Jump to content
✨ STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE WORLD TOUR ✨

Community Center near Ground Zero becoming political football


mksh24

Recommended Posts

Exactly.

 

 

 

"Good of the community" :wtf: You think they're going to gun down everyone in the streets? Or maybe they're going to rob a few banks, assassinate the mayor? :lol: It's a religious center, not a terrorist or gang center. :rolleyes:

 

Yes - a "religious" centre that might well upset relatives of those who died in 9/11, and people living and working in the area who were directly affected by what happened that day. If they want to build anything in the vicinity it should be a multi-faith temple/chapel which promotes religious unity.

 

 

 

Bahahahahahahahaaa! Fail! :lol: :lol:

 

If anything's a "fail" it's your childish reaction and shameful lack of respect for the 9/11 victims and next-of-kin.:angry:

 

As I said, only a moron could fail to see the kind of reaction the building of a mosque in the vicinity could provoke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes - a "religious" centre that might well upset relatives of those who died in 9/11, and people living and working in the area who were directly affected by what happened that day. If they want to build anything in the vicinity it should be a multi-faith temple/chapel which promotes religious unity.

 

 

 

 

 

If anything's a "fail" it's your childish reaction and shameful lack of respect for the 9/11 victims and next-of-kin.:angry:

 

As I said, only a moron could fail to see the kind of reaction the building of a mosque in the vicinity could provoke.

 

If we want religions to be united, why not take the first step and ALLOW THEM TO WORSHIP WHAT THEY WANT WHEREVER THEY WANT? Like Nick said, if it's private property, they could build anything they want! They could build a gun store (with a license, obviously), a bowling alley, a church, or a mosque.

 

And no, your epic fail came from the fact that you had not read the whole thread, which contained important information to the story. :rolleyes: And it was not relevant to the 9/11 attacks, so it was in no way disrespectful to the victims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we want religions to be united, why not take the first step and ALLOW THEM TO WORSHIP WHAT THEY WANT WHEREVER THEY WANT? Like Nick said, if it's private property, they could build anything they want! They could build a gun store (with a license, obviously), a bowling alley, a church, or a mosque.

 

And no, your epic fail came from the fact that you had not read the whole thread, which contained important information to the story. :rolleyes: And it was not relevant to the 9/11 attacks, so it was in no way disrespectful to the victims.

 

he always ignores posts he dislikes, his brain doesn't allow him to post smart replies so it's easier for him to pretend he didn't read that stuff.

 

 

By the way the only morons are the ones who think that all the muslims are terrorists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this guy who posted a comment under the article concerned, pretty much hit the nail on the head:

 

Hi Justin, first let me say that I admire your common sense approach to the question of whether the mosque should be built two blocks from ground zero. While I’m also on the side of logic and reasoning; I’m also painfully aware of the fact that it doesn’t always apply. Even though I believe in the law and common sense to solve most debates, I have also learned that we sometimes have to consider the opinion of the people in the equation. Even though we both agree that they have the legal right to build their mosque doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t consider the moral rights as well. Any judge will tell you that not all cases are decided purely on the law. He will also tell you that sometimes extenuating circumstances sometimes have a great deal to do with his decision. A good example is a man that filed a case against his neighbour who wanted to plant a mulberry tree on his property. Because the tree would border both properties, plus the fact that mulberries stain the driveway, it’s perfectly understandable why the neighbour was against it. Even though the judge understood that the man had the legal right to plant the tree, he also took into consideration the moral rights of the other man. Instead of judging the case solely on legality he got the two men to agree on a mutual agreement. The man agreed to plant a fruitless shade tree and both men were happy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we want religions to be united, why not take the first step and ALLOW THEM TO WORSHIP WHAT THEY WANT WHEREVER THEY WANT? Like Nick said, if it's private property, they could build anything they want! They could build a gun store (with a license, obviously), a bowling alley, a church, or a mosque.

 

As has been said on countless occasions already (and which you have chosen to ignore), this has nothing to do with what they can legally do. It has to do with consideration for the feelings of the victims.:dozey:

 

And no, your epic fail came from the fact that you had not read the whole thread, which contained important information to the story. :rolleyes: And it was not relevant to the 9/11 attacks, so it was in no way disrespectful to the victims.

 

In which case you were jumping to conclusions (again), because as far as I could tell, nobody posted a map showing the exact location of the proposed mosque.:dozey:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he always ignores posts he dislikes, his brain doesn't allow him to post smart replies so it's easier for him to pretend he didn't read that stuff.

 

At least I have a brain.:lol:

 

 

By the way the only morons are the ones who think that all the muslims are terrorists.

 

No. They are also morons, of course.:smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

No. They are also morons, of course.:smug:

 

now you're contradicting yourself, because if only morons relate muslim religion to the terrorists involved in the 2001 attacks, it shouldn't be a problem to build a mosque in NYC (because as someone said, it's not even in the same neighborhood), it'd be just like building a catholic church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who will be angry, and why?:confused:

The only people who have a right to be angry are the relatives of the victims of the atrocity.

 

Since you live in the UK, I'm talking about FOX news. It's the most biased piece of crap ever. It makes me so mad every time I watch it. It's not by choice either my parents watch it 24/7. The channel holds Rhodes Scholars such as Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity.

 

Also they interviewed someone on fox news who lost a family member in 9/11 and said she was for the idea of the mosque. Which will be built 2 BLOCKS away. So I doubt all relatives of victims are up in arms about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

now you're contradicting yourself, because if only morons relate muslim religion to the terrorists involved in the 2001 attacks, it shouldn't be a problem to build a mosque in NYC (because as someone said, it's not even in the same neighborhood), it'd be just like building a catholic church.

 

No it wouldn't, because the terrorists involved in the 9/11 were Islamic extremists, not Catholics.:dozey:

That's why it's perfectly understandable that the relatives of the victims might be angered by a mosque built in the vicinity (two blocks away must be pretty close).

If you can't recognise that fact, I'd be astonished.:stunned:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you live in the UK, I'm talking about FOX news. It's the most biased piece of crap ever. It makes me so mad every time I watch it. It's not by choice either my parents watch it 24/7. The channel holds Rhodes Scholars such as Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity.

 

Also they interviewed someone on fox news who lost a family member in 9/11 and said she was for the idea of the mosque. Which will be built 2 BLOCKS away. So I doubt all relatives of victims are up in arms about this.

 

If only a few of the relatives are angry about it, that should be enough for common sense to prevail.:dozey:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also if you're interested in Glenn Beck here are some of his finest moments!

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB9hu9tHofM]YouTube- Glenn Beck lies about World Cup soccer[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGeZQrpZbjI]YouTube- Beck "Lose" His "Mind;" Screams At Caller: "Get Off My Phone You Little Pinhead!"[/ame]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are extremists as you said it. You can't relate them to the other 99,9% of the muslims, it's stupid.

 

Nobody is. That doesn't alter the fact that the relatives of the victims might be angry/upset about it, and its their feelings that matter at the end of the day, nobody else's, whatever your opinion might be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody is. That doesn't alter the fact that the relatives of the victims might be angry/upset about it, and its their feelings that matter at the end of the day, nobody else's, whatever your opinion might be.

 

Nobody is? Tell that to half of America

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you live in the UK, I'm talking about FOX news. It's the most biased piece of crap ever. It makes me so mad every time I watch it. It's not by choice either my parents watch it 24/7. The channel holds Rhodes Scholars such as Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity.

 

Also they interviewed someone on fox news who lost a family member in 9/11 and said she was for the idea of the mosque. Which will be built 2 BLOCKS away. So I doubt all relatives of victims are up in arms about this.

 

Fox is very pro-Republican, right? :thinking: I only watch NBC and CBS, but I heard they were.

 

And all those guys are biased assholes. :nice:

 

This whole mosque thing reminds me of this local story.

 

Basically, a blind man had a gun and a gun license before he went blind, and people took him to court saying that his license should be revoked since he was blind. Whether or not people were happy about it or whether or not it was safe, he was allowed to keep his gun because it's part of his Constitutional right. He just has to take a Braille test. Thank God I don't live too close to him. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...