I' making. You can attribute the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan to all of Christianity, in the same way you can't attribute all of Islam to 9/11. Personally, I think an inter-faith centre would be better, but that's just me.

It's really ironic when the government makes laws it's infringing on republicans property but when someone wants to build a Mosque on their property they legally own and the government does nothing they get mad.

Panda, Are there typos and punction missing or is this your correct intent as written?
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:06:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:04:42 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:57:18 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:52:15 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:42:28 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Fair enough, no more Christian churches in Iraq or Afghanistan.
: DEAL!

You don't get the point I'm making. You can't attribute the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan to all of Christianity, in the same way you can't attribute all of Islam to 9/11. Personally, I think an inter-faith centre would be better, but that's just me.

It's really ironic when the government makes laws it's infringing on republicans property but when someone wants to build a Mosque on their property they legally own and the government does nothing they get mad.

Panda, Are there typos and punction missing or is this your correct intent as written?

Two mistakes. Fix'd. Now Go.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:08:01 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:04:42 AM, twsurber wrote:
Yee-haww....

that's a rather unappealing noise coming out of you.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:10:09 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:08:01 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:04:42 AM, twsurber wrote:
Yee-haww....

that's a rather unappealing noise coming out of you.

or were you genuinely confused about what the panda was saying?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Strikeeagle84015
Posts: 867
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:14:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Okay although they should be allowed to build a mosque at ground zero I just don't get why they have to build it there I mean as a matter of courtesy couldn't they build it somewhere else
: At 8/17/2010 7:17:56 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
: Hey dawg, i herd you like evangelical trolls so we put a bible thumper in yo bible thumper so you can troll while you troll!

Arguing with an atheist about God is very similar to arguing with a blind man about what the Sistine Chapel looks like
Marilyn Poe

Strikeeagle wrote
The only way I will stop believing in God is if he appeared before me and told me that he did not exist.
twsurber
Posts: 505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:16:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:06:23 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:04:42 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:57:18 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:52:15 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:42:28 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:10:32 AM, twsurber wrote:
That is adding insult to injury. HFN

Fair enough, no more Christian churches in Iraq or Afghanistan.
: DEAL!

You don't get the point I'm making. You can't attribute the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan to all of Christianity, in the same way you can't attribute all of Islam to 9/11. Personally, I think an inter-faith centre would be better, but that's just me.

Correct, regardless, this is an exception to logical thought. An interfaith center makes much more sense, yet I don't envision that as a realistic possibility.

It's really ironic when the government makes laws it's infringing on republicans property but when someone wants to build a Mosque on their property they legally own and the government does nothing they get mad.

I don't completely understand this paragraph. Are you saying that whoever owns the property has a right to build whatever they wish without interference from the govt? And, that no one should get upset if there is no interference?

If so, that too is logical. As is the Jews building housing in Jerusalem.

Two mistakes. Fix'd. Now Go.
Valtarov
Posts: 136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:23:22 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:14:57 AM, Strikeeagle84015 wrote:
Okay although they should be allowed to build a mosque at ground zero I just don't get why they have to build it there I mean as a matter of courtesy couldn't they build it somewhere else

My objections exactly. It was Islam that motivated the attacks. It may have been an incredibly distorted, corrupt, etc. view of Islam, but it was a form of Islam nonetheless. Due to courtesy, they shouldn't build a Mosque teaching Islam on the site, in interest of respecting those who died due to a distorted view of that faith.
"We are half-hearted creatures,
fooling about with drink and sex and
ambition when infinite joy is offered us,
like an ignorant child who wants to go on
making mud pies in a slum because he
cannot imagine what is meant by the offer
of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily
pleased."—C.S. Lewis, "The Weight of Glory"
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:23:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:16:23 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:06:23 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:04:42 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:57:18 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:52:15 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:42:28 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
It's really ironic when the government makes laws it's infringing on republicans property but when someone wants to build a Mosque on their property they legally own and the government does nothing they get mad.

I don't completely understand this paragraph. Are you saying that whoever owns the property has a right to build whatever they wish without interference from the govt? And, that no one should get upset if there is no interference?

Yes, or at least that's what Conservatives often support, they right to do what one wants with one's property so long as they are not infringing on any bodies rights. Of course there are planning issues but the since the mosque doesn't violate any, I don't see any legal reason the government should intervene.

They own the land, can do with it within legal bounds as they please. If they want to build a Mosque, so be it. There's no basis for the government to interfere, and there is a huge amount of hypocrisy if Conservatives object to it and say the government should interfere with it.


If so, that too is logical. As is the Jews building housing in Jerusalem.

If the Jews own the land in Jerusalem, they can build anything that the law permits.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:29:19 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:25:10 AM, Koopin wrote:
We should build churches on the grounds of the crusades.

If people who want to build them own the land then go ahead.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:33:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:29:19 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:25:10 AM, Koopin wrote:
We should build churches on the grounds of the crusades.

If people who want to build them own the land then go ahead.

Yep, after they are done constructing the Japanese museum right next to pearl harbor.
kfc
twsurber
Posts: 505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:35:02 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Yes, if they legally own the land, they have the right to build a Mosque there, without any interference from the government. Further, they are also entitled to the same police protection from the very NYPD.

I didn't say my opinion was logical, correct, or even politically correct. My opinion on this matter is completely and unabashedly biased, hypocritical, and prejudiced. I am not speaking on behalf of anyone other than myself. I am not representing the collective views of Conservatives nor anyone else, just mine.

I don't expect my view to be accepted by most. It is nothing less than abrasive & controversial. I am supposed to be forgiving, understanding, and taking a stand for what is logically correct. Unfortunately, on this matter, I am not.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:35:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:23:43 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:16:23 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:06:23 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:04:42 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:57:18 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:52:15 AM, twsurber wrote:
At 8/5/2010 7:42:28 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
It's really ironic when the government makes laws it's infringing on republicans property but when someone wants to build a Mosque on their property they legally own and the government does nothing they get mad.

I don't completely understand this paragraph. Are you saying that whoever owns the property has a right to build whatever they wish without interference from the govt? And, that no one should get upset if there is no interference?

Yes, or at least that's what Conservatives often support, they right to do what one wants with one's property so long as they are not infringing on any bodies rights. Of course there are planning issues but the since the mosque doesn't violate any, I don't see any legal reason the government should intervene.

They own the land, can do with it within legal bounds as they please. If they want to build a Mosque, so be it. There's no basis for the government to interfere, and there is a huge amount of hypocrisy if Conservatives object to it and say the government should interfere with it.


If so, that too is logical. As is the Jews building housing in Jerusalem.

If the Jews own the land in Jerusalem, they can build anything that the law permits.

Even if they don't own the land the Israeli government allows Jews to build housing in Jerusalem, even if it means the Arab owners are illegally evicted.

The Israeli analogy was not a good one because they have no respect for the law.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:37:34 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:35:15 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:

The Israeli analogy was not a good one because they have no respect for the law.

OP is a Zionist Christian (I believe).
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:37:49 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:33:07 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:29:19 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:25:10 AM, Koopin wrote:
We should build churches on the grounds of the crusades.

If people who want to build them own the land then go ahead.

Yep, after they are done constructing the Japanese museum right next to pearl harbor.

*Facepalm*

No, it's like objecting to building an Asian museum beside Pearl Harbour.

Japan is one part of Asia. Attributing Asia to Pearl Harbour is like attributing the every sect of Islam to 9\11, even though one f*cked up sect of Islam committed the act.

The Mosque is for the Sufi sect of Islam, which had nothing to do with 9/11
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:39:13 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:35:02 AM, twsurber wrote:
Yes, if they legally own the land, they have the right to build a Mosque there, without any interference from the government. Further, they are also entitled to the same police protection from the very NYPD.

I didn't say my opinion was logical, correct, or even politically correct. My opinion on this matter is completely and unabashedly biased, hypocritical, and prejudiced. I am not speaking on behalf of anyone other than myself. I am not representing the collective views of Conservatives nor anyone else, just mine.

I don't expect my view to be accepted by most. It is nothing less than abrasive & controversial. I am supposed to be forgiving, understanding, and taking a stand for what is logically correct. Unfortunately, on this matter, I am not.

"Ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is right. In our judgment, building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause more pain – unnecessarily – and that is not right."
-Anti-Defamation League

Sums up your view on it?
kfc
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:39:21 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:35:02 AM, twsurber wrote:
Yes, if they legally own the land, they have the right to build a Mosque there, without any interference from the government. Further, they are also entitled to the same police protection from the very NYPD.

I didn't say my opinion was logical, correct, or even politically correct. My opinion on this matter is completely and unabashedly biased, hypocritical, and prejudiced. I am not speaking on behalf of anyone other than myself. I am not representing the collective views of Conservatives nor anyone else, just mine.

I don't expect my view to be accepted by most. It is nothing less than abrasive & controversial. I am supposed to be forgiving, understanding, and taking a stand for what is logically correct. Unfortunately, on this matter, I am not.

http://www.debate.org...
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:41:30 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:35:02 AM, twsurber wrote:
Yes, if they legally own the land, they have the right to build a Mosque there, without any interference from the government. Further, they are also entitled to the same police protection from the very NYPD.

I didn't say my opinion was logical, correct, or even politically correct. My opinion on this matter is completely and unabashedly biased, hypocritical, and prejudiced. I am not speaking on behalf of anyone other than myself. I am not representing the collective views of Conservatives nor anyone else, just mine.

I don't expect my view to be accepted by most. It is nothing less than abrasive & controversial. I am supposed to be forgiving, understanding, and taking a stand for what is logically correct. Unfortunately, on this matter, I am not.

I agree with you in so much as the choice of location was a little insensitive, but it could have been worse, it could have actually been on Ground Zero itself, rather than merely close by.

But then, even if it were built a few blocks away, there would still be complaints and no doubt some would say it shouldn't be built anywhere in Manhattan.

Where do you draw the line?
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Valtarov
Posts: 136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:42:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 8/5/2010 8:39:13 AM, Koopin wrote:
At 8/5/2010 8:35:02 AM, twsurber wrote:
Yes, if they legally own the land, they have the right to build a Mosque there, without any interference from the government. Further, they are also entitled to the same police protection from the very NYPD.

I didn't say my opinion was logical, correct, or even politically correct. My opinion on this matter is completely and unabashedly biased, hypocritical, and prejudiced. I am not speaking on behalf of anyone other than myself. I am not representing the collective views of Conservatives nor anyone else, just mine.

I don't expect my view to be accepted by most. It is nothing less than abrasive & controversial. I am supposed to be forgiving, understanding, and taking a stand for what is logically correct. Unfortunately, on this matter, I am not.

"Ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is right. In our judgment, building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause more pain – unnecessarily – and that is not right."
-Anti-Defamation League

Sums up your view on it?

Pretty much my view.
"We are half-hearted creatures,
fooling about with drink and sex and
ambition when infinite joy is offered us,
like an ignorant child who wants to go on
making mud pies in a slum because he
cannot imagine what is meant by the offer
of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily
pleased."—C.S. Lewis, "The Weight of Glory"
twsurber
Posts: 505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2010 8:44:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago

*Facepalm*

No, it's like objecting to building an Asian museum beside Pearl Harbour.

Japan is one part of Asia. Attributing Asia to Pearl Harbour is like attributing the every sect of Islam to 9\11, even though one f*cked up sect of Islam committed the act.

The Mosque is for the Sufi sect of Islam, which had nothing to do with 9/11

But Panda, In reality and sympathetically, aren't you also arguing that even the sect of Islam that committed the 9/11 terrorist attacks should ALSO be able to build there without impediment, IF they have exclusive right to the land?

I get your argument that "Islam" is NOT to blame, but individuals within one sect of Islam, perhaps not even that particular sect, just the individuals that participated in 9/11.