Controversial topic inc: Muslim cultural center+mosque in NY

[Sabindeus]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I am totally against him burning the Koran because it is very disrespectful. I feel the same way as someone burning the Bible. This crack is obviously doing it for attention.

I just have seen folks argue that it is their right to build there even though it causes some hurt feelings. I have also seen Muslims that believe they shouldn't build there also because of hurtful relations it could cause...and possible violence. It just bothers me that some of those people won't use that arguement for pastor. If it applies to one group then it obviously applies to both.

It makes it easier if you apply some utilitarianism... What do they gain by building a mosque? A place to worship and a community center and etc. etc. What do the gain by burning a Koran? A bunch of ashes. The arguments about freedom of speech are fine and all, but the reason one gets labelled wrong and the other doesn't is because of the actual real world benefits of burning a book are negligible.

[Mcduffie]

Well NPR was reporting that some German soldiers had to open fire at some protesters that were getting out of hand in Afghanistan over this issue. It didn't sound like anyone was seriously hurt, so I hope that holds true. There were some other larger and peaceful protests, but the sentiment seemed to be that the US government should stop him, which exasperates me somewhat. Of course we have people here that believe that too...

I thought the guy said that he wasn't going to do it though?

The full circle jerk is here: http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/10/florida.quran.burning.imam/index.html?hpt=T2

[gtechman]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I am totally against him burning the Koran because it is very disrespectful. I feel the same way as someone burning the Bible. This crack is obviously doing it for attention.

I just have seen folks argue that it is their right to build there even though it causes some hurt feelings. I have also seen Muslims that believe they shouldn't build there also because of hurtful relations it could cause...and possible violence. It just bothers me that some of those people won't use that arguement for pastor. If it applies to one group then it obviously applies to both.

It makes it easier if you apply some utilitarianism... What do they gain by building a mosque? A place to worship and a community center and etc. etc. What do the gain by burning a Koran? A bunch of ashes. The arguments about freedom of speech are fine and all, but the reason one gets labelled wrong and the other doesn't is because of the actual real world benefits of burning a book are negligible.

Then the folks getting up in arms about the Koran burning should feel the same towards Bible burning.

[cerwillis]

Then the folks getting up in arms about the Koran burning should feel the same towards Bible burning.

No one says it isn't a double standard. Christians don't declare jihad on an entire country in reaction to a burned bible, some muslims do in reaction to a burned koran. I think it important to get away from what is morally right and wrong in this situation and focus more on the reality of what would happen if he does this. If it was just hurt feelings involved, this guy would get a thumbs up, but it is much bigger than that, and really could have no positive outcome for anyone except him and his boys being able to pat themselves on the back and give the middle finger to Islam.

edit: I don't mean to imply that burning a bible would have any positive effect either. I just want us to get out of Afghanistan for the sake of our soldiers and our wallets, and this sort of tomfoolery really doesn't help. I hope he enjoys being on TV.

[gtechman]

Then the folks getting up in arms about the Koran burning should feel the same towards Bible burning.

No one says it isn't a double standard. Christians don't declare jihad on an entire country in reaction to a burned bible, some muslims do in reaction to a burned koran. I think it important to get away from what is morally right and wrong in this situation and focus more on the reality of what would happen if he does this. If it was just hurt feelings involved, this guy would get a thumbs up, but it is much bigger than that, and really could have no positive outcome for anyone except him and his boys being able to pat themselves on the back and give the middle finger to Islam.

edit: I don't mean to imply that burning a bible would have any positive effect either. I just want us to get out of Afghanistan for the sake of our soldiers and our wallets, and this sort of tomfoolery really doesn't help. I hope he enjoys being on TV.

Then wouldn't someone say that this is letting the terrorist win? So you aren't going to allow someone their freedom of speech because you fear it will make someone else mad and they may go out and murder innocent people? I totally understand this, but when you write it down and try to be objective about it, it tends to be pretty insane.

Trust me, our overseas military safety is the very first thing on my mind here. I work for the USAF. I disagree with this for many reasons. This is all just for the sake of arguement.

[cerwillis]

You and I are in agreement then. I don't really support backing down to bully tactics, but in this case, its a cost/benefit thing and the benefit is nil.

[Mcduffie]

Then the folks getting up in arms about the Koran burning should feel the same towards Bible burning.

No one says it isn't a double standard. Christians don't declare jihad on an entire country in reaction to a burned bible, some muslims do in reaction to a burned koran. quote]

Wiki the word Jihad. It doesn't necessarily mean "holy war." Just a "striving" or a "struggle" against something. So if a muslim were to be working against child abuse in a community, he could say he was on jihad against child abuse. Though, most Americans would immediately assume he was contemplating buying an AK-47 to kill child abusers. Which may be false.

Christians have declared their own intentions of a "jihad" on Afghanistan in retaliation for attacks on September 11th. I imagine a lot of Christians have done it for the situation with the mosque in New York. Some Christians have even made terrorist attacks agains the US itself, in retaliation for government decisions. See below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutaree

People are people. They rage against what upsets them. We're no better than Muslims or Afghanis in that respect. We shouldn't consider ourselves such.

[Fridmarr]

Then the folks getting up in arms about the Koran burning should feel the same towards Bible burning.

No one says it isn't a double standard. Christians don't declare jihad on an entire country in reaction to a burned bible, some muslims do in reaction to a burned koran. I think it important to get away from what is morally right and wrong in this situation and focus more on the reality of what would happen if he does this. If it was just hurt feelings involved, this guy would get a thumbs up, but it is much bigger than that, and really could have no positive outcome for anyone except him and his boys being able to pat themselves on the back and give the middle finger to Islam.

edit: I don't mean to imply that burning a bible would have any positive effect either. I just want us to get out of Afghanistan for the sake of our soldiers and our wallets, and this sort of tomfoolery really doesn't help. I hope he enjoys being on TV.

Then wouldn't someone say that this is letting the terrorist win? So you aren't going to allow someone their freedom of speech because you fear it will make someone else mad and they may go out and murder innocent people? I totally understand this, but when you write it down and try to be objective about it, it tends to be pretty insane.

Trust me, our overseas military safety is the very first thing on my mind here. I work for the USAF. I disagree with this for many reasons. This is all just for the sake of arguement.

Just one nitpick. It's not a matter of "allowing" freedom of speech. Only in rare cases is that to be constrained, and the qualifications for which are demanding. This clearly does not meet that standard.

It's not a rational reaction to commit acts of violence as a response to a book burning, and I wouldn't hold this guy responsible for those acts if they were to happen. You commit a violent act because someone burned a book, you are responsible for it 100%. However, it's not like he's doing something that is otherwise right in spite of the consequences, he's doing something stupid, and with no benefit in spite of the consequences. So the natural reaction is to try to convince him to stop, but ultimately that's his choice.

[cerwillis]

I am hopeful that this guy will learn something on his trip to NY, and at the very least, cancel this event on the grounds that his religion is not a hateful one. I would also hope that the rest of the world is getting the message that the (edit: overwhelming) majority of Americans are against the idea, and that our government is practically begging him to cancel it. There is some potential for good to come of this.

[Dorvan]

Christians have declared their own intentions of a "jihad" on Afghanistan in retaliation for attacks on September 11th. I imagine a lot of Christians have done it for the situation with the mosque in New York. Some Christians have even made terrorist attacks agains the US itself, in retaliation for government decisions. See below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutaree

People are people. They rage against what upsets them. We're no better than Muslims or Afghanis in that respect. We shouldn't consider ourselves such.

Are you really drawing a moral equivalence between a military response against the perpetrators of a terrorist attack that kills 5,000 people and a violent response to a book burning?

[Koatanga]

Christians have bombed abortion clinics, killed politicians, and even perpetuated the Crusades and the Holocaust. Don't for a moment believe the Christian faith is any more immune to extremists than any other.

Most KKK members would consider themselves Christian, but are they examples of Christianity as a whole? They may not be representative of your beliefs, but they still fall under the umbrella of "Christian" whether you like it or not.

There are also Mulsim extremists, who believe and behave contrary to the way the vast majority of Muslims would behave. You can bet there are some pretty pissed of Muslims who don't approve of the actions of the extremists, and certainly have issues with how those actions represent their religion.

Painting all Muslims with the same brush on the basis of actions of extremists is exactly the same as someone blaming all Christians for the actions of the KKK.

[Dorvan]

If that's directed at me, you're responding to an argument that I'm not making. Mcduffie's post was drawing a specific moral equivalence that I find to be completely off the wall, and I wanted to clarify that.

[Mcduffie]

If that's directed at me, you're responding to an argument that I'm not making. Mcduffie's post was drawing a specific moral equivalence that I find to be completely off the wall, and I wanted to clarify that.

Hmm, the quote in my post removed Cerwillis' part. What I was saying is that members of the US have and will declare Jihad on an entire country for the actions of one person. I can't think of the number of times I heard "we should've turned the whole country into a glass parking lot."

The inequality of a terrorist attack killing 5,000, and a book burning speaks for itself.

[masterpoobaa]

Just remember folks:

"If you aren't with us then you support the terrorists!"

This information was brought to you thanks to the George Bush fanclub.