Yes, but can you ask yourself why I would interject such a view, without any kind of relevant prompt...? I don't remember participating in a thread about a controversial religious construction project until now.
i think you could agree that there is some provocation from the other side. as long as you're an equal opportunity troll-ignorer...
If you seriously believe that anything from "the other side" justifies what you are doing, or that what you are doing doesn't create most of it, then you are even more delusional than I thought. I don't think you do believe that. I think you are having a "good time," in a sick, twisted way enjoyable only to basso. You could prove me wrong, but you are incapable of doing so.
Every time you say something reasonable, people applaud you for it around here. Probably because it's so rare. Don't play the blame game, "he started it" isn't an excuse to act as Deckard so succinctly put it.
who said anything about who started it? i just find it remarkable that certain posters here (i won't name names, but they're very present in this thread) make vicious personal attacks a routine part of their posts, and are never subjected to the same approbation that those of us on the opposite of an issue are, despite the fact that said personal attacks are never returned in kind. it's a fascinating dynamic, and why i can't take deck's admonishments seriously.
You have made just about the most vicious and unprovoked personal attacks in the history of this board when you explicitly and repeatedly said that critics of the Iraq war hated America and wanted Americans to die. You further suggested that anyone who was for abortion rights wanted babies to be murdered and that anyone who didn't support Sarah Palin hated special needs children. Hypocrite. *******. Plagiarist. Scumbag.
If I said "basso provoked me", then what else am I doing but saying "basso started it"? Pretty simple. This pedantic, purposefully obtuse crap is why everyone around here dislikes you so much.
basso's theme song: <iframe class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="480" height="385" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1vQn1JXjQXU?hl=en_US" frameborder="0"></iframe>
Very well put. People have a right to be upset about the Mosque as much as the congregants of the Mosque have a right to build it there. I am not bothered by the right of those who feel the mosque is inappropriate so much as that the opposition seems to be driven by paranoia and ignorance. Having debated with Donnymost before regarding religion I think I can safely say that he has an equal opportunity opposition to religion but I don't think his view is representative of most of those who are protesting this mosque. From the statements I have heard it is as you note driven by fear and an inability to separate the actions of a handful of individuals from a religion as a whole.
Not to mention within a few blocks of Ground Zero there are also some strip clubs and adult themed stores.
Yes, they have a right to be upset. Just like someone would have a "right to be upset" if a black family moved into his neighborhood ten years after some other random black man punched his sister in the nose. Our freedoms in this country include rights to be stupid, ignorant and bigoted. That doesn't mean our leaders should respect those rights to the extent that they even consider opposing the building. When the KKK marches, good Americans who hate bigotry but love our freedoms say "I respect their right to express themselves, but they are wrong." Donny's position is entirely reasonable, but it seems extremely misplaced in this thread, which is focused on very specific bias toward one religion and not toward all houses of worship. It would have been much clearer if he had included in each of his posts some note saying "I don't oppose Islam in particular; I oppose all religion." Without that note, it's kind of like being opposed to all marriages but showing up in a gay marriage thread and repeatedly saying "I oppose gay marriage. Am I a bigot?"
