Mosque at Ground Zero

[Brinn]

My thoughts on this issue are that if the Imam's true goals are to create an interfaith dialogue he has sorely misread the situation. My evidence for this is all around us; it's in the news, it's this very thread.

How different would the perception of this project be if, after all the negative reactions, the Imam basically said, "we understand the sensitivity to this proposal given its proximity to ground zero. We will look for a desirable site in a different location and hope you will all join us when we open our new community center."

If the goal is truly to build an interfaith dialogue and improve relations, I think they have failed.

[SerScot]

Cail,

Well said.

Zarathustra,

No, I don't think being Muslim exempts people from bigotry when they presume motives on the part of the people proposing the Cordoba Center. The only reason for individuals and families to be upset about the construction of the Cordoba Center is if they are linking the people proposing the center to the people responsible for 9/11.

[Zarathustra]

Edit- And I gotta say to everyone (myself included) how fucking ridiculous this thread has gotten. Everyone seems to agree that there's a First Amendment right for this community center to be built blocks from the WTC site (well, everyone except Rus who seems to think that he's the sole keeper of The Truth), but y'all are still arguing about it.

Meanwhile, the economy still sucks, we've still got an invasive federal government, two wars, Gitmo's still open and we're still torturing, no one knows what's going on with the "transparent" health insurance bonanza that passed, BP's cutting and running from the Gulf. But golly, them dirty ragheads want to build a YMCA in downtown Manhattan (where not one of us lives), and this thread gets more traffic than any other one here. And it's not just us, this non-story has taken over CNN, HuffPo, RealClearPolitics, and just about every political and news site out there.

Fucking pathetic. We've been snookered into getting all worked up over this, which has no effect on our daily lives at all (even if they have a banner out front that says "Death to the Infidels!"). Meanwhile, Rome is burning.

That's certainly a valid opinion. I can't disagree with your points that there are other important issues, and this one is perhaps getting too much attention.

However, I think this issue is important because it bookends an entire era that began with 9/11, and encompasses everything that has happened since to define the difference between liberal and conservative: how are we going to remember 9/11? Who will control the dialog? Who will control the history? Have we learned the lessons of that day?

This mosque probably won't affect our daily lives, but it has become a lightning rod, a symbol of the struggle to define what America is. Do we let what is great about this country (i.e. our freedom) become an excuse to allow others to undermine this country? There are Muslims who want to infiltrate our culture and our government institutions, and slowly/silently take over America. And there are plenty of people willing to let them do it, one step at a time, because they are scared of being called "intolerant" or "bigot." They think appeasement and abstaining from criticism is the same as enlightenment and open-mindedness.

I quoted about 10 Muslims on the last page who think exactly like I do about this issue. Since they are talking about members of their own religion, it's impossible for their opinions to come from closed-minded intolerance. They can't be bigots against their own religion. Obviously, it is possible to object to the mosque without being an Islamophobe. Something else is going on here.

We're a country that was attacked, that went to war, and yet never got justice for that attack, or won that war. We have not defeated Al Qaida. We have not captured Bin Laden. We have had no public moment where we could say, "We won." Instead, we have a mosque that over 60% of Americans see as the final sign of defeat, the planting of the flag on conquored territory. It's obvious to me ... it's obvious to the Muslims I quoted. I don't really think that's "fucking pathetic." I don't think we've been snookered into getting all worked up. I think we're seeing America wake up to the fact that we might not ever win. We might keep giving ground if we don't take a stand now. The war won't be won or lost in some cave around the world. The final battle will be fought right here. Islamic supremacists will slowly take over our culture, and some of us will defend them at every step. We'll allow them to censor South Park. We'll allow them to violate church and state in order to give themselves preferential treatment at public schools. We'll allow them to plant a victory flag at Ground Zero. We'll let them use our freedoms to subvert our freedoms.

This isn't a war we can fight with guns. It's not even a war we can fight by taking away freedoms. It's a war you fight only one way: with the freedom of speech. And that's what I'm doing.

[Cail]

I'll be blunt, I don't think much of Islam. It's an intolerant religion that blunts individualism and oppresses women. It's hopelessly (and happily) mired in the 7th Century.

With that said, I will not stoop to their level to keep them from believing whatever they want to believe, or limiting their freedom here.

[Zarathustra]

Zarathustra,

No, I don't think being Muslim exempts people from bigotry when they presume motives on the part of the people proposing the Cordoba Center.

So you're actually calling these Muslims bigots for opposing the mosque!?! (Ki predicted that's what you would do, but I argued pretty hard on your behalf.)

I agree that being Muslim doesn't exempt one from being a bigot. In fact, I think most bigotry comes from religion. However, it is impossible to be a bigot against your own religion! That's absurd. How can you be intolerant of something you believe? Obviously, these Muslims whom I quoted aren't Islamophobes! They simply know enough to see through imam Rauf. One was a professor of Islamic studies at a university, for pete's sake! You really think he's a religious bigot?? Wow. It really has nothing to do with one's motivations or tolerance, does it? Apparently, it only matters if they disagree with you.

The only reason for individuals and families to be upset about the construction of the Cordoba Center is if they are linking the people proposing the center to the people responsible for 9/11.

Did you read each quote I gave? None of them linked the the people proposing the center with the 9/11 terrorists. (Besides, I thought "presuming motives" was a sign of bigotry ... yet you're doing it here.)

With that said, I will not stoop to their level to keep them from believing whatever they want to believe, or limiting their freedom here.

Neither will I. I hope only to change their hearts and minds by adding my voice to the outcry.

[SerScot]

Zarathustra,

No. That, again, presumes islam is a monolith. It's perfectly possible for co-religionists to be bigoted against one another. Catholics v. Protestants/Orthodox v. Catholics and this is despite the fact they are all Christian demoninations. Within Islam you have tensions and bigotry between Sunni/Shia/Sufi to name a few permutations.

[sindatur]

John Stewart last night pointed at the FOX News stories about one guy who is possibly funding the building of this thing and how he funds hundreds(?) of extreme Mosques, and how FOX has avoided giving his name, NY apparenlty rejected a donation from him(?). According to John Stewart this guy is a part owner of FOX News.

I realize John Stewart is a comedy show and often takes things out of contetxt, but he also often gives a far more true view of a story then any of the News Networks do. Anyone see John Stewart last night and know the skinny on this?

[aliantha]

They can't be bigots against their own religion.

Of course they can. Rus is is bigoted against just about any other type of Christianity (altho he tries to make it sound like a virtue ). Just like Christianity, Islam has numerous sects.

We're a country that was attacked, that went to war, and yet never got justice for that attack, or won that war. We have not defeated Al Qaida. We have not captured Bin Laden. We have had no public moment where we could say, "We won."

Because we went to war against the wrong people.

The final battle will be fought right here. Islamic supremacists will slowly take over our culture, and some of us will defend them at every step. We'll allow them to censor South Park. We'll allow them to violate church and state in order to give themselves preferential treatment at public schools. We'll allow them to plant a victory flag at Ground Zero. We'll let them use our freedoms to subvert our freedoms.

Take a deep, cleansing breath, Z, before you hyperventilate.

Six-tenths of the American population is going to take over America. Riiiiight.

Thanks but no. I'm putting my faith in the Founding Fathers. They haven't steered us wrong yet.

[rusmeister]

Rus,

If such a Government were to require children be raised as Orthodox Christians or face having those Children taken from them would that be just and proper in your mind? What about banning public declarations that God does not exist or that Christ is not the son of God. Would you be comfortable with such restrictions on pain of civil fine or criminal sentences?

Hi SerScot,

I have never said, and have actively opposed, the notion of forced conversion - what you describe, otoh, is something the Turkish Muslims actually did in creating their famed Janissaries, for example. Are you familiar with the history of the Orthodox Church and what Islam has always done to it? The two cannot live on equal terms. Pluralism can make them do so, by treating their beliefs as not true and fostering atheism and agnosticism, but it can't reconcile them and leave them their central propositions that their beliefs are true and ought to be acted on, publicly as well as privately.

If by public declarations you mean simply a private person standing on a platform, no problem. Let unbelievers air their ideas. If you mean using public power to actively teach the idea, then yes, I would oppose it, and do oppose the active fostering of pluralism in public schools which has led us to the enormous gap between us today.

[Cail]

They can't be bigots against their own religion.

Of course they can. Rus is is bigoted against just about any other type of Christianity (altho he tries to make it sound like a virtue ). Just like Christianity, Islam has numerous sects.

To be fair, Rus is bigoted against everyone but himself. He's told two people who are members of the Orthodox Church (SerScot and Zahir) that they don't know what they're talking about.

It seems like in Rus's world if you're not Rus, you don't know wtf you're talking about.

[rusmeister]

They can't be bigots against their own religion.

Of course they can. Rus is is bigoted against just about any other type of Christianity (altho he tries to make it sound like a virtue ). Just like Christianity, Islam has numerous sects.

Since you mentioned me by name...

Our understandings of what a bigot is obviously differ.

You hold it to be anyone who disagrees with and "does not tolerate" mutually exclusive beliefs, or something along those lines, n'est-ce-pas?

I hold it to be UNREASONABLE intolerance. If the intolerance is reasonable, then it is not bigotry. If I have determined that a certain mushroom is poisonous, then I am reasonable in my intolerance toward that mushroom. And ideas ARE dangerous. I do not say, 'never talk about them'. I DO say, 'Talk about them - only explain why they are not to be tolerated'. Whoever has power is going to enforce their own understanding of that, regardless of what others think, anyway.

I am intolerant about some things, and am reasonable in doing so. Bigotry charged dismissed.

[SerScot]

Rus,

Rus,

If such a Government were to require children be raised as Orthodox Christians or face having those Children taken from them would that be just and proper in your mind? What about banning public declarations that God does not exist or that Christ is not the son of God. Would you be comfortable with such restrictions on pain of civil fine or criminal sentences?

Hi SerScot,

I have never said, and have actively opposed, the notion of forced conversion - what you describe, otoh, is something the Turkish Muslims actually did in creating their famed Janissaries, for example. Are you familiar with the history of the Orthodox Church and what Islam has always done to it? The two cannot live on equal terms. Pluralism can make them do so, by treating their beliefs as not true and fostering atheism and agnosticism, but it can't reconcile them and leave them their central propositions that their beliefs are true and ought to be acted on, publicly as well as privately.

I'm well aware. Both of the history of the Ottoman Empire (Lord Kinross, The Ottoman Centuries) and of the history between Orthodox Church and the expanding Muslim Empire. If I understand you correctly you are not comfortable with the Orthodox Janissary option, is that right?

If by public declarations you mean simply a private person standing on a platform, no problem. Let unbelievers air their ideas. If you mean using public power to actively teach the idea, then yes, I would oppose it, and do oppose the active fostering of pluralism in public schools which has led us to the enormous gap between us today.

How about a public forum like a television show or something of that nature? No captive audience like a school but widely available. I take it you would not object to requiring students to take classes in Orthodoxy theology that teach Orthodoxy is "the Truth"? What about classes that expose kids to other cultures and principles without giving them a judgment about the validity or "truth" of those cultures and faiths? What if the parents refused to place their Children in Public Schools and taught them about their non-Orthodox faith at home. Would you be comfortable requiring them to have their children in a class that Teaches Orthodoxy as I described above. If they still refuse despite the requirement would you be comfortable with fines, what about jail sentences to enforce such a requirement?

It's just to expose these children to the "Truth" after all.

[aliantha]

I am intolerant about some things, and am reasonable in doing so.

According to your own definition, of course. I'm pretty sure most other bigots could make a similar case for their own unreasonable prejudices.

But we've been down this road several times.

[Avatar]

Snide comments aside, some interesting posts I think. I definitely agree that much more is being made of this than is probably necessary, because as I've pointed out, it's an emotionally charged topic.

Is it just me? Or is everybody ignoring LM's point (good posts LM) that this particular guy has been cleared by the FBI? Shouldn't that be evidence that he's not a radical?

As for the Muslims saying this is a poke in the eye for America, it's no different from Christians who say that the invasion of Iraq/Afghanistan is "gods judgement" on unbelievers, or that AIDS is a "judgement" on gays. Just because some people see it meaning one thing, doesn't mean it does. (To anybody but them of course.)

Finally, I really don't see Islamic supremacists taking over your culture. Don't you think your culture is stronger than that?

In fact...it's quite interesting...think about it...what is the objective of terrorism? To create fear. Maybe they are winning afterall...because that's what I'm seeing...the fear that somehow you'll lose, that somehow they're stronger...that somehow they're taking over...

Anybody ever think that maybe you're all doing yourselves more harm than the terrorists are?

--A

[aliantha]

Finally, I really don't see Islamic supremacists taking over your culture. Don't you think your culture is stronger than that?

In fact...it's quite interesting...think about it...what is the objective of terrorism? To create fear. Maybe they are winning afterall...because that's what I'm seeing...the fear that somehow you'll lose, that somehow they're stronger...that somehow they're taking over...

Anybody ever think that maybe you're all doing yourselves more harm than the terrorists are?

Absolutely. If they never blow up another building, they're creating a climate of fear. And some folks here are running with that, for reasons of their own.

Oh, and kudos to LM for the info about the FBI. Yes, you'd think, if the imam was really a terrorist, they would've found out about it during the background check. Unless you think the FBI is inept...

[SerScot]

Aliantha,

It'll be rationalized. I also love how everyone ignored the fact that the Imam proposing the Cordoba Center gave a eulogy at Daniel Pearls funeral. Obviously the action of a radical Islamist bent on subverting and destroying the United States.

[aliantha]

It'll be rationalized.

Oh right, how could I forget about Obama's birth certificate and Vince Foster's death and....

I saw a mention of the imam's speech at Pearl's funeral. Thanks for bringing that up.

[Cybrweez]

To be fair, Rus is bigoted against everyone but himself. He's told two people who are members of the Orthodox Church (SerScot and Zahir) that they don't know what they're talking about.

Cail, that's a very bigoted thing to say. You sound very intolerant of another's intolerance. See? Bigotry is useless in today's world. You're all bigots, did you know? See the animosity towards Z? Why are you all so intolerant of his intolerance? Can't you all just accept his beliefs?

Z asked some questions on last page about phobia, I didn't notice a response to it. Great question, you see Islamophobe frequently, what about Christianityophobe? Never? Yea, me neither. Yet, wouldn't the same be applied to Z? I've yet to hear those arguing against him on this thread call him a Christianityophobe in the Close. There is a defense of Islam, by attacking opponents, that is completely absent when speaking of other religions, Christianity especially.

I read this today:

For the first time, the United States of America has submitted a “mea culpa” report to the United Nations Human Rights Council detailing the failings of our human rights record. According to the report, “High unemployment rates, hate crime, poverty, poor housing, lack of access to health care and discriminatory hiring practices are among challenges … affecting blacks, Latinos, Muslims, South Asians, American Indians and gays and lesbians in the United States.” Is that really how the Obama Administration views America?

But there is a disturbing omission in the report. According to the FBI’s latest statistics, there were more than 1,600 religiously motivated hate crimes in 2008. Nearly two-thirds of them were anti-Jewish, while just 8% were classified as “anti-Islamic.” Yet the Obama Administration tells the U.N. Human Rights Commission that Muslims are an oppressed minority while ignoring the overwhelming number of anti-Semitic hate crimes.

And, according to NPR, "Crimes against Muslims fell from 115 in 2007 to 105 this year, according to the report."

We were asked to take the FBI's conclusions more seriously than our own, so where's the general concern about the anti-Semitism in this country? I see quite a lot of concern about anti-Islam expressed in this thread.

[Cail]

Well of course 'Weez, when you're top dog everyone wants a piece of you. Just as there are "protected minorities", there are "protected religions". The same mentality that professes that a black person can't be racist sees no problem attacking Christianity while protecting Islam (or Judaism).

[Damelon]

We were asked to take the FBI's conclusions more seriously than our own, so where's the general concern about the anti-Semitism in this country? I see quite a lot of concern about anti-Islam expressed in this thread.

Maybe because this is a thread related to Islam? My thoughts would be the same if they were anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, anti-Evangelical, or anti-Atheist.