Should we be like Saudis re Religious Freedom?
Newt Gingrich argues that the US should?like the oppressive theocracy of Saudi Arabia?forbid certain religions from building places of worship in certain places. Specifically, we should reject (?refudiate??) the mosque near Ground Zero.
In essence, his argument is: they're intolerant, thus we should be intolerant.
Do you agree?
Newt Gingrich Statement on the Proposed ?Cordoba House? Mosque at Ground Zero | Newt.org
Replies
159
SoWal Insider
It's tricky. I am open and don't believe most Muslims are radical. However, this location does seem questionable to me.
Beach Fanatic
.
If Palin did her homework, she?d know that there are dozens of mosques already located within a one-mile radius of those craters, ..."
Good! Since this is the case, it would appear there are plenty of mosques already built and located in the area of ground zero. Certainly seems there is no need to build another. (Unless you have a specific agenda).
Beach Fanatic
First off, Newt is misinformed. The Cordoba House will be a diverse cultural center which will not be a mosque and have nothing to do with religion whatsoever. It will be a place for community gatherings in promotion of tolerance of all, mainly utilizing arts and culture as a catalyst. As far as the name is concerned, Cordoba was a thriving city a thousand years ago that housed the largest library in the world and it was a global center of trade and culture where Muslims, Christians and Jews lived in prosperous harmony.
The World Trade Center reflected that tolerance, hence it's name. What would be a better site than the Cordoba house to teach acceptance and tolerance, especially in New York where millions of immigrants entered this Country. When we reject projects based on the faith of the builder it is a danger to our economic and cultural future and is not what this Country stands for.
It pays to get "the rest of the story". Thanks for posting
Beach FanaticAuthor
Let's assume that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a bad guy with a really disgusting world view; let's assume he hates the US & hates Christians & Jews.
If he's broken any law let's arrest him for it. But, unless he's broken a law, we should leave him alone (although with reasonable suspicion, he might be ?monitored? by ?the authorities.?)
One of the great things about our country (as opposed to, say, Saudi Arabia) is that each of us is free to have any cockamamie opinion or worldview we want?and we're allowed to voice those opinions in front of God & everyone without fear of being arrested or killed. For proof of this just read the SoWal political forum.
If the First Amendment only protects ?nice? speech it's not worth much. The First Amendment shows its worth & power when it protects objectionable speech.
Unless & until the Muslims who want to build the mosque break a law, they should have all the rights & privileges of their citizenship. If they are American citizens, they should be treated like their fellow citizens.
If he's broken any law let's arrest him for it. But, unless he's broken a law, we should leave him alone (although with reasonable suspicion, he might be ?monitored? by ?the authorities.?)
One of the great things about our country (as opposed to, say, Saudi Arabia) is that each of us is free to have any cockamamie opinion or worldview we want?and we're allowed to voice those opinions in front of God & everyone without fear of being arrested or killed. For proof of this just read the SoWal political forum.
If the First Amendment only protects ?nice? speech it's not worth much. The First Amendment shows its worth & power when it protects objectionable speech.
Unless & until the Muslims who want to build the mosque break a law, they should have all the rights & privileges of their citizenship. If they are American citizens, they should be treated like their fellow citizens.
Moderator
Agreed...
There's no legal precedent in place to deny the mosque. There are probably no hidden or ulterior motives, either. But when a guy like Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the one promoting / financing the mosque, it's going to come under fire despite the best of intentions.
There's no legal precedent in place to deny the mosque. There are probably no hidden or ulterior motives, either. But when a guy like Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the one promoting / financing the mosque, it's going to come under fire despite the best of intentions.
margarita brocolia
Good! Since this is the case, it would appear there are plenty of mosques already built and located in the area of ground zero. Certainly seems there is no need to build another. (Unless you have a specific agenda)..
Since NY is a true melting pot of Muslims, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Christians, Atheists, Buddhist, etc - all being just as patriotic, or not, as you, me, and others around the US and all calling themselves Americans, like you, me, and others around the US; why shouldn?t the person who owns the land and the architect who envisioned and developed the idea do as they wish as long as it is within all the building requirements and regulations of the city?
According to Mango's post, I guess you could consider the "specific agenda" to be: "It will be a place for community gatherings in promotion of tolerance of all, mainly utilizing arts and culture as a catalyst."
.
Edited
SoWal Insider
Let's assume that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a bad guy with a really disgusting world view; let's assume he hates the US & hates Christians & Jews.
If he's broken any law let's arrest him for it. But, unless he's broken a law, we should leave him alone (although with reasonable suspicion, he might be ?monitored? by ?the authorities.?)
One of the great things about our country (as opposed to, say, Saudi Arabia) is that each of us is free to have any cockamamie opinion or worldview we want?and we're allowed to voice those opinions in front of God & everyone without fear of being arrested or killed. For proof of this just read the SoWal political forum.
If the First Amendment only protects ?nice? speech it's not worth much. The First Amendment shows its worth & power when it protects objectionable speech.
Unless & until the Muslims who want to build the mosque break a law, they should have all the rights & privileges of their citizenship. If they are American citizens, they should be treated like their fellow citizens.
The psychology of this goes a little further for most humans (most Americans) than simply Freedom of Speech. If someone hates us so much as well as hates Christians and Jews, why would he want to build in this particular location? Or, in this Nation at all? Because of the freedoms in which we believe and revere.....to have discussions like this? The group that opposes this mosque is questioning the motives in this fashion. And, there is an opposing group that is for this mosque being built in this location because they believe it be healing to many people and on many levels.
Beach FanaticAuthor
.
......it would appear there are plenty of mosques already built and located in the area of ground zero. Certainly seems there is no need to build another. (Unless you have a specific agenda).
Then if someone applies to build a new church or synagogue in the area, you'd be OK with telling them, "Sorry, but you can't build. There are plenty of churches and synagogues in this area already." ?
Edited
Beach FanaticAuthor
Slippery Slope: watch our for the Thought Police
We're on a slippery slope if we start denying people/groups rights because we suspect that they might do us harm.
The psychology of this goes a little further for most humans (most Americans) than simply Freedom of Speech. If someone hates us so much as well as hates Christians and Jews, why would he want to build in this particular location? Or, in this Nation at all? Because of the freedoms in which we believe and revere.....to have discussions like this? The group that opposes this mosque is questioning the motives in this fashion. And, there is an opposing group that is for this mosque being built in this location because they believe it be healing to many people and on many levels.
We're on a slippery slope if we start denying people/groups rights because we suspect that they might do us harm.
SoWal Expert
My guess is that the US government is already keeping a close eye on this guy.
And he isn't the only religious leader preaching intolerance or hatred towards a certain group, religion, or making anti-American statements.
We just notice this more because he's Muslim and in NY, not Christian and in the Bible Belt.
And he isn't the only religious leader preaching intolerance or hatred towards a certain group, religion, or making anti-American statements.
We just notice this more because he's Muslim and in NY, not Christian and in the Bible Belt.
Beach FanaticAuthor
My guess is that the US government is already keeping a close eye on this guy.
And he isn't the only religious leader preaching intolerance or hatred towards a certain group, religion, or making anti-American statements.
We just notice this more because he's Muslim and in NY, not Christian and in the Bible Belt.
Do you reckon the Rev. Franklin Graham is being monitored for his anti-Islamic statements?
Banned
The psychology of this goes a little further for most humans (most Americans) than simply Freedom of Speech. If someone hates us so much as well as hates Christians and Jews, why would he want to build in this particular location? Or, in this Nation at all? Because of the freedoms in which we believe and revere.....to have discussions like this? The group that opposes this mosque is questioning the motives in this fashion. And, there is an opposing group that is for this mosque being built in this location because they believe it be healing to many people and on many levels.
Are you asking why would a Muslim want to build a mosque in NYC? It probably has partly to do with the larger than average number of Muslims who live in the area. The fact that people from one religion hate another is as American as apple pie. Even within the Christian religion, people within the various denominations regularly bash others and say very hateful things. I've heard Baptists say terrible things about Catholics for instance.
I have no doubt that the Muslims are trying to grow and expand their turf, but then so is everybody else. That's a motive, not so ulterior, shared by many. I also have no doubt that some Muslims would like to see this country turned into a Muslim nation. Again, the same could be said for some Christians wanting their beliefs to be the basis of government. Their reasoning I guess is that they were here first.
This is why I'm firmly in favor of a strong separation of church and state. We all have the right to observe or disregard the sanctity of religious doctrine as we see fit, we have the obligation not to interfere with others in this regard, but we don't have to like each other. When I say "we" I'm talking about everybody, Muslim, Jew, Christian, atheist, humanist, Mormon, Wiccan, Unitarian, Satanist, Rastafrian, Pastafarian.
SoWal Expert
Yes - though not necessarily by the US government. Probably by the ACLU, Islamic groups, and those who use his bigotry as a recruiting tool and excuse for violence.
SoWal Insider
We're on a slippery slope if we start denying people/groups rights because we suspect that they might do us harm.
Well, I don't think that's the premise of the group opposing the construction of this mosque and it certainly isn't mine. Please don't misread or misconstrue my statement, which is thoughtful observation. I was responding to your hypothetical statement of assuming someone hates us. If someone hates us that much, then why do they want to build here?
margarita brocolia
The psychology of this goes a little further for most humans (most Americans) than simply Freedom of Speech. If someone hates us so much as well as hates Christians and Jews, why would he want to build in this particular location? Or, in this Nation at all? Because of the freedoms in which we believe and revere.....to have discussions like this? The group that opposes this mosque is questioning the motives in this fashion. And, there is an opposing group that is for this mosque being built in this location because they believe it be healing to many people and on many levels..
You could add a group that believes that there may not be any legal reason to deny the right to build.
Beach Fanatic
I'm tired of puzzling about this :scratch:- one minute I read this and another I read that
I'll just wait and see what happens.
I'll just wait and see what happens.
SoWal Insider
What I meant by that 30Ashopper, is that are other places of worship allowed? If any are allowed then of course a mosque should be. If the others aren't then of course nothing should be built. I would imagine they are all allowed - so in that case, yes. (I think I said it in reverse above, but meant the same thing)
I still don't understand WHAT this has to do w/Saudi Arabiawhich is a point we agree on right?
I'm pretty sure all are allowed, government generally doesn't have the right to restrict such things. Building codes and standards yes, but not what takes place within the building after it's built, assuming it's legal.
Banned
I'm pretty sure all are allowed, government generally doesn't have the right to restrict such things. Building codes and standards yes, but not what takes place within the building after it's built, assuming it's legal.
There are such things as zoning restrictions, which typically take into account the nature of the business.
Beach Fanatic
Well, I don't think that's the premise of the group opposing the construction of this mosque and it certainly isn't mine. Please don't misread or misconstrue my statement, which is thoughtful observation. I was responding to your hypothetical statement of assuming someone hates us. If someone hates us that much, then why do they want to build here?
They want to build this mosque because they do hate us. It is to be a monument to the killing of innocents at the World Trade Centers. It is a monument - in their eyes- of their triumph over the infidel. I don't give a rat's patootie about political correctness when it comes to the enemy. Google how many mosques in the Florida Panhandle or where ever you live. You may be amazed.
Beach Fanatic
I'm pretty sure all are allowed, government generally doesn't have the right to restrict such things. Building codes and standards yes, but not what takes place within the building after it's built, assuming it's legal.
I know they are all allowed - that's the point of my statement. If one is allowed then how can you say no to another.
But that's as far as I'm going with this. I've read several articles today and each time I read one I find something I agree with from both camps.
It'd be nice if religion wasn't so divisive. But it is and this won't go away and I'm afraid it will keep many people in a state of anger on both sides of this issue.
SoWal Insider
Lucifer, I am not questioning anything. I don't have CNN or Fox any longer and not sure I want those channels ever again (don't miss them at all). I get the evening news now and that's it-it also isn't as detailed as cable news outlets. My response was to a hypothetical question and I have considered both sides in this.
I am glad I don't have this decision weighing on my shoulders because despite a victory for either side, there is a loss as strong for the opposition. The comments I've heard have spoken of 'healing' for, not just NYC and Americans, but for the world. I agree with this. I have also heard statements that this mosque can carry wounds even deeper and provide a possible haven for radicals of the Muslim faith for those who do seek harm for anyone who doesn't share their beliefs.
This is a tough one and yes I feel those cracks in my heart again for many, many people who experienced loss of loved ones in those towers Sept.11, 2001-it's hard to forget and hard not to forget.
Rita, I agree with you-I can add a group from a legal perspective, but I presume both sides are relying heavily on this from a respect of bldg code, legal organization and ensuring the Articles or Org aren't peppered with illegal aliens I.E. Radical Muslims.
I so trust this will have a good result. And, one not followed with violence and hatred.
I am glad I don't have this decision weighing on my shoulders because despite a victory for either side, there is a loss as strong for the opposition. The comments I've heard have spoken of 'healing' for, not just NYC and Americans, but for the world. I agree with this. I have also heard statements that this mosque can carry wounds even deeper and provide a possible haven for radicals of the Muslim faith for those who do seek harm for anyone who doesn't share their beliefs.
This is a tough one and yes I feel those cracks in my heart again for many, many people who experienced loss of loved ones in those towers Sept.11, 2001-it's hard to forget and hard not to forget.
Rita, I agree with you-I can add a group from a legal perspective, but I presume both sides are relying heavily on this from a respect of bldg code, legal organization and ensuring the Articles or Org aren't peppered with illegal aliens I.E. Radical Muslims.
I so trust this will have a good result. And, one not followed with violence and hatred.
Banned
This thread has convinced me that Christopher Hitchens is right, "Religion poisons everything"
Edited
SoWal Insider
I know what you're saying, Lucifer; however, I think it's humans who are doing the poisoning. For people who believe in higher power regardless of faith, I love their passion. For those who don't believe, I respect their beliefs.
Banned
I know what you're saying, Lucifer; however, I think it's humans who are doing the poisoning. For people who believe in higher power regardless of faith, I love their passion. For those who don't believe, I respect their beliefs.
I do agree with you. It's the humans doing the poisoning using religion as their weapon. It doesn't have to be that way, but that's just what happens, not in each and every case, but often enough.
SoWal Insider
One World Trade Center (previously coined the "Freedom Tower" by Governor Pataki) is the centerpiece of Libeskind's design. The building will rise to 1,362 feet, the height of the original World Trade Center south tower, and its antenna will rise to the symbolic height of 1,776 feet (541 m). The antenna's height refers to 1776, the year in which the United States Declaration of Independence was signed.....the designer is Jewish......Larry A. Silverstein (born May 30, 1931) is an American businessman, and real estate investor and developer in New York City. Silverstein was born in Brooklyn, and became involved in real estate, together with his father, establishing Silverstein Properties. Silverstein separated from his partner, Bernard Mendik, in 1977, and bought a number of large office buildings in Midtown and Lower Manhattan in the late 1970s. In 1980, Silverstein won a bid from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to construct 7 World Trade Center, to the north of the World Trade Center. Silverstein was interested in acquiring the entire World Trade Center complex, and put in a bid when the Port Authority put it up for lease in 2000. Silverstein won the bid when a deal between the initial winner and the Port Authority fell through, and he signed the lease on July 24, 2001, only weeks before the towers were destroyed in the September 11 attacks.....the owner of the property is Jewish, and this is nothing more than an religious tug of war.
Edited
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.