Local (Houston) Talk Radio Host Calls for Blowing Up of Mosque

I agree... for the most part, but it isn't that simple for many, really.

First, it's not whether or not Muslim places of worship are offensive to Americans in general, it's the question if it is disrespectful to have one there... after what happened there. Those that perpetrated this act of terrorism there did so specifically in the name of their religion. Are they representative of that faith? No, but it's not exactly a loose or indirect coincidence of an affiliation either. They did this under directive of [their idea of] religion that, correct me if I am wrong Mathloom, does in so many words advocate eradication of the infidels in its scripture. Perhaps I'm wrong on that... interpretation is exactly that, and I reserve the right to be misinformed on this.

So, while they don't represent the totality of their faith in these actions, they are not quite as separate IN SOME PEOPLE'S MINDS as your post would indicate, and therefore I can't exactly get with calling people who feel this way "absolutely ridiculous." I don't agree with them, but I don't think it's as much a no brainer as some would suggest that this is a completely non-volatile idea.

As for the McVeigh example... I don't know for sure if he was a Christian or not, the details vary, but I do think that his act was more carried out against the government from an oppressed citizen mindset, rather than a Christian eradicating infidels mindset, so it's not the same exactly.

I personally think it would be a pretty awesome gesture on our part to help build the mosque there, and one that solidifies the values we hold dear... but I have to say that those values were shaken to the core by those that pronounced this very religion as the reason for 9/11, and I can easily see why it gives some people pause and makes them emotional.

 

And do you have a more adult response to those analogies?

As for being a tolerant guy what is wrong with that? As I said before we live in a plural society and the only way that works is tolerence and respect. As you said yourself before you would like people to do unto you as you do unto others. Don't you see that means tolerence and respect of things that you don't agree with or even understand.

 

I think in the wake of what happened it's understandable for people's emotions to be amped up.

However, the terrorists claiming they did what they did for Islam, which isn't really what they claimed, at least in a direct manner, doesn't change the U.S. constitution. It should be a no-brainer that crazy terrorist killers claiming something doesn't and shouldn't implicate everyone else of that same group/religion/cause especially when that group/religion/cause has gone out of their way to denounce and condemn the attack.

It is irrational, and we shouldn't give in to irrationality.

 

There is nothing wrong with being a tolerant guy. I am one myself.

I am, however, somewhat suspicious of people who try to make others believe that they are completely free of prejudice and go to great lengths to prove that. Many left-wing people are like that, and then boom - it turns out that they are at least as prejudiced as those they claim to be morally superior to. Batman Jones' recent repetition of his xenophobic rants against me are just one example, and the anonymous insults by rep givers are another one. There is a lot of anger there.

In your case, I don't think it is so much anger as taking the easy way of picking your position along what the majority in this forum says. You really want to fit in and for people to like you. Fair enough.

The issue I see is that tolerant people like you and others are in danger of fighting for certain people's rights who later turn out to be massively intolerant (if not even hate preachers).

I just want to make sure that they are not. I would like to be sure of the true intentions of Mr. Rauf.

As to your analogies, CrazyDave has already debunked your silly McVeigh analogy.

You post "And again with the divide between Muslims and the rest of the America. Show me where it says that Muslims cannot be good Americans." The statement about the divide is not from me - it is from Mr. Rauf. And you show me where I would have said they cannot be good Americans.

 

I'm all in favor of a mosque/cultural center focusing on denouncing terrorism. If it was my decision, I would have it built.

 

Counterproductive and perhaps even a bit disingenuous, but I don't know about irrational. I do agree with most of what you say here though... maybe just not how you're saying it. That's fine by me.

What they did or said should not and does not implicate all of Islam. It's that this is a sensitive place to put such a thing for those reasons in that situation.

I would side more with it being a symbol that could remind us how we define ourselves as strong, as free and as Americans, but I don't think that someone who might disagree is absolutely ridiculous.

 

I understand that we are mostly in agreement, so any things I discuss here are pretty much just me being nitpicky. If folks hold out anger towards a whole group for the actions of a few even though most of that group denounced the actions of the few, then it seems irrational to me.

Just like it is irrational to have a strong fear of flying because there are plane crashes. Yes there are, but flying is still safer than driving, and to believe that any plane you are on will crash because a few have is irrational.

 

Yes, but it's only natural you would get that indication because you assume the worst about Muslims in every post in your bbs history.

Since I'm clicked on reply, I'm sure you'll be ecstatic to know that I agree with the rabbi but don't think it should be the deciding factor.

It's not my mosque. No one HAS to go. The only reason I would be hesitant is because it may make the mosque a specific target for Al Qaeda and because I don't think any religious authorities should make political statements. Otherwise, I very much like the rabbi's idea.

I would be happy for the authorities in charge of approval to ask them in an interview of their position with regards to Al Qaeda's actions/behavior.

I don't want to endanger American lives just to satisfy your irrational insecurities, especially since even the families have not requested this. If they did, I would give it more thought.

Edit: Btw, if Islam had a flag, and it wasn't planted in America already, then hell yes this is planting a flag. Next to the hundreds of other flags which are a part of the country. Next to all the religious and non-religious people. What you can't seem to understand is that the Al Qaeda flag and the Islamic flag are not the same, except in the eyes and minds of the few who like to see it that way. So the planting of the flag, in itself, is a message to OBL that "our flag is different than your flag."

 

Sure. I think we differ in that because of the site, I am more willing to understand the hesitance or condemnation of it. I don't agree, but... I understand.

I don't know that I'd use that analogy for various reasons, but to try and play along, If someone else has a problem with planes, I understand they could have their reasons... even if I don't agree.

I think the main thing is that just because someone doesn't think there should be a mosque at or near ground zero, does not mean that they condemn all Islam or that they are irrational or ridiculous, in my opinion.

 

Oh wow. I must frame this post.

 

That's a great point, thanks.

Do you think there are any concrete ways to determine what the reasons are?

I mean, they went to a Manhattan Community board. What other things can they do to increase their ability to receive good/useful feedback, and try to present their proposal as well?

 

Good to hear you like the Rabbi's idea. The argument that it might make it a target for Al Qaeda doesn't make much sense to me. You said that the mosque would be a big "F you" to Al Qaeda as it is planned now. How would it then not be a target already?

 

Take a guess.

 

Explain.

 

Why should they have to build a extremism museum? This is America, as long as they aren't doing anything illegal they should not be permitted from building a mosque or have to meet somebody else's requirements. If a new Jewish Temple opens up next to a Turkish cafe, nobody would demand that they make a museum about commando raids in international waters.

 

Who said they "have to"? It is a suggestion by a Rabbi that I would like to hear their answer to. You are making the same mistake as rocketsjudoka.

 

A Muslim co-worker and I were discussing this mosque initiative today, and he said something interesting that I was not entirely aware of. He says that after 9/11, building a new mosque ANYWHERE was extremely challenging and was met every time with protestations and hate-filled campaigns against it at the local level. He mentioned one being built near Katy recently that was met with similar hostilities, and another one in Florida, and one in Virginia, and one in California and a bunch of other places. He says the only difference here is the NYC proposal has become a national issue for obvious reasons, while the other mosques met no less of a pushback and smear campaigns from an organized opposition, but the issue remained local in all other cases. In his opinion, it is time to take a stand for the right of Muslims to build their houses of worship anywhere they choose, as long as it is legal and pursued through the usual channels of buying a land, getting a permit going through the normal procedures for it. He says the issue is made all the more urgent because this NYC mosque controversy is a national issue now, and what Muslim-Americans do now will impact all other mosques and Muslim institutions all across the country, and if they retreat on their plans now the radicals on the right will view it as a victory and it will only encourage the hateful few to take action everywhere else using it as their blueprint. To him, this is the moment of truth, "our Rosa Parks moment", he said half-jokingly. If nothing else, he says Muslims cannot retreat now on this particular project, but the time will come when they might have reconsider and concede on another project.

I thought it was an interesting perspective so wanted to share it.

 

Hearsay of self-victimization, what else is new.

 

That's fair enough. I highly doubt that there is similar opposition elsewhere in the country, but I see that this could be useful in more than one way, one of which is to exercise their freedom to build it and the other being that they actually need a large mosque in this area. The fact that they are trying to reach out to the people of that community says a lot about them, especially since they don't HAVE to do that.

Ofcourse, some won't understand because they are programmed to think a certain way and, through that, become incapable of seeing things through the eyes of minority group who have traditionally been given a hard time literally everywhere in the world (including their own country).

 

In Katy...a guy used land right next to a mosque and used it for pig races on Friday nights, right after Friday prayers. Came off like a complete jackass to me.

There's a thread about that somewhere here.

EDIT: here it is http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=121089&highlight=pig+races