Do You Think A Mosque Should Be Built Near Ground Zero?

[Alex(Killer Of Dreams & Legends)]

I honestly do not care if they build it there, but I see why people get worked up because the fact is that Muslim terrorist flew planes into the world trade center and killed many innocent people. Now the easiest way to explain to people who don't understand why New York citizens and USA citizens do not want it. Its like going to a fast food restaurant and having a bad experience , that does not speak for the other stores in the chain but you are so hell bent you will never do business at that location again.

Now I just wanna know who the hell thought of the idea to put this Mosque in this location, because I think that some stupid person will return the favor and blow it up or something . Its like putting a strip club next to a school kinda , but In America we have freedom of religion I do not like people damning my god so I won't do that to theirs, but not all Americans think that way . Plus what happened to the freedom tower at ground zero? I have never been to new york so do not know exactly where it will be.

 

[Xemmy]

My argument is going to be simple and short.

It should be quite obvious that is the majority of the people is this country do not want a mosque built near ground zero, then out of respect for the majority of this country, you don't do it. I could care less if it is a mosque, a monastery, a church, a brothel or whatever, if we as a majority don't want it there, don't build it there, build it somewhere else. This piece of shit who wants to build it, is only doing it so close to ground zero as a slap in the face to this country. Most other decent people would have stopped fighting about it and found another place to build. It's not about religious freedom, it's about pouring salt in the wound.

Believe it or not, there are Muslims in America who just want a place to worship close by. If I were a Christian, I wouldn't want the nearest church to be 10 miles out of the way. And the majority don't have a say in this matter. The Bill of Rights was put there to protect people from the majority. They have religious freedom, and therefore the governments hands are tied. For all you know about the man trying to get the mosque built, he could just be looking for a place to worship. All though the Muslims living in the middle east are generally mafia wifes to terrorism, it's not quite the same here in the states. Muslims here treat their religion pretty much the same way as Christians treat theirs here. I compare it to Christians from the Dark Ages. Now I agree with you that it is rubbing salt in the wound, but that doesn't mean they're rubbing it in for fun, or malice.

 

[MikeJames]

I don't think that this 'center' should be allowed. One of the reasons is the fact that the church that was there for MANY years before the attacks happened has not been allowed to rebuild. Another reason is that the person in charge of this build has 'ties' to radical muslims. And last, because a majority of the people don't want it built there. The government is making choices against what a majority of the people that live in that area want. If the people don't want it, don't do it..........just like the healthcare bill that passed......oh wait, I guess government knows best.......

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

I don't think that this 'center' should be allowed. One of the reasons is the fact that the church that was there for MANY years before the attacks happened has not been allowed to rebuild. Another reason is that the person in charge of this build has 'ties' to radical muslims. And last, because a majority of the people don't want it built there. The government is making choices against what a majority of the people that live in that area want. If the people don't want it, don't do it..........just like the healthcare bill that passed......oh wait, I guess government knows best.......

This entire post is idiotic.

One of the reasons is the fact that the church that was there for MANY years before the attacks happened has not been allowed to rebuild.

The Muslim recreation center isn't being built in the same place as the church that was destroyed was.

Another reason is that the person in charge of this build has 'ties' to radical muslims.

Citation needed.

The government is making choices against what a majority of the people that live in that area want. If the people don't want it, don't do it..........just like the healthcare bill that passed......oh wait, I guess government knows best.......

The government has nothing to do with the recreation center being built there. They wouldn't be able to prevent it if they wanted to.

 

[Vanderhook]

FromTheSouth - You are twisting your "sources" and your arguments are very weak. You come off looking very ignorant.

You know, just saying where something came from casually is not citing. You need to actually provide a link or be more specific. Otherwise, no one can trust your large claims.

I took a look at this 60 minutes segment that you were looking at.
From Wikipedia:

Columnist Jonathan Rauch wrote that Abdul Rauf gave a "mixed, muddled, muttered" message after 9/11. Nineteen days after the attacks, he told CBS’s 60 Minutes that fanaticism and terrorism have no place in Islam. Rauch said that the message was mixed, however, because when then asked if the U.S. deserved the attacks, Rauf answered: "I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened. But the United States’ policies were an accessory to the crime that happened." Rauch observed

And before you go all "WIKIPEDIA ISN'T A SOURCE!!!" that little paragraph was cited, unlike your whackjob claims. http://www.press.uchicago.edu/News/911rauch.html

He never said USA deserved 9/11. He's also saying that violence has no place in Islam. What he is saying that US foreign policy towards the Middle East has contributed to Muslim anger towards the US. Which is true. I don't see how you could possibly say otherwise. It's not like Al-Qaeda did what they did just for shits and giggles. They are pissed that the US is in Arab lands. I've lived in the Middle East. I've seen US-Arab relations first-hand. It's very easy to see that many Muslims have resentment towards the west.

EDIT: Also, saying that the "Mosque" is a training ground for Muslim terrorists.... LOL ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS?! HAHAHAHAHAHAH WHAT A ******. It's a fucking community center! It's basically a YMCA with a Muslim theme.

 

[JuviJuiceIsLoose]

For people saying that the Community Center shouldn't be built because a Majority of People don't agree that it should be built.

There is such thing called Ad Populum Argumentum . Just because a large majority of people believe something to be true, doesn't make it so.

If your neighbors come to you saying they took a poll and decided you shouldn't be in the neighborhood, would you move?

This comes down to the Constitution. A lot of the people in the media coming out against this building aren't what I'd call bastions of morality!

Newt Gingrich cheated on and divorced his 1st wife while she was ill with Cancer with his 2nd wife. He then cheated on his 2nd wife with his 3rd wife while he was out in public condemning Bill Clinton for his Adultery.

Sarah Palin says she loves the Constitution. Which is true, except for the part she disagrees with. She praised Dr. Laura for supposedly fighting for 1st Amendment rights. Well, Freedom of Religion is part of the 1st Amendment. She's got no problem defending someone's right to say the N word over and over again on the radio. Although, earlier this year she tried to get David Letterman fired for making fun of her daughter.

She also said that one of the President's aids should be fired after saying the word "******s".

The people who are drumming up this controversy are deliberately trying to divide the country because of the upcoming Mid-Term Elections.

It also just so happens that Palin and Gingrich could possibly run for President.

This is the same divide and conquer scare tactics people have been using since the beginning of time. There's always a "boogeyman".

This week it's Muslims, last week it was Mexican immigrants. Before that it was people in favor of integration. Before that it was the Italians, the Irish, and so on.

This just happens to be the wedge issue of the moment. A year from now, there's gonna be a new "boogeyman".

 

[RockFan89]

For people saying that the Community Center shouldn't be built because a Majority of People don't agree that it should be built.

Nice job starting off your post with a subordinate clause posing as a sentence.

There is such thing called Ad Populum Argumentum . Just because a large majority of people believe something to be true, doesn't make it so.

That would be relevant if we were debating the veracity of something, not the appropriateness of something.

If your neighbors come to you saying they took a poll and decided you shouldn't be in the neighborhood, would you move?

Probably, I wouldn't want to live in a place where so many people didn't like me.

This comes down to the Constitution.

No, not really. No one is debating whether they have the right to build the mosque there, they are debating whether it is in good taste to do so.

A lot of the people in the media coming out against this building aren't what I'd call bastions of morality!

60% of the country is against it, so pointing to Newt Gingrich's lack of moral standing or Palin's hypocrisy is not an argument for your side. I bet Osama Bin Laden is for the mosque, but that wouldn't be an argument for the other side.

This week it's Muslims, last week it was Mexican immigrants. Before that it was people in favor of integration. Before that it was the Italians, the Irish, and so on.

No one is blaming Muslims for anything, they are just saying that it is inappropriate to build a mosque so close to ground zero. And no one has a problem with Mexican immigrants, it's illegal immigrants who disrespect our laws that Americans have a problem with. And when was the last time that the Italians or Irish were blamed for a problem in this country?

 

[JuviJuiceIsLoose]

No one is blaming Muslims for anything, they are just saying that it is inappropriate to build a mosque so close to ground zero. And no one has a problem with Mexican immigrants, it's illegal immigrants who disrespect our laws that Americans have a problem with. And when was the last time that the Italians or Irish were blamed for a problem in this country?

I was making a point that throughout history, there's always been a non issue that gets blown way out of proportion.

There's always been a non-existent "boogeyman" that people try to use to stir up fear among the population.

The World Trade Center isn't the only place that was attacked on 9/11. The Pentagon was attacked, and low and behold there's a Mosque there, too!

There are lots of Mosques around the area of the World Trade Center, and there's never been a problem.

 

[One to Remember]

Sean Hannity tried to say this was an insult because even though its not at ground zero the facade of the building was damaged by a piece of the towers so its apart of it lol. How many protesters here had anything to say about any mosques being build between 1993 and right before 9/11 u know he time period after the FIRST attack on the towers and right before the SECOND.

I think the U.S. has the capeabilities to outright destroy all our threats in the middle east. The non radical muslims need to remember that why its dangerous to speak out you are allies we really don't need. They should try to become known, try to make a difference. The U.S. will be more inclined to walk on egg shells if we se them tryin to beak through but theymust remember wedont need them and we have to protect ourselves first so they need to speed it up.

As far as U.S. policy casing 9/11 i mean why even blast that stement as hatng or blaming 'America"? Because I know if i went through the actions he is alluding o most of you people would not condone. How many of you would had used military power torestore the shah of Iran after his overthrow if you were president? You wouldn't. If you dont have it in you to condone are partake in the foreign policy decisions the imam is alluding to how can you then attack him?

I did vote against the mosque but ithink you should all stop arguing, you have no legal viability and not one of you has a means to stop the mosque from being built that would not lead to ur own arrest.

 

[Davi323]

There are absolutely no legal barriers to prevent the mosque from being built. But, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. And that is where I struggle with this issue. My head says the 1st Amendment guarantees them the right to their religion. My heart says okay, but they aren't being told not to build a mosque, they are being told they shouldn't build it right there, at that specific location. If you are prevented from building your church/mosque/synagogue at all, that would definitely be a violation of any religion's 1st Amendment rights. But, I haven't seen anyone say that there can't be any mosques in the NYC area, the hostility is entirely related to it's location.

Then there is the name...Cordoba House. Do any of you actually understand the significance of that particular name? Cordoba was a city in Spain that was conquered by Muslims, and remains a symbol of Islam conquering over Christianity. Is that close to Ground Zero REALLY a good place to build something named after Islamic conquest? Given what happened? They have a legal right to do it, but, is it in good taste? If you claim its entirely peaceful and non-provocative, why in the hell would you name it after such a vivid symbol like that? By naming it that, its essentially a giant "FUCK YOU" to New York, and to America. Its essentially Vene, Vidi, Vici. I came, I saw, I conquered.

It is the height of poor taste to build a mosque that close to ground zero, with a name like that. Maybe if it was named after something peaceful, instead of something definitely aggressive, I wouldn't be so uneasy. And I do recognize their legal right to do so. I am just suggesting that perhaps a little sensitivity be used, that's all.

 

[One to Remember]

There are absolutely no legal barriers to prevent the mosque from being built. But, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. And that is where I struggle with this issue. My head says the 1st Amendment guarantees them the right to their religion.

thats true but they are already as unpopular as they are gonna ever be and they have the law on their side in a nation of laws.. Insensitivity doesn't register to a court system that is robotic. It wants to know what fits text book deffinitions of whatever and whether or not another law may or may not take precedence over a ruling.

My heart says okay, but they aren't being told not to build a mosque, they are being told they shouldn't build it right there, at that specific location. If you are prevented from building your church/mosque/synagogue at all, that would definitely be a violation of any religion's 1st Amendment rights. But, I haven't seen anyone say that there can't be any mosques in the NYC area, the hostility is entirely related to it's location.

But no one cares about a suggestion. They had nothing to lose 9 years ago. If your request can't be made more then that, a mere plead, why do you even bother? No legal viability=defeat of the non outlaw. What is the location anyways?

You realize that they could build directly on ground zero because G.Z. is owned by someone? If the owner of that land stopped freedom tower from being built in favor of a a burger king based amusement park called Have It Your Way World YO WOULD HAVE TO RESPECT IT BECAUSE THIS IS A NATION OF LAWS and someone legally owns that land.

Then there is the name...Cordoba House. Do any of you actually understand the significance of that particular name? Cordoba was a city in Spain that was conquered by Muslims, and remains a symbol of Islam conquering over Christianity. Is that close to Ground Zero REALLY a good place to build something named after Islamic conquest?

I am glad you brught that up. I think it should be an issue Americans look into. After all the only means to stop it is to hope no one in America will join the construction crew as Bill O'Reilly keeps saying or prove the monies used to make it are illegal in some way. The name may justify the inquery to the source of funds. But I think during a recession they may find a construction crew.

Given what happened? They have a legal right to do it, but, is it in good taste? If you claim its entirely peaceful and non-provocative, why in the hell would you name it after such a vivid symbol like that? By naming it that, its essentially a giant "FUCK YOU" to New York, and to America. Its essentially Vene, Vidi, Vici. I came, I saw, I conquered.

The district of Columbia is named after a Catholic fanatic and a murderer. Delaware is named after Reds yet full of Whites and a few Blacks.. It's not the first stupid, ironic, and/or ominous name in American history.

Furthermore what is the fall of Iberia to you anywys? Your most likely a Baptist, Methodist, or whatever, all of which are reformed churches and Protestant. The Protestants left the Catholic church over more reasons then a king wanting a new wife. The Fall of Cordoba means nothing because the Catholics and Muslims deserve each other. And why even call Catholics Christians? They are Catholics, why broaden the term and reattach liabilities to reformed churches, Eastern Orthodox Churches, and the like?
I do think the name is odd though.

 

[Tha Wolfpac]

I voted Hell Yes. If the United States needs a way to realise and trust the Islamic community this building is a start. Why hate on islam when you know nothing about what it truly symbolises and what it truly means, Islam doesnt tell people to kill and destroy it is a peaceful religion and i see this building as a hopeful mending process where un-educated people can learn the true meaning and teaching of Islam not the extremists view on things. Afterall time is the greatest healer. So i am all for a Mosque being built, allahuakbar.