On building mosques and burning Qur'ans

[IrishinSyria]

At IrishSyria
6) Burning the Qur'an is more offensive than burning the bible for two reasons: 1)The Bible is just the vehicle in which God's word is spread, whereas the Qur'an is the word of God itself. And 2) Its the difference between calling a white person cracker and a black person a n****er. Insults mean little when directed to people at the top of the social order, but are much more potent when they have a history of slavery or military dominance behind them.
^^^^IN YOUR OPINION - THIS IS ONLY TRUE IF ISLAM IS YOUR RELIGON^^^^

point 1 has nothing to do with my religion; it has everything to do with how each individual religion perceive their basic tenants of faith. Each of the Abrahamic faiths have one object that was God's gift to his people. In Judaisim, it was the Covenant. In Christianity, it was Jesus. In Islam, it was the Qur'an. A Muslim would perceive the burning of a Qur'an to be far worse of an insult than a Christian would perceive the burning of a Bible.

Of kind of nerdy interest to me is whether or not they'll be burning Arabic Qur'ans. Because if they only have English ones then its technically not God's word, only a translation, and thus burning that book is more akin to burning a Bible. That is a distinction which, I think, will matter to nobody.

Sorry if I didn't articulate better.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

...Why don't we use this opportunity to talk to and learn about the Muslim community and bridge our differences.

The 9/11 victims' opposition to the mosque (for lack of a better term) has nothing to do with not "learning" enough about Islam. Similarly, others' opposition to the "mosque" -- based on sympathies for those victims' sensitivities -- has anything to do with not "learning" enough about Islam.

It's just an 'old-wound' issue that is common in post-traumatic stress. Something that reminds you of the cause of a significant loss often causes resentment.

Consider if there were a monument or shrine devoted to the victims of drunk driving. Now, imagine that someone planned to put a bar "3 blocks" away. Surely opposition to the bar would be understandable. Does that mean that such opponents are against drinking? No. Does it mean that opponents think there is a link between the bar's future patrons and previous drunk driving accidents? No. Does it mean that opponents think that all bar patrons drive drunk? No. Does it mean that opponents think that all drinking should be banned? No. It just presents a reminder of the cause of their victimhood.

 

[jmurphy75]

You are so mind jobbed... did I say Islam is terrorism?? ANYWHERE did I even remotely make that connection??? No, you projected that on to me then got on some pulpit and talked down to me for the way you projected... I own a Quran and I have Muslim friends... I could give a shit...

9/11 was carried out in the name of that religion... that DOES NOT mean the religion is to blame nor am I attacking Muslims in general... grow up...

Look at it from this light... It's like if the KKK blew up a black church in the south killing hundreds, and then while bodies are still being found here comes some group of whites who have nothing to do with the KKK that want to build some Anglo center right next door to the church that has yet to be rebuilt... is that their right? sure? do they have anything to do with the KKK? no. Is it in good taste and the way to reach out to the Blacks who have been attacked? absolutely not. And the blacks would have every right to oppose it without being called "racists" and or "White-a-phobic"

how hard is that to understand??? Yet it's I who don't understand Islam and am ignorant...??? They say it's about building bridges... they are not doing that, that is my point and THAT is why the driving force behind the attacks is vital here... again I can't comprehend why that's hard to understand.

WAKE UP... in this very thread to only person or people who have been attached to anything is those who think the mosque is a bad idea... NOT Muslims in general attached to terrorism world wide... it's some made up argument.

and sorry this building got hit with debris from the second plane... so spare me on the point that it's nowhere near ground zero...

Amen!

 

[Maddog77]

Thread is getting out of control as I predicted.

 

[ACamp1900]

Of kind of nerdy interest to me is whether or not they'll be burning Arabic Qur'ans. Because if they only have English ones then its technically not God's word, only a translation, and thus burning that book is more akin to burning a Bible. That is a distinction which, I think, will matter to nobody.

this is a very intersting point imo... didn't even think of that, but yeah, it will matter to no one... lol

seriously, in terms of building bridges and being together... if we are all up in amrs about Qurans being burnt where is the outrage about throwing the Cross in a jar of urine?? or burning the bible... which happens often enough... two way street.

it's pretty easy to understand people will be hurt and offended by religious attacks like that... but again, it's freedom of expression... and again, you can always count on some idiot from somewhere to go there

it's like the damn Mosque... how the hell can you oppose the guy burning the Quran yet stand for the Mosque?? It's all freedoms people... basically, I'm for either happening but personally believe both are poor choices under the circumsatances and should be spoken out against... plain and simple.

 

[ACamp1900]

Thread is getting out of control as I predicted.

it is???

 

[IrishMoore1]

The 9/11 victims' opposition to the mosque (for lack of a better term) has nothing to do with not "learning" enough about Islam. Similarly, others' opposition to the "mosque" -- based on sympathies for those victims' sensitivities -- has anything to do with not "learning" enough about Islam.

It's just an 'old-wound' issue that is common in post-traumatic stress. Something that reminds you of the cause of a significant loss often causes resentment.

Consider if there were a monument or shrine devoted to the victims of drunk driving. Now, imagine that someone planned to put a bar "3 blocks" away. Surely opposition to the bar would be understandable. Does that mean that such opponents are against drinking? No. Does it mean that opponents think there is a link between the bar's future patrons and previous drunk driving accidents? No. Does it mean that opponents think that all bar patrons drive drunk? No. Does it mean that opponents think that all drinking should be banned? No. It just presents a reminder of the cause of their victimhood.

You raise a good point and I understand that. But if you can't build a mosque 2 blocks away, then where do you draw the line? How many blocks away is appropriate? 4 blocks, 5, 6, 7? 100?

Also, I really do think it at least has some part to do w/ knowledge of Islam. Perhaps no one on this board has stated Islam = terrorism, but there are plenty of people out there who do, and it certainly doesn't help the situation. If you want to talk about families of the victims, that is absolutely understandable. However, where can we draw the line?

 

[no.1IrishFan]

I just read an article that Donald Trump has placed an offer to purchase the proposed site of the mosque for 25% more than was previously offered so he could stop it from being built in that location. I'll try to get the link.

 

[no.1IrishFan]

Here it is: Trump offers to buy site of proposed mosque - Crain's New York Business

 

[GreatGolson]

i didnt want to comment here, but i feel my opinion is valid. We follow our teams, cheer for the irish, and love sports because they are a way OUT from the outside world, I come here to ESCAPE from the everday fear mongering of the media, the government, the taliban, china, and whoever else is telling me to be afraid. Or the fact that my friends are on the ground in Afghanistan right now! On this forum, lets just go back to worrying about denard robinson and the strength of our LBs

 

[timm3117]

You raise a good point and I understand that. But if you can't build a mosque 2 blocks away, then where do you draw the line?

The issue isn't can or can't you build the mosque, it is should you or shouldn't you. If islam is a religon of "peace" they SHOULD understand why this is upseting to Americans.

 

[FrankMA]

I'll just put in my two cents worth. It is bad taste to burn the Koran and it is even more in bad taste to build a Mosque at the ground zero site. Both are offensive and not necessary.

 

[fortwayne_nd]

Osama's video messages?

That doesn't look like the same guy, at all. Swiss institute brands latest bin Laden tape a fake - smh.com.au

When he said he was cuckoo for coco puffs, well I wondered if it was the real thing.

 

[mgriff]

It's not at the ground zero site, for the 100th time. It is about two blocks away. http://inewp.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/ch_map1.jpg

 

[ACamp1900]

Parts of the plane went straight through the towers and landed on the spot they are building this thing at dude... it's not where the towers stood but it is at ground zero...

 

[Dacian_Irish]

Islam is a very scary religion! If you don't know your history I beg that you do your research. I ask how did Mohamed spread this new religion so fast in the seventh century. This is bigger than just a location of a mosque of book burning. This is a conflict that is inevitable and it started over a thousand years ago.

I say burn the Qur'an and tax all mosques double just like they do to Christian churches in the middle east and other Muslim lands.

 

[Dacian_Irish]

I hope that is true about trump offering to purchase the land. If someone has a link please post.

 

[mgriff]

Parts of the plane went straight through the towers and landed on the spot they are building this thing at dude... it's not where the towers stood but it is at ground zero...

You read my site yet?

 

[mgriff]

Islam is a very scary religion! If you don't know your history I beg that you do your research. I ask how did Mohamed spread this new religion so fast in the seventh century. This is bigger than just a location of a mosque of book burning. This is a conflict that is inevitable and it started over a thousand years ago.

I say burn the Qur'an and tax all mosques double just like they do to Christian churches in the middle east and other Muslim lands.

While you are completely correct in regard to the spread of the Muslim faith, what do you think Spain did in the New World with Christianity? The only reason more Native Americans weren't forcibly converted was because most of them died.

 

[ACamp1900]

While you are completely correct, what do you think Spain did in the New World with Christianity?

and when the Spainish have some rogue sect of their people attack and kill thousands of Americans based on said Christianity you will have a point......... until then........

 

[mgriff]

and when the Spainish have some rogue sect of their people attack and kill thousands of Americans based on said Christianity you will have a point......... until then........

They didn't even have an event such as 9/11, and still did it, in the name of God. I think the point is even more valid! Both religions have spread their ideologies through blood in their history. He was setting a precedent for the violence of the Muslim faith, when Christianity shares many of the same characteristics in the past.

That is not to mention how many innocent civilians America has killed since 9/11. Far far more than the four thousand unfortunate souls in 9/11. It was a tragedy, but that does not justify our actions or the amount of people killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, which far surpasses the total from 9/11.

 

[Anchorman]

and when the Spainish have some rogue sect of their people attack and kill thousands of Americans based on said Christianity you will have a point......... until then........

How many Muslims were killed by the Crusades?

 

[ACamp1900]

They didn't even have an event such as 9/11, and still did it, in the name of God. I think the point is even more valid! Both religions have spread their ideologies through blood in their history. He was setting a precedent for the violence of the Muslim faith, when Christianity shares many of the same characteristics in the past.

That is not to mention how many innocent civilians America has killed since 9/11. Far far more than he four thousand unfortunate souls in 9/11. It was a tragedy, but that does not justify our actions or the amount of people killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, which far surpasses the total from 9/11.

sure...

but does Christianity tell women if you get raped you must kill yourself to bring honor back to your family because your tempting of the man who did it shamed your family name??? B/C portions of Islam currently does... Does Christianity currently support stoning women to death for having a relationship out of wedlock... because portions of Islam currently does... and I go on down the list... this can not be a fight you want to make man is it giff... seriously???

look I didn't really want to get into the religious comparrison thing... I respect a persons veiws as long as it fits into the laws of the land... and or doesn't affront someone else rights... period.

I got into this because some other clown here said EVERYONE who stands agianst this Mosque is ignorant and is just scared of their own fears... I take huge exception to that because the Poilitcal Correctness crowd constantly points fingers at people for judging the whole group off the actions of a few, for throwing names and stimas at people and spitting down right hate... but what the fuck do they do in doing so?!?!?! ... and I'm tired of it...

I think this is a bad idea becuase it will not build bridges and heal wounds as they say it is intended to do so... otherwise we wouldn't have this thread.
I think it is a bad idea b/c this group has far too many questions to be this involved in something this close to the towers
I think it's a bad idea out of flat out poor taste at this point.

NOT because I don't understand that Muslims are people too and NOT because I'm some backwards biggot... that's my issue.

 

[ACamp1900]

How many Muslims were killed by the Crusades?

Which ones?? The ones where the Muslims first invaded Southern Europe in the name of religion or the ones where the Europeans took their idea and turned it on them??????

 

[mgriff]

I'm not saying you're a backward bigot. There are flaws in whatever religion you want to choose. Pick a holy book and find me a perfect one. I don't really want to get into the Christianity v Islam ideologically because then I would have to offend a tremendous amount of people, and I don't want that. What you are saying is that they killed a bunch of our people, so they can't build a mosque. The United States, however, has killed many, many more people in Iraq and Afghanistan than were killed here on 9/11. My point is that it goes both ways, and we have killed each other.

 

[ACamp1900]

I'm not saying you're a backward bigot. There are flaws in whatever religion you want to choose. Pick a holy book and find me a perfect one. I don't really want to get into the Christianity v Islam ideologically because then I would have to offend a tremendous amount of people, and I don't want that. What you are saying is that they killed a bunch of our people, so they can't build a mosque. The United States, however, has killed many, many more people in Iraq and Afghanistan than were killed here on 9/11. My point is that it goes both ways, and we have killed each other.

for the record I didn't say you called me that... I'm stating why I'm even here...

as for what we did, that was a response during a time of war which is far different from a deliberate civilian attack during times of peace... How anyone can even compare the two..... and we also have given two nations of minorities and women freedoms that they never could have dreamed of before hand...

we also dropped the bomb on Japan... a nation I have strong ties with and admire... innocents died... but the nation was not a victum at that point... that's the cold hard fact.


and NO... I have said nothing even close to the effect of "they killed a bunch of our people, so they can't build a mosque"... if that's what you hear here then please step back... you're not grasping this.

THEY HAVE SAID "this will heal wounds and build bridges and that is why we must continue on..." ah.... yeah...

 

[ACamp1900]

btw, did everyone see where the preacher from Gainesville says he now will NOT burn the Quran as long as they move the Mosque... what an idiot...

although, he did not say not BUILD the Mosque, just MOVE it... we are supposed to be all for building bridges and coming to the table of brotherhood right???... eh, he's still got issues

 

[mgriff]

for the record I didn't say you called me that... I'm stating why I'm even here...

as for what we did, that was a response during a time of war which is far different from a deliberate civilian attack during times of peace... How anyone can even compare the two..... and we also have given two nations of minorities and women freedoms that they never could have dreamed of before hand...

we also dropped the bomb on Japan... a nation I have strong ties with and admire... innocents died... but the nation was not a victum at that point... that's the cold hard fact.


and NO... I have said nothing even close to the effect of "they killed a bunch of our people, so they can't build a mosque"... if that's what you hear here then please step back... you're not grasping this.

THEY HAVE SAID "this will heal wounds and build bridges and that is why we must continue on..." ah.... yeah...

Iraq? We were attacked by Iraq or terrorists in that country? Last time I checked the official policy of the Central Intelligence Agency was that Iraq harbored no terrorists because of the rule of Saddam Hussein. We were not at a time of war either. War has never been declared by Congress for either country. Bush had an Authorization for the Use of Military force, which is not a Declaration of War passed by Congress. Iraq didn't have WMDs and harbored no terrorist organization. So all the civilian deaths in Afghanistan are okay in your book because we were attacked.

 

[ACamp1900]

No, no civilian deaths are okay... but you talk as if we are to blame for everything... I say grow up... the United States of America has cured more oppression, spread more freedoms, spread more wealth and happiness than any nation of peoples in history... I'm not going to be spun into feeling bad about it because we've done some things here and there that are basically common practice everywhere else... I'll leave that at that...

as far as Iraq... you're the one on the planes didn't fly into the WTC or Pentagon websites... you'd think Iraq moving the WMDs would be another one of your nice little theories...

 

[mgriff]

See, you say theories, I would say you read the other side of the argument before you pass judgment. You are working from one side only, and not reading both sides of the story. To come to a conclusion without reading all the facts is the sign of one with growing up to do. I love how you resort to name calling when presented with evidence contrary to your beliefs. Using the past actions of the United States is grounds for the ills perpetrated by it today? That is quite a conclusion you come to. Again, name calling and bringing up points which have no bearing on the conversation are great tactics when you're losing an argument.