|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 3:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| CentralCali wrote: |
| I couldn't care less what they preach in the new mosque. So long as we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the United States, they have nothing to apologize for. And as soon as the bigots realize that proteching the Muslims' freedom of speech and freedom of religion is not identical to, it is protecting everyone's freedom of speech and freedom of religion, the better off everyone, including the bigots, will be. |
Well said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| djsmnc wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| northway wrote: |
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Define moderate anything. |
If people are going to state that the mosque should be built because it will preach a 'moderate' Islam, then they need to define what they mean by that, since a number of Muslim figures who have been deemed 'moderate' (usually by liberal Infidels) have, upon closer inspection, turned out to be regular run-of-the-mill Jew hating, Jihad supporting, Shariah advocating Muslims.
When a Muslim is described as a moderate it invariably means someone who says nice and fluffy things about 'inter-faith dialogue' and 'pluralism' to ignorant Western audiences, but who tells a very different tale when Kaffirs are not around. |
I take it you haven't known too many Muslims personally if this is your view, and I'm sorry for you. |
Moderate Islam meaning tolerant Islam. Go spend some time in Malaysia, a Muslim country, and tell me that they are extremists. What good does ostracizing an entire group of people do? |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8451630.stm
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=9527846
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2577230.cms
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/18156/islam-8
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/24/world/asia/24malaysia.html?_r=1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/crossing_continents/6150340.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6278568.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8151352.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6990454.ece
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/263905.stm |
Yes there are extremists there, just like there are extremist Christians in America. On a whole though I found it to be a extremely tolerant society when I was there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I could provide a boatload of links to the atrocities committed by American Christianists. There are extremists everywhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djsmnc
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| northway wrote: |
I could provide a boatload of links to the atrocities committed by American Christianists. There are extremists everywhere. |
How about extreme Jainists? I want links on that! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mc_jc wrote: |
The huge debate is why the mosque is being build there in the first place- there aren't many muslims in the area and most live across the river in New Jersey- why build it in a place where there are few followers to worship in it?
Ground Zero has become a "sacred place" for many Americans, especially those who lost loved ones during the attacks. There feeling is that the mosque is indeed a slap in the face because it is being built right near the new World Trade Centers.
What many politicians and analysts fear- if plans to build the mosque are delayed or cancelled, it could send a wave of anti-American sentiment throughout the muslim community and throughout the muslim world. But many moderate muslims feel the mosque is wrong for being built there because it will a lot of ill-will against muslims by many Americans, something many fanatics want. |
I think you're on the right lines with this.
In recent years, some cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad were published in Denmark. Freedom of speech in Denmark dictated that the publishers should have the right to publish the cartoons, but many people questioned the taste, decency and wisdom of doing so on the basis that the cartoons were profoundly offensive to many Muslims. Now, an Islamic cultural center, which includes a mosque, is apparently going to be established very close to Ground Zero. Religious freedom in the US seems to dictate that the cultural center has the right to exist. However, many people question the taste, decency and wisdom of the cultural center on the basis that it's profoundly offensive to many Americans.
If I were to use the search engine at left wing newspapers such as the New York Times and the Guardian, instantly I will find articles condemning the cartoonists yet supporting the cultural center, despite the fact that both cause great offence. Likewise, the default position of the right is supporting the cartoonists yet not supporting the cultural center. Supporting the cartoonists and the cultural center seems coherent, and so does not supporting the cartoonists and not supporting the cultural center. But supporting one and not the other is incoherent and perhaps people who take either of these views would care to explain the reasoning behind them? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| djsmnc wrote: |
| northway wrote: |
| I could provide a boatload of links to the atrocities committed by American Christianists. There are extremists everywhere. |
How about extreme Jainists? I want links on that! |
Aren't Jains kind of inherently extreme, given the whole mask business with the fundamentalists? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mc_jc wrote: |
The huge debate is why the mosque is being build there in the first place- there aren't many muslims in the area and most live across the river in New Jersey- why build it in a place where there are few followers to worship in it?
Ground Zero has become a "sacred place" for many Americans, especially those who lost loved ones during the attacks. There feeling is that the mosque is indeed a slap in the face because it is being built right near the new World Trade Centers.
What many politicians and analysts fear- if plans to build the mosque are delayed or cancelled, it could send a wave of anti-American sentiment throughout the muslim community and throughout the muslim world. But many moderate muslims feel the mosque is wrong for being built there because it will a lot of ill-will against muslims by many Americans, something many fanatics want. |
[/quote]
And many people who live in New Jersey work in New York, as the PATH train is a straight shot across the river. Muslims have to pray a lot. It makes sense to have a mosque downtown to suit their prayer needs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seoulio
Joined: 02 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| mc_jc wrote: |
The huge debate is why the mosque is being build there in the first place- there aren't many muslims in the area and most live across the river in New Jersey- why build it in a place where there are few followers to worship in it?
Ground Zero has become a "sacred place" for many Americans, especially those who lost loved ones during the attacks. There feeling is that the mosque is indeed a slap in the face because it is being built right near the new World Trade Centers.
What many politicians and analysts fear- if plans to build the mosque are delayed or cancelled, it could send a wave of anti-American sentiment throughout the muslim community and throughout the muslim world. But many moderate muslims feel the mosque is wrong for being built there because it will a lot of ill-will against muslims by many Americans, something many fanatics want. |
I think you're on the right lines with this.
In recent years, some cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad were published in Denmark. Freedom of speech in Denmark dictated that the publishers should have the right to publish the cartoons, but many people questioned the taste, decency and wisdom of doing so on the basis that the cartoons were profoundly offensive to many Muslims. Now, an Islamic cultural center, which includes a mosque, is apparently going to be established very close to Ground Zero. Religious freedom in the US seems to dictate that the cultural center has the right to exist. However, many people question the taste, decency and wisdom of the cultural center on the basis that it's profoundly offensive to many Americans.
If I were to use the search engine at left wing newspapers such as the New York Times and the Guardian, instantly I will find articles condemning the cartoonists yet supporting the cultural center, despite the fact that both cause great offence. Likewise, the default position of the right is supporting the cartoonists yet not supporting the cultural center. Supporting the cartoonists and the cultural center seems coherent, and so does not supporting the cartoonists and not supporting the cultural center. But supporting one and not the other is incoherent and perhaps people who take either of these views would care to explain the reasoning behind them? |
I dont think you are making a reaosnable comparison here.
Those cartoons have to do with Freedom of Speech, this mosque has to do with freedom of relgion. The people of islam had every right to be pissed off at those cartoons, just as ANY christian is going to get up in arms if similar cartoons were done making fun of Jesus Christ.
The cartoonists decided to exercise their freedom of speech, so did the muslims in response.
The people of new york can voice thier discontent at this mosque, but there is no "freedom to have your opinions dictate others actions" in the American constitution.
This is ignoring the fact that yet again it is total ignorance to blame islam for what the terrorists did, it was not islam, it was not its ideals, it was a group of selective morons reading something and taking only the readings and excerpts that support thier stupid ideals.
As stated many time,we dont blame Christianity when the Westboro Baptist Church Morons picket soldiers funerals bashing gays. And the whole persecution of gays by many Christians proves my last point when they quote Leviticus 11.7 ( though shalt not lie with a man as you do a woman) to condemn homosexuality, even though most of the old testement is ignored for right and wrong moral codes of conduct.
So the ignorance of people in New York "feeling" that this Mosque is disrespectful is beside the point. Many jealous boyfriends "feel" that thier girlfriend talking to another man, or even leaving the house without them is disresepctful. People with meotional reactions with no ability to look at a subject objectively shoudl not be dicating what people can or can not do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djsmnc
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Location: Dave's ESL Cafe
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Seoulio wrote: |
| People with meotional reactions with no ability to look at a subject objectively shoudl not be dicating what people can or can not do. |
Looks like your hand was getting a little tired at the end there. Also, I quote leviticus to condemn homosexuality, but I also don't allow my girlfriend near me until a certain amount of time after her time of the month. Not because of Leviticus though.
Anyway, I agreed with your message and again reiterate that the Constitution provides for the establishment of a mosque or any other house of worship. People are trying to take an emotional stance on the issue, but it's really moot if they truly believe in civil liberties. they do have a right to protest, though! I haven't heard the Ron Paul Republican stance on this issue, but I would imagine he would also in support of the mosque. If not I'm swearing the guy off for good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seoulio
Joined: 02 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| djsmnc wrote: |
| Seoulio wrote: |
| People with meotional reactions with no ability to look at a subject objectively shoudl not be dicating what people can or can not do. |
Looks like your hand was getting a little tired at the end there. Also, I quote leviticus to condemn homosexuality, but I also don't allow my girlfriend near me until a certain amount of time after her time of the month. Not because of Leviticus though.
Anyway, I agreed with your message and again reiterate that the Constitution provides for the establishment of a mosque or any other house of worship. People are trying to take an emotional stance on the issue, but it's really moot if they truly believe in civil liberties. they do have a right to protest, though! I haven't heard the Ron Paul Republican stance on this issue, but I would imagine he would also in support of the mosque. If not I'm swearing the guy off for good. |
You want your girlfriend to stay away from you at that time of the month, hey thats fine, that's between you and your girlfriend at the time, you don't think everyone should follow this rule, and you wouldnt be ignorant enough to try.
If you want to use leviticus ( like many Christians do even though they discount MANY other rules in the OT like selling your daughter into slavery, being pit to death for working on the sabbath, or being stoned if you wear two different threads or plant two different crops side by side) to back your belief that homosexuality is wrong, that is your right. YOu have no right to tell a homosexual, or to use this book as "proof" that their lifestyle is wrong.
You by no means have to have sex with the same gender yourself, but no one has the right to tell another that this is "unnatural" "wrong" "sinful" or "immoral"
So one has the right to tell you how to think, or to dictate what you can or can not do with your life or body.
You can say to a homosexual " I personally think what you are doing is wrong" in a free society we have that right, but in a free society that homosexual also has the right to be equal to you, and to not be treated differently for what others narrowmindedly view as "wrong" when it isn't even any of thier business |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
makemischief
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Location: Traveling
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| northway wrote: |
| djsmnc wrote: |
| northway wrote: |
| I could provide a boatload of links to the atrocities committed by American Christianists. There are extremists everywhere. |
How about extreme Jainists? I want links on that! |
Aren't Jains kind of inherently extreme, given the whole mask business with the fundamentalists? |
Personally I think Sky-Clad Jains are awesome. Way to take faith to the extreme. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is already a mosque in the downtown area:
http://www.masjidmanhattan.com/
OMG! They really are taking over!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's already a mosque there? So what? There's certainly more than one church and more than one synagogue in the town. So, how about a few questions:
- Was the old mosque established by the same sect as the new one?
- Does the old mosque have the same facilities as the new one?
- Is the old mosque of a size sufficient to hold those who wish to worship there?
Note that I really don't think any of these matter a whit as, IMHO, the right to build a house of worship equates to wisdom to build it and therefore it's realy nobody else's business. But it sure would be nice to know if the people whining about the new place actually knew something about the subject of their whining. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It won't be a mosque, it'll be a cultural center. A basketball court, some other recreational facilities, and only two 'prayer centers' at the top two floors. No areas for preaching or service.
And of course, its not being placed at Ground Zero, but two blocks away from the corner of the site. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CentralCali wrote: |
There's already a mosque there? So what? There's certainly more than one church and more than one synagogue in the town. So, how about a few questions:
- Was the old mosque established by the same sect as the new one?
- Does the old mosque have the same facilities as the new one?
- Is the old mosque of a size sufficient to hold those who wish to worship there?
Note that I really don't think any of these matter a whit as, IMHO, the right to build a house of worship equates to wisdom to build it and therefore it's realy nobody else's business. But it sure would be nice to know if the people whining about the new place actually knew something about the subject of their whining. |
Your sarcasm detector and sense of humor seriously could use a boost.
But yes, they don't really know what they are whining about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
