Is is hypocritical for Palin/Beck to hold a rally at Lincoln Park on Aug 28th?

Yours is the most enlightened response so far in this thread. I understand the shame that people in one's faith can bring (I am thinking now of the Baptist Church in Kansas that mocks the grieving families at military funerals). The shame brought about by people who purport to love God but who really hate everything for which God represents must be bourne by the reconcilers of the world. It is they who must sacrifice for the greater good. If building this mosque or community center somewhere else smooths and eases the path to an enlightened future, then this should be strongly considered.

 

No, everybody should only be silent about everything that might offend people if they demand that other people not do things that would offend people.

Palin has said that the builders of the Islamic center should not build it because it will be offensive or hurtful to people. Using her logic, she should not be holding this rally if it is also going to offend people.

 

Lou, we have a black president for crying out loud. We are clearly living in a nation that is now free from racism (except the racism of the Obama regime against good, honest white folks).

 

This is inaccurate on so many levels.

To use an elected politician as the tell-all metric on racism is absurd. To claim that we are free of racism when the Aryan Nation and the KKK still exist is absurd.

 

I think it's hypocritical for Beck to sideline Linkin Park on Aug 28th.

Beck's a bigger draw.

 

You obviously missed the sarcasm in his post.

 

Keep in mind there are two sides. Smoothing and easing the path depends on both sides being satisfied with the outcome. That's not possible at this point. One side will be unhappy, and it is important to determine which side has a better cause.

I see what you are saying. I think we are both looking at the same problem but propose different solutions. You want to ease the tension. I can't agree with easing the tension because the tension should not exist, will otherwise continue to exist, and is completely irrational. Will you ease the tension forever?

IMO, if this sentiment/tension is allowed to fester, it will perpetuate like a never-ending disease. They will feel worse and worse, and it will become worse and worse.

Which of these is a better outcome:

1) A group of people are relieved that the mosque is not built two blocks away, despite there being one 4 blocks away. They continue to get angry or sad at the sight of anything Islamic. Every minaret, every mosque, etc. Muslims are sent the message: you remind us of terrorists.

or

2) This center/mosque gets built. The people of the center engage the community. The community is uneasy. Over time, the victims families/friends along with other people in the area begin understanding that terrorists are a common enemy. Young muslims are told, over and over again, about the terrorists' failed attempt to hijack Islam, to hijack America, to hijack freedom.

I think we just agree to disagree, though both of us are interested in the long-term success of all the people involved.

 

Dude, nothing, and I mean nothing at that mosque will teach anything that justifies or pushes anyone to do some sort of a murder period. Nothing in the quran justifies killing innocents, its infact called the greatest ultimate sin. Infidels? Actually the Quran refers to Christians and jews as people of the book and that people of other faiths have their own salvation towards god and should be respected. Yes these are straight from that book...they will nitpick a phrase and not look at the context or what its talking about, and then use it for their agenda(that can be done to distort the bible if they wanted to).

Infact, on this particular imam, ready his speech he gave at the daniel pearl memorial, talks about pluralism and peace. Not to mention bush hired this guy as a convoy and to spread and talk about what islam really is about, yes bush did. The state government supports him even. I don't personally agree with all his sayings, but the above statements are facts, apparently the govt trust him not just this president, but the last one who was republican did too. Not to mention, al-quaeda actually has targeted him to kill too, what does that say if he is siding with him?

The fact is, those people in the middle east that do not like america or their foreign policies come from a land of turmoil and unrest, you put any people of any faith in that, adn they are going to be rebellious and chaotic and point fingers. Its just like people like to talk about black and white literacy rate and they point towards race and its irrelevant, look at the socioeconomic situation and then you will find consistency on their tests, etc rather than looking and grouping races. Even America, right now, bad economic times, naturally its a rebellious atmosphere, people point fingers, its happening to us as much as it is them in different ways

 

Who can predict the future? I would love for your "2)" to be fullfilled. However, another scenario might unfold. Let's say the center / mosque is built, but a terrorist cell infiltrates and uses the site for ill purposes. Once that spark is lit, the "I told you so" crowd could easily become violently inflamed and motivated to actions that all would come to regret.

There will always be terrorists of every ilk planning destruction near and far. However, this mosque/center provides too tempting a target for these enemies of mankind to use as leverage to break a fragile trust.

BTW, in my way of thinking, rational, calm discussion and compromise always leads to peaceful, humane solutions. Avoiding discussion leads to mistrust, suspicion and anger --- and conflict soon follows.

 

Oops, I guess I should have put in the , or the 'sarcasm' tags.

 

A lot of it is but not all of it. I will take people who argue that they don't think the Islamic center should be built there because it is controversial at their word and that they are trying to avoid the controversy. The problem that I have though with that is that the controversy is one that is being driven by paranoia and ignorance. The people arguing against the center because it is controversial may not be racist necessarily just wanting to avoid controversy.

 

What do you define the area? The 9/11 attack caused damage through a wide area of NYC. I was in NYC on 9/28/2001 and there was damage more than 10 blocks away.

Also if you are saying no religious structure should be built what about the shrine made from the cross of the girders that was erected on Ground Zero itself?


Isn't that a Christian religious structure?

Except that you wrote,

If you are not claiming that you don't know whether they did or not why did you write that then?

 

But you are allowing the radicals to dictate the terms of the cultural debate. You agree that the terrorists that carried out 9/11 were an extreme minority that doesn't define the whole religion but you allow them to define the whole religion by saying that no Islamic Center, no matter how moderate, should be built around Ground Zero.

That to me is the same thing as saying that no Christian Church, even if they are Quakers, should be allowed to be built near Arlington Cemetery because of the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church.

 

That is just paranoia. I could just as easily say that a Christian Church shouldn't be built because another Eric Rudolph could go there.

Yes there are terrorists and madmen out there. We don't hold a whole religion or people responsible for the actions of a few.

In fact this goes to an argument you have brought up how unfairly you feel the Tea Party gets labled for the actions of a few extremists, extremists that you point out the Tea Party tries to get rid of. You are doing the same thing though in saying that the actions of a few extremists will taint all Muslims so therefore this Center shouldn't be built where they want to. Even though the Muslims who want to build this have gone out of their way to distant themselves from the extremists.

 

The Greek Orthodox Church is the only religious entity that actually has the "right" to build there because their construction would be a "re-build." Their church that sat on the site was destroyed, but the City of New York has done everything possible to keep them from rebuilding. I do not see the fairness in that either.

There are many sacrifices that people must make for the sins of others. There are blacks who want reparations for crimes that occurred 150 years or more ago by people long since dead against people long since dead.

Like the crimes of slavery or the holocaust or any other horrendous wrong, we should learn from these wrongs to avoid future wrongs. However, the innocents on both sides are the ones must create and uphold the peace, whether those innocents be nations or corporations or religions or neighbors.

 

The neighbors, religions and corporations of lower Manhattan have no issue with the mosque being built.

 

See Refman: Not according to NYC or national polls. Personally, I don't trust polls, but they seem as arbitrary as your assessment.

 

I meant any SANE neighbor, religion or corporation

 

Sane -- meaning only those who agree with you.