Page 17 of 22 FirstFirst ... 71213141516171819202122 LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 423
  1. #321  
    We must be bored to be arguing this, the mosque is not on ground zero. its two blocks away and not just two regular blocks, two New York Blocks. which in most places its like being on the other side of town.
  2. #322  
    just so we are all on the same page, 2 nyc blocks is 1/10 of a mile.
  3. kushanj1's Avatar
    Posts
    48 Posts
    Global Posts
    50 Global Posts
    #323  
    talk about ignorance. go learn something about Islam and the difference between what regular Muslim people believe and what terrorists radicals believe. Total Ignorance!
  4. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #324  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Giuliani on Mosque: "This Project Is Divisive"
    Former mayor acknowledges developers have "right" to build, but defers to question, "should they?"
    By JENNIFER MILLMAN
    Updated 10:47 AM EDT, Thu, Aug 19, 2010

    The former mayor who helped lead the city through the tragic aftermath of the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, came out in opposition of building a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero.

    "This project is divisive," Rudy Giuliani said on the "Today" show this morning as he commented for the first time on the debate that has swept the nation. "This project is creating tremendous pain for people who've already made the ultimate sacrifice. All you're doing is creating more division, more anger, more hatred."

    NBC's Matt Lauer reminded Giuliani of comments he made roughly 14 months after 9/11 in which he evoked freedom of religion as one of America's founding principles, and asked how Giuliani reconciles his opposition to the mosque with his espousal of the idea that "no one's going to interfere with you" because of that principle.

    The one-time presidential candidate quickly acknowledged the developers have a constitutional right to build the mosque but deferred to the question, "Should they build it?"

    "The question here is of sensitivity, of people's feelings, and are you really what you pretend to be," Giuliani said. "If you want to claim to be the healer, then you're not on the side of the person who's pushing those divisive issues.

    "I was the first person on Sept. 11 to step forward in the heat of battle and say, 'No group blame, do not blame Arabs, it's a small group.' But the reality is that, right now, if you are a healer you do not go through with this project. If you're a warrior, you do."

    Giuliani also said he agreed with Gov. David Paterson, who proposed the mosque be built on a location not associated with the same sensitivities as the land near Ground Zero.

    Paterson last week offered to help the mosque developers find a new spot, perhaps on state land. When the developers shot down that idea, the governor said he would at least like to have a meeting with them to discuss it. That meeting has yet to be scheduled, and Paterson told NBCNewYork on Wednesday that there were no concrete plans to hold it at all.

    "That would be their choice," Paterson said. "I'm making myself available. It's up to them."

    Mayor Michael Bloomberg has remained a vociferous supporter of building the mosque two blocks from Ground Zero. Bloomberg's office didn't immediately respond to an e-mail inquiry seeking a response to Giuliani's comments this morning.

    Weighing in for the first time yesterday, Archbishop Timothy Dolan agreed with Paterson that the mosque should be built elsewhere out of respect for individuals' "sensititivites." Dolan evoked Pope John Paul II's intervention when a convent was set to be built near Auschwitz as an example of how a solution could be found. Giuliani agreed with that approach.

    The issue of the mosque -- whether and where it should be built -- continues to play out on the local and national political stage. The Conservative Party of New York released an ad urging Con Ed to refuse to sell the second building, which they own, to the Cordoba Initiative. That building would need to be demolished, according to the developers' plans for the mosque.

    Meanwhile, conservative fire brand Sarah Palin tweeted a link to another ad using 9/11 family members and survivors to protest the site.

    Giuliani also played to the sentiments of 9/11 families.

    "I know some people who are crying over this," he said.

    President Obama set off a national firestorm last week when he voiced his support for the "right" to build the mosque. Asked Wednesday if he regretted upholding the mosque’s right to be built, the President said he had "no regrets."
    Eh... I don't really care much for what any politician has to say about the issue. Giuliani only says what he thinks is more popular at the time. At least Bloomberg is sticking to his guns. He can be all right sometimes.

    I guess my problem with the "they CAN build it, but shouldn't" statement is that while it's saying that it supports the Constitution and that no one should be able to force them to not build it legally, the Cordoba Initiative should be forced morally instead. The Constitution is a great thing, and nobody should ever feel ashamed or guilted into exercising the rights it affords them.
  5. #325  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    False argument. It's been repeatedly pointed out that this isn't about the legal right to build there. Next....
    You gave me a hypothetical question and I answered it. I do not care what gets built where, in other countries.

    Huh? I didn't confuse anything. Where did that come from? And there's more racists in the Democratic Party than in the Tea Party. But what does that have to do with anything?
    And you say I went on a tangent? LOL

    Why? Please don't bother.... at least not for my sake. What you've said so far seems to be only remotely related to what I've posted. Al Qaeda? Fox News? Saudi Money? Perhaps you meant this message for someone else? It's almost as if you just used my post to launch in to a series of loosely related.... ideas?
    You posted concern about what will be built here with Saudi money and I posted what is currently being funded by the Saudis. Your reply is "LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" LOL

    Perhaps you could give a direct answer to my direct comment to you about what your tune would be if Israel was building a synagogue in the Gaza Strip close to a site they had recently bombed?
    Again I say, what would be built in other countries is of no concern to me...
    "Brace yourself, you beautiful *****. I am about to **** you up with some truth!" - Kenny Powers

    "I don't mind paying taxes. With taxes, I purchase civilization."
    - H.L. Mencken
  6. #326  
    Quote Originally Posted by Courousant View Post
    just so we are all on the same page, 2 nyc blocks is 1/10 of a mile.
    In New York, a block is a rectangle.
    In Manhattan, the blocks are horizontal rectangles, which means a block south to north is a much shorter distance than a block from east to west.

    This thing will be built two blocks north, which is alot shorter than say two blocks east.
  7. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #327  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    In New York, a block is a rectangle.
    In Manhattan, the blocks are horizontal, which means a block south to north is a much shorter distance than a block from east to west.

    This thing will be built two blocks north, which is alot shorter than say two blocks east.
    Right. Like he said, 2 North-South blocks is approximately 1/10 of a mile.
  8. #328  
    Quote Originally Posted by Speebs View Post
    Right. Like he said, 2 North-South blocks is approximately 1/10 of a mile.
    He did NOT say north-south.
    He said nyc.
    Quote Originally Posted by .
    Courousant 02:36 PM 08/19/2010 -- [Reply] [!!]
    just so we are all on the same page, 2 nyc blocks is 1/10 of a mile.
  9. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #329  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    He did NOT say north-south.
    He said nyc.
    He said it was 1/10 of a mile, which is much more specific than "2 blocks" or "2 North-South blocks." Why nit-pick this?
  10. #330  
    Quote Originally Posted by Speebs View Post
    Eh... I don't really care much for what any politician has to say about the issue. Giuliani only says what he thinks is more popular at the time. At least Bloomberg is sticking to his guns. He can be all right sometimes.

    I guess my problem with the "they CAN build it, but shouldn't" statement is that while it's saying that it supports the Constitution and that no one should be able to force them to not build it legally, the Cordoba Initiative should be forced morally instead. The Constitution is a great thing, and nobody should ever feel ashamed or guilted into exercising the rights it affords them.
    Actually that was the original point of many of the restrictions in the Bill of Rights. (remember the Bill of Rights was not part of the original constitution but was added immediately after in a compromise with New York in order to keep the state on board). The Bill of Rights represents restrictions on what the government (originally only federal, but later applied to the states as well) can do with respect to those rights enumerated. The whole theory was that these things should be outside of the sphere of government. Our founding fathers never thought that or intended that the Bill of Rights should be used to prohibit social pressures. The idea that "you should never be made to feel guilty for exercising your rights" is pretty much the backbone of the debate here and where I and others would disagree with you. Just because you can does not mean you should.

    Hate speech is the easiest example (and so that we are all clear: I AM NOT COMPARING THE DOWNTOWN MUSLIM SPIRITUAL CENTER TO HATE SPEECH). But just because you can say all ****** are dogs and should be killed or exported, doesn't mean that you should or should never be made to feel guilty for saying so.

    Again, this debate boils down to the following: Just because they can build the Mosque or spiritual center at that particular location, doesn't mean that they should.
  11. #331  
    wow, a bit nit-picky today. 2 north-south blocks are 1/10 of a mile. In NY talk, when you describe a distance in blocks, you are always referring to N/S blocks. But I apologize that I wasn't specific. And yes, in this case, the proposed site is 2 blocks north, and therefore approximately 1/10 of a mile north of "Ground Zero".
  12. Speebs's Avatar
    Posts
    297 Posts
    Global Posts
    403 Global Posts
    #332  
    Quote Originally Posted by Courousant View Post
    Actually that was the original point of many of the restrictions in the Bill of Rights. (remember the Bill of Rights was not part of the original constitution but was added immediately after in a compromise with New York in order to keep the state on board). The Bill of Rights represents restrictions on what the government (originally only federal, but later applied to the states as well) can do with respect to those rights enumerated. The whole theory was that these things should be outside of the sphere of government. Our founding fathers never thought that or intended that the Bill of Rights should be used to prohibit social pressures. The idea that "you should never be made to feel guilty for exercising your rights" is pretty much the backbone of the debate here and where I and others would disagree with you. Just because you can does not mean you should.

    Hate speech is the easiest example (and so that we are all clear: I AM NOT COMPARING THE DOWNTOWN MUSLIM SPIRITUAL CENTER TO HATE SPEECH). But just because you can say all ****** are dogs and should be killed or exported, doesn't mean that you should or should never be made to feel guilty for saying so.

    Again, this debate boils down to the following: Just because they can build the Mosque or spiritual center at that particular location, doesn't mean that they should.
    I agree that this is the crux of the issue. I wish we could just get everyone (especially the news) to throw away all of the other strawmen arguments.
  13. #333  
    Quote Originally Posted by Courousant View Post
    wow, a bit nit-picky today. 2 north-south blocks are 1/10 of a mile. In NY talk, when you describe a distance in blocks, you are always referring to N/S blocks. But I apologize that I wasn't specific. And yes, in this case, the proposed site is 2 blocks north, and therefore approximately 1/10 of a mile north of "Ground Zero".
    I know what NY talk is. I grew up and spent most of my life there.
  14. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #334  
    Quote Originally Posted by dbdoinit View Post
    I know what NY talk is. I grew up and spent most of my life there.
    hey! I know you! didn't we used to go to different schools together?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  15. #335  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    hey! I know you! didn't we used to go to different schools together?
    heh heh
  16. #336  
    Quote Originally Posted by Speebs View Post
    I'm not sure what your beef is with atheists, or why you think it's atheists who are pursuing this (if you have a legimate reason for saying this then please let me know).

    It's a matter of church/state. Nothing else needs to factor into the issue. Period. I don't necessarily agree with the judge's decisions, but they made it. We have a very specific judicial process in this country, and I have to believe that if there was no solid LEGAL (not emotional) case for having them taken down, then the decision would have been different.
    Sorry.....I brought up the atheists because they are the ones behind wanting the crosses taken down (in Utah) per the article I posted earlier. If you had read the article, you would have read the following:

    But American Atheists, Inc., the Texas-based group that sued to have the crosses removed from state property, argued that the crosses could imply that the trooper who died there was a Christian.

    Would that qualify as a "legitimate reason" for pointing the finger at the atheists on the cross issue? So again, why does a cross hurt a group so much as to want to pursue this?
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  17. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #337  
    I can’t believe people are continuing to bring up the red herring that this is a First Amendment right after so many pages of posts explaining that, yes, of course it is but what someone can do and what someone should do are always two different questions. How many times does this need to be said?
  18. #338  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenanator View Post
    WAY OFF TOPIC: You just made the argument for gay marriage but just changed the names of the players! Oh the sweet irony!
    It is WAY off topic....but why would atheists be fighting gay marriage?
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  19. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #339  
    Quote Originally Posted by Courousant View Post
    The idea that "you should never be made to feel guilty for exercising your rights" is pretty much the backbone of the debate here and where I and others would disagree with you. Just because you can does not mean you should.
    Who said that you should never be made to feel guilty for excercising your right? Certainly that can't be applied in all circumstances. Just because you have a legal right, it doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do.

    It's interesting that the mosque builders are the ones that are ignoring "what should be (or not be) done", but you give them a pass and admonish those that are calling them on it.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  20. #340  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    I can’t believe people are continuing to bring up the red herring that this is a First Amendment right after so many pages of posts explaining that, yes, of course it is but what someone can do and what someone should do are always two different questions. How many times does this need to be said?
    You could lead a horse to water, but.....

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions