• 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!

Mosque near WTC moves forward

Regarding the "Cordoba House" mosque being built 2 blocks from ground zero in NYC...

  • Total voters
    58
  • Poll closed .
Agent Ferris said:
Really? Tell me what exactly do I believe that is anywhere near as crazy as the example I mentioned previously?
Click to expand...
Would you be so kind as to share a little about yourself?
 
Agent Ferris said:
Me? Well I enjoy long walks on the beach, sunsets, puppies, enslaving humanity, and taking over the universe. ;)
Click to expand...
We could say you have an unhealthy fixation on a TV show. And fixating that much on something that's fake is crazy.
 
Goshin said:
And yet, there is no getting around the fact that the 9/11 hijackers were Muslims motivated by Jihad. I get a little baffled sometimes by people who don't seem to want to recognize that little fact, or the undeniable truth that Islam seems to produce an aweful lot of terrorists. How many of the most recent 100 suicide bombers were Muslim? Is the number 99 or 100? Has any other religion produced 100 suicide bombers in the past decade... or even 10?
Click to expand...

Well there was a time when murderous crusaders were all Christian, but that fact doesn't say much about Christianity. It's just another example of the misuse of a religion by those who peddle a false narrative, i.e. that the West is out to destroy Islam.
 
I think its insensitive and lacks tact. While not all Muslims are responsible, we can not ignore the fact that said religion inspired the attacks that brought down said towers and that fact won't be forgotten.

That said, this country has religious freedom and I don't plan on picking and choosing when I care about the constitution. If they buy that plot of land and it meets the zoning restrictions I have no legal issue with them building a mosque there.
 
The responses to this thread has made my change my mind.

I hope they build two Mosques within walking distance to the WTC.
 
Arch Enemy said:
The responses to this thread has made my change my mind.

I hope they build two Mosques within walking distance to the WTC.
Click to expand...

How about going all the way and just make the new WTC building mosques with minarets and calls to prayer? In for a penny, in for a pound. :shrug:
 
SgtRock said:
You should have ended that statment with "Allahu Akbar"
Click to expand...

No. I should have ended it with "in shah allah". If you're going to stereotype learn to do it correctly.

Ockham said:
How about going all the way and just make the new WTC building mosques with minarets and calls to prayer? In for a penny, in for a pound. :shrug:
Click to expand...

No. City ordinance wouldn't allow it. I'm a man for the rule of law, and unfortunately for the opposition the law is on the Muslims side.
 
Arch Enemy said:
No. City ordinance wouldn't allow it. I'm a man for the rule of law, and unfortunately for the opposition the law is on the Muslims side.
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of any City ordinance which would not allow converting the planned WTC buildings into mosques. In fact, since you're for the rule of law, such a move would be allowed Constitutionally under at least the 1st amendment.

What City ordinance over rules the 1st Amendment? Link?
 
Ockham said:
I'm not aware of any City ordinance which would not allow converting the planned WTC buildings into mosques. In fact, since you're for the rule of law, such a move would be allowed Constitutionally under at least the 1st amendment.

What City ordinance over rules the 1st Amendment? Link?
Click to expand...


City Ordinance would not allow the noise of the Muslim call to worship to be loud enough to be effective in reaching the people of New York City.
 
The Dome of the Rock sits atop the Temple mount, erected after the fall of the second Jewish temple. This is no coincidence, since the pattern in the spread of Islam is to destroy the religious structures of the conquered people and replace them with mosques.

What greater example of America's number one religious symbol than the twin towers, eh? Since we worship capitalism and all.......
 
Arch Enemy said:
City Ordinance would not allow the noise of the Muslim call to worship to be loud enough to be effective in reaching the people of New York City.
Click to expand...

You're actually, 100% wrong in this case. Here's the evidence:

NY Law Library, DEP Noise Code, 1998 ---


24-217 Exemptions.

The provisions of this code shall not apply to the operation or use of any organ, bell, chimes or other similar instrument by any church, synagogue, mosque or school.

NPC Law Library: city of New York Noise Ordinance

So I'll ask again, why not change your opinion and go all the way, since there is no noise ordinance in NYC that would prevent it. I think it's time you move the goal post and change your argument.
 
How come nobody can 'exercise their rights' and be considerate of others at the same time anymore? How hard would it be for those muslims to build their mosque a few miles farther away? The law might not require them too, but would it kill them to show a little respect for the thousands of innocent people who were murdered by some of their fellow muslims?
 
Last edited:
Great idea, let's build the tallest building in the world, and put a mosque at the top.
 
Vincent said:
How come nobody can 'exercise their rights' and be considerate of others at the same time anymore?
How hard would it be for those muslims to build their mosque a few miles farther away? The law might not require them too, but would it kill them to show a little respect for the thousands of innocent people who were murdered by some of their fellow muslims?
Click to expand...

I have to say, I can see the point of the original article in that, outreach would be to show the BEST of Islam close to where such a tragedy occurred in SUPPORT of healing that tragedy. However, this is way overly optimistic in my view --- if this were another 30 or 40 years in the future, it would probably be embraced. But 10 years is not enough time. The holes are still there - such loss of innocent life is not quickly forgiven so I agree with you... too soon, not a good idea. Islam should be more interested in sending outreach to madrassas and other pockets of radicalized Islam around the world instead of some attempt at outreach to the victims and the ground zero location. Let the victims have time --- get Islam's own house in order first. That would go much further than putting a mosque on the front steps of the new WTC.
 
Ockham said:
A $100 million dollar glass mosque called the "Cordoba House" is being built approximately 2 blocks away from ground zero. The purpose, according to Imam Feisel Abdul Rauf, is to "...foster better relations between the West and Muslims." Costs are being handled by groups such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, which would pay for the construction.

Not everyone is on board though...




So weigh in -- is this all OK due to the stated intent, or is it NOT okay and this type of outreach building should be built somewhere not so close to the site of 9/11?




Read more: Plan for mosque near World Trade Center site moves ahead
Click to expand...

If they bought the land and can finance putting a mosque up, then that's that. They're free to do so and there's nothing we can legitimately do to stop them.
 
Ockham said:
I have to say, I can see the point of the original article in that, outreach would be to show the BEST of Islam close to where such a tragedy occurred in SUPPORT of healing that tragedy. However, this is way overly optimistic in my view --- if this were another 30 or 40 years in the future, it would probably be embraced. But 10 years is not enough time. The holes are still there - such loss of innocent life is not quickly forgiven so I agree with you... too soon, not a good idea. Islam should be more interested in sending outreach to madrassas and other pockets of radicalized Islam around the world instead of some attempt at outreach to the victims and the ground zero location. Let the victims have time --- get Islam's own house in order first. That would go much further than putting a mosque on the front steps of the new WTC.
Click to expand...

I can't help but think that the real outreach is that of Saudi money reaching out from across the Atlantic to finance the thing.

I would be more supportive of it's building if plans were in works to build a 100 million dollar church in Mecca. Somehow the notion of reciprocity never enters the picture when it comes to the relationship between Islam and the west.
 
Blackdog said:
He is the worst kind of political hack. One that is a bigot and hides behind intellectualism to disguise his bigotry.

I am not even going into the fact he is a tin foil hat wearing Republican.

He is everything I said.
Click to expand...

I really respect you doing this, BD.
 
Vincent said:
Actually, that's Islam that has people killed for leaving the faith.
Click to expand...

You're generalizating Islamism for Islam. Fail. Is there radicalized Islam? Yep. Is it the majority? Nope. Every movement has a lunatic fringe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom