Obama to support ground zero mosque

[southpaw23]

Everything I've read on Elohim City and McVeighs association point to a shared anti-government sentiment. They were retaliating for the Ruby Ridge and Waco incidents as opposed to a religious attack.

Now the guy that killed Dr Tiller is a nut job and as a Christian denounce his "doing Gods work". That is clearly someone with a perverted form of Christianity just as in Elohim City.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...Quran.Burning/ <----Let's attempt to rationalize this one?

Or as I like to call it, the conservative strategy of..."Let's piss them off and see if that works"...brilliant.

[youngandfree]

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...Quran.Burning/ <----Let's attempt to rationalize this one?

Or as I like to call it, the conservative strategy of..."Let's piss them off and see if that works"...brilliant.

I think that guy is out of line also as do a lot of conservatives I've talked to. It does raise the question again of how its ok for the Christianity haters to piss on a crucifix or make a virgin mary out of elephant dung. But its not ok for a journalist to make a political cartoon about the prophet or for comedy central to censor any derogatory depictions of Mohammed but its ok for them to make derrogatory reference to Jesus Christ.

[HereToStudy]

I think that guy is out of line also as do a lot of conservatives I've talked to. It does raise the question again of how its ok for the Christianity haters to piss on a crucifix or make a virgin mary out of elephant dung. But its not ok for a journalist to make a political cartoon about the prophet or for comedy central to censor any derogatory depictions of Mohammed but its ok for them to make derrogatory reference to Jesus Christ.

Anyone can make comments about anyone. Muhammad is no more protected than Jesus is, from a law standard. I do not condone a comic who depicts the prophet. That **** got out of hand and is annoying. As you said, if I can draw Jesus in a non religious manner, muhammad is in line for the same treatment.

Burning a Quran is blatant hate though, just as burning a bible would be. Both of these statements coming from a very proud athiest. I am anti-religion, but I have no reason to actively spread hate about a religion or target it. My family is religious, I do not in any form condemn them. When religions start treating each other the same way, life would be easier.

Edit:
P.S.
The prophet was featured in south park many seasons ago, previous to the debate that happened last season.

[EasyEJL]

Burning the US flag was determined to be protected by freedom of speech, no reason burning a Quaran is any different. Just like no laws against them building a civic center more than 2 blocks away from ground zero.

[HereToStudy]

Burning the US flag was determined to be protected by freedom of speech, no reason burning a Quaran is any different. Just like no laws against them building a civic center more than 2 blocks away from ground zero.

I wasn't claiming it was against the law.

Burn an american flag in front of a patriot, you will probably get your ass kicked.
Burn a gay pride flag in front of a homosexual, get your ass kicked.
Burn a bible in front of a christian, expect retaliation.

Why is this seen as something that wouldnt, by nature, lead to retaliation?

[dsade]

I wasn't claiming it was against the law.

Burn an american flag in front of a patriot, you will probably get your ass kicked.
Burn a gay pride flag in front of a homosexual, get your ass kicked.
Burn a bible in front of a christian, expect retaliation.

Why is this seen as something that wouldnt, by nature, lead to retaliation?

Initiate violence for any of these retarded reasons: go to prison and deal with your conscience for being a violent, irrational dirtbag.

How about people actually act on the morality they claim to have? I don't recall anywhere in the bible where it says it's cool to kick anyone's ass over ink on paper anything...nor words, nor much of anything else.

They are doing what they think is right/within their rights. Should the threat of violence by ignorants make them cower?

[EasyEJL]

I wasn't claiming it was against the law.

Burn an american flag in front of a patriot, you will probably get your ass kicked.
Burn a gay pride flag in front of a homosexual, get your ass kicked.
Burn a bible in front of a christian, expect retaliation.

Why is this seen as something that wouldnt, by nature, lead to retaliation?

Come on, you'd let a gay guy kick your ass?

Why can't burning the Quaran be viewed as retaliation for them burning US flags in the street and carrying presidential effigies around?

Just because someone is doing something out of retaliation doesn't make them morally superior to the person who did what offends them.

[HereToStudy]

God I always make myself promise to stay out of political threads, and again here I end up...

Initiate violence for any of these retarded reasons: go to prison and deal with your conscience for being a violent, irrational dirtbag.

How about people actually act on the morality they claim to have? I don't recall anywhere in the bible where it says it's cool to kick anyone's ass over ink on paper anything...nor words, nor much of anything else.

They are doing what they think is right/within their rights. Should the threat of violence by ignorants make them cower?

Oh I completely agree. I don't believe in violence, I believe violence just leads to more violence. I am just stating the obvious in what would happen.

Anyone who thinks actively burning the Quran, or any book from any culture or religion is the "right" thing to do is inadequately equipped mentally. I'd love to hear how it is the right thing to do. P.S. Extremist thought 9/11 was the right thing to do. Hitler thought he was doing the right thing. Belief you are doing the right thing doesnt equate to it being the correct thing to do.

Come on, you'd let a gay guy kick your ass?

Why can't burning the Quaran be viewed as retaliation for them burning US flags in the street and carrying presidential effigies around?

Just because someone is doing something out of retaliation doesn't make them morally superior to the person who did what offends them.

Joking aside, One of the biggest guys at my gym is, at least i believe, gay. Not only could he kick my ass, he could probably crush me. But I know you meant that as a joke.

It can be viewed as retaliation. Doesnt make it right. Retaliation leads to more retaliation which leads to more retaliation. The problem is this: When you are attacking the Quran, you are attacking the religion. One that 95+% of its followers have no association a terrorist group. I know many here are not city people, which can lead to more shielded views of other races/religions (I dont mean this offensively - my views on both are different living in a mixed neighborhood than when I was in suburbia). But I am sure you have all met a follower of Islam at some point. Did they try to kill you? Would they if they had the chance? In 99% of cases the answers are no.

This would be no different than if I started burning down churches because I saw on TV a pedo got arrested. I mean Catholics are pedophiles right? Even their leaders, all pedos correct? No, that is not true. Not at all. Now you see how associating the thoughts of a few to the masses does not work.

[EasyEJL]

It can be viewed as retaliation. Doesnt make it right. Retaliation leads to more retaliation which leads to more retaliation. The problem is this: When you are attacking the Quran, you are attacking the religion.

No, its no different than burning a US flag, literally. It can also be a symbol of the governments of most of the middle east, as they use Sharia law to govern by. Anyone here support stoning of the woman in Iran because of adultery? Sharia law there.

As with racism, people who are looking to be offended will find a way to be offended regardless of what you do unless you totally kowtow to them.

[southpaw23]

Come on, you'd let a gay guy kick your ass?

Why can't burning the Quaran be viewed as retaliation for them burning US flags in the street and carrying presidential effigies around?

Just because someone is doing something out of retaliation doesn't make them morally superior to the person who did what offends them.

It's simple because we as Americans would like to believe that we uphold ourselves to a higher standard. What they do is of no consequence. How we carry ourselves in spite of it, is the litmus test. Hate should not be met with more hate.

Personally I'm not the least bit religious, so I believe all religions are fair play. Comedy is comedy and that's fine, however, if you get into areas that hint at extremism, you're asking for trouble. There is nothing right about what this so called "christian" deems appropriate in the form of burning copies of the Qur'an, irrespective of what they do on their side (flag burning), we should always look to uphold ourselves to a higher standard of decency.

This idiot has every right in the world to burn the Qur'an, however, it doesn't preclude him from being a nimrod. I'm going to venture a guess and say that this "preacher" in all likelihood received a very limited education.

[southpaw23]

God I always make myself promise to stay out of political threads, and again here I end up...



Oh I completely agree. I don't believe in violence, I believe violence just leads to more violence. I am just stating the obvious in what would happen.

Anyone who thinks actively burning the Quran, or any book from any culture or religion is the "right" thing to do is inadequately equipped mentally. I'd love to hear how it is the right thing to do. P.S. Extremist thought 9/11 was the right thing to do. Hitler thought he was doing the right thing. Belief you are doing the right thing doesnt equate to it being the correct thing to do.




Joking aside, One of the biggest guys at my gym is, at least i believe, gay. Not only could he kick my ass, he could probably crush me. But I know you meant that as a joke.

It can be viewed as retaliation. Doesnt make it right. Retaliation leads to more retaliation which leads to more retaliation. The problem is this: When you are attacking the Quran, you are attacking the religion. One that 95+% of its followers have no association a terrorist group. I know many here are not city people, which can lead to more shielded views of other races/religions (I dont mean this offensively - my views on both are different living in a mixed neighborhood than when I was in suburbia). But I am sure you have all met a follower of Islam at some point. Did they try to kill you? Would they if they had the chance? In 99% of cases the answers are no.

This would be no different than if I started burning down churches because I saw on TV a pedo got arrested. I mean Catholics are pedophiles right? Even their leaders, all pedos correct? No, that is not true. Not at all. Now you see how associating the thoughts of a few to the masses does not work.

Perfectly stated and last I checked Hakeem Olajuwon(muslim) never tried to kill David Robinson(christian), except in the post.

[HereToStudy]

No, its no different than burning a US flag, literally. It can also be a symbol of the governments of most of the middle east, as they use Sharia law to govern by. Anyone here support stoning of the woman in Iran because of adultery? Sharia law there.

As with racism, people who are looking to be offended will find a way to be offended regardless of what you do unless you totally kowtow to them.

Come on man. This one should be obvious to you. Do I support the stoning of a woman in Iran due to adultery? No. But it is no different than a country being upset with our justice system. Many countries are against Capital Punishment, they can disagree with our countries use of it just as I can disagree with them stoning. It is not our countries job to police that.

Should I start burning bibles in the street because the Catholic Church still thinks women using contraception are whores? Or because they preach only abstinence? Lets ask Bristol how that is working out...

I also am not looking to be offended. As I mentioned, if I had my way, Religion would disappear, overnight, and I would be a happy man. I have no need to protect Islam or any other religion. I personally say to hell with them all.


..and SouthPaw, I am with you on all fronts.

[AE14]

HTS I am with you on getting rid of religion. However, we as a species are foolish enough to find another reason to hate and kill each other.

At the end of the day, this is not a Mosque nor is it on ground zero. End of thread IMO

[Condition1]

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.-- Pastor Martin Niemoller

I didn't originally make the comparison of this speech and the targeting of a group, but it's something of a fair warning.

I want to make clear once again that I did not originally make the comparison of this quote/speech to the community center situation. If you want a link to the video I will send you the link via PM.

[Condition1]

HTS I am with you on getting rid of religion. However, we as a species are foolish enough to find another reason to hate and kill each other.

At the end of the day, this is not a Mosque nor is it on ground zero. End of thread IMO

This.

[EasyEJL]

Should I start burning bibles in the street because the Catholic Church still thinks women using contraception are whores? Or because they preach only abstinence?

If you want to and feel strongly about it, then yes you should. That how things do actually change, by individuals taking actions, and building consensus. That also is how our founding fathers envisioned it, people being involved, and using free speech for something more than **** jokes.

[416]

I find interesting the way some talk about other religions with what seems to be piety and hypocrisy.By that I mean this, religion is a personal or institutionalized system grounded in belief.That would mean atheism itself is a religion and yet some of those who practice it would like to see other religions gone.Sounds a lot like the extremes in those other religions they seem to look down on.
Also they love to talk about the atrocities of those other religions but ignore those of thier own.Stalin,Mao,Pol Pot,Kim Jong-il,Tito,Castro to name a few. Atheist all and responsible for more deaths than all other religions this past century.
Hey, I say there is room for all.

[Condition1]

I find interesting the way some talk about other religions with what seems to be piety and hypocrisy.By that I mean this, religion is a personal or institutionalized system grounded in belief.That would mean atheism itself is a religion and yet some of those who practice it would like to see other religions gone.Sounds a lot like the extremes in those other religions they seem to look down on.
Also they love to talk about the atrocities of those other religions but ignore those of thier own.Stalin,Mao,Pol Pot,Kim Jong-il,Tito,Castro to name a few. Atheist all and responsible for more deaths than all other religions this century.
Hey, I say ther is room for all.

Atheism is non-belief in the supernatural. This is not to insult religions and it's going based on Richard Dawkin's book "The God Delusion." He also calls out agnostics saying that either you do or don't believe. This I don't agree with, personally. The size, expansion, mysteries of the universe and how things work... I mean, no energy in the universe is wasted, it's got to go somewhere, to me that's not "death," it's more like re-distribution.

Anyhow, I get the gist of what you're saying but there really isn't anyone getting killed in the name of atheism. To go back past your time frame of the last century, Spanish conquistadors killed millions upon millions upon millions in the name of God... and resources. Point being, the natives were read some religious stuff in Spanish (i'll look it up, I have the book) and given the option to convert, then they were killed for not converting.

No Atheist group, in the name of Atheism, has ever mass murdered anywhere near to millions. Ole Columbus (or Colon) and his boys brought an entire race to extinction (The Natives of what is now Haiti.) Extinction.

[416]

Atheism is non-belief in the supernatural. This is not to insult religions and it's going based on Richard Dawkin's book "The God Delusion." He also calls out agnostics saying that either you do or don't believe. This I don't agree with, personally. The size, expansion, mysteries of the universe and how things work... I mean, no energy in the universe is wasted, it's got to go somewhere, to me that's not "death," it's more like re-distribution.

Anyhow, I get the gist of what you're saying but there really isn't anyone getting killed in the name of atheism. To go back past your time frame of the last century, Spanish conquistadors killed millions upon millions upon millions in the name of God... and resources. Point being, the natives were read some religious stuff in Spanish (i'll look it up, I have the book) and given the option to convert, then they were killed for not converting.

No Atheist group, in the name of Atheism, has ever mass murdered anywhere near to millions. Ole Columbus (or Colon) and his boys brought an entire race to extinction (The Natives of what is now Haiti.) Extinction.

I did not deny atrocities have happened in the name of religion.But atheist do try to deny atheism's part in many atrocities.You say millions and millions and millions, but the people i mentioned were responsible for well over 100 million and some say 100s of millions in the name of communism of which one of the most important foundational beliefs is atheism.

Do you really believe religion to be the cause of the atrocities you mentioned? More like religion was used to justify what was actually done to gain land, money,and power.Just as when communist atheists killed those who believed in God because they were a danger to the state, when what they really meant was they were a danger to the control they held on the people.

[HereToStudy]

If you want to and feel strongly about it, then yes you should. That how things do actually change, by individuals taking actions, and building consensus. That also is how our founding fathers envisioned it, people being involved, and using free speech for something more than **** jokes.

My answer was to leave the church. This is protest in a civilized manner, and I feel if more members would open their eyes to the organization they follow, they would as well, and change would come. Instead blind faith is promoted. It was when I did this that athiesm in general made sense to me.