How tolerant are we?

[JustinM]

Actually, I believe this mosque is violating the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

Everything about this mosque is "respecting an establishment of religion."

Good point.

Not really; Congress is making no law here. This isn't about establishment of a religion; islam is already long established and is not sanctioned by the U.S. government. This is a state and local issue that involves the will of the people...pro or con.

Yes, this is and should be a state and local issue but then why did Prez. Obama go public and supporting the establishment of a mosque. This is violating the 1st amendment. Liberals would say the same thing if President G.W. Bush went public and supported a church to be built near ground zero as a memorial of 911.

I agree with others this is more about Islam " extremist " rubbing 911 in the face of its victims just because it can. This mosque is being funded by terrorist organizations.

The President made this statement because he is an egomaniac. He still thinks that he is the final authority on all things that fall within our borders and that the power of his words alone can solve this. He is a deluded and angry man, and will use any opportunity he can find to stick his thumb in the American public's eyes.

More than anything, this is a 10th Amendment issue. NYC has the sovereign right, as a sovereign state in the US, to set social policy, or allow or prohibit a mosque or whatever other building to be built.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

There we have it, it is ultimately up to the citizens of NYC to decide if they want a mosque there, and they are well within their rights under the 10th Amendment to say no. That should be the end of the discussion. But it won't be, because people like to pick and choose what parts of the Constitution they want to follow and what parts they want to ignore. It is much like the apostates that selectively use scripture to promote unbiblical social issues.

[JustinM]

Actually, I believe this mosque is violating the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

Everything about this mosque is "respecting an establishment of religion."

Good point.

Not really; Congress is making no law here. This isn't about establishment of a religion; islam is already long established and is not sanctioned by the U.S. government. This is a state and local issue that involves the will of the people...pro or con.

Yes, this is and should be a state and local issue but then why did Prez. Obama go public and supporting the establishment of a mosque. This is violating the 1st amendment. Liberals would say the same thing if President G.W. Bush went public and supported a church to be built near ground zero as a memorial of 911.

I agree with others this is more about Islam " extremist " rubbing 911 in the face of its victims just because it can. This mosque is being funded by terrorist organizations.

The President made this statement because he is an egomaniac. He still thinks that he is the final authority on all things that fall within our borders and that the power of his words alone can solve this. He is a deluded and angry man, and will use any opportunity he can find to stick his thumb in the American public's eyes.

More than anything, this is a 10th Amendment issue. NYC has the sovereign right, as a sovereign state in the US, to set social policy, or allow or prohibit a mosque or whatever other building to be built.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

There we have it, it is ultimately up to the citizens of NYC to decide if they want a mosque there, and they are well within their rights under the 10th Amendment to say no. That should be the end of the discussion. But it won't be, because people like to pick and choose what parts of the Constitution they want to follow and what parts they want to ignore. It is much like the apostates that selectively use scripture to promote unbiblical social issues.

You know what the most disappointing thing about all this is? In the past, tyrants have taken advantage of the illiteracy and ignorance of their people to enslave them. What is our excuse?

[JustinM]

The 1st Amendment, or Establishment Clause at it is commonly known, is a shackle for Congress, not the people. Keep that in the forefront of your mind before speaking out in ignorance.

I think it highly offensive to change the wording of Constitutional Amendment into a clause. Amendment signifies permanence, written in stone, unchangeable. Whereas clause implies temporary, changeable, and insignificant.

[wyguy]

What gets me, is these liberal politicians that keep harping about "religious freedom" in regard to this mosque, are the same ones that are backing laws that will make it illegal for Christian pastors to preach that homosexuality is a sin!

[Guest]

This article really made me think this morning....we, as Americans are supposed to be tolerant and respectul of beliefs and cultures outside of our own, and I am all for that. I've never read anything in the Bible or the Constitution however that calls on us to be stupid. This proposed mosque is flat out disrespectful of Americans and especially those whose loved ones and friends were MURDERED on that site and, in some cases, still rest there since some were never found....

Even In Canada

Mischief in Manhattan

We Muslims know the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation

By Raza and Tarek Fatah, Citizen Special

They Know The Truth

There are many questions that we would like to ask. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans, as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.

If Rauf is serious about building bridges, then he could have dedicated space in this so-called community centre to a church and synagogue, but he did not. We passed on this message to him through a mutual Saudi friend, but received no answer. He could have proposed a memorial to the 9/11 dead with a denouncement of the doctrine of armed jihad, but he chose not to.

It's a repugnant thought that $100 million would be brought into the United States rather than be directed at dying and needy Muslims in Darfur or Pakistan.

Let's not forget that a mosque is an exclusive place of worship for Muslims and not an inviting community centre. Most Americans are wary of mosques due to the hard core rhetoric that is used in pulpits. And rightly so. As Muslims we are dismayed that our co-religionists have such little consideration for their fellow citizens and wish to rub salt in their wounds and pretend they are applying a balm to sooth the pain.

The Koran implores Muslims to speak the truth, even if it hurts the one who utters the truth. Today we speak the truth, knowing very well Muslims have forgotten this crucial injunction from Allah.

If this mosque does get built, it will forever be a lightning rod for those who have little room for Muslims or Islam in the U.S. We simply cannot understand why on Earth the traditional leadership of America's Muslims would not realize their folly and back out in an act of goodwill.

[Burning_Ember]

I see, so you are willing to lay the blame for stabbing of the cab driver at the feet of all those who oppose the mosque??? If the situation were reversed and a Muslim stabbed a cabbie for opposing the mosque's location at Ground Zero, you would be on here lecturing us not to lay this murder at the feet of the Muslim community. But you are all to willing to blame the Muslim cabbie's death on all of those who oppose the mosque.

Let's use a parallel situation.

Let's pretend a drunken mentally ill Muslim got into a cab when massive protests about the Mosque were going on, asked the cabbie whether he was a New Yorker, then freaked out, mocking 9/11, and stabbed him... And it turned out that he was a film student who just made a documentary about people struggling in Gaza... And he was exposed to people calling the people who oppose the Mosque Nazis and/or Terrorists, I'd be putting blame on people making incendiary comments supporting the Mosque. Making things up about what I think according to you is not factual.

This again, only points to the hypocritical double-standard you have erected.

If you think I'm such a hypocrite about all this, how about I go to New York and ask what people think? I know a Psychologists/Psychiatrists/Sociologists I can ask about this situation locally about peoples reactions. Afterwards, I can probably post some stuff up on Youtube.

[other one]

I heard on the Radio this morning that the Muslim Cab driver was against building the Mosque near ground Zero and the guy that tried to kill him was actually a backer of building the Mosque

I can't document that yet but what irony if it turns out to be true.

[MorningGlory]

I heard on the Radio this morning that the Muslim Cab driver was against building the Mosque near ground Zero and the guy that tried to kill him was actually a backer of building the Mosque

I can't document that yet but what irony if it turns out to be true.

I heard the part about the muslim cabbie being against the building of this mosque also. Don't know about the attacker; I think he's just a criminal who is obviously unbalanced.

[Guest shiloh357]

Let's use a parallel situation.

Let's pretend a drunken mentally ill Muslim got into a cab when massive protests about the Mosque were going on, asked the cabbie whether he was a New Yorker, then freaked out, mocking 9/11, and stabbed him... And it turned out that he was a film student who just made a documentary about people struggling in Gaza... And he was exposed to people calling the people who oppose the Mosque Nazis and/or Terrorists, I'd be putting blame on people making incendiary comments supporting the Mosque. Making things up about what I think according to you is not factual.

Nice attempt to dodge my remarks. Had the stabber been a Muslim, you would have been on this board telling us not to judge all Muslims by his actions. The fact of the matter is that you are attempting to blame EVERYONE who is opposing this mosque for the actions of one mentally deranged person. Yet you are attempting to paint everyone who opposes the mosque as if they are all using incendiary language and that is both unfair and untrue.

What is more disturbing is that you are lumping EVERYONE who opposes the mosque together with a radical fringe who do not represent the majority. The people shown using the incendiary language on all of the news channels are the supporters of the mosque who paint the majority as anti-Muslim, or islamaphobic. According them and you, none of us can oppose the mosque for any reason other than the notion that we hate Muslims. It shows a very limited capacaity for intelligent discourse on your part.

I can imagine there are some crazies who may be saying some anti-Muslim things. People like that come out of woodwork all of the time. The problem is that you are using the radical fringe to judge EVERYONE who opposes the mosque. If one Muslim slips up, you want us to just ignore it and move on. Yet, you are quick to take the actions of one person and lay it at the feet of anyone and everyone who opposes the mosque as if we are all culpable for his actions. It is a doublestandard that you seem to lack the moral decency to avoid.

Quote

This again, only points to the hypocritical double-standard you have erected.

If you think I'm such a hypocrite about all this, how about I go to New York and ask what people think? I know a Psychologists/Psychiatrists/Sociologists I can ask about this situation locally about peoples reactions. Afterwards, I can probably post some stuff up on Youtube.

That would not be a bad idea, except you have already proven that you are incapable of being honest or fair about the issue thus far, so frankly, I would not trust any "research" someone like you would produce.

[Burning_Ember]

That is a good idea. Make the video, tell us where we can find it at YouTube, and I will check it out. It does appear your point is centered around the idea that infringement on free speech is somehow justified to keep peace, and I wouldn't agree with that regardless of how much violence is incited. If there was gun fights in the street as a result of people's insults, I would still oppose laws banning free speech.

My position is moreso that incendiary speech about topics that people get very emotional about, especially like these ones can cause violence. When people have problems like mental illness or are intoxicated, those act as magnifiers for personal prejudices. I mean, people have the freedom to say pretty much whatever they want, and they have the right to do so. Where the line could be drawn for prohibiting free speech is a pretty complicated issue, and if people aren't violating laws regarding assault (like threatening to kill someone) or something, it should generally be allowed.

If people could talk about things like this to reach some kind of compromise without some people calling Muslims Nazis or people using far worse terms than I've used referring to people against the Mosque... Y'know, ask what is wrong, why, and how it can be solved, rather than being angry in the general direction of something, more would probably be accomplished, especially regarding 51 Park Place.