Ground Zero Mosque -- Should it Be Built?

[Kulindahr]

But where does capitulation end?

Our modern North American societies are built upon the precept of Common Law and precedent.


Why don't the people of the US realize that if the mosque/community centre isn't built, the terrorists have won?

That article I quoted (someone else linked to it), by a prominent Muslim journalist, suggested that if the mosque is built (at that location), the terrorists will just use it, as will the Islamophobes -- as is already happening.

That author noted there aren't enough Muslims in the area to need such a center, and another location might be better -- that's a view from the Middle East.

I'll agree that if it isn't built at all, the terrorists have won. But from that Muslim perspective, I think maybe if it's built at the proposed location, they'll have won something else.

Nice quandary.

 

[White Eagle]

Another article from Alternet that I received this AM. This is amazing. It seems:

in 2000, a Republican Congress passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act… The goal of the legislation, supported by a coalition of religious groups, was to respond to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Employment Division Department of Human Resources v. Smith and give churches, synagogues, mosques and other places of worship more power in disputes with local and municipal authorities.

The rest of the law that the Republicans passed it at:

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy...t-keeps-gov-from-messing-with-islamic-center/


Posted by Joshua Holland at 11:19 am
August 18, 2010
comments10 COMMENTS
Religious Right Pushed Law that Keeps Gov from Messing with Islamic Center
Posted by Joshua Holland on @ 11:19 am
Article printed from speakeasy: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy
URL to article: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy...t-keeps-gov-from-messing-with-islamic-center/

We have a Constitution that prohibits the government from pushing religious institutions around. But the Right is all about ginning up controversies where none exist, and during the Bush years they made a lot of noise about how religious freedom was under assault — by which they meant religious organizations’ freedom to discriminate — and got a little-known bill called the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act passed by Congress.

I want to see Kulindar's response to this. I guess it makes the argument invalid now.
At the end of the article Joshua Holland asks:

Who will be the first wingnut to call for its repeal?

 

[Kulindahr]

That law shouldn't be repealed.

But as a famous Supreme Court justice once said, "The Constitution is not a suicide pact". If the analysis of the Muslim journalist I referenced is correct, then the mere existence of the Center at that location would serve to aid the terrorists -- just as to not allow it to be built at all would be a victory for them.

Government action? I'd rather see a dozen actual mosques spring up around the WTC than for government coercion to "solve" the problem. But if negotiation and a land swap can bring a resolution -- awesome.

BTW, the commentary you quoted concerning that law is incorrect. By "religious freedom", the people who got that legislation rolling meant just what the law says: to be allowed to build where it's actually legal, instead of being stonewalled (like the rebuilding of the Orthodox church near the WTC -- seems the law hasn't done much, huh?), to be able to use street parking just like anyone else (there was a situation where a liberal-dominated city council decided a weekend ban on street parking would be a nice idea), etc. Yes, people signed on who like religious discrimination -- but, then, they have a point: freedom of religion has to mean freedom to follow one's beliefs, not just hold them (and if the Mormons still held that blacks are barred from their church, that would be their right).

 

[White Eagle]

Ok thanks. I thought there would be a quick fix. Duh!

 

[SuperPsyze]

Last I heard, it's not going to be named Cordoba House anymore. I think they're going to name it the Park 51 Community Center. And it's even really a mosque. Isn't the prayer area just equivalent to a chapel on the upper floor?

I don't know why this is even an issue. I suppose you can't really argue with bigots.

 

[White Eagle]

Last I heard, it's not going to be named Cordoba House anymore. I think they're going to name it the Park 51 Community Center. And it's even really a mosque. Isn't the prayer area just equivalent to a chapel on the upper floor?

I don't know why this is even an issue. I suppose you can't really argue with bigots.

You got that right!!!

 

[Kulindahr]

Last I heard, it's not going to be named Cordoba House anymore. I think they're going to name it the Park 51 Community Center. And it's even really a mosque. Isn't the prayer area just equivalent to a chapel on the upper floor?

I don't know why this is even an issue. I suppose you can't really argue with bigots.

I liked "Cordoba House" -- that said something.

And people would have gone, "Huh? Corduroy House???"

 

[laikaNYC]

Far-left wignut Howard Dean has now come out AGAINST the proposed Ground Zero Mosque! I'm curious to see how the liberals here will spin this. When Harry Reid and numerous Democratic Congressmen came out against the proposed Mosque, they were accused of "caving in to bigotry"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/18/dean-comes-proposed-mosque-near-ground-zero/

 

[MisterMajestic]

^^^WRONG...I'm watching Keith O. right now..The Good Doctor is speaking and he just said he believes there should be a discussion with New York 911 activists & the Development group...He also stated @ the end of the day the Development group has the Legal Right to build.

Noone cares about the 4 Dems that have spoken against the Center being built..They are Moderates that will likely lose in their majority Conservative areas.....

Do your homework...

 

[philusmc]

Far-left wignut Howard Dean has now come out AGAINST the proposed Ground Zero Mosque! I'm curious to see how the liberals here will spin this. When Harry Reid and numerous Democratic Congressmen came out against the proposed Mosque, they were accused of "caving in to bigotry"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/18/dean-comes-proposed-mosque-near-ground-zero/

Democrat or republican, it doesn't matter. Freedom of religion is just that. You can't say "I'm for freedom of relegion, but..". There can be no but. Folks can't have this both ways regardless of political party affiliation. It's like being a little bit pregnant, you are or you're not.

The fear-mongering that's been ginned up I think has come from the right to make this into a political issue. It's not. It's a constitutional right issue. Both as freedom of relegion and property rights.

There's already a mosque there, has been for decades. Why is this causing such a big deal other than giving the right a manufactured WEDGE issue that they can try and win political points with.

I thought they were all for constitutional rights, but I guess in their constitution it doesn't apply to ALL americans, just who they want it to apply.

 

[philusmc]

^^^WRONG...I'm watching Keith O. right now..The Good Doctor is speaking and he just said he believes there should be a discussion with New York 911 activists & the Development group...He also stated @ the end of the day the Development group has the Legal Right to build.

Noone cares about the 4 Dems that have spoken against the Center being built..They are Moderates that will likely lose in their majority Conservative areas.....

Do your homework...

Look at Laika's source: FOX NUTS. No wonder. They only deal in misinformation, lies, fear and trumped up drama.

 

[laikaNYC]

Look at Laika's source: FOX NUTS. No wonder. They only deal in misinformation, lies, fear and trumped up drama.

Is the far-left Salon.com a better source for you?

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/18/dean

 

[bankside]

Why is anyone trying to turn this into a left-wing right-wing thing? You people remember that there are often more than two answers to a question, right?

 

[MercuryJones]

Democrat or republican, it doesn't matter.

And it takes someone pathologically partisan to go laika's route.

I don't identify as a liberal or as a Democrat, and even if I did I'd make up my own mind on the merits of the case. So I don't give a fuck what Harry Reid or anyone else says.

Someone like laika or pixie who are only here to take sides in partisan issues (which to their eyes is every issue) could never understand that.

 

[MercuryJones]

Why is anyone trying to turn this into a left-wing right-wing thing? You people remember that there are often more than two answers to a question, right?

See my above response. To the pathologically partisan, there are only two sides - and there aren't even core issues, just two sides.

 

[Kulindahr]

Is the far-left Salon.com a better source for you?

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/18/dean

I notice that the commentary there can't even get what Dean said straight when the video is right above it. He did not say that "the vicinity of Ground Zero be turned into a Muslim-free zone because some people don't want Muslims near it", he specifically said that the area doesn't belong to any particular faith.

And he made a valid point that you get off to a bad start with trying to show others they can live alongside you by doing something that stirs up a great amount of opposition.

At any rate, laika, you're spinning things by making his position seem totally negative, when it isn't at all.

 

[unclaimedblessing]

There are over 100 mosques in NYC.

Surely an existing one could be modified to include a community/cultural center at a location that won't create one whose location is offensive to so many.

The proposed building might incite even more violence and hatred.

It hasn't been just terrorists attacking Mosques in the Moslem world. In many cases it's been Shiite vs Sunni.

If the existing Mosques in NYC haven't been victimized why build another in a location that will only fan the flames of religious & popular political intolerance?

 

[MercuryJones]

Surely an existing one could be modified to include a community/cultural center at a location that won't create one whose location is offensive to so many.

Why?

Why are minorities supposed to bend over backwards to satisfy bigots?

Should Jews be isolated to certain neighborhoods so as not to offend Evangelicals?

Should gays not get married so as not to offend gay-haters?

 

[CowboyBob]

This is the topic du jour for conservatives now, to rile up the populace to get out and vote. Just a few weeks ago it was all about jobs. A few weeks from now they'll come up with some other non-issue to stir up fake outrage and keep on doing this until the elections in November.

It's pathetic and demented that they continue to race-bait, but they historically have done that. They take a group of people, and stir up controversy and demagogue all over the media.

If they didn't have Muslims, they would focus on homosexuals, or communists, or whomever. Wasn't gay marriage (hey, that's you and me) an election issue just two years ago? Republicans realize they can't win elections on the issues, so they try to scare people into voting. What are their solutions to problems right now except for tax cuts for the rich? They know that's not an effective campaign issue to change the subject, quick!

 

[laikaNYC]

This is the topic du jour for conservatives now, to rile up the populace to get out and vote. Just a few weeks ago it was all about jobs. A few weeks from now they'll come up with some other non-issue to stir up fake outrage and keep on doing this until the elections in November.

It's pathetic and demented that they continue to race-bait, but they historically have done that. They take a group of people, and stir up controversy and demagogue all over the media.

If they didn't have Muslims, they would focus on homosexuals, or communists, or whomever. Wasn't gay marriage (hey, that's you and me) an election issue just two years ago? Republicans realize they can't win elections on the issues, so they try to scare people into voting. What are their solutions to problems right now except for tax cuts for the rich? They know that's not an effective campaign issue to change the subject, quick!

Bob, you still haven't gotten it through your through your head that both Republican and Democratic voters, as a majority, are against the proposed location. Your charges of race-baiting are about as phony as a three-dollar-bill