The Nutjobs threatening to burn Qurans thread (merged)

#176
#176
IBlvNTmWrk said:
The Iman in NYC, by voluntarily agreeing to move the mosque to a different location, could easily accomplish one of his primary objectives of building the mosque... fostering better relationships between Muslims, Christians, and any/all affected by 9/11.

Just curious (for LG and anyone else who cares to express their perspective)... which of the following do you consider to be the Iman's primary reason for building it where currently planned?

  1. Because legally they can?
  2. They shouldn't succumb to "right wing" and "religious fanatic" pressure to move it.
  3. Because in the end it will accomplish one of the objectives of fostering better relationships.
  4. Because it will be a monument of "a great victory" in the heart of the city for those who oppose Muslims.
Feel free to insert any other valid reason I may have omitted.
Click to expand...


The original reason to build it there is that they had bought that land some time ago and felt that there was a need for it there because of the community they would serve. They had help from a local JCC in planning and fashioning it.

They were surprised to find quite a bit down the road that some right wing nut had latched onto it as a symbol of conquering the US and generally a place for Islam to thumb its collective nose at us.

Now, the reason to not move it, is that the right has allowed the demogoguing on the issue to continue, because it served their short term political goal of continuing the charade that Obama is a Secret Agent Muslim (SAM).

In other words, originally in part 3, and now 1 and 2.

It was never 4. No one in their right mind believes that.
 
#177
#177
volinbham said:
This is the argument that so many have made against the mosque yet they are called bigots and Islamophobes. You are now officially a bigot.
Click to expand...


Actually, it is that I have come to realize that I was unfair as painting that rationale (and those who subscribed to it) as in league with the loons.

Basically, I identified your thinking with that of gsvol because the end result would be the same.

And that was wrong. I am in concert with those who would politely ask him to consider it, but not package it up in the idiotic and incendiary anti-Islamic rhetoric we see from those who would have us in a Holy War.

(Cue gsvol to say we are already in one).
 
#178
#178
lawgator1 said:
Actually, it is that I have come to realize that I was unfair as painting that rationale (and those who subscribed to it) as in league with the loons.

Basically, I identified your thinking with that of gsvol because the end result would be the same.

And that was wrong. I am in concert with those who would politely ask him to consider it.
Click to expand...

:hi: Now if all the other reactionaries would stop for a minute and consider that there are more positions than "for mosque" or "hate muslims" we could move the dialogue forward.

That's the irony. The one's so quick to label anyone who wasn't 100% on board with the mosque as bigots were actually showing tremendous intolerance themselves.
 
#179
#179
volinbham said:
:hi: Now if all the other reactionaries would stop for a minute and consider that there are more positions than "for mosque" or "hate muslims" we could move the dialogue forward.

That's the irony. The one's so quick to label anyone who wasn't 100% on board with the mosque as bigots were actually showing tremendous intolerance themselves.
Click to expand...


I am on board with your first paragraph.

As to your second, I think that the reaction was so over the top from the real zealots that it made everyone suspicious that anyone suggesting moderation was in reality also advocating it just to generally be anti-Islam, which is not fair.

Now this part I know you won't agree with: Just as the left should not charcaterize everyone on this issue as either 1) for it or 2) a bigoted sociopath, I also think that someone prominent on the right should have come forward and reigned in the gsvol types and said there is no place for that kind of hateful rhetoric.

They can't. I mean, McCain or some other Republican running for reelection cannot afford ot come across as namby pamby. But it would have been helpful I think had someone respected from the right put the kibosh on some of the more ridiculous claims out there.
 
#180
#180
lawgator1 said:
The original reason to build it there is that they had bought that land some time ago and felt that there was a need for it there because of the community they would serve. They had help from a local JCC in planning and fashioning it.

They were surprised to find quite a bit down the road that some right wing nut had latched onto it as a symbol of conquering the US and generally a place for Islam to thumb its collective nose at us.

Now, the reason to not move it, is that the right has allowed the demogoguing on the issue to continue, because it served their short term political goal of continuing the charade that Obama is a Secret Agent Muslim (SAM).

In other words, originally in part 3, and now 1 and 2.

It was never 4. No one in their right mind believes that.
Click to expand...

Actually the first to raise this as a concern were victims and families of victims of 9/11 attacks. Unless you're calling all of them right wing nuts? It's the people who have the greatest voice in the matter. But yet all you can focus on is what it has become and your own distorted view of the opposition. Yeah, you know those victims...a bunch of hateful people.

I think you need to pop The Siege out of your DVD player and stop living through that movie. I swear every single knee jerk liberal out there seems to think The Siege is what we're facing now. Maybe a call to Denzel is in order.
 
#181
#181
CSpindizzy said:
Actually the first to raise this as a concern were victims and families of victims of 9/11 attacks. Unless you're calling all of them right wing nuts? It's the people who have the greatest voice in the matter. But yet all you can focus on is what it has become and your own distorted view of the opposition. Yeah, you know those victims...a bunch of hateful people.

I think you need to pop The Siege out of your DVD player and stop living through that movie. I swear every single knee jerk liberal out there seems to think The Siege is what we're facing now. Maybe a call to Denzel is in order.
Click to expand...


No.
 
#182
#182
LG, you always seem to come back to the lunatic fringe of the right as being the driver or face of any particular issue. Have you ever stopped to think the reason for this?

The fact is that most are in opposition of this mosque or Obama's spending, just to give you a couple of examples, because of good reason. People feel it's way too soon and in poor taste in the proposed mosque example, not because they irrationally hate Muslims or Obama. You are simply giving the loons more power than they deserve, perhaps they are so prominent in your mind because this is what left leaning media outlets are pushing. It just so happens these outlets have ideals to which you subscribe and identify with, in short you and they are both responsible for them being the driving forces behind these particular issues simply as a product of your own minds.
 
#183
#183
KB5252 said:
LG, you always seem to come back to the lunatic fringe of the right as being the driver or face of any particular issue. Have you ever stopped to think the reason for this?

The fact is that most are in opposition of this mosque or Obama's spending, just to give you a couple of examples, because of good reason. People feel it's way too soon and in poor taste in the proposed mosque example, not because they irrationally hate Muslims or Obama. You are simply giving the loons more power than they deserve, perhaps they are so prominent in your mind because this is what left leaning media outlets are pushing. It just so happens these outlets have ideals to which you subscribe and identify with, in short you and they are both responsible for them being the driving forces behind these particular issues simply as a product of your own minds.
Click to expand...

He'd never see that!
 
#185
#185
sjt18 said:
Because Islam is theocratic, I believe there is very good reason to find out who is financially backing this mosque. I believe that makes this Imam's political statements very relevant.
Click to expand...
That is ridiculous. Though your opinions often differ from mine, they are usually expressed wih a certain amount of intelligence; but your use of the term "theocratic" shows either a lack of understanding of the word, or an attempt to mislead. A religion can not, by definition of the word, be theocratic.

Depends on what you are calling the right and who you accept as "Christian". Both terms are broadly used... and abused.

If you allow those who hold beliefs contrary to the NT to claim the title "Christian" then, yeah, there are some who assert that conservatism is "anti-Christian".
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet that there quite a few Muslims that would make that same statement in reference to some who claim Islam as their faith.

I personally feel that my time is better spent trying to be a good Christian, than trying to determine who around me are Christians.

MATT 7:1
 
#186
#186
lawgator1 said:
I am on board with your first paragraph.

As to your second, I think that the reaction was so over the top from the real zealots that it made everyone suspicious that anyone suggesting moderation was in reality also advocating it just to generally be anti-Islam, which is not fair.

Now this part I know you won't agree with: Just as the left should not charcaterize everyone on this issue as either 1) for it or 2) a bigoted sociopath, I also think that someone prominent on the right should have come forward and reigned in the gsvol types and said there is no place for that kind of hateful rhetoric.

They can't. I mean, McCain or some other Republican running for reelection cannot afford ot come across as namby pamby. But it would have been helpful I think had someone respected from the right put the kibosh on some of the more ridiculous claims out there.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with you and here's why. If some moron is spewing Muslim hate they speak for themselves. Public condemnation does little but fan the flames. Here's the thing, I don't remember prominent righties labeling pro-mosque advocates. Yet, lefties immediately labeled anti-mosque folks as bigots and worse. Why label them? The public can see that many against the mosque are simply asking the question you asked above - if this will cause so much pain will it really accomplish a healing bridge or would moving it be the more healing move? In fact a great deal of the public is in this camp. Those people are easily distinguishable from haters yet the left pundits fell all over themselves to lump all opposition together.

Thats the point - you can disagree without demonizing your opposition. You are now complaining that people on the right didn't jump into the fray of labeling people's intent. The truth is we don't know exactly who hates and who has legit concerns. Rather than call out individuals and parse their words to uncover bigotry why not just state clearly what you stand for and let that be it?

It is the left that started the accusation game here and now you want the right to join in. Not me.

Finally, I bet if you go through comments from prominent righties you'll find calls for not attacking Islam and for being tolerant of Muslims. You might not have noticed it because they didn't specifically say people against the mosque are bigots.
 
#187
#187
In the end it shouldn't really matter about Qu'rans burning or Mosque's being built. What matters is the specific theology with respect to Islam and how that drives the reaction of those across the world that will be offended.

Anybody that doesn't think Islam deserves special consideration as a legitimate threat at this particular point in history is crazy. Bottomline, not all Muslims are crazy, homicidal lunatics..of course. But the theology absolutely is.
 
#188
#188
edit *decided it was in bad taste.

For what it's worth, it was a picture of a burning Quran with the caption:

"Just gonna stand there and watch me burn
Thats all right because Allah the way it hurts"
 
Last edited:
#189
#189
rjd970 said:
In the end it shouldn't really matter about Qu'rans burning or Mosque's being built. What matters is the specific theology with respect to Islam and how that drives the reaction of those across the world that will be offended.

Anybody that doesn't think Islam deserves special consideration as a legitimate threat at this particular point in history is crazy. Bottomline, not all Muslims are crazy, homicidal lunatics..of course. But the theology absolutely is.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
#190
#190
DinkinFlicka said:
Yeah, I really said something stupid.

I think you're too daft to understand that I just said Obamacare sucked.

I wish I could say I enjoyed your nonsense, but your posts are about as unenjoyable to read as your font.
Click to expand...

That would be the idea jim bob!

:hi:
 
#192
#192
al-gore-500x600.jpg










weeweed.jpg
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top