• 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!

Ground zero mosque wins key vote

texmaster said:
So its your claim that there are no parisan newsources on your side? Please tell me you are kidding.

BTW, Shilery was fired by the Obama adminstration. You do remember they aren't republicans right?
Click to expand...

Unlike you, I don't have a side. And, I take the words of news outlets, particularly those with an obvious spin, with a grain of salt.

As far as what happened with Ms. Sherrod, imagine the calamity that would have occurred if the Obama administration hadn't quickly fired her. It's a shame that the reports that totally screwed up her life weren't fact-checked before being put out as "news."
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
Seriously, I'll be the first to admit and acknowledge and apologize or own up to instances where my hypocrisy is legitimately displayed and someone can show it as such. However when people go for backassward attempts that are obviously bogus in attempts to smear me and do so in such a juvenile and amateurish way its delightfully fun to show them how pathetic their attempt was and how easy it is to poke holes in their dishonest arguments.

J-mac is sending mixed messages, saying he has no problems with legally allowing people to build...and then saying it'd be different with regards to near 9/11. I simply want to know what his actual stance is in regards to whether or not the government should be holding it up or prohibiting it.

I thank him for the post to moderate muslims and they for the most part are mirroring my sentiments towards the thing. That said I do find it ironic he's siting the words of the very people he wants essentially barred from the U.S. by making Islam Illegal.
Click to expand...


Yep, it's a riddle....I'll try and be as clear as I can here so that from this point on there should be NO ambiguity about where I stand.

On the Mosque site, I think that is is a direct affront to those victims families, and everyone in America to not only build a shrine there, but to name it as they originally wanted to, Cordoba House. Those who know their history will immediately see why.

Do I have a distrust of Muslims? Yes, I don't think it is possible to have witnessed the past 10 years, and further, and not. Call it bias, call it what ever you want. it is what it is.

Do I want to "outlaw" Islam in America? No. I don't think that would do any good, and would only feed into increased isolationism.

Do I think that Islam is a force to be taken at face value when moderates speak? No. It is a proven fact that dishonesty in the furtherance of this cause to convert all the world is a tenant of the religion.

I think we must be awfully careful in how we approach this conflict of Islam v. Western Culture, it is dangerous, and will thrive of pitting us against each other. If the majority of Muslims are a peaceful group wishing only to worship as they will, and denounce terror around the world vocally and unhesitatingly then more power to them, but we shouldn't have to prompt that from them if they are truly for peace.


j-mac
 
Catz Part Deux said:
He gets pissed off by short-sighted fascists who want to trample on the bill of rights because of their own irrational phobias.

I have to admit, so do I.
Click to expand...
I hadn't pegged him as the type who got "pissed off" - I guess I just haven't been reading the "more excitable" threads.
 
I say this again. Why do many conservatives support the government telling someone what they can do on private property and restricting religous freedom? If you hate Islam then why act like many Islamic nations who oppose and make it illegal for any other faith to build a church/temple/anything that isn't a mosque? It's the same oppressive ideology. You don't have to believe that the placement of the mosque is a good thing, you can protest it and hate Islam all you want. But you don't have the right to deny them their Constitutional right just as much as they have no right to deny you yours. It's hypocrisy of epic proportions. So the government should grow so big that they are allowed to break the Constitution and restrict religious freedom just as long as it isn't your religion/ideology?
 
Last edited:
Taylor said:
I hadn't pegged him as the type who got "pissed off" - I guess I just haven't been reading the "more excitable" threads.
Click to expand...

I can see how frustrating it can be to deal with people online who don't get American Civics at the most basic level, and want to use the law to enforce their prejudices. It's hard to imagine that people are actually that short-sighted and stupid, and that they don't see what the longterm ramifications of allowing government to pick and choose treatment of religious entities would be.
 
member one:

Hey! Build whatever you want, Support what ever you want. I Never, NOT ONCE said that a Mosque shouldn't be built in America at all. Just not at Ground Zero. Don't you get it? If you think that for one moment that my argument is based in destroying rights, then I have a far different view than that which you subscribe to me.
Click to expand...

no call for prohibition

member two:

First, there's a different between saying they SHOULDN'T build it there and that they should be PROHIBITED by the government from building there. It seems to me you're suggesting the latter. If I'm incorrect and you're suggesting the first, then my apologizes.
Click to expand...

that call for a prohibition seems to be imagined by our interlocutor

that'd be what insiders call a strawman

LOL!

member two elsewhere this week:

You have repeatedly beaten up one gigantic strawman because you do not possess the ability to actually debate my arguments as you continually misrepresent my argument not in a slight way but in an obviously glaring way
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
digsbe said:
I say this again. Why do many conservatives support the government telling someone what they can do on private property and restricting religous freedom? If you hate Islam then why act like many Islamic nations who oppose and make it illegal for any other faith to build a church/temple/anything that isn't a mosque? It's the same oppressive ideology. You don't have to believe that the placement of the mosque is a good thing, you can protest it and hate Islam all you want. But you don't have the right to deny them their Constitutional right just as much as they have no right to deny you yours. It's hypocrisy of epic proportions. So the government should grow so big that they are allowed to break the Constitution and restrict religious freedom just as long as it isn't your religion/ideology?
Click to expand...


A little over the top if you ask me....I am but a mere truck driver. An observer if you will....posting my opinions and debating with the fine people here in no way hampers anyones 'civil rights'..... Whew.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
A little over the top if you ask me....I am but a mere truck driver. An observer if you will....posting my opinions and debating with the fine people here in no way hampers anyones 'civil rights'..... Whew.


j-mac
Click to expand...

If you were the law, would you ban the mosque from being built because of the sensitivities in regards to Ground Zero? You don't have to agree with building the mosque, and it's your right to protest it. However, the belief that they shouldn't be allowed to build it is unconstitutional. And preforming that action would be a violation of Constitutional rights like we've never seen before.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Unlike you, I don't have a side.
Click to expand...

Ok I laughed out loud on that one.


Most of us have been spoon fed the glories of capitalism and the free market since we were old enough to eat at a table. But a few years ago, I saw a study much like this one, and thought, "What if we're not getting it? What if the aquisition of wealth isn't really the way to happiness?"

the fact that GITMO still hasn't been closed, and we are still holding suspects without access to legal counsel, and may even be torturing people is EXTREMELY bothersome to me. As is the fact that we still don't have clear goals/objectives in A-stan or Iran, and no real exit plan....Obama is significantly better, in almost every way, than Bush.

In various threads, whenever the mistakes of Bush are brought up, some people always seem to want to bury the past and act like it never happened so they can blame everything on Obama instead..
Click to expand...

I have many many more examples but please don't insult our intelligence again by pretending you aren't a full fledged liberal. I am at least honest about my side.

And, I take the words of news outlets, particularly those with an obvious spin, with a grain of salt.
Click to expand...

Of course you do

As far as what happened with Ms. Sherrod, imagine the calamity that would have occurred if the Obama administration hadn't quickly fired her. It's a shame that the reports that totally screwed up her life weren't fact-checked before being put out as "news."
Click to expand...

How about when the left put out false articles against Palin?

* Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she increased funding and signed a bill that will triple per-pupil funding over three years for special needs students with high-cost requirements.

* She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.

* She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.

* Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.

* Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."


FactCheck.org: Sliming Palin

Where were you?
 
Last edited:
digsbe said:
If you were the law, would you ban the mosque from being built because of the sensitivities in regards to Ground Zero? You don't have to agree with building the mosque, and it's your right to protest it. However, the belief that they shouldn't be allowed to build it is unconstitutional. And preforming that action would be a violation of Constitutional rights like we've never seen before.
Click to expand...

It's a good thing we have the law, which is much better than mob rule.
 
digsbe said:
If you were the law, would you ban the mosque from being built because of the sensitivities in regards to Ground Zero? You don't have to agree with building the mosque, and it's your right to protest it. However, the belief that they shouldn't be allowed to build it is unconstitutional. And preforming that action would be a violation of Constitutional rights like we've never seen before.
Click to expand...


Let me bold this and place it in caps so that you may understand better....NOT AT GROUND ZERO!!!!ANYWHERE ELSE BUT THERE!!!!


j-mac
 
Well it's a good thing that it's two blocks away from ground zero then.
 
j-mac said:
Let me bold this and place it in caps so that you may understand better....NOT AT GROUND ZERO!!!!ANYWHERE ELSE BUT THERE!!!!


j-mac
Click to expand...

But why is it constitutional to ban it from Ground Zero? They don't have to like it. Heck, they can protest it out of the neighborhood if they want to. But what legal defense is there to prevent them from building it near the site?
 
Last edited:
they shouldn't be FORCED to move

but if they're sincere about their professions of wanting to improve relations with their neighbors...

well, they could start by listening to em
 
texmaster said:
I have many many more examples but please don't insult our intelligence again by pretending you aren't a full fledged liberal.
Click to expand...

Your ultra conservatism taints your perceptions on these issues. After all, you consider ZYPHLIN a liberal, as well.

How about when the left put out false articles against Palin?
Click to expand...

I wasn't on this board, but I vigorously defended her. It pissed me off to see feminists attacking her.
 
I was just in an elevator with some muslims!!!

I was soooo scared...

so glad they didn't cut my head off or blow up the elevator!!!!

I'm so brave for my fear!
 
Jetboogieman said:
I was just in an elevator with some muslims!!!

I was soooo scared...

so glad they didn't cut my head off or blow up the elevator!!!!

I'm so brave for my fear!
Click to expand...

Once, I had to fly on a plane with a Muslim. He kept staring at me. Clearly, he was a terrorist, plotting my demise. That's what they do, you know.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Once, I had to fly on a plane with a Muslim. He kept staring at me. Clearly, he was a terrorist, plotting my demise. That's what they do, you know.
Click to expand...

I had a roommate who was a Muslim. Guy liked fat chicks.
 
Ikari said:
I had a roommate who was a Muslim. Guy liked fat chicks.
Click to expand...

the_more_you_know2.jpg
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Your ultra conservatism taints your perceptions on these issues. After all, you consider ZYPHLIN a liberal, as well.
Click to expand...

Zyphlin is no conservative that much is painfully clear. libertarian possibly.

And those quotes of yours are not even close to being centrist so please stop pretending who you really are.

I wasn't on this board, but I vigorously defended her. It pissed me off to see feminists attacking her.
Click to expand...

LOL You do realize there is a search engine on this forum right?

You started this thread:


Thread: Sarah Palin Already Bored, Saying Crazy Things on Facebook

Sarah Palin Already Bored, Saying Crazy Things On Facebook - sarah palin - Gawker

Gawker's coverage of Palin is HI-LAR-IOUS.

More:

Sarah Palin Quit Because She Was Not Very Good At Her Job - sarah palin - Gawker

I'd be so ****ing happy if Sarah Palin restricted her activities to Alaska. You betcha I would.

Clearly, Bristol is the designated "slut" of the family.

And as before there are many many more.


Yes, you are indeed the great defender of Palin. :2wave: . Sometimes its almost too easy. :lamo

If you really were "vigorously defending her" on some other board as you claim, clearly you've gotten over that

Just be honest about who you are like most of us here. Your lean is obviously liberal.
 
Last edited:
Rumor has it that a gay bar is going up next to the mosque. It's purpose will be to cater to gay muslim men. I'm sure there will be plenty of tolerance shown by the muslims.
 
I dunno, nobody cares about the strip club or porno stores around Ground Zero I guess they probably wouldn't mind a gay bar?

New York Dolls - Google Maps

Btw it's good to know that conservative pundits are high fiving in their circle jerk over that too.
 
JohnWOlin said:
I dunno, nobody cares about the strip club or porno stores around Ground Zero I guess they probably wouldn't mind a gay bar?
Click to expand...

What about your hard earned tax dollars? These are your hard-earned tax dollars at work...

Imam behind support for Ground Zero mosque, Feisal Abdul Rauf may do fundraising on Federally funded trip - NYPOST.com

The imam behind a plan to build a mosque near Ground Zero is set to depart on a multi-country jaunt to the Middle East funded by the State Department -- raising concerns that taxpayers may be helping him with the controversial project's $100 million fund-raising goal.

Feisal Abdul Rauf is taking the publicly funded trip to foster "greater understanding" about Islam and Muslim communities in the United States, the State Department confirmed yesterday.

"He is a distinguished Muslim cleric," said State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley, when asked about the journey, reportedly to include stops in Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Qatar.
Click to expand...
 
How does what a Murdoch ran tabloid talking about "maybe might could happen" have anything to do with what I just posted?
 
Zyphlin said:
I disagree
Click to expand...

At its root, its source documents, tradition, literature, commands, scriptures, Islam is an evangelistic religion. Meaning, it has a command to expand with the eventual goal that everyone is Muslim. If this was confined to peaceful preaching and conversion only by the willing, with tolerance for everyone else, there wouldn't be a ****ing problem. But virtually all of its expansion has been by violent conquest and eradication or repression of all other beliefs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom