Mosque Plan at TT site Clears Hurdle in New York - Page 12

AZZenny · August 17th, 2010, 08:22 AM

This whole thing is a shining example of the way everything is polarized, inflated, escalated, media-spun for ratings and let the partisan name-calling begin.

I haven't heard anyone anywhere say they "can't" build this. I see no one suggesting we abrogate the Constitution to stop them, or saying the Constitution doesn't protect their right to do so.

Opponents like me are saying "it's allowed, it's protected by law, but it's a really lousy idea." Or maybe, "They're allowed, but it seems pretty rude and provocative."

Or how about this -- this might work: "It's within their rights to build, and it's within our rights to protest that we find it offensive."
That's assuming the same First Amendment rights extend to the opponents as to the proponents.

I hope those of you who are shrilly casting some of us as rednecked unumerkin jackbooted natzi bigots realize you are soundiung just as mis-directed and hysterical as you accuse us of being.

Now -- I'd love to see Larry Flynt buy 52 Park and open the constitutionally-protected Hustler Community Center for Sexual Liberation.

THAT I would support 100%. Maybe even send a donation..

DWKB · August 17th, 2010, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZZenny

Now -- I'd love to see Larry Flynt buy 52 Park and open the constitutionally-protected Hustler Community Center for Sexual Liberation.

THAT I would support 100%. Maybe even send a donation..

This is already down there:

PortlandCardFan · August 17th, 2010, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZZenny

This whole thing is a shining example of the way everything is polarized, inflated, escalated, media-spun for ratings and let the partisan name-calling begin.

I haven't heard anyone anywhere say they "can't" build this. I see no one suggesting we abrogate the Constitution to stop them, or saying the Constitution doesn't protect their right to do so.

Opponents like me are saying "it's allowed, it's protected by law, but it's a really lousy idea." Or maybe, "They're allowed, but it seems pretty rude and provocative."

Or how about this -- this might work: "It's within their rights to build, and it's within our rights to protest that we find it offensive."
That's assuming the same First Amendment rights extend to the opponents as to the proponents.

I hope those of you who are shrilly casting some of us as rednecked unumerkin jackbooted natzi bigots realize you are soundiung just as mis-directed and hysterical as you accuse us of being.

Now -- I'd love to see Larry Flynt buy 52 Park and open the constitutionally-protected Hustler Community Center for Sexual Liberation.

THAT I would support 100%. Maybe even send a donation..

Will you marry me?!?!

CaptTurbo · August 17th, 2010, 08:43 AM

I say build it. It will be a target for every off balanced mentally unstable person in America. The Timmothy McVeighs will be hitting this and that would send a pretty clear message.

Rivercard · August 17th, 2010, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoyaltyisaCurse

Because a large number of Americans are overly emotional and/or bigoted toward Muslims is not a reason to prevent the center.

That's really uncalled for. So in your mind anyone who thinks this is a bad idea can be dismissed as an emotionally crazed irrational bigot? Guess that makes it easy to avoid discussing the real underlying issues.

82CardsGrad · August 17th, 2010, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DWKB

Obama did come out in accordance with the 2/3 of this country stating that it is their legal right to build the mosque in that location. As far as I know that's his only statement regarding this so unless you've got a quote from him stating differently I'm calling you out on this bull.

Considering your track record on making statement coincidentally in accordance with the "conservative meme of the day" I'm be careful throwing out group think and lemming accusations in such a cavalier mannor.

Not so surprisingly, you missed the point entirely. Did I say he didn't make the case for their legal right?
The issue is what he didn't say. And again, had he said what he didn't say, I have little doubt you and others wouldn't be barking about the "legal rights" of Rauf...

82CardsGrad · August 17th, 2010, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZZenny

This whole thing is a shining example of the way everything is polarized, inflated, escalated, media-spun for ratings and let the partisan name-calling begin.

I haven't heard anyone anywhere say they "can't" build this. I see no one suggesting we abrogate the Constitution to stop them, or saying the Constitution doesn't protect their right to do so.

Opponents like me are saying "it's allowed, it's protected by law, but it's a really lousy idea." Or maybe, "They're allowed, but it seems pretty rude and provocative."

Or how about this -- this might work: "It's within their rights to build, and it's within our rights to protest that we find it offensive."
That's assuming the same First Amendment rights extend to the opponents as to the proponents.

I hope those of you who are shrilly casting some of us as rednecked unumerkin jackbooted natzi bigots realize you are soundiung just as mis-directed and hysterical as you accuse us of being.

Now -- I'd love to see Larry Flynt buy 52 Park and open the constitutionally-protected Hustler Community Center for Sexual Liberation.

THAT I would support 100%. Maybe even send a donation..

Very well said - again, Zenny... Question for you - you have been a very strong supporter of Obama. Why do you think he chose to speak out on this topic, and in so doing leaving out that which you (along with me and most other Americans, including a large number of Dems), see to be the most salient point on this topic? I don't get it...

82CardsGrad · August 17th, 2010, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivercard

That's really uncalled for. So in your mind anyone who thinks this is a bad idea can be dismissed as an emotionally crazed irrational bigot? Guess that makes it easy to avoid discussing the real underlying issues.

If you are against the construction of the Mosque, you are a "crazed irrational bigot".
If you oppose Obama, you are a racist....

Yea - we've come a long way since the end of the Bush era...

Rivercard · August 17th, 2010, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 82CardsGrad

I don't get it...

It's called politics. What actual good could come from Obama saying that a mosque erection in that location would be tasteless? His personal opinion isn't necessary.

AZZenny · August 17th, 2010, 09:29 AM

82 - Because he's a politician and was speaking before a Muslim group on a Muslim holiday. The next day he said he hadn't and wouldn't comment on the wisdom of the choice of location, which is as close as most smart Democratic politicians would get to saying 'read my lips: bad idea.' I have absolutely no doubt had he been speaking to a NYPD/FDNY organization, then the day 2 comments would have been incorporated into the original statement.

82CardsGrad · August 17th, 2010, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivercard

It's called politics. What actual good could come from Obama saying that a mosque erection in that location would be tasteless? His personal opinion isn't necessary.

What good? Well, it could've been a moment where he, on behalf of our country, spoke in context, supporting ALL religions and ALL rights for everyone. But that with those rights, come responsibilities. As such, he (us) would expect greater discretion to be used. Greater understanding for what took place just a few steps away from the site of this proposed mosque. It could have been an opportunity to bring this particular (supposedly more moderate) group of muslims together with "us", to create a more constructive conversation. Perhaps it would've led to a point where all of us "crazed, irrational bigots" would have been afforded a more intimate look into the intent for this mosque, and a deeper understanding of Rauf himself. Perhaps it would have led to an agreement between all parties - one that would have been acceptable to Rauf and to the crazed, irrational bigots.

However, Obama, in his infinite wisdom, short-circuited and only amped up the entire debate by myopically pointing out the legal rights of Rauf. Stupid... just plain Stupid...

82CardsGrad · August 17th, 2010, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZZenny

82 - Because he's a politician and was speaking before a Muslim group on a Muslim holiday. The next day he said he hadn't and wouldn't comment on the wisdom of the choice of location, which is as close as most smart Democratic politicians would get to saying 'read my lips: bad idea.' I have absolutely no doubt had he been speaking to a NYPD/FDNY organization, then the day 2 comments would have been incorporated into the original statement.

Fair enough and as always, thank you for your thoughtful and reasoned point of view Zenny...
I think, the day after speaking to the Muslim group, he still could've been a bit more clear and direct about expressing the "bad idea" point, I understand why he didn't make that point when he first raised this topic in front of the Muslim group on a Muslim holiday...

conraddobler · August 17th, 2010, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 82CardsGrad

What good? Well, it could've been a moment where he, on behalf of our country, spoke in context, supporting ALL religions and ALL rights for everyone. But that with those rights, come responsibilities. As such, he (us) would expect greater discretion to be used. Greater understanding for what took place just a few steps away from the site of this proposed mosque. It could have been an opportunity to bring this particular (supposedly more moderate) muslims together with "us", to create a more constructive conversation. Perhaps it would've led to a point where all of us "crazed, irrational bigots" would have been afforded a more intimate look into the intent for this mosque, and a deeper understanding of Rauf himself. Perhaps it would have led to an agreement between all parties - one that would have been acceptable to Rauf and to the crazed, irrational bigots.

However, Obama, in his infinite wisdom, short-circuited and only amped up the entire debate by myopically pointing out the legal rights of Rauf. Stupid... just plain Stupid...

Only Nixon could go to China and with Obama's cred with the Muslim community only he could really drive this point home without being offensive.

He should just speak the plain truth, as far as American's go they understand the legal right to do this and want it protected but the entire idea is in poor taste period.

82CardsGrad · August 17th, 2010, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by conraddobler

Only Nixon could go to China and with Obama's cred with the Muslim community only he could really drive this point home without being offensive.

He should just speak the plain truth, as far as American's go they understand the legal right to do this and want it protected but the entire idea is in poor taste period.

Wasn't this one of the greatest hopes for Obama?? Wasn't he supposed to be, FINALLY, the great unifier? THE ONE who would finally deliver this country from the ravages of prejudice and bias? IMHO, he has done more to fan the flames rather than build bridges. And sadly, I believe a vast majority of the country feels the same.
Don't get me wrong, I am not implying that his inability to fulfill his promise here is intentional. I just think he was seriously over-sold and has therefore come up seriously short.

Rivercard · August 17th, 2010, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 82CardsGrad

Perhaps it would have led to an agreement between all parties - one that would have been acceptable to Rauf and to the crazed, irrational bigots.

What possible agreement could do satisfy everyone? Either you have a mosque or you don't.