Obama's Mosque Remarks Reverberate

[bytor2112]

On Saturday, the president said, "I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque" near Ground Zero, he told reporters during a visit to the Gulf Coast. "I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding."

I tend to agree with President Obama on this one , or at least I agree with his comments, though he probably should have distanced himself from the issue.

That being said, they do have the right to do so....but, they are seriously galvanizing public opinion even more against them. Stupid or bad taste? Probably both. Intentionally mean spirited? Possibly so. More on the story here...

Edited August 16, 2010 by bytor2112

[UrbanFool]

I agree with all of that, but aren't tax-payer's dollars paying for this new mosque? I think it's a complete slap in the face, and we're going to take it.

[bytor2112]

I agree with all of that, but aren't tax-payer's dollars paying for this new mosque? I think it's a complete slap in the face, and we're going to take it.

No...I think it is privately funded. But a slap in the face no less.

[Jenamarie]

No...I think it is privately funded. But a slap in the face no less.

How so? It's not being built ON Ground Zero, it's 3 city blocks away.

[bytor2112]

How so? It's not being built ON Ground Zero, it's 3 city blocks away.

New York is a big city....couldn't they have built this some where else?

[Jenamarie]

New York is a big city....couldn't they have built this some where else?

3 city blocks isn't far enough away? The muslims building this mosque aren't the ones who brought down the towers.

[bytor2112]

3 city blocks isn't far enough away? The muslims building this mosque aren't the ones who brought down the towers.

Maybe not....though Hamas has been very vocally supportive of the effort.

[Wingnut]

Maybe not....though Hamas has been very vocally supportive of the effort.

Only because they know it will infuriate Americans.

[bytor2112]

Only because they know it will infuriate Americans.

Exactly....so maybe the building should be located somewhere else as a affirming statement that they do not support terrorists and are sensitive to the memory of the 9-11 attacks.

[bytor2112]

Even New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who denounced opponents of the proposed 15-story mosque and Islamic center near Ground Zero as tramplers on religious freedom, asked the mosque organizers "to show some special sensitivity to the situation." Yet, as columnist Rich Lowry pointedly noted, the government has no business telling churches how to conduct their business, shape their message or show "special sensitivity" to anyone about anything. Bloomberg was thereby inadvertently conceding the claim of those he excoriates for opposing the mosque, namely that Ground Zero is indeed unlike any other place and therefore unique criteria govern what can be done there.

Bloomberg's implication is clear: If the proposed mosque were controlled by "insensitive" Islamist radicals either excusing or celebrating 9/11, he would not support its construction.

But then, why not? By the mayor's own expansive view of religious freedom, by what right do we dictate the message of any mosque? Moreover, as a practical matter, there's no guarantee that this couldn't happen in the future. Religious institutions in this country are autonomous. Who is to say that the mosque won't one day hire an Anwar al-Aulaqi -- spiritual mentor to the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas Day bomber, and onetime imam at the Virginia mosque attended by two of the 9/11 terrorists?

Charles Krauthammer has an interesting take on the issue.

[Guest]

From what I understand, this same Imam already have a mosque 12 blocks away. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[MarginOfError]

From what I understand, this same Imam already have a mosque 12 blocks away. Correct me if I'm wrong.

What does that have to do with anything?

How many meetinghouses are in this city? Do they really need to add another one anytime soon?

[Matthew0059]

If the Imam behind the construction of the Ground Zero mosque already has a mosque 12 blocks away and doesn't have enough followers to justify the creation of another mosque- then that would be very suspect.

I think the Church builds more meetinhouses to meet membership demands- not to make statements or stir controversy.

[Just_A_Guy]

Are the issues here really that different from the LDS Church's management of the Mountain Meadows site?

[Tarnished]

We have to take into consideration that not all Muslims are the same. There are the extremists and there are those who are not extremists. When this project was first announced there was not a huge outcry over it, it has only been over time and through misrepresentation of the media that this has become some huge controversy.

When it comes down to it the difference between the extremists and those who are not is much like the difference between different Christian faiths, it is like some Christian group (say Baptists (not picking on a religious sect here, just making an analogy)) is the cause of some terrorist act somewhere in the world and a few years later another Christian group (say Catholics) want to build a religious building near (but not at) the site of the terrorist act, and people of that area say the same things that people here are saying. Would it really make sense? Not really because the Baptists are not the Catholics and vice versa. The extremists are not the regular Muslims and often their beliefs differ in significant ways from those who are not extremists. I think to look for some diabolical and politically destructive plot in this is really grasping at straws.

[Faded]

The controversy over the mosque near Ground Zero has been strange certainly. As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, seeing this sort of behavior is nothing new. Both Catholicism and Protestantism denounce us as "Not Christians" for our rejection of the Trinity Doctrine. Every single time that we try to build a new Temple, a bunch of hatemongers show up enmasse. They picket and protest at the proposed site. They go through government channels to try to stop the Temple from being built. They plug into every local media outlet that will listen to them, decrying "the evils of the Mormons" and seeking to stop us from building our much needed sacred structure.

Examples:

"The Newport Beach Planning Commission gave its approval for the Newport Beach California Temple on October 3, 2002, despite protests from the numerous residents in attendance. The Church worked closely with residents in a spirit of compromise, making changes in response to their concerns that included turning off flood lighting by 11:00 p.m., changing the color of the building from off-white to an earth-tone shade of seashell, and reducing the height of the spire from 124 feet to 100 feet.1

On November 12, 2002, the Newport Beach City Council gave final approval for the temple upon agreement by the Church to make a second reduction in the height of the steeple from 100 feet to 90 feet. The 10-foot concession gained yards in public relations, as staunch opponents embraced the compromise, saying they were ready to move forward as a community." Newport Beach California LDS (Mormon) Temple

Essentially, we're not allowed to build our own holy structure as we see fit. Local governments will insist on making it smaller or different or that it be in a different location for the most ridiculous of reasons. Heaven help us if we'd been unwilling to comprise on design and/or location for countless temples.

"Much opposition was met to the building of the Atlanta Georgia Temple including a protest march down Atlanta's Peachtree Street. When protestors arrived at the temple on dedication day, the governor—who had been invited to attend—ordered a police escort of demonstrators away from the property. He assured President Hinckley that he would not be a Governor Boggs (the governor who ordered the extermination of Mormons in the state of Missouri in 1838)." Atlanta Georgia LDS (Mormon) Temple

Good for the Georgia governor for seeing reason here. The USA has a bloody history of religious intolerance and it's good that he sought to not repeat it. The Missouri Extermination Order stayed on the books until the 1970's. But once again, our religion building a place of worship was met with public outrage and hostility.

These same people also show up without fail at General Conference (a world-wide meeting of our Church) to protest us.

YouTube - LDS General Conference Protesters

Is this really so very different? In fact, the Muslims in question who are trying to build this mosque are so moderate and so opposite to the fundamentalist Muslims that many Muslims question their Muslim-ness. "We want to push back against the extremists," Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the lead organizer, is quoted as saying.

My heartfelt condolences to the Muslims of New York City who are being targeted by a similar pack of bigots as we've routinely faced. I can understand how infuriating this must be.

I did look into the location and yes it certainly is close to ground zero. About 300-400 yards away or so. The Burlington Coat Factory that would need to be demolished was seriously damaged by the collapse of the World Trade Center towers -- so it's pretty close indeed. The fact that it's so close to ground zero was just asking for controversy -- stupid though the controversy is.

I think the best solution is to do more to sell it as a monument in defiance against Muslim extremists and in favor of peace and reconcilliation.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Faded

[Wingnut]

From what I understand, this same Imam already have a mosque 12 blocks away. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Have you ever been to New York City? Twelve blocks is a long way.

[MarginOfError]

I think the Church builds more meetinhouses to meet membership demands- not to make statements or stir controversy.

Ayuh! Anyone want make a guess of how many muslims live in New York City?

[bytor2112]

Bad taste and they know it. They certainly have the right...but should they do it? I think it widens the divide...especially in New York City. We have neighbors ( I live in Fl) that lost a brother in the attack and they are disgusted by this.

[bytor2112]

My heartfelt condolences to the Muslims of New York City who are being targeted by a similar pack of bigots as we've routinely faced. I can understand how infuriating this must be.

You know there hearts well enough to call them ....bigots? Really? Bigots....pretty harsh. A CNN poll shows that nearly 70% of Americans oppose the plan...all bigots? Or are you referring to a specific group as bigots?

Edited August 17, 2010 by bytor2112

[Wingnut]

You know there hearts well enough to call them ....bigots? Really? Bigots....pretty harsh. A CNN poll shows that nearly 70% of Americans oppose the plan...all bigots? Or are you referring to a specific group as bigots?

I would refer to them not as bigots, but in many of those cases, ignorant.

[bytor2112]

I would refer to them not as bigots, but in many of those cases, ignorant.

Would you say that those in support of the building are ignorant or do they just get a pass?

[Wingnut]

Neither. I personally am ambivalent. I don't care if it's built, and I'm not up in arms about it. I chose the word 'ignorant' because I think a lot of people who oppose the building of the mosque do so with the argument, "but they blew up our building!" Faithful, practicing Muslims did not blow up our building. Islamic fanatic extremists did.

I'm curious though -- why might those in support of the building be considered ignorant? I guess I can't see that side of the coin.

[bytor2112]

Ignorant of the deep feelings many have regarding this issue. If not ignorant....insensitive. I am ambivalent as well.....I think it is a bit of a slap and in bad taste...but.....

[Tarnished]

Again I must return to the Christian example I used before. If the people who did the terrorist act were Baptists and the people who wanted to build the building were Catholics would you have the same problem?