Mosque going up in NYC building

[Machjo]

In a building damaged by debris from the Sept. 11 airliners that brought down the World Trade Center and soon to become a 13-story mosque, some see the bridging of a cultural divide and an opportunity to serve a burgeoning, peaceful religious population. Others see a painful reminder of the religious extremism that killed their loved ones. link

It seems as if there's a really mixed reaction to having a Mosque so close to Ground Zero. Some are saying it's a great setting for moderate Muslims to try to bridge gaps and an opportunity for moderate Muslims' voices to be heard, but some who lost loved ones think it's more or less a slap in the face.

"I think it's despicable, and I think it's atrocious that anyone would even consider allowing them to build a mosque near the World Trade Center," said Rosemary Cain, whose son, George Cain, a firefighter, died on Sept. 11.

According to the article, the groundbreaking will be announced later this year, possibly coinciding with the tenth anniversary of the attacks. I'm thinking that could be viewed as a little insensitive by some, but of course moderate Muslims had nothing to do with 9-11, so I'm sure that's the message they want to get across.

Ultimately, while I can understand why some would be sensitive to the idea, if moderate Muslims do want to speak out and be heard more, it seems as if it's a good idea.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the relatives of the following are funding this mosque:

And who are we to dictate how they are to spend their money and, more importantly, how they are to honour and commemorate the lives of the loved ones they'd lost in 911? Just as other victims of 911, they also have an equal right to be remembered without bigotry.

[Machjo]

In a building damaged by debris from the Sept. 11 airliners that brought down the World Trade Center and soon to become a 13-story mosque, some see the bridging of a cultural divide and an opportunity to serve a burgeoning, peaceful religious population. Others see a painful reminder of the religious extremism that killed their loved ones. link

It seems as if there's a really mixed reaction to having a Mosque so close to Ground Zero. Some are saying it's a great setting for moderate Muslims to try to bridge gaps and an opportunity for moderate Muslims' voices to be heard, but some who lost loved ones think it's more or less a slap in the face.

"I think it's despicable, and I think it's atrocious that anyone would even consider allowing them to build a mosque near the World Trade Center," said Rosemary Cain, whose son, George Cain, a firefighter, died on Sept. 11.

According to the article, the groundbreaking will be announced later this year, possibly coinciding with the tenth anniversary of the attacks. I'm thinking that could be viewed as a little insensitive by some, but of course moderate Muslims had nothing to do with 9-11, so I'm sure that's the message they want to get across.

Ultimately, while I can understand why some would be sensitive to the idea, if moderate Muslims do want to speak out and be heard more, it seems as if it's a good idea.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the relatives of the following are funding this mosque:

And who are we to dictate how they are to spend their money and, more importantly, how they are to honour and commemorate the lives of the loved ones they'd lost in 911? Just as other victims of 911, they also have an equal right to be remembered without bigotry.

[lictor616]

In a building damaged by debris from the Sept. 11 airliners that brought down the World Trade Center and soon to become a 13-story mosque, some see the bridging of a cultural divide and an opportunity to serve a burgeoning, peaceful religious population. Others see a painful reminder of the religious extremism that killed their loved ones. link

It seems as if there's a really mixed reaction to having a Mosque so close to Ground Zero. Some are saying it's a great setting for moderate Muslims to try to bridge gaps and an opportunity for moderate Muslims' voices to be heard, but some who lost loved ones think it's more or less a slap in the face.

"I think it's despicable, and I think it's atrocious that anyone would even consider allowing them to build a mosque near the World Trade Center," said Rosemary Cain, whose son, George Cain, a firefighter, died on Sept. 11.

According to the article, the groundbreaking will be announced later this year, possibly coinciding with the tenth anniversary of the attacks. I'm thinking that could be viewed as a little insensitive by some, but of course moderate Muslims had nothing to do with 9-11, so I'm sure that's the message they want to get across.

Ultimately, while I can understand why some would be sensitive to the idea, if moderate Muslims do want to speak out and be heard more, it seems as if it's a good idea.

it always amazes me how self-described atheists and secular rationalists, when liberal and leftist, put up with the most anti-secularist, anti-freedom policies and schemes...

its because ultimately, leftists are suffering from their own religion of political correctness.

[bloodyminded]

I'm inclined to give some respect to posters like Shady, DogOnPorch and Ghosthacked. Whether you agree with them or not, at least they have the guts to be honest about their views. Not hide behind excuses or politically correct doublespeak.

Actually (Ghosthacked aside), the quaint little notion, plagiarized from old children's tales, that the Freedon-loving West flits about the globe trying bravely to save an ungrateful world from Communists and Terrorists IS "politically correct doublespeak." At best.

[bloodyminded]

it always amazes me how self-described atheists and secular rationalists, when liberal and leftist, put up with the most anti-secularist, anti-freedom policies and schemes...

its because ultimately, leftists are suffering from their own religion of political correctness.

Political correctness is an issue for liberals and leftists, I agree that far. However, no one is more politically correct than that most delicate, daintiest of all spectrum points: the political Right.

[WIP]

it always amazes me how self-described atheists and secular rationalists, when liberal and leftist, put up with the most anti-secularist, anti-freedom policies and schemes...

its because ultimately, leftists are suffering from their own religion of political correctness.

You can call whatever you like a religion, but us liberal secular humanists are not stupid enough to join your fundamentalist forces in a holy war against your competition.

[lictor616]

Political correctness is an issue for liberals and leftists, I agree that far. However, no one is more politically correct than that most delicate, daintiest of all spectrum points: the political Right.

What political right is that? The centrist conservatives? I mean really what presence does the real articulate, non-religion crazed right have? UKIP? Perhaps the BNP or the NDP in Germany? Who put up with incessant death threats, domestic terrorism, tarring and insults? are those the delicate dainty "right wingers" you refer to?

[lictor616]

You can call whatever you like a religion, but us liberal secular humanists are not stupid enough to join your fundamentalist forces in a holy war against your competition.

You're already engaged in a holy war against Western Civilization... I guess your hands are full, I understand.

[bloodyminded]

What political right is that? The centrist conservatives? I mean really what presence does the real articulate, non-religion crazed right have? UKIP? Perhaps the BNP or the NDP in Germany? Who put up with incessant death threats, domestic terrorism, tarring and insults? are those the delicate dainty "right wingers" you refer to?

Sure, centrist conservatives, like centrist liberals, and like the further Left, all suffer from degrees of political correctness. That's natural. The objects and subjects of PC might differ from point to point, but it exists.

It's the far right who are the most rabid PC-ers.

[lictor616]

Sure, centrist conservatives, like centrist liberals, and like the further Left, all suffer from degrees of political correctness. That's natural. The objects and subjects of PC might differ from point to point, but it exists.

It's the far right who are the most rabid PC-ers.

The right who are the Most Politically Correct? Oh sure, It doesn't get more PC, pro egalitarian, pro-thrid world immigration, anti-Western then Nick Griffin or La Destra in Italy...

as long as we're spouting barefaced lies...

[lictor616]

Sure, centrist conservatives, like centrist liberals, and like the further Left, all suffer from degrees of political correctness. That's natural. The objects and subjects of PC might differ from point to point, but it exists.

It's the far right who are the most rabid PC-ers.

Political Correctness is the prevailing orthodoxy of our society- it doesn`t vary as much as it gets more aggressive more brazen in its unappeasable hatred of the Civilization of the West and its creators, European Man and Woman.

Centrist liberals? No the CHoice in Canada is between left wing Socialists in the Lib party, outright communists in the NDP, or center-left Conservatives. There IS no right wing presence in canada of any importance. Canadian and American conservatism is finished- it has failed in its mission to conserve what was left of Civilized Canada and America.

[bloodyminded]

The right who are the Most Politically Correct? Oh sure, It doesn't get more PC, pro egalitarian, pro-thrid world immigration, anti-Western then Nick Griffin or La Destra in Italy...

as long as we're spouting barefaced lies...

You haven't thought out what the term "political corectness" really signifies. Since you have swallowed wholesale the self-indulgent attack politics of the Right, you haven't even bothered to concern yourself with why political correctness can be bothersome or stultifying.

You imagine it to mean, "left-wing." Full stop.

but consider: if there is somehting wrong with political correctness as the term is usually understood, it can't be merely about "left wing." That's not a criticism. It carries no information.

Political correctness as an irritant is a rhetorical device used to shut down debate, through intellectual intimidation, perhaps: "You shouldn't say such things," etc. It is (arguably) in intent, and (certainly) in effect, a means of trying to shut people up.

So yes, from the Left, PC has often involved matters of "identity politics," notably around race, gender, and so on.

But it's rampant in all parts of the political spectrum; and to hold it up as a merely leftish phenomenon is profoundly unreasonable, and openly deceptive.

(Hell, it was intiially identified and coined by the Left, as rational self-criticism.)

Thus: "Why don't you support the troops?"...outright political correctness.

Or if one criticizes Israel's Gaza war: "you're an anti-semite." (This one's quite popular with the moral and political cowards, terrified of honest debate.)

Or--since you mentioned immigration--the more virulent anti-immigrant forces are easily as politically correct in their views and their rhetoric as are the pro-immigration forces.

Get angry at the burning of the national flag? that's political correctness.

Throwing tantrums about socialism, to the point of "red-baiting" one's opponents? Poilitical correctness.

It's all over the place, lictor. So It's no surprise that the thougthless, delicate Right Wing will embrace it wholeheartedly...and they do. They could scarcely "win" an argument without it.

Edited May 30, 2010 by bloodyminded

[lictor616]

You haven't thought out what the term "political corectness" really signifies. Since you have swallowed wholesale the self-indulgent attack politics of the Right, you haven't even bothered to concern yourself with why political correctness can be bothersome or stultifying.

You imagine it to mean, "left-wing." Full stop.

but consider: if there is somehting wrong with political correctness as the term is usually understood, it can't be merely about "left wing." That's not a criticism. It carries no information.

Political correctness as an irritant is a rhetorical device used to shut down debate, through intellectual intimidation, perhaps: "You shouldn't say such things," etc. It is (arguably) in intent, and (certainly) in effect, a means of trying to shut people up.

So yes, from the Left, PC has often involved matters of "identity politics," notably around race, gender, and so on.

But it's rampant in all parts of the political spectrum; and to hold it up as a merely leftish phenomenon is profoundly unreasonable, and openly deceptive.

(Hell, it was intiially identified and coined by the Left, as rational self-criticism.)

Thus: "Why don't you support the troops?"...outright political correctness.

Or if one criticizes Israel's Gaza war: "you're an anti-semite." (This one's quite popular with the moral and political cowards, terrified of honest debate.)

Or--since you mentioned immigration--the more virulent anti-immigrant forces are easily as politically correct in their views and their rhetoric as are the pro-immigration forces.

Get angry at the burning of the national flag? that's political correctness.

Throwing tantrums about socialism, to the point of "red-baiting" one's opponents? Poilitical correctness.

It's all over the place, lictor. So It's no surprise that the thougthless, delicate Right Wing will embrace it wholeheartedly...and they do. They could scarcely "win" an argument without it.

So far as the evidence tells, the only legitimate efforts to curtail speech are consistently carried out by leftists alike: Political Correctness in the sense that you outlined is precisely a leftist dominated occupation. Hate Speech, the ADL, the anti defamation league, Human Rights Canada etc, these are all hard left wing institutions...

"the more virulent anti-immigrant forces are easily as politically correct in their views and their rhetoric as are the pro-immigration forces."

interesting, the anti-immigration crowd receives zero support from the media, is routinely denounced as "hate" by the PC media... and yet here you are saying that people who want immigration laws to be merely ENFORCED... they're the ones trying to "shut down the debate" and being "PC"...

if you could show me through A and B how you arrived to that conclusion, I shall be very astonished.

[bloodyminded]

So far as the evidence tells, the only legitimate efforts to curtail speech are consistently carried out by leftists alike: Political Correctness in the sense that you outlined is precisely a leftist dominated occupation. Hate Speech, the ADL, the anti defamation league, Human Rights Canada etc, these are all hard left wing institutions...

No they aren't.

"the more virulent anti-immigrant forces are easily as politically correct in their views and their rhetoric as are the pro-immigration forces."

interesting, the anti-immigration crowd receives zero support from the media, is routinely denounced as "hate" by the PC media...

Where? Where is all this denunciation?

I know it's a cherished religious belief that the left is all full of politically correct foolishness and the right is full of hard-working folks full of "common sense." But there's nothing to back this nonsense up.

Edited May 30, 2010 by bloodyminded

[lictor616]

Where? Where is all this denunciation?

I know it's a cherished religious belief that the left is all full of politically correct foolishness and the right is full of hard-working folks full of "common sense." But there's nothing to back this nonsense up.

Where is the Denunciation?

USA TOday, MSNBC, CNN, FOX, have regarded the recent arizona immigration law as "institutionalized racism" (a familiar PC concern)

Again the entire mass media are on ONE side- the orthodox side that don't want to see immigration stopped because they believe in the mantra of diversity. And to judge by the fact that people are opposing simple APPLICATION of the border and immigration laws tells me that this is pretty "COMMON SENSE"... do you agree that protecting borders and registering or naturalizing foreigners to become LEGAL citizens is a common sense approach to the question of immigration? You're saying that the application of a countries own laws is nonsense?

The lonely voice of opposition to mass floodstyle of ILLEGAL immigration, Lou Dobbs, was forced to resign as a result of his unorthodox position..

there is one kind of PC... i'm afraid its leftist... the onus is on you to find strong examples of the contrary i,m afraid.

[bloodyminded]

Where is the Denunciation?

USA TOday, MSNBC, CNN, FOX, have regarded the recent arizona immigration law as "institutionalized racism" (a familiar PC concern)

You list some of the major news media sources, and then quote the charge you claim they are making.

I was asking for evidence, not your opinion buttressed by a possibly improper use of scare quotes.

Again the entire mass media are on ONE side- the orthodox side that don't want to see immigration stopped because they believe in the mantra of diversity.

I understand this is your claim. I'm asking for evidence.

there is one kind of PC... i'm afraid its leftist... the onus is on you to find strong examples of the contrary i,m afraid.

I listed several strong examples. That you ignore them is surely not my fault.

[lictor616]

I listed several strong examples. That you ignore them is surely not my fault.

care to give one?... or "repeat" one...

i remember no specific concrete example given by you to the effect that it is politically correct to oppose mass third world immigration... none whatsoever.

Edited May 30, 2010 by lictor616

[WIP]

You're already engaged in a holy war against Western Civilization... I guess your hands are full, I understand.

I'm against your vision of Western Civilization that you have already tipped us off as being white and Christian. Just as I don't judge everyone professing to be a Christian by what Tim McVeigh did to the Oklahoma City Federal Building, I likewise don't judge every Muslim by Al Qaeda....especially after how much I have learned over the intervening years about how several U.S. administrations have supported the development of Islamists movements as allies against Communism. Sometimes the Frankenstein monster comes back to bite you in the ass!

Now, the trick is to keep the bridges open to the majority of Muslims who don't believe this is a zero sum game, and realize that they have to find ways of living in harmony with the rest of the world that does not share their beliefs. As in Christendom, there are those who want a winner-take-all solution to the so called 'Clash of Civilizations' and those who realize we are all losers if resources continue to be spent on war-making rather than finding solutions to big problems that affect everyone on the planet.

[bloodyminded]

care to give one?... or "repeat" one...

i remember no specific concrete example given by you to the effect that it is politically correct to oppose mass third world immigration... none whatsoever.

It's not just about immigration: becauise that wasn't our only point of discussion. By a long shot.

No, I won't repeat what you can see for yourself through the admittedly difficult, radical leftist action of scrolling up the page....

[Shady]

A perfect example of political correctness gone horribly wrong is the Muslim officer who shot up several soldiers at Fort Hood. There were several instances of red flags regarding his record and behavior. But because political correctness has seeped into even the military like raw sewege. The people in charge of remedying red flag situations, decided on a pass, feeling that because the officer was Muslim, there could be some very negative consequences regarding their actions. The blood is on your hands lefties. Deal with it.

[BubberMiley]

If what you say is true (and I know you're consistently frightened to own up to it if it is not), you really shouldn't be making excuses for the incompetence of those people who were aware of those red flags. It gives them a pass when they really shouldn't get one.

[Machjo]

Yup. We should simply ban all Muslims from approaching anywhere within 2 miles of Ground Zero, and for those Muslims who'd lost relatives on 9/11, we could build an alternative shrine for them, in a camp with walls around it (for their own protection of course), along with a requirement to wear an armband with a crescent moon and star (for their own security of course), along with work camps and other facilities (because Arbeit macht Frei after all)

Interestingly enough, while bigots of all stripes scream bloody murder over the community centre, some relatives of 9/11 victims even adopted Islam after 9/11:

To each their own I guess.

[Guest American Woman]

A perfect example of political correctness gone horribly wrong is the Muslim officer who shot up several soldiers at Fort Hood. There were several instances of red flags regarding his record and behavior. But because political correctness has seeped into even the military like raw sewege. The people in charge of remedying red flag situations, decided on a pass, feeling that because the officer was Muslim, there could be some very negative consequences regarding their actions. The blood is on your hands lefties. Deal with it.

So where's your proof that those who ignored red flags are lefties? Are you going to try to say that the military is made up predominantly of lefties? And if it were only lefties who noticed the red flags, what's wrong with the conservatives that they didn't even pick up on the red flags?

What happened is that red flags were ignored. Why some feel the need to blame one political side or another in so many instances is beyond me. It's as if "blaming lefties" is the main issue/concern rather than "ignoring red flags."

[bloodyminded]

A perfect example of political correctness gone horribly wrong is the Muslim officer who shot up several soldiers at Fort Hood. There were several instances of red flags regarding his record and behavior. But because political correctness has seeped into even the military like raw sewege. The people in charge of remedying red flag situations, decided on a pass, feeling that because the officer was Muslim, there could be some very negative consequences regarding their actions. The blood is on your hands lefties. Deal with it.

Wrong. If anyone besides the killer is to blame, it's the members of the military who ignored the supposed red flags.

But military fetishism makes some people avoid placing the proper blame.

[Sir Bandelot]

Yup. We should simply ban all Muslims from approaching anywhere within 2 miles of Ground Zero

Yes indeed. Likewise let there be no muslim shops. No muslim businesses, no residence. a special squad should be formed out of loyal patriots who will inspect the ID of people who are walking around in the streets.

Because, there's a chance that some of them could be muslims... and even if they are moderate muslims, not all muslims are moderate, so some who might go into a corner store where muslims work might get together and celebrate when no white people are around...