DescentBB

Cuda wrote:so you are willing to teach something that is unproven as fact in the public school system just because it is the latest and most accepted theory

They have been doing that for a long time now. Once there were 9 planets now only 8.

Remember the Snowball earth theory. The just showed this not to long ago on one of the science channels.

http://faculty.riohondo.edu/mforrest/ge ... ceage.html

Now it may not of happen.

http://www.sflorg.com/earthnews/en032207_01.html

How many how many different ways have the dinos die over the last 20 years.

Asteroid Impact

Climate Change

Volcanic Eruptions

Disease

Yet they teach them as fact. Oh yea the Dinos didn't die out they are birds now.

http://www.birding.com/birdsdino.asp

On religion in schools:

Science is taught because it is scientifically verifiable in a laboratory setting. If you put sodium in water, it will explode, every time. On a more practical level, science is useful to keep the United States ahead of its rivals. Teaching kids science is what makes them interested in becoming scientists, an outcome that has real tangible immediate benefits for society in the form of technology and innovation. Same goes for math.

History is taught so people know how we got to this point. I'm not here to debate which version of history is better, suffice to say, history is important.

English/language arts is/are taught to help us communicate, as communication is the basis of any society. Grammar and spelling are a bonus, as are understanding the finer points of Shakespeare.

Religion, on the other hand, when it comes to public schools, strikes me as something best suited for an elective class, if at all. I took an excellent \"religions of the world\" course my freshman year in college that covered some basic concepts about Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism. Very enjoyable course, very neutral-minded professor. I'd love to see something like that in public schools.

The reason why I'd put it in an elective is that it really doesn't satisfy the same sort of core requirement as math/science/history/english.

So yeah.

null0010 wrote:On religion in schools:
Religion, on the other hand, when it comes to public schools, strikes me as something best suited for an elective class,

Earlier I wrote: Why can't a school have elective classes on religion? isn't that what school is supposed to be about? enlightenment??? free thinking????

tunnelcat wrote:...
I agree with everything you've stated here Kilarin. I have no argument. However, the tyranny of the majority always seems to rear it's ugly head whenever a particular majority starts seeing it's majority power waning. White European Americans are now experiencing that very situation and they don't seem to be taking it very well...

What is the difference between the tyranny of the majority and the tyranny of the vocal minority enabled by a political party that exploits their interests to gain control of the legislature and enact laws against the majority?!?

The answer is:
Only the number of people who are hurt by the tyranny.

So the concept of 'justice is served if the majority isn't the writing the rules' is merely a rationalization to condone your brand of tyranny.

That is why we have laws and the constitution to judge the laws by. If the laws hurt a minority...tough ★■◆●.
Being a minority doesn't mean you get exemptions from the law if the law passes constitutional muster. Well....it used to mean that... before a certain political party discovered they could cash in on a combination of minorities and irrational white guilt.

There comes a time when you kick that sleeping dog once too often and he rears up and bites you on the ass as you try to get the hell out of his way. I think the liberals are about to get bit.

.

CUDA wrote:

null0010 wrote:On religion in schools:
Religion, on the other hand, when it comes to public schools, strikes me as something best suited for an elective class,

Earlier I wrote: Why can't a school have elective classes on religion? isn't that what school is supposed to be about? enlightenment??? free thinking????

Yes? Does it surprise you?

As an aside, I never understood why a person couldn't be extremely religious and believe in evolution, genetics, quantum physics, etc, all at once. It's not like they contradict each other directly.

CUDA wrote:personally I take offense at your implication that anytime a prayer is spoken in a public place or religion is talked about in a school or a a government building it's indoctrination. its called freedom of speech......
Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak without censorship or limitation, or both........why do you wish to censor us???? are you that afraid of our way of thinking????

NO, I don't want to censor you, mostly. Maybe you're not even an Evangelical, so this may not apply to you, but isn't one of the major tenets of Evangelical Christianity the requirement to proselytize and spread the word of Jesus to unbelievers? That's not praying to God in a peaceful, unobtrusive way, that's pushing your religion on others that may or may NOT want to listen. How do Evangelical Christians keep from just "quietly praying to themselves" in public areas or in public school and yet resist the urge to proselytize when they are essentially required by their beliefs to do so? This observation is a few years old, but illustrates the fear that a political Christian movement was beginning to take fervent hold with the second election of Bush and forever alter the secular nature of U.S. politics. The 'Culture Wars' that were started a few years ago to gain political traction was and is a perfect example of politics influenced by ONE religion. You may dismiss this as a liberal rant, but it's what a good sized segment of this country's population PERCEIVE is happening.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... _n8578373/

And only the history of all world religions would be appropriate to be taught in public school, not the teaching of any one particular modern religion. That can be done in that person's particular church or place of worship. That's what they're there for. I would no more want my tax dollars to go towards teaching the history of Islam, Hinduism or Buddhism than I would towards the history of Christianity, because there's a fine line between teaching history and teaching dogma. They're very intertwined in religion.

CUDA wrote:oh and FYI Gran Torino is an Excellent Movie

Everyone has sold me on it! I'll buy it since I like Clint!

Well, well Will Robinson, I feel a smidgen of resentment coming from you. You say tough **** to those in the minority in this country? Are you saying that you are a poor little minority victim and want your country back or are you saying that if someone IS in a minority, they should just shut up and suck it up? Are you going to keep blaming liberals for your suffering or for the problems our country is having right now? Why are liberals at fault anyway? True liberals don't worship the almighty dollar as their God, use Wall Street as their church, have the free market as their religion or go to war on a whim, unlike the false liberals in Washington right now. And the conservative party is just different colored stripe on the same corporate skunk. That's not to say that liberalism is good, it has it's problems, just as true conservatism has it's downside. The extremes are never a good balance. But since this country is really run by the corporations now, by default they are the majority power and they most certainly aren't liberal. Liberalism is a moot point and not even in the ballgame. In fact, they've already lost long ago. That sleeping dog you're referring to is going to bite the wrong butt and you're blaming the wrong group for our nation's ills. If the Tea Party gets in office, corporations will have even more power, if that's even possible.

As for white people becoming the minority and NOT liking it Heretic, read this:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/i ... -the-right

You disparage black rappers for their hatred of whites. Well, given our nation's sordid black slave history, which white people seem to have swept under the convenient rug by the way, I don't blame them for being bitter yet STILL! I takes a LONG time to erase evil memories and hatred, especially when you see privileged white people carrying signs at political rallies claiming they're victims of black racism and rich TV personalities, like Glenn Beck, doing the same. It just ignites the hatred all over again.

null0010 wrote:As an aside, I never understood why a person couldn't be extremely religious and believe in evolution, genetics, quantum physics, etc, all at once. It's not like they contradict each other directly.

Depends on what religion, I personally reject most organized religion, but remain highly spiritual.

I found it very hard to reconcile science and Christianity.

...............

tc…find me a “true liberal” and I’ll give you 20 bucks.

First I didn't disparage anyone I just pointed to some links. Second you dig up a leftest talking about hate crimes but the left won't even go after the hate crimes committed by the blacks. It's true the whites are becoming the minority but still don't mean the majority can use hatred to suppress them by calling out in the public for the killing of the whites and killing cracker of babies. How about the slavery committed by the blacks to the blacks or has that been swept under the rug too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_slave_trade

I still think you dropped your sign.

tunnelcat wrote:....

Well, well Will Robinson, I feel a smidgen of resentment coming from you. You say tough **** to those in the minority in this country?

No, I say if the laws in our country pass the constitutional smell test then it is tough ★■◆● if those laws also happen to hurt anyone, including minorities. Obey the law or change it. (which should bring you back to my point that you are ignoring regarding the so called tyranny of the majority)

For example, if the law allows a policeman to ask for ID then just because a Mexican american might feel like the cop is assuming he's an illegal immigrant doesn't mean we should bend the rules to accommodate his little whiny ass feelings.
That is a different point of view than the strawman argument you went on to attribute to me in the rant that followed your erroneous assertion:

tunnelcat wrote:Are you saying that you are a poor little minority victim and want your country back or are you saying that if someone IS in a minority, they should just shut up and suck it up? Are you going to keep blaming liberals for your suffering or for the problems our country is having right now? Why are liberals at fault anyway? True liberals don't worship the almighty dollar as their God, use Wall Street as their church, have the free market as their religion or go to war on a whim, unlike the false liberals in Washington right now. And the conservative party is just different colored stripe on the same corporate skunk. That's not to say that liberalism is good, it has it's problems, just as true conservatism has it's downside. The extremes are never a good balance. But since this country is really run by the corporations now, by default they are the majority power and they most certainly aren't liberal. Liberalism is a moot point and not even in the ballgame. In fact, they've already lost long ago. That sleeping dog you're referring to is going to bite the wrong butt and you're blaming the wrong group for our nation's ills. If the Tea Party gets in office, corporations will have even more power, if that's even possible. ...

No, I didn't say those things. Did you formulate all that just so I might forget the question I asked you that you managed to avoid answering?!?

Here, try again:

"What is the difference between the tyranny of the majority and the tyranny of the vocal minority enabled by a political party that exploits their interests to gain control of the legislature and enact laws against the majority?!?"

tunnelcat wrote: but isn't one of the major tenets of Evangelical Christianity the requirement to proselytize and spread the word of Jesus to unbelievers? That's not praying to God in a peaceful, unobtrusive way, that's pushing your religion on others that may or may NOT want to listen.

The right to proselytize is critical, and does not exist in many countries. BUT, I don't think that conflicts with your right not to listen. Christians have the right to publish books. They have the right to hold meetings and advertise them. They have the right to purchase billboard space. They have the right go knocking on doors and ask if you'd like to come to church. You have the right to not buy the books, to not attend the meetings. To ignore or disparage the advertising and billboards. And to tell the door knockers to get lost (or to post a no trespassing sign).

What Christians often miss is that this same right must apply to everyone else. If its ok for Christians to purchase a billboard and put up "messages from God", then it's ALSO ok for Atheist, Moslems or Satanists to publish billboards advertising THEIR agenda.

Will Robinson wrote:What is the difference between the tyranny of the majority and the tyranny of the vocal minority enabled by a political party that exploits their interests to gain control of the legislature and enact laws against the majority?!?"

If it's outside the constitution, tyranny is tyranny. If its the majority complaining because the vocal minority is insisting upon equal rights, then to heck with the majority.

Kilarin wrote:...

Will Robinson wrote:What is the difference between the tyranny of the majority and the tyranny of the vocal minority enabled by a political party that exploits their interests to gain control of the legislature and enact laws against the majority?!?"

If it's outside the constitution, tyranny is tyranny. If its the majority complaining because the vocal minority is insisting upon equal rights, then to heck with the majority.

No problems with your take on it. I'd like to see TC, and other liberals, come to grips with their often misused talking point about the "tyranny of the majority". They pull it out like a supplement to the race card.
Equal rights is fine but if you are an illegal alien, for example, you should be facing the punishment of the law not enjoying sanctuary in a city run by liberals who refuse to follow federal law....and now those liberals run the federal government! A tyranny of the minority is in effect in many ways so it pisses me off to see/hear a liberal complain about the tyranny of the majority. whiny little biotches every one!

Spidey wrote:

null0010 wrote:As an aside, I never understood why a person couldn't be extremely religious and believe in evolution, genetics, quantum physics, etc, all at once. It's not like they contradict each other directly.

Depends on what religion, I personally reject most organized religion, but remain highly spiritual.

I found it very hard to reconcile science and Christianity.

It's easy. Here is how:

1. The Bible is a book written by men about God, relating metaphorical and literal tales of morality and commandments on how to live a righteous life.

2. Evolution? God did it. Big bang? God did it. Mentions of time in the Bible are symbolic and not meant to be taken literally.

That wasn't very hard.

Got it all figured out, huh.

Spidey wrote:Got it all figured out, huh.

Hardly.

Will Robinson wrote:"What is the difference between the tyranny of the majority and the tyranny of the vocal minority enabled by a political party that exploits their interests to gain control of the legislature and enact laws against the majority?!?"

OK, before I answer your question, what particular recent tyrannical laws have the minority imposed on the majority? And not a wimpy 51 percent majority either! If you're referring to liberals coddling immigrants, you need to take a look at the conservatives who never forced businesses and farmers to NOT hire illegals in the first place. If that had been enforced, NOT EMBRACED, YEARS AGO, we wouldn't have the problem TODAY! Hiring illegals has always been one of those wink, wink, backroom conservative political and business ideals to help said businesses get cheap labor when there weren't enough white European citizens who would do the work. God forgive us that we built our country from the sweat of slaves and cheap illegal labor! Ingrate racist morons!

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/immigr ... esty_3.htm

This controversy ties in with the racism meme as well. Heretic, Africa has been under the thumb of slavery for most of it's populace's existence. Your Wiki link clearly shows that. So what you're saying is that blacks shouldn't be mad at us anymore because we weren't the only ones to exploit them and we stopped doing it long ago? They should just shut up and live and let live? You're also forgetting that state sanctioned discrimination against blacks was still going on in the U.S. up to the 1960's. You may even find a few racist blue laws on the books in a few states that, although not enforced, that we know of, are still there.

And what little nugget of a law change are the Republicans trying to get through that's as racist as you can get? The 14th Amendment was enacted to give citizenship birthrights to the African slaves and their children as part of Reconstruction! And this is part of our CONSTITUTION that the majority are trying to get rid of since it doesn't mesh with modern thinking. You're also forgetting all the Chinese and Mexicans that were brought in country for cheap labor too, especially to build the first railroads!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth ... nstitution

What a slap in the face!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_republica ... itizenship

Then read this, second paragragh:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Romney

So if Mitt Romney joins this little effort, like a good Republican, he's essentially saying that his father shouldn't have become a U.S. citizen! George Romney is Mexican by their birthright laws, so technically George Romney is Mexican born to American parents. So they move back here to the states and claim citizenship for their Mexican-born son. And George also tried to run for President in 1968! A Mexican born citizen!

Read this Tunnelcat and see what state sponsored racism is already taken place.

Racism In America

As far as Slavery today Africans are still being enslaved

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_modern_Africa

Kilarin wrote:The right to proselytize is critical, and does not exist in many countries. BUT, I don't think that conflicts with your right not to listen. Christians have the right to publish books. They have the right to hold meetings and advertise them. They have the right to purchase billboard space. They have the right go knocking on doors and ask if you'd like to come to church. You have the right to not buy the books, to not attend the meetings. To ignore or disparage the advertising and billboards. And to tell the door knockers to get lost (or to post a no trespassing sign).

What Christians often miss is that this same right must apply to everyone else. If its ok for Christians to purchase a billboard and put up "messages from God", then it's ALSO ok for Atheist, Moslems or Satanists to publish billboards advertising THEIR agenda.

Oh, it's damn hard when some of these people drive their moving Jesus freak proselytizing cars around with sections of Bible verses splattered all over the windows claiming all non-believers will burn in hell if they don't do this and that. But I can no more back censoring that than I can some idiot liberal driving around with a Darwin Fish or Peace Sign on their car too. But when these freaks come to my door, pushing their claptrap, sometimes I'm just not that friendly.

Oh, and Christian Americans are up in arms over that Mosque that they're trying to build near ground zero and have been trying to block at all costs. How is that being tolerant of other religions?

Heretic, you're talking about reverse racism against whites and that blacks are too dumb and angry to get anywhere. Well, I still think that poor little privileged white people are wrong to gripe. We had it good for most of our country's history, while those of other races were used and suffered under our watch. NOW you whine?

Yes, affirmative action is NOT a good solution to the problem and it's the one liberal idea that needs revision or even elimination. Merit, talent and knowledge should always be considered first. But if you always base your system on that, those in the poorest places will always be left behind, and black people are stuck in that place, even if they have the drive and talent to succeed. Not all are dumb and angry. Yes, blacks would do far better if they got that angry chip off their shoulders and worked hard, but when they see their first black president get dissed again and again by mostly white people yelling on TV or carrying derogatory signs, that chip just grew a few roots. We have nobody to blame but ourselves.

And since slavery is still going on in Africa, all the more reason to be bitter in the land of plenty HERE!

EDIT: The trickle down economics in your sign DON'T WORK, for Blacks, Latinos, Whites or this country!

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/ta ... ef=reccafe

tunnelcat wrote:Heretic, you're talking about reverse racism against whites and that blacks are too dumb and angry to get anywhere.

I didn't say anything about how they are dumb or angry you typed those words not me. Quite the opposite they are smart and they can do things for themselves they don't need the government raising taxes and fees so high they can never get out of the poor neighborhoods they are in.

I think the whole article you read hasn't sunk into your mind yet. It was about the double standard of racism.

"Although some blacks and liberal Whites concede that non-Whites can, perhaps, be racist, they invariably add that non-Whites have been forced into it as self-defense because of centuries of White oppression. What appears to be non-White racism is so understandable and forgivable that it hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not an act is called racism depends on the race of the racist. What would surely be called racism when done by Whites is thought to be normal when done by anyone else. The reverse is also true."

The logical consequences of this are clear. Since we are required to believe that the only explanation for non-White failure is White racism, every time a non-White is poor, commits a crime, goes on welfare, or takes drugs, White society stands accused of yet another act of racism. All failure or misbehavior by non-Whites is standing proof that White society is riddled with hatred and bigotry. For precisely so long as non-Whites fail to succeed in life at exactly the same level as Whites, Whites will be, by definition, thwarting and oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. First of all, racism is a sin that is thought to be committed almost exclusively by White people. Indeed, a black congressman from Chicago, Gus Savage, and Coleman Young, the black mayor of Detroit, have argued that only White people can be racist. Likewise, in 1987, the affirmative action officer of the State Insurance Fund of New York issued a company pamphlet in which she explained that all Whites are racist and that only Whites can be racist. How else could the plight of blacks be explained without flirting with the possibility of racial inequality?

tunnelcat wrote:Oh, and Americans are up in arms over that Mosque that they're trying to build near ground zero and have been trying to block at all costs. How is that being tolerant of other religions?

fixed it for you.

its Americans that are upset.
and while your ragging on Christians, how about we put a Shinto shrine on the USS Arizona. or maybe the Muslims they will allow a Synagogue in Mecca. the issue here is not tollerence for religion. its about Islam slapping us in the face. since FYI one of the chief backing orginizations of the Mosque is a known terrorist organization.

http://article.nationalreview.com/43861 ... c-mccarthy

you really should research things like this before posting hate against the Christians TC.

CUDA wrote:how about we put a Shinto shrine on the USS Arizona

That would be a mighty fine re-purposing of what is now a waste of metal on the ocean floor. I say let's do it.

tunnelcat wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:"What is the difference between the tyranny of the majority and the tyranny of the vocal minority enabled by a political party that exploits their interests to gain control of the legislature and enact laws against the majority?!?"

OK, before I answer your question, what particular recent tyrannical laws have the minority imposed on the majority? ...

No, you've had at least two opportunities to answer and you continue to market your red herring instead. So just carry on with your proselytizing the liberal gospel after all we both know the answer and now we all know you don't dare face up to the implication it brings...the reflection in that mirror is too much for you, I understand. Go stick another pin or two in your Reagan voodoo doll, you'll feel better.

Will Robinson wrote:No, you've had at least two opportunities to answer and you continue to market your red herring instead. So just carry on with your proselytizing the liberal gospel after all we both know the answer and now we all know you don't dare face up to the implication it brings...the reflection in that mirror is too much for you, I understand. Go stick another pin or two in your Reagan voodoo doll, you'll feel better.

Fine. The problem is, it's not liberal ideas that are destroying this country and it's not liberals that are even in the "majority". The corporate masters have everyone hoodwinked. They now have protected personhood status and THEY have the majority. If you paid attention to the liberal side of things instead of dismissing them as wackos, you would find that they aren't particularly happy with their "leader" and his choices either.

CUDA, it's only supposed to be a community center with a small place for worship and it's 2 blocks away from ground zero. It's not even on hollowed ground! If we can't find some way to reconcile our differences between cultures and religions, then what hope is there for the future of any long term peace? Besides, "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer" as they say.

They don't want healing. Why else would they have wanted to name it after some thing the conquered. It's a monument to their destruction of the World Trade Center. That is how liberal ideas that are destroying this country. The only reason it going to get built is because everyone in the governmental bodies is afraid to stand against it. The general public can scream till their face turns blue but in the end the governmental bodies, being in the public eye fear for their selves and their families will let it happen. Then we will have what Europe has car fires and pandemonium in the streets.

The project's name raised issues for some, in as much as it refers to Córdoba, Spain, the capital of the Caliphate of Córdoba during the period of Muslim rule in Spain, where Muslim conquerors defeated Spanish Christians in the 8th century. In the eyes of some critics, the naming of the project after the seat of power of the centuries-long Islamic occupation of Spain was inflammatory. The project investors subsequently renamed the project \"Park51\".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cordoba_In ... ame-change

Why was no one upset when a mosque was built INSIDE the Pentagon less than a month after 184 people were killed there on 9/11?

Strange I don't think there is a mosque there just a place for them to pray. If fact your story you point to doesn't mention a mosque except in the headline. Funny how the guy from the salon points to a article where Pentagon observes Muslim holy month. Far cry from building a mosque. Just another attempt of the left to attack the right. Very poor attempt on your part to troll.

http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2 ... tagon.html

Neither is the Cordoba Center a mosque. It's not even going to look like a Mosque.

What…no minarets?

null0010 wrote:Neither is the Cordoba Center a mosque. It's not even going to look like a Mosque.

You will have to troll better than that.

The mosque and community center would be located two blocks from the Lower Manhattan site of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Cordoba purchased the property for $4 million and planned to build a 13-story, $100 million Islamic center, of which the mosque would be a part.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... ound-zero/

they are places of learning and are supposed to be a secular environment, free of religious indoctrination

Instead of religious indoctrination, you get atheistic indoctrination and government propaganda.

Heretic wrote:

null0010 wrote:Neither is the Cordoba Center a mosque. It's not even going to look like a Mosque.

You will have to troll better than that.

The mosque and community center would be located two blocks from the Lower Manhattan site of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Cordoba purchased the property for $4 million and planned to build a 13-story, $100 million Islamic center, of which the mosque would be a part.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... ound-zero/

This is a photograph taken at a presentation showing what the Cordoba House Community Center (the name has recently been changed to "Park51") will look like:


Exactly like every other building in the city.

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/08/0 ... te.php?o=2

A mosque is masque is a mosque no matter how many times you call it the Cordoba House Community Center. The fact you keep omitting is Cordoba House Mosque and Community Center. Why do you keep leaving out the Mosque part?

Heretic wrote:A mosque is masque is a mosque no matter how many times you call it the Cordoba House Community Center. The fact you keep omitting is Cordoba House Mosque and Community Center. Why do you keep leaving out the Mosque part?

If a mosque is a mosque is a mosque, regardless of its other purposes and facilities contained within, then the Pentagon is a mosque.

Either all buildings with areas dedicated to muslim prayer are mosques, or they aren't. You can't have it both ways.

Well that didn't answer the question. Did it? First a designated area in a building that has been there for decades is a different animal than building a Mosque and adding a community center to it. So no the pentagon isn't a mosque nor was a mosque added to the pentagon. SO again why do you leave out Mosque in the Cordoba House Mosque and Community Center.

Here I'll answer for you. The left doesn't like to call things what they are for instance Terror attack is now \"A Man Cause Disaster\" Hell they won't even say the words \"Radical Islam\" War on terror is now \"Overseas Countenance Operation\" Suicide Bomber is now \"Homicide Bomber\"

It amazes me to see people on this board attack a group of Christians over just about any thing but defend to the end Radical Islamic Terrorist. So what happens when it all built and done we find out it was built by funds from terrorist organizations and watch them dancing in the streets to their victory over the great Satan in the USA.

1. I don't call it a mosque because it does not appear to be a mosque.

2. Even if it were a full-on-dome-and-four-minarets mosque, I still wouldn't think there was anything wrong with putting it there. If they own the property, it's their business what is on it.

Would you like it if your neighbors tried to stop you from putting whatever the hell you wanted on your property? I don't think you would.

(Here comes a b-b-b-but muslims)

null0010 wrote:If they own the property, it's their business what is on it.

no its not. it's the Governments say whats on it. from the type of building that's put there to the type of business thats run from said building.

thats why we have City planning commissions to approve the look of the buildings.
building codes to make sure the building is safe.
and business licenses to approve the type of business and its location.

It's symbolism people!
\"Ground Zero\" where is it? It's no where near the Pentagon or the field near some Pennsylvania town that most of us don't remember the name of...

If Muslims wanted to take part in the healing process and/or rehabilitate their religions image they would have some concerns about the message it sends to have a terrorist organization fund a Mosque at the site of the worst Muslim extremist terrorist attack known to man! If on the other hand they wanted to send a different message it would be the perfect place to build it.

I can't get inside other peoples mind so I have to judge people and actions based on what I know and I know if I was a Muslim I would think this was a bad idea and want it to be built a little further away.
If I was a radical Muslim I'd be thrilled with planting our 'flag', staking out a glorious landmark to honor our faith, in the freshly blood stained site of our heroic martyrs successful attack.

I think that the planned start date of the building speaks for itself.


The group plans to break ground 9/11/2011.

What does a Mosque look like.

Lala Mustafa Pasha Mosque in Cyprus was formerly St. Nicholas Cathedral - it is one of the very few surviving churches in gothic designs that had been converted into a mosque.

What a Beautiful Mosque



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion ... s#Churches

null0010 wrote:As an aside, I never understood why a person couldn't be extremely religious and believe in evolution, genetics, quantum physics, etc, all at once. It's not like they contradict each other directly.

Exactly.

Unless you think Genesis 1 is a historical narrative instead of a poetic restructuring of the Egyptian creation myth.

tunnelcat wrote:I don't want to censor you, mostly.

....But when these freaks come to my door, pushing their claptrap, sometimes I'm just not that friendly.

So where's the need for censorship?

When some freak comes to my door asking me to sign a petition to support some freak cause, I'm going to tell him to get lost. There's no need for censorship there -- just need for strong anti-trespassing laws.

Regarding the Ground Zero mosque:

Mayor Bloomberg wrote:“Let us not forget that Muslims were among those murdered on 9/11, and that our Muslim neighbors grieved with us as New Yorkers and as Americans. We would betray our values and play into our enemies’ hands if we were to treat Muslims differently than anyone else. In fact, to cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists, and we should not stand for that.

“For that reason, I believe that this is an important test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetimes, as important a test. And it is critically important that we get it right.

“On Sept. 11, 2001, thousands of first responders heroically rushed to the scene and saved tens of thousands of lives. More than 400 of those first responders did not make it out alive. In rushing into those burning buildings, not one of them asked, ‘What God do you pray to?’ (Bloomberg’s voice cracks here a little as he gets choked up.) ‘What beliefs do you hold?’”

I don't think they intend it as a "stab at the heart of America" -- but even if they do, so what? It's their right. And if Fred Phelps buys some property in San Francisco or Berkley and puts up a GodHatesFags center, that's his right too. People, quit getting your panties all in a bunch over this.