Ron Paul to Sunshine Patriots: Stop Your Demagogy About The NYC Mosque!

[jhaag]

http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-08-20/ron-paul-sunshine-patriots-stop-your-demagogy-about-the-nyc-mosque/ Edited October 4, 2010 by Casper
removed copyrighted text

[jhaag]

different website, so now i'm a two trick pony...

[John]

ron paul has his head on straight.

[RFM]

The first amendment has no asterix. I am happy to see Ron Paul weigh in this time.

[psyco1]

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[SAMBUSA]

Moar fear:nono:

[Disclaimer]

3 Reasons the “Ground Zero Mosque” Debate Makes No Sense

[magley64]

I was watching some of the "debate" on hannity the other day.

they kept repeating :

1. 68% of americans don't want this built

A. Who the fuck cares? it's not their choice.

2. "Moderate" muslims don't support the building

A. since when does being moderate make you correct?

3. this emam is a radical (spelling?)

A. I don't give a shit if he's a gorilla, it's not your call.

[chevysoldier]

3 Reasons the “Ground Zero Mosque” Debate Makes No Sense

My .02.

How did this happen? Well, basically a complacent or a complicit media helped perpetuate three ideas that are either outright lies or intellectually dishonest arguments designed to bring out the very worst in all of us.

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/blog/3-reasons-the-ground-zero-mosque-debate-makes-no-sense/#ixzz0xMF8shfE

Media is mostly liberal. Rarely are is any news given without their own twist to the story. Rarely is the news actually just the facts of the story.

1. It’s Not at Ground Zero

This has already been addressed by ReconRat. That area is still considered ground zero. Damage was still done at that location.

2. It’s Not Strictly A Mosque

What is the main component of this structure? I'm asking because I don't know. Churches have daycares in them but they are not considered a daycare.

3. You Can’t Simultaneously Acknowledge A Right And Insist That Your Government Suppress It

Yes it is private property and therefore cannot be kept from being built. We are supposed to have freedom of religion in this country. Of course we have a right to bear arms but that has/is being suppressed. It's funny liberals pick and choose when the Constitution should be followed.

[Disclaimer]

Media is mostly liberal.

Says the conservatives.

Rarely are is any news given without their own twist to the story. Rarely is the news actually just the facts of the story.

But I can agree with this.

This has already been addressed by ReconRat. That area is still considered ground zero. Damage was still done at that location.

The Constitution is location specific?

What is the main component of this structure? I'm asking because I don't know. Churches have daycares in them but they are not considered a daycare.

It's a community center. Whatever that means. Like the guy who wrote the Cracked article points out - You don't call St. Mary's Hospital a church, just because it has a chapel in it, do you?

Yes it is private property and therefore cannot be kept from being built. We are supposed to have freedom of religion in this country. Of course we have a right to bear arms but that has/is being suppressed. It's funny liberals pick and choose when the Constitution should be followed.

I dunno who's picking and choosing except the conservatives...

Especially considering ORDN, I think most of the people deemed "liberal" are proud and responsible gun owners.

[chevysoldier]

The Constitution is location specific?

Huh? The article said the Coat Factory wasn't ground zero. I was just pointing out that ground zero isn't just the location of the WTC. It encompasses the damage zone. There were multiple attacks on 9/11. The WTC done was the main point of attack. That area of damage is ground zero

It's a community center. Whatever that means. Like the guy who wrote the Cracked article points out - You don't call St. Mary's Hospital a church, just because it has a chapel in it, do you?

That's what I am asking. Is the prayer area some little room or it the main component of the building? Yeah St. Mary's Hospital isn't a church, just because it has a chapel in it. But is a mosque a community center because it has a basketball court? I went to a my school wasn't a community center because it had a playground/ bball court on it.

I dunno who's picking and choosing except the conservatives...

Especially considering ORDN, I think most of the people deemed "liberal" are proud and responsible gun owners.

See:

In a video posted on YouTube, Adam Sharp of the St. Louis Tea Party asked Rep. Phil Hare which part of the Constitution authorizes the government to mandate that all Americans buy a private product such as health insurance. The Illinois Democrat replied, "I don't worry about the Constitution on this."

I'm not saying a liberal can't be a proud gun owner. But the libs want to say the Constitution protects the "mosque" but on the flip side say it doesn't protect gun rights because it was meant for black powder rifle defense of the redcoats. Who's picking and choosing again?

Edited August 22, 2010 by chevysoldier

[cg2112]

That's what I am asking. Is the prayer area some little room or it the main component of the building? Yeah St. Mary's Hospital isn't a church, just because it has a chapel in it. But is a mosque a community center because it has a basketball court? I went to a my school wasn't a community center because it had a playground/ bball court on it.

I dunno who's picking and choosing except the conservatives...

There are many things that set this community center apart from a mosque (a more accurate word for it would be a "masjid.")

First, there are a number of elements of the center (a swimming pool, a gym, etc) would not be allowed in a mosque. Second, non-Muslims are not allowed to eat in a mosque - in the community center, there is a restaurant open to the public. Lastly, and probably most important, a mosque is a building dedicated to worship. The community center will have a prayer room, but the building itself is not a place of worship.

[The King]

Yes it is private property and therefore cannot be kept from being built. We are supposed to have freedom of religion in this country. Of course we have a right to bear arms but that has/is being suppressed. It's funny liberals pick and choose when the Constitution should be followed.

While I believe they have every right to build a Mosque anywhere they damn please (with respect to building codes), I have to admit your above point is valid.

[Disclaimer]

Huh? The article said the Coat Factory wasn't ground zero. I was just pointing out that ground zero isn't just the location of the WTC. It encompasses the damage zone. There were multiple attacks on 9/11. The WTC done was the main point of attack. That area of damage is ground zero

And my point was, even if it was ON ground zero, the Constitution still applies.

Now, if you want to get into a discussion on secularism, we can do that too. I'd much prefer to not even have to discuss religious buildings and where they should/should not be placed. Should a Catholic church be placed next to a little kids playground? I dunno - given their history. See, the "Where is it located?" debate is just dumb.

That's what I am asking. Is the prayer area some little room or it the main component of the building? Yeah St. Mary's Hospital isn't a church, just because it has a chapel in it. But is a mosque a community center because it has a basketball court? I went to a my school wasn't a community center because it had a playground/ bball court on it.

That's still up in the air... I don't know enough about the details to make a determination either way. I don't have any better argument than "wait and see" since I don't have experience with how these "Community Centers" work. Regardless -- it's private property and if that's what they want... then so be it. You can't discriminate against a group of people just because another group of people did you wrong.

I'm not saying a liberal can't be a proud gun owner. But the libs want to say the Constitution protects the "mosque" but on the flip side say it doesn't protect gun rights because it was meant for black powder rifle defense of the redcoats. Who's picking and choosing again?

See:

"In a video posted on YouTube, Adam Sharp of the St. Louis Tea Party asked Rep. Phil Hare which part of the Constitution authorizes the government to mandate that all Americans buy a private product such as health insurance. The Illinois Democrat replied, "I don't worry about the Constitution on this."

Where has anyone said that, "it was meant for black powder rifle defense of the redcoats."? Besides this is apples/oranges comparing where a religious building should be placed to healthcare or the Right to Bear arms. If you want to turn this into a healthcare of gun control debate we can do that, but I thought you wanted to stick to the topic?

[magley64]

the question of whether it's a mosque or a denny's shouldn't matter one iota. it's private property, shut the hell up, it's none of your f*cking business.

[chevysoldier]

There are many things that set this community center apart from a mosque (a more accurate word for it would be a "masjid.")

First, there are a number of elements of the center (a swimming pool, a gym, etc) would not be allowed in a mosque. Second, non-Muslims are not allowed to eat in a mosque - in the community center, there is a restaurant open to the public. Lastly, and probably most important, a mosque is a building dedicated to worship. The community center will have a prayer room, but the building itself is not a place of worship.

Thank you. That's why I was asking, I had no idea. JRM was quoting a site but didn't know the structure of the building.

And my point was, even if it was ON ground zero, the Constitution still applies.

Now, if you want to get into a discussion on secularism, we can do that too. I'd much prefer to not even have to discuss religious buildings and where they should/should not be placed. Should a Catholic church be placed next to a little kids playground? I dunno - given their history. See, the "Where is it located?" debate is just dumb.

That's still up in the air... I don't know enough about the details to make a determination either way. I don't have any better argument than "wait and see" since I don't have experience with how these "Community Centers" work. Regardless -- it's private property and if that's what they want... then so be it. You can't discriminate against a group of people just because another group of people did you wrong.

Where has anyone said that, "it was meant for black powder rifle defense of the redcoats."? Besides this is apples/oranges comparing where a religious building should be placed to healthcare or the Right to Bear arms. If you want to turn this into a healthcare of gun control debate we can do that, but I thought you wanted to stick to the topic?

Skip to 5:45. She is way far left.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtkgoGY4Cm4

I was using gun control to make a point. You said you don't know who is picking and choosing except conservative. Both the right to bear arms and freedom of religion are in the Constitution. But liberals believe one can be trampled on and the other can't. I even said it's private property and can't be kept from being built. Both issue are protected equally and should be treated as such.

I never said they can't build there even if it was on the same site as the buildings. You gave a internet site that said it wasn't on ground zero. I was just pointing out ground zero isn't just where the twin towers stood. But somehow you took that as me saying the Constitution doesn't apply on ground zero.

[chevysoldier]

the question of whether it's a mosque or a denny's shouldn't matter one iota. it's private property, shut the hell up, it's none of your f*cking business.

Yeah I really don't care if it's built or not. They have a right to build there if they want to. Now if it were to come out that this was connect to the 9/11 terrorist plan, that's be something different. IIRC plans for this were in the works before 9/11?

[RFM]

Yeah I really don't care if it's built or not. They have a right to build there if they want to. Now if it were to come out that this was connect to the 9/11 terrorist plan, that's be something different. IIRC plans for this were in the works before 9/11?

Doesn't matter when the thought of putting this up was either. And rather than fret about who is putting up the Mosque... Read and know... Just saying...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-08-19/ground-zero-mosque-imam/?cid=hp:exc

[Disclaimer]

I was using gun control to make a point. You said you don't know who is picking and choosing except conservative. Both the right to bear arms and freedom of religion are in the Constitution. But liberals believe one can be trampled on and the other can't. I even said it's private property and can't be kept from being built. Both issue are protected equally and should be treated as such.

Well, I can only speak for myself which is pretty disconcerting when you get labeled and written off, since I tend to be one of the token "liberals", which isn't an accurate label.

[chevysoldier]

Yeah I really don't care if it's built or not. They have a right to build there if they want to. Now if it were to come out that this was connect to the 9/11 terrorist plan, that's be something different. IIRC plans for this were in the works before 9/11?

Doesn't matter when the thought of putting this up was either. And rather than fret about who is putting up the Mosque... Read and know... Just saying...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-08-19/ground-zero-mosque-imam/?cid=hp:exc

I know It doesn't matter when it was thought up. Freedom of religion protects it. But if, and it's a big if, this building is part of the 9/11 plan, it now falls under acts of war and cannot let be built. That would be my only reason of why it shouldn't be built is what I meant.

[Disclaimer]

You're a homo.

How's that for a label?

[YSR_Racer_99]

"Yourself" means, uhm, yourself. Not Isaac's Papa, not me. Just. Your. Self. We all have a perception of who we are and where we fall. Where do you perceive yourself? Of course, feel free to tell me that its none of my business.

[Disclaimer]

Why the insistence on labels? I try to treat everyone as an individual. I also try not to put a blanket "label" on anyone until they start labeling themselves and others.

I don't WANT a label.

[magley64]

jrm is a Pittakionophobic...

[serpentracer]

When does a religion become a political movement? And if/when it becomes one' date=' does its "right to private property" begin to be trumped by its motives of personal, civil rights trampling?[/quote']

I personally say ban all religion.

religion rules everything this country does. it's sickening to me.

but, since the constitution gives the people the right to practice any religion they want and the right to assemble, you can't just start denying them their rights. whether you agree with it or not, it's their right to have such a place.

that is if you truly believe in the constitution and what america stands for.

I personally think they are doing it to be assholes or stir the pot so to speak. I would expect that place to be targeted for vandalism quite often

Edited August 23, 2010 by serpentracer