Page 33 of 114 FirstFirst ... 232930313233343536374383 ... LastLast
Results 481 to 495 of 1710

Thread: Cordoba House / Islamic Center

  1. #481

    Default

    Don't know what you're talking about. ^

  2. #482
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    coy

  3. #483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ablarc View Post

    Exactly, and that's why BPC makes the distinction between legality and rightness.
    We as a people live first and foremost by our collective ‘values (inate sense of right vs.wrong)’ ; we then codify those values into the ‘laws’ of the land; laws which reflect those very self same ‘Values’.

    BPC – and othere here – I believe are making an appeal to those more fundamental principals/values that we ‘as a people’ wish to uphold. Those common values were prior to , and are greater than the current ‘questionable’ constitutional arguments that have been raised.

    I hear that appeal; and have come to agree with that position – it is just ‘wrong’ to build ‘cordoba house’ any where near ground zero. End of story.

  4. #484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ablarc View Post
    And yours too, Zip.

    There's a lot more territory between "right" and "wrong" than there is between say, a liberal and conservative interpretation of a constitutional clause.

    I recommend greater humility in your claim to mastery of the former. At some point, you have to show your credentials in that field. Are you perhaps God --or just a wee bit short?
    My opinion on the matter does not deny anyone their rights.

    My opinion: Religion as an institution has long outlived its relevance. Back when humans invented religion, they had the same need to explain their environment as we do today. They looked at the night sky, and not coincidentally, astronomy/astrology became one of the first scientific disciplines. We still think heaven is "up there somewhere."

    Scientific discoveries are uncovering a universe much more incredible than that invented by our ancestors. And ancient mysteries are being revealed for what they are - embellished ordinary events.

    It would be better for the human condition if all the clerics in all religions defrocked themselves and got real jobs - maybe Doctors Without Borders, or Teachers Without borders, or Carpenters Without Borders.

    I like to consider my opinion the "correct" one; if I considered my opinion a "right," there would be no mosque at Park Pl. And no Trinity, no St Paul's, no St Peter's, no synagogue on White St.

    As someone said in an article in this thread, rights trump beliefs or feelings.

    --------------------------------------------------


    Maybe you can explain the alternate interpretations of the First Amendment.

  5. #485
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    8,113

    Default

    ^ What he said.

    ::clap, clap, clap::

  6. #486
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infoshare View Post

    Those common values were prior to , and are greater than the current ‘questionable’ constitutional arguments that have been raised.

    I hear that appeal; and have come to agree with that position – it is just ‘wrong’ to build ‘cordoba house’ any where near ground zero. End of story.
    End of your story, maybe . Not sure I like an ending where it's essentially "The law be damned, I think otherwise."

    And values more "fundamental" than the Constitution? Sounds like a bit of religion creeping into the legal code.

    So: Are we now no longer a land of laws, but just of uncodified values and principles?

  7. #487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ablarc View Post
    Exactly, and that's why BPC makes the distinction between legality and rightness. (Remember, you could find that self-same schism somewhere in Europe in 1938.)
    Please explain the equivalence between this and this.

  8. #488

    Default

    "It's just wrong!" will never hold up in an argument, legal or otherwise. If everyone shares such a universal, fundamental, core understanding of what is right and wrong, why do so many think it's wrong to deny these people the right to build their "mosque?"

    You know what is also wrong? Violation of individual rights to property, arbitrary application of the law, and violation of fundamental legal and aspirational values (free worship) of this country. You will just have to come to the realization that these worshipers have the same rights and privileges as anyone else, even if you might find their religion repugnant.

    Yes, it may stink, it may stink to high heaven to you, but there are more important things at issue than your hurt feelings. Does building a mosque attack our very character as Americans? Does the destruction of the twin towers? No, we endure. But to discriminate against these people in such an outrageous fashion strikes at the very heart of our values.

    Let's try not to make NYC Jerusalem.

  9. #489
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,773

    Default

    So, let me get this strait.

    If any Christian does something horrible, by the "Law of Right-ness" no Christian edifice of any kind could be placed near anything that would remind someone of that act? Even if they own the land, have all the permits, and are within their rights?

    This is all drum beating, and the ones that bang the loudest usually do not have the most to say, they just have the most to correct in their own lives before they can deal with something that has no other criminal pretext than making them uncomfortable.

    Any person saying "My XXX died at 9-11" needs to seek therapy. That was 9 years ago, and if you are still hung up on Death to forbid a group that had nothing to do with his death because Faux News told you... Well, "Necrophilial" comes to mind.

    Any person claiming "this is not right" has their own feeling of uncomfortable-ness with things that are different. There is no basis for it being right or wrong, no examples have been brought up with a direct connection to its impropriety. I suppose EVERY BUILDING ON THE WTC SITE should have been a memorial, and every building for 5 blocks around raised because building anything that might remotely have any connection to the Muslim faith would be wrong?

    This is just a territorial reaction that bears no real weight in the realm of "right" and "wrong". If these guys start dancing around like that small bunch of dip-poops in a remote area of, what was it, Afghanistan, after the crash. If they start dancing like that on 9-11, then they deserve criticism. Otherwise those that deserve it are the ones showing their bigoted insecure territorial side.

    This is just such an insanely STUPID thing to protest when we have so many other things not only in this world, but in our own country, and in our own CITY that need to be looked at it drives me mad.

    Who cares that there is still a problem with Oil Cleanup in the Gulf, those damned Towel Heads are building a Mosque right on the graves of our American Heroes!!!!!!

  10. #490

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp View Post
    "right and wrong"

    Not "right and wrong." Your opinion.

    And pre-emptive terms like "hate spewing elements" do nothing to foster intelligent debate. You've made up your mind. What do you want to debate about, the mechanism we use to throw them out?
    Yes, my opinion as to right and wrong. And it was not I who started the debate, it was the Imam, who showed up at my Community Board and asked them for their blessing. Although they regretabbly gave it to him, I am a member of that same community, and am offering my alternative view on the issue. The same First Amendment that protects the Imam's right to justify 9/11 and advocate Sharia over secular law protects my right to call him a scary fanatic whose values are inconsistent with those of my community. But neither side's exercise of his or Constitutional right is necessary ennobling simply because it is lawful.
    Last edited by BPC; August 3rd, 2010 at 04:54 PM.

  11. #491

    Default

    I agree with the Landmark Commission's decision. Landmarking decisions cannot be based on intended use, particularly intended religious use. I disagree with my Community Board's decision to support the project. They really should not be in the business of blessing or condemning religious institutions, whether Muslim or Catholic or any other. The First Amendment, in addition to guarantying freedom of religion, separates Church and State, and CB1, for these purposes, is the State.

  12. #492

    Default

    "a scary fanatic whose values are inconsistent with those of my community."

    I will say this: that article he wrote for the HufPost... if any other religious leader in the US wrote something as crazy-a$$ed as that, they would have been laughed at and heckled to no end.

  13. #493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BPC View Post
    The same First Amendment that protects the Imam's right to justify 9/11 and advocate Sharia over secular law protects my right to call him a scary fanatic whose values are inconsistent with those of my community.
    You're entitled to your opinion, not to demand that elected officials disregard the law.

    But neither side's exercise of his or Constitutional right is necessary ennobling simply because it is lawful.
    It seems to me that your position is the one that's ignoble, based on flimsy soundbites.

    As far as "the introduction of hate-spewing elements into our community" or "a scary fanatic whose values are inconsistent with those of my community," he was a member of "our community" longer than either of us.

  14. #494
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fabrizio View Post

    ... that article he wrote for the HufPost...
    To help us out when references are made ^ a link to the post or article is REALLY helpful.

    (isn't there a smiley that blows a kiss?)

    Aha!

  15. #495

    Default

    Looks more like he's belching a kiss.


    ------------


    Analyze this:

    http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showth...l=1#post332639

    Oh and after you've read that.... read the mission statement from the Muslim American Society.

    Read the whole thing. Read it well:http://maschicago.org/NewsArticles/t...THODOLOGY.aspx

    And just for fun, while reading it, try substituting the word Islam with Christianity. And imagine if this were coming from some Christian group.

    "MAS is a Islamic American movement for comprehensive reform, gradual reform of our society to make it just, prosperous, and morally sound. MAS’s mission statement is “I only desire (your) betterment to the best of my power” "
    Last edited by Fabrizio; August 3rd, 2010 at 06:07 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software