|
|
|
emsby
Skeptic Friend
76 Posts |
 Posted - 08/19/2010 : 14:35:03 [Permalink]
|
Here are my thoughts on the matter... I'm a life-long NY'er:
a) This is not a mosque, it's a community center with some sort of prayer room inside, similar to how hospitals have chapels.
b) It's already there, they are merely remodeling an already-existing building.
c) Space is extremely limited and scarce on the island of Manhattan. People have to build wherever possible. This is why NY'ers puffawed the idea that we wouldn't rebuild a huge office tower at Ground Zero. Oh, really? Where would you like the hundreds of thousands of square feet of office space that we lost to go instead? Hmm?
d) It's not even being built at Ground Zero. It's being built sort of near it. Anyone who knows anything about NYC knows that here a few square blocks can be considered an entire neighborhood. There's a spot near my old office that is literally 2 city blocks called Little Korea.
e) NYC is multi-cultural by definition. This city is built on the idea that all people, from all nations and all religions, can come together and build something amazing. That's how this city came to be... by people with wildly different cultures putting their differences aside and working together. Hasidic Jews ride the subways with Fundamentalist Muslims... and nobody cares. The very idea of being "against" something like this is very un-NYC.
f) I experienced 9/11. I lived through that day. I watched the second plane fly into the tower with my own 2 eyes. And I am deeply pissed off at and offended by people (ahem... Sarah Palin) who very recently suggested that NYC wasn't part of "real America" and are now suddenly so concerned about us. F off.
g) If we don't build it, the terrorists win.  |
Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earthbound misfit, I. |
| Edited by - emsby on 08/19/2010 14:38:27 |
 |
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 15:39:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
And yes, they can damn well build their mosque there as long as they are in compliance with local, state, and federal laws. They have that right and that ends the discussion. |
Agreed
| All this bullshit about "should they?" is meaningless. The right to do it implies that they should do it. |
| Harris et al should stick to criticising the stupidity of islamic beliefs(or any other religious beliefs). |
That's what he is doing.
| Saying that a person has a right to do something but then saying they shouldn't do it is tantamount to you saying they shouldn't have that right. |
| The big picture matters and I'm going to stick by our system of laws and the Constitution. |
I agree.
| Islam poses no threat to us unless we ourselves decide to discard the rights we have assigned to everyone. |
Really?
Originally posted by DAVE W.
But that's not going to happen by denying a building permit. We need to get society as a whole to reject religion before we can go tinkering with the First Amendment. |
I have never once stated (nor has Sam Harris) that they should be denied a building permit. I agree with the rest of your statement.
A few Quotes from the Koran (Quran) for Dave W.
"[We] shall let them live awhile, and then shall drag them to the scourge of the Fire. Evil shall be their fate" (2:126).
"The unbelievers are like beasts which, call out to them as one may, can hear nothing but a shout and a cry. Deaf, dumb, and blind, they understand nothing" (2:172).
"Theirs shall be a woeful punishment" (2:175).
"Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage. . . . [I]f they attack you put them to the sword. Thus shall the unbelievers be rewarded: but if they desist, God is forgiving and merciful. Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil-doers"(2:190–93).
The only true faith in God's sight is Islam. . . . He that denies God's revelations should know that swift is God's reckoning" (3:19).
"Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people. They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is evident from what they utter with their mouths, but greater is the hatred which their breasts conceal" (3:118).
"Let not the unbelievers think that We prolong their days for their own good. We give them respite only so that they may commit more grievous sins. Shameful punishment awaits them" (3:178).
"You see many among them making friends with unbelievers. Evil is that to which their souls prompt them. They have incurred the wrath of God and shall endure eternal torment. . . .You will find that the most implacable of men in their enmity to the faithful are the Jews and the pagans, and that the nearest in affection to them are those who say: ‘We are Christians'" (5:80–82).
"[T]heir hearts were hardened, and Satan made their deeds seem fair to them. And when they had clean forgotten Our admonition We granted them all that they desired; but just as they were rejoicing in what they were given, We suddenly smote them and they were plunged into utter despair. Thus were the evil-doers annihilated. Praise be to God, Lord of the Universe!" (6:43–45).
"[T]hose that deny Our revelations shall be punished for their misdeeds" (6:49).
There are of course many, many more such excerpts.
Now someone quote me some Leviticus :)
|
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 15:52:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by astropin
They are not going to "abide by our values." |
What choice will they have? So long as they are in our country, they'll have to. Unless, of course, we demonstrate that we have no interest in abiding by them ourselves.
|
That sums it up nicely. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 16:19:36 [Permalink]
|
astropin asked:
Yes, really. Militant extremists factions may intend us harm, but curtailing our own freedoms and rights will in no way prevent them from trying to blow some shit up.
Also, I'd like an answer as to why you think the opinion of "millions of muslims" should inform and direct our actions. Seriously, you need to answer that question.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 17:23:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by astropin
I have never once stated (nor has Sam Harris) that they should be denied a building permit. |
Then why ask if they should build the mosque? What's the point?
I heard Imam Rauf talking about the mosque on NPR tonight. He thinks the mosque needs to be physically close to Ground Zero so that he and others can easily engage in outreach to help people differentiate Muslims from terrorists.A few Quotes from the Koran (Quran) for Dave W.
...
Now someone quote me some Leviticus :) |
No need to drag the violence of the Jews into this. The New Testament has plenty of Christian idiocy directed at non-believers.
And that's really the point: these "holy" books are have tons of dangerous tribalism and "othering," but most adherents (actual people) ignore those bits of the dogma, most of the time. In other words, the people aren't as dogmatic as the religion tells them to be. Punishing heretics merely for being heretics isn't mainstream dogma in any of these religions. In fact, some of those Quranic verses you quoted insist that non-believers should be left alive so that they can sin some more (and thus suffer more in the afterlife).
That's why I asked dglas to actually quote the "dogma" he's vaguely ranting against and to provide statistics on how many Muslims actually adhere to whatever that "dogma" is. He wants us to think that the alleged "dogma" is a clear-and-present danger, but he refuses to describe it or show how prevalent its adherents are. If this "dogma" is followed by nobody, then it's necessarily harmless.
Much more dangerous to "our way of life" in my mind are the rich Christian Dominionists who are throwing their money around in US politics in a real, direct effort to turn the country into a theocracy (an effort that's much more likely to be successful than a mosque near Ground Zero). But I don't see anyone saying, "well, of course they have the right to give their money to whoever they want, but should they?" Shall we have a "discussion" about whether or not the Constitution Party should field candidates in elections? Isn't insensitive of them towards the families and friends of the millions of people who've died trying to protect "our way of life?" |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
dglas
Skeptic Friend
Canada
397 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 17:36:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by moakley
Originally posted by dglas
Quote moakley:
"dglas, no one is saying you can't criticize the tenets of the religion of Islam."
|
That would be H.Humbert. But it was you who in their opening comment emphatically stated that we can either kiss the Islamist butts now or we can kiss the Islamist butts later, but we will be kissing Islamist butts. Do you still hold to that idea or are you backing away from it?
|
My error. Apologies. It's hard to pick out identities from a mob of insults and derision. |
--------------------------------------------------
- dglas (In the hell of 1000 unresolved subplots...)
--------------------------------------------------
The Presupposition of Intrinsic Evil
+ A Self-Justificatory Framework
= The "Heart of Darkness"
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
dglas
Skeptic Friend
Canada
397 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 17:41:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by dglas
"Contemporary meanings? Mind reading? Limiting the range in order to get desired results?" Dave is actually appealing to interpretation and vagueness as a defense. Will he cherry-pick his Koran references, too? |
Are you kidding me? Do you think that every Christian interprets every Bible passage the same way, and thus they all believe that the "dogma" says the same thing(s)?How can I evade that which you haven't actually argued for?| No, Dave, the onus is upon you to prove that every possible discussion about islamic dogma is bigotry. |
Why? I'm not arguing that every discussion about Islamic dogma is bigotry. I'm arguing that you haven't actually discussed any particular Islamic dogma.| All those stringent requirements apply to you. Tell me, Dave, do you, for some inexplicable reason, believe that islam in America somehow intrinsically different from all the rest of islam in the world? |
I see no evidence that all Muslims adhere identically to the same dogmas. I see evidence that some Muslims interpret the Koran's teaching differently than other Muslims. Do you believe that Sufi Islam is intrinsically identical to Sunni?| On what do you base this belief? |
Observation.| Do you somehow believe that the experiences of Europe will somehow magically not be repeated here? |
Do you somehow believe that the experiences of Europe were prompted by terrorist attacks on European soil that killed over 3,000 people? Our experiences are already different. And so are our laws. How could the future be identical?| You sound like someone saying that cyanide won't hurt "me" even if it kills everyone else who drinks it because (fill in the blank). |
Now you're comparing Muslims to cyanide. Nice.| And, yes, I noticed how you tried to change the subject matter from islam to muslims - from ideas to people - exposing your determination to confuse of the two. |
Yeah, right. Man, that's piss-poor evasion. The ideas didn't destroy the Twin Towers, dglas. People did. Islam hasn't done anything in Europe, Muslims have.| First, Dave, I have to try, just as Sam Harris does, to get through the noise of people like Dude who mindlessly squeal "bigotry" with arms folded and fingers firmly in ears and in lieu of actually talking about the subject matter. This requires baby steps, apparently. Look how emotionally charged Dude's opening post was - "how any democrat can fail to see the obvious position" (the "obvious" position) doesn't leave a lot (any, actually) room for discussion. Aren't you embarrassed by this person calling himself a "skeptic?" |
Of course not. He knows that Muslims don't all act the same, and that the principles this country was built on are more important than protecting ourselves from something which may not happen. There is only one correct answer in this debate, and that is that the people who own the building must be allowed to build whatever they want to there (subject to zoning and code). If religion enters into any argument against it, then any legal prohibition based on that argument will violate the First Amendment. There's certainly no getting around that.
And if you say that Islam is impermissible there, then you have to be prepared for other people to say that atheism is impermissible somewhere else. Are you ready to do that? Is that the sort of principle you want to stand by?| Now Dude is just being Dude, which is to say, generally nonsensical, oblivious and worthless, aggressive, abusive and ridiculous. His opening post might be a warning sign to any rational person that what follows is emotional, vitriolic garbage, which it is. Now, as rational, thinking people, we have to rise above Dude's tantrum-attempts to use force of will to forbid any discussion or thought and actually consider arguments based on merit rather that plastering a label on them and trying to pretend they don't exist. I class Dude in the same category as Dennis Markuze, but with a different "message." Is this a board for ranting, or a board for thinking? |
Well, you certainly seem to be trying to turn it into a board for insults.| I have just had to spend several posts trying to defend examining ideas - among self-professed skeptics! How incredibly pathetic is that? |
What's pathetic is that you haven't presented the ideas to be examined. "The dogma" is not an idea held by Muslims anywhere.
You said to moakley:| It is a classic attempt to equate the dogma with the people... |
What "dogma?"| ...such that any critique of the ideas becomes a personal attack. |
You haven't critiqued even a single Islamic idea in this thread.| Honestly, I see little in this thread but a mob-mentality, rallying behind a word. |
Actually, I'm rallying against the word "dogma," but you're the one who keeps using it without showing us its referent.
|
So Dave cannot or will not separate the dogma from the people.
And he does not realize islam is founded on an absolutist dogma.
Dave, let me know when you have overcome these errors on your part. perhaps then, we can talk. |
--------------------------------------------------
- dglas (In the hell of 1000 unresolved subplots...)
--------------------------------------------------
The Presupposition of Intrinsic Evil
+ A Self-Justificatory Framework
= The "Heart of Darkness"
--------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 18:31:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by dglas
Originally posted by moakley
Originally posted by dglas
Quote moakley:
"dglas, no one is saying you can't criticize the tenets of the religion of Islam."
|
That would be H.Humbert. But it was you who in their opening comment emphatically stated that we can either kiss the Islamist butts now or we can kiss the Islamist butts later, but we will be kissing Islamist butts. Do you still hold to that idea or are you backing away from it?
|
My error. Apologies. It's hard to pick out identities from a mob of insults and derision.
|
You are the one who entered this thread with insults and derision, now you are crying that you are being insulted? Really?
Stop being a pathetic little hypocrit.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 18:38:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by dglas
So Dave cannot or will not separate the dogma from the people. |
Dogma is harmless without people adhering to it. Or do you have an example of dogma which everyone ignored but which still did someone harm?| And he does not realize islam is founded on an absolutist dogma. |
Funny you should be complaining about insults when you're so free with them.
All faith-based religions are founded upon absolutist dogmas. Why is Islam's particular absolutist dogma relevant in regards to the Democrats failing to properly defend a community center/mosque in lower Manhattan on constitutional principles?| Dave, let me know when you have overcome these errors on your part. perhaps then, we can talk. |
Probably not. We won't be able to talk until you specify what "dogma" you want to discuss, but you appear to be refusing to. We won't be able to talk until you acknowledge that dogma is harmless when independent of people, and so using "Islam" as the subject for an active verb is inappropriate anthropomorphism (much like "science says...") and thus an attempt to hide the fact that you're discussing the actions of Muslims. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 18:56:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by dglas
Originally posted by moakley
Originally posted by dglas
Quote moakley:
"dglas, no one is saying you can't criticize the tenets of the religion of Islam."
|
That would be H.Humbert. But it was you who in their opening comment emphatically stated that we can either kiss the Islamist butts now or we can kiss the Islamist butts later, but we will be kissing Islamist butts. Do you still hold to that idea or are you backing away from it?
|
My error. Apologies. It's hard to pick out identities from a mob of insults and derision.
|
An apology is not necessary. Hell, I have actually quoted H.Humbert on my FB page and received a couple of likes.
Unfortunately, your task now appears to be answering questions. I can appreciate the fact that you are feeling a little beat up, but you kinda stepped into it by only being equiped with a handful of talking point and not much depth.
Take care, Mike... |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 19:03:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by dglas
My error. Apologies. It's hard to pick out identities from a mob of insults and derision.
|
Not really. Our names are pretty prominent. 
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 19:36:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Also, I'd like an answer as to why you think the opinion of "millions of muslims" should inform and direct our actions. Seriously, you need to answer that question.
|
When did I say they should?
Although it already has in some fashions. With censorship of Muhammad cartoons and caricatures in newspapers and TV shows. If the moderate Muslims really want to sit at the table of reasonable discourse then they themselves should have a little fun with Muhammad's likeness. That I would love to see.
Islam differs from the dogma of the other major religions because there is a rather significant number who follow some of the worst parts of it quite literally.......and the "moderates" are doing very little to stop it. |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 19:51:44 [Permalink]
|
| Welcome back emsby! Been a while... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 20:06:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by astropin
With censorship of Muhammad cartoons and caricatures in newspapers and TV shows. If the moderate Muslims really want to sit at the table of reasonable discourse then they themselves should have a little fun with Muhammad's likeness. |
Wow. Refusing to create images is, by itself, at best a silly quirk of a religion. The unreasonable part, as you know, was that a bunch of Muslims threatened violence to enforce an Islamic value on others. (How many actually followed through on the threats? One?) If it weren't for that, do you really think that some other Muslims need to engage in a practice that they find anathema to "sit at the table of reasonable discourse"?!
Do you think that some Jews ought to eat pork before they can engage in a rational discussion, too? Or that if Catholics want to sit at the table, some of them should drive nails through Eucharists?| That I would love to see. |
No doubt, but it doesn't say much for you that you think that it's a requirement for reasonable discourse.| Islam differs from the dogma of the other major religions because there is a rather significant number who follow some of the worst parts of it quite literally.......and the "moderates" are doing very little to stop it. |
How much is "a rather significant number?" Is it a higher or lower number than that of Christians who think that dismembering primary science eduction is a good idea? (Something which few moderate Christians are doing anything about, as well.) |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2010 : 21:15:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by astropin
Originally posted by Dude
Also, I'd like an answer as to why you think the opinion of "millions of muslims" should inform and direct our actions. Seriously, you need to answer that question.
|
When did I say they should?
Although it already has in some fashions. With censorship of Muhammad cartoons and caricatures in newspapers and TV shows. If the moderate Muslims really want to sit at the table of reasonable discourse then they themselves should have a little fun with Muhammad's likeness. That I would love to see.
Islam differs from the dogma of the other major religions because there is a rather significant number who follow some of the worst parts of it quite literally.......and the "moderates" are doing very little to stop it.
|
You quoted Harris saying it in support of your position. Do I need to re-quote your post for you?
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
| Edited by - Dude on 08/19/2010 21:15:32 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
I… WTF…?
