• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Landmark commission hearing may determine future of ground zero mosque

All of which is irrelevant to their legal rights as property owners who have passed zoning law.

You don't like Islam. That's pretty obvious, but unlike other places, namely Islamic ones, we have a thing called the Constitution.

Your whole argument is nothing more then emotional reasons why you don't like Islam. But in the context of legal property laws, your argument means absolutely nothing.



I have no problem with islam, Laila I consider a good DP friend for example, I think she would agree groundbreaking on 911 is a big FU to those like me who lost family and friends in the 911 attacks.


that said, is it confirmed this is thier plan?
 
All of which is irrelevant to their legal rights as property owners who have passed zoning law.

Learn to ****ing read, I said they have the right to their Mosque.

You don't like Islam.

Anyone opposed to oppression wouldn't.

That's pretty obvious, but unlike other places, namely Islamic ones, we have a thing called the Constitution.

A) The social contract was not entered into voluntarily and is thus null and void.

B) I already said they can do what they want with their property.

Your whole argument is nothing more then emotional reasons why you don't like Islam. But in the context of legal property laws, your argument means absolutely nothing.

I already said that they have every right to their Mosque, what I made clear though is that there is a difference between defending the rights of this group and defending the group itself, it seems you are engaging in the latter which would make you an enemy of liberty and not its defender.
 
This sounds like "every black is a potential criminal," or "every priest is a potential molestor," or "every man is a potential rapist," and so on.

I'll correct your statement: Every human is a potential terrorist.



Muslims -- the new niggers!

This is why I have such an issue with the Muslim faith and the way our media, politicians and seemingly, most people are portraying it. The fundamentalist, "kill the infidel" types are called radical, islamo-fascists and we say they are not true Muslims. The moderates we want to deal with are the true Muslims. No!!! Sorry, wrong ****ing answer. The radicals are the ones who are TRUE to their faith and that is why we will NEVER have peace with Islam. We will be at war with any Muslim who TRULY believes that the Koran is the word from Allah and Mohammed is his prophet.
 
All of which is irrelevant to their legal rights as property owners who have passed zoning law.

You don't like Islam. That's pretty obvious, but unlike other places, namely Islamic ones, we have a thing called the Constitution.

Your whole argument is nothing more then emotional reasons why you don't like Islam. But in the context of legal property laws, your argument means absolutely nothing.

If you're going to pretend to respond, respond to ALL of his points. Cherry picking is just pathetic.
 
I have no problem with islam, Laila I consider a good DP friend for example, I think she would agree groundbreaking on 911 is a big FU to those like me who lost family and friends in the 911 attacks.
that said, is it confirmed this is thier plan?

Heh, you are my favourite too =)

I think it is wrong and insensitive to do it, it should be those who planned to build it that ought to halt their project and choose another location with perhaps the help of the State officials.

What I have a problem with right now is those who are using this issue to paint broad brushes against all Muslim. You can see them in this thread
 
Last edited:
We will be at war with any Muslim who TRULY believes that the Koran is the word from Allah and Mohammed is his prophet.

Every Muslim believes the Qu'ran is the word of God and Prophet Mohammed is one of his messengers.

Save me from the stupid :roll:
 
A) Mainstream Islam = capital and/or corporal punishment for apostasy, homosexuality, adultery, and pre-marital sex.

B) If you honestly believe that then I feel sorry for you. The main proponent of this plan says that the U.S. brought 9-11 upon itself. The intent is clear it is incitement plain and simple. Do they have the right to have this Mosque? Yes. Do they have a right to hold the ground breaking on 9-11 in a clear intention to incite? Again yes. But I have every right in the world to say **** YOU, **** your celestial dicator, **** your oppressive political ideology masquerading as a religion, and **** anybody who supports you and your group.

A. Irrelevant even if true.

B. The US did bring 9/11 upon itself. But there's no reason Muslims can't oppose the extremist tendencies on both sides that contributed to it. In fact, they have every reason to do so.
 
How about to show solidarity with the victims of terrorism?

By the same group headed by a man who said America brought 9-11 on itself? :roll: This would be like showing solidarity with the victims of WW2 by having a groundbreaking ceremony for a Shinto temple a block away from Pearl Harbor.

You people are clearly looking for any reason to excuse this clear cut case of intent to incite, which any rational human being realizes having a grounbreaking ceremony for a Mosque a block away from the WTC's on 9-11 to be.
 
A. Irrelevant even if true.

Completely true.

B. The US did bring 9/11 upon itself.

Ya and Poland brought on the German invasion. :roll:

But there's no reason Muslims can't oppose the extremist tendencies on both sides that contributed to it. In fact, they have every reason to do so.

Yes let's oppose extremist tendencies by giving the perverbial **** you to the U.S. and celebrating 9-11 by holding the groundbreaking ceremony for the rising of the Islamic flag on the site where the U.S. was hit by Muslims on 9-11, on 9-11.

I understand that you love Islamism and will do anything to defend it but please don't insult my intelligence by actually pretending to believe the bull**** which you spew forth.
 
Last edited:
A. Irrelevant even if true.

B. The US did bring 9/11 upon itself. But there's no reason Muslims can't oppose the extremist tendencies on both sides that contributed to it. In fact, they have every reason to do so.

Ah another Bin Laden supporter. Well done.

If you claim that America brought 9.11 upon itself you might as well join Al Queada because they believe exactly like you do.
 
Ah another Bin Laden supporter. Well done.

If you claim that America brought 9.11 upon itself you might as well join Al Queada because they believe exactly like you do.

Actually, you and Ferris are the ones who have consistently been toeing the Al Qaeda line. Your interpretation of the Koran with regard to religious freedom in Muslim societies is pretty close to Bin Laden's ideal. Fortunately, most Muslims don't agree with you.
 
Ah another Bin Laden supporter. Well done.

If you claim that America brought 9.11 upon itself you might as well join Al Queada because they believe exactly like you do.

Al Qaeda would love you.
Your image of Islam is exactly what they wish every Muslim followed.

If all 1.2billion of us had it in for US there is no army big enough to stop us
It's a good thing the majority of us Muslims are not hate filled bigots eh.
 
Actually, you and Ferris are the ones who have consistently been toeing the Al Qaeda line. Your interpretation of the Koran with regard to religious freedom in Muslim societies is pretty close to Bin Laden's ideal. Fortunately, most Muslims don't agree with you.

Go ahead. Show us where we are wrong.

Show us all the religous freedom that Muslim dominated countries dish out.

Then explain how America deserved 9.11

I'll wait.
 
Al Qaeda would love you.
Your image of Islam is exactly what they wish every Muslim followed.

If all 1.2billion of us had it in for US there is no army big enough to stop us
It's a good thing the majority of us Muslims are not hate filled bigots eh.

I never said all Muslims are fundementalists. I said Islam directly read does direct violence toward non believers.

Lets take your statement:

Every Muslim believes the Qu'ran is the word of God and Prophet Mohammed is one of his messengers.

And now the Verse of the Sword

"9:5 Fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)."

Thanks for being so transparent.
 
Last edited:
Show us all the religous freedom that Muslim dominated countries dish out.

Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Turkey, Jordan .... they are some Muslim countries which allow freedoms.
 
Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Turkey, Jordan .... they are some Muslim countries which allow freedoms.

You make it so easy to prove you wrong.

Jordan: The state religion is Islam. The Government prohibits conversion from Islam and proselytization of Muslims.

Some freedom LOL

Let's continue:

Kuwait:

The Constitution also provides that the State protect the freedom to practice religion in accordance with established customs, provided that it does not conflict with public policy or morals.

The Constitution states that Islam is the state religion and that Shari'a (Islamic law) is a main source of legislation.


Next

UAE: Muslim women cannot marry non-Muslim men. Should a non-Muslim man and a Muslim woman their marriage will not be considered valid, and both are subject to arrest, trial and imprisonment on grounds of fornication.
Missionary activity is technically not prohibited, but practice makes such activity difficult although not dangerous.
Conversion from Islam is technically not illegal, but such are not recognized; converts remain Muslims in all official documents and practice
.

Bahrain:

The Constitution states that Islam is the official religion and that Shari'a (Islamic law) is a principal source for legislation. Anti-Islamic writings are prohibited. Every religious group must obtain a license from the Ministry of Justice and Islamic Affairs (MOJIA) to operate. A religious group may also need approval from the Ministry of Social Development, the Ministry of Information, and/or the Ministry of Education for some activities, such as opening a school.

LOL Thanks for proving my point. You don't have a clue what religous freedom is.

Only Turkey comes close and they still have their issues.

While Catholics in Turkey enjoy religious freedom, they are still waiting for civil juridical recognition, Benedict XVI pointed out to the nation's new envoy to the Holy See.


But considering your background I'm not surprised in the least you would think this is religous freedom in Muslim dominated countries.
 
I don't even know why some people just don't admit they hate Muslims. I'd have more respect for you Tex, Ric, Ferris if you just admitted it and we can stop pretending
 
Last edited:
I don't even know why some people just don't admit they hate Muslims. I'd have more respect for you Tex, Ric, Ferris if you just admitted it and we can stop pretending

I'd have more respect for you if you didn't pretend you understand what religous freedom is with those pitiful examples.

Smart move not debating them either.
 
Would you prefer I said - Somalia, Saudi Arabia, Iran?

Smart not answering my question. Just admit it and we can move on.
Oh and also good move in not arguing with me on my own holy book, I guess even you know when you got owned. :lamo
 
You and others attacked me because my ideas were "unconstitutional". Now, eminent domain which is clearly legal (Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution) is being discussed and you're, the one thats foaming out of the mouth...lol

Now, who is the hypocrite?

Eminent Domain is constitutional, but the way you are wanting to apply it is NOT constitutional.
 
I already said that they have every right to their Mosque, what I made clear though is that there is a difference between defending the rights of this group and defending the group itself, int seems you are engaging in the latter which would make you an enemy of liberty and not its defeder.

By only discussing the private property law? Really. How did I defend the group by only discussing their private rights to their own property?

Furthermore, you may want to revisit the post you criticized.
 
I have no problem with islam, Laila I consider a good DP friend for example, I think she would agree groundbreaking on 911 is a big FU to those like me who lost family and friends in the 911 attacks.

that said, is it confirmed this is thier plan?

Still not relevant to what I'm talking about. You may disagree with the Mosque, but private property laws are still evenly applied.
 
I don't think it's the Koran that is the problem, it is that a lot of the Middle East which practices Islam is living in undeveloped conditions, and so Islam is the only reality a lot of people know. This is especially true in the very rural and outlying areas. The Bible is full of violence and hate too if you wish to hone in on those specific passages, but as most Christians will tell you, people don't cling to so many Old Testament notions anymore, and that is entirely because most Christians now live in modernized, free nations, with access to higher education, where they know that it's not okay to smite people for not resting on the Sabbath. The way religion is perceived and is used evolves alongside everything else.

If you go to India, the cities are becoming more and more modernized, which means more education; but if you go to the rural countryside there are still people who believe in superstitions stemming from Hinduism about pleasing the gods or else death. (Just FYI, I'm not making any assertions about the validity of their faith, just the politics.) Even the urban people talk about how backward the countryside can be, and they live in the same nation.

To say that the root of violence is Islam is to deny all the other factors related to the violence, like politics, corrupt governments, economy, lack of stable development, war, poor access to education, regional security, etc. All of these things affect what values people are taught growing up. Afghanistan for example was a thriving proto-democracy before the British Empire, and the USSR and American campaigns of the Cold War; it had a rich culture with the foundations of civil rights beginning to form. Then it got torn to hell by war and politics, and as usual the tribal leaders and all their values seized control of the nation. The Taliban does not represent the best of what Afghanistan can achieve, and its radical Muslims do not represent the kind of society that was there before it became so war torn. I wish more people would learn the history of Afghanistan to see how cool it was even less than a century ago.

A lot of people are lacking the insight into the bigger picture of the Islamic world, especially from an historical perspective. Yes there has been barbarity, and yes the Koran has violent passages, but the choice over what passages get used in the world has always been determined by power politics. It is really easy and tempting to blame Islam for everything but usually it's corruption and under-development of nations that causes people to turn to religion for the solution to everything.
 
Back
Top Bottom