It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Christians launch crusade against new U.S. mosque

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 03:38 AM
I live in the UK and we nearly have as much mosques as churches here. The mosques we have in our town are not what you would call discreet either. It looks like you are driving through the center of Baghdad.

I don't really have a problem with them and in fact they add a bit of character to the city. It seems the Christians in the US are just slightly more fanatic than our Christians here. Whats the problem with having a mosque?

On the other hand i do see some peoples points of view because places like Iran, and other eastern countries would not let us build churches and if we did they would probably end up as ashes.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 03:44 AM
reply to post by t0minit8181

I think you mean Saudi Arabia. Iran has plenty of churches to service the 300,000 or so Iranian Christians, many of which are considered important cultural and historical sites within Iran.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 03:45 AM
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

well you learn something new everyday. I couldn't imagine a church in a place like Iran.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 03:54 AM
reply to post by t0minit8181

You've been watching too much news.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:14 AM
reply to post by t0minit8181

Just 'cause there are crazy people doesn't make it an asylum. Iran's actually a pretty nice place from what I hear. It's too bad certain nations are so desperate for Iran to be a new "evil empire" to justify permanent war footing.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:25 AM
reply to post by laiguana

does America have any history of 'home grown' Islamic terrorism?

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 04:28 AM
So much for freedom of religion..................

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:24 AM

Originally posted by TheBorg
I think that if the City Council was thinking, they would have shot back to the people that not only does the Constitution afford all of us the freedom of expression, but also of religion!! Because of this, I think all religions should be equally represented across any and every city.

If Satanists, or any other religion wanted a place to worship, they should be allowed to have one just as much as we Christians want 'em. To be any other way is extremely unfair to those that practice a faith other than Christianity.


[Edit for punctuation and clarity.]

[edit on 31-1-2008 by TheBorg]

People never read the whole damn thread. *sigh*

the city did not ban a Mosque, it is to big for the small town.. they have to A. Fund the repairs to streets and sewer expansion them selves, or build a much smaller Mosque.


posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 08:53 AM
Sooo... would someone tell me how this is different from the abuse Christians sometimes suffer by Islamic hands?

Neither is right.

That might be so rockpuck, however the comment that "We believe that Chirstianity is right and Islam is wrong" speaks volumes about the real source of the decision.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by grover]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 09:14 AM
reply to post by grover

And if you lived in the AREA LIKE I DO and you know the DDN you would know that the comment was not from the city council at ALL.. it was from a "speak out" section, where they ask morons on the street downtown what they think about certain issues.

But.. WND is a much better source of information.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 09:38 AM

Originally posted by goosdawg
Considering the type of hateful, god-fearing folks they would have had for neighbors, the approval of their variance request would probably have been only the beginning of their troubles in such a backwards, regressive community.

More knee-jerk intolerance from the ignorant people with imaginary friends.

yeah, because building a mosque would be the key to an enlightened "proressive", non backwards community

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 11:12 AM
It seems a zoning issue has been taken over by extremeist. Find somewhere else to build the thing simple enough.


posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 12:17 PM
It's nice browsing through an article, but once trying to read "beyond what's written" is chaotic. People will always try to find the meaning behind something whethere there is SOMETHING or NOTHING at all, just to ruffle those feathers

In the end, the article might be all about the zoning and nothing else.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:19 PM
reply to post by palehorse23

I think this is ridiculous and I think that even though they said it was for traffice and sewage reasons, Barry Jude pretty much admitted the real reason when he said that they (he) thought Islam was wrong. I am tempted to email the ISGD and share my opinion with them.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:26 PM
Looking at it from the Americans point of view:

I don't blame them really, because after 9/11 I don't think people are that tollerant still and there is still an unease about the cultural differences. We seem still at war with their laws and our democracy, its not over, Islam and democracy has not shaked hands yet. So by having this influx of Muslims you wonder why they are making them selves at home like they are your friends, many people thought they may have come to liberate them selves from that rule not bring it with them. Amoungst that you will find Muslims who want a way out just to be restricted again, many honour killings happen because some just want to be liberated and do what teens do.

But Building a Mosque will make more Muslims immigrate to that area, more will likely to stay rather than go back and for some that is a threat. But even if that sounds odd there will always be their intollerence that will affect the local rules of the land. This is not demonising but the fact is, the more Muslims you have the less rights you will have along with it, it's also a moral victory that is not spoken of but is a driving force to hinder non-Mulsim belivers of their way of life.
You will probably see in this town new laws that will effect schools like for example not have crosses in classrooms and another being grave yards too and various prayer times and rooms, everywhere along with a courtroom battle costing local authorities a few thousand of tax payers money. This has happened already else where because one Muslim spoke up and everyone had to change due to political correctness madness. Islam is not just a Religion its a political force too, it comes with rules and changes and the liberal minded will allow their own cultural losses that disturbed no one for years to come to an end.

I guess it has some threat and fearmongering to changes that come with it. There will be a divide of the people and there will be an area of town where people would avoid, this has happened near me also let alone read about other towns. There is a difference in faith and it's not the same Jesus that they preach. One died one did not, its no different from an atheist saying he was a normal man because that defines the faith.
Arabs are the decendents of Abraham too, not Islam it self, ever since then the two have split and has be written that the Arab line will always be against its cusons the Jews and are today.

All this will come to play in what this town may think, I do not mind so much as I guess every faith has a right, but Islam is not just a faith its a law too and you either tollerate its laws or you don't and that is where the fight for keeping our freedoms is accused as religious bashing as one can always put the switch on and say it's the religion they are discriminating against and it gets confusing. In a free society you will find Muslims are
still under Muslim laws and the ones who want to escape will be treated no different in America or the West as if they were in the Middle East and the price could be death for honour, the fear is here with them.

But from a point of view of these simple Americans who have probably a 50s point of view of the world, its probably a threat and a bad time for Muslim relations with America who are still on edge.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by The time lord]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:43 PM
Ahhh another chance to get to know and love your neighbor shot down by the 'my gods better than your god mentality'.

Where is my george bush card board cut out..wait a minute here it is.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 05:59 PM
Having read the original article, and the entire thread to date, I'm going to suggest that if jumping to conclusions was an Olympic event, posters here could probably bring home the gold, the silver, the bronze, and at least a few honorable mentions.

There seems to be an assumption that all the members of the city council are Christian, and that they hate Islam. Does anyone here know the actual people in question? If so, I haven't seen them post. I also haven't seen anyone post that they live in the city in question, or that they attended the city council meeting. In short, we know next to nothing about the people who made the decision, the information upon which that decision was based, or the circumstances in which the decision was made. That rather limits our ability to make any sort of informed commentary on their decision.

Even assuming that they were all Christians (not a given by any means, even in a small town in the middle of the Bible Belt), it's still a long stretch to assume that the denial of a zoning variance was religiously motivated. I can speak to this issue from both sides of the aisle, since I was a city councilman for six years, mayor of a small town for two years, and pastor of a small church (in a different town) for four years. I've presided over zoning votes, I've participated in zoning votes, and (amusingly enough) had building plans shot down by zoning votes. When my small church decided to build an actual building (rather than meeting in a rented storefront), we applied for a permit, and got turned down because of traffic flow...there were already four churches in the area, and while traffic was fine Monday through Saturday, traffic around noon on Sunday was enough to make a preacher cuss. Trust me. When we got turned down, I didn't hire a lawyer and threaten a suit, I got the Building and Grounds committee together and we found a new site. We got turned down there because of problems with the electrical service. We still didn't sue, we found a third site and applied for yet another permit. The last time I visited my old stomping grounds, New Hope Baptist Church was alive and well....I got invited to the current pastor's home for Sunday dinner, and was invited to speak at the evening services.

The point of my rather rambling story is that we don't know anything of consequence about the situation, but rejection of a zoning variance doesn't constitute a "Crusade" constitutes rejection of a zoning variance, nothing more, and nothing less. It's not an infraction of freedom of religion, freedom of expression, nor is it persecution.

As for people in the town having opinions (pro or con) about Islam as a faith, doesn't freedom of expression extend to those people as well? Even if you don't agree with them, they have a right to express their opinion.

I'd suggest that if folks here are really worried, they should keep an eye on this situation. If this congregation gets turned down six or seven times, then you might have evidence of a "Crusade", but one rejection really doesn't measure up.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 06:20 PM
reply to post by Brother Stormhammer

Read whole thread eh?

I am from the outlying area of Sugercreek.
Less then 10 min drive actually.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 06:41 PM
Really, who cares what the Baptist pastor allegedly said. He is entitled to his opinion - just like everyone else. Even if it is fals and stupid. In fact, dont most religions, including Islam say that their religion is the right way and the others are wrong?

The ONLY issue here is this:

The rejection, officials say, was based only on the expected sewage and traffic impact, the Dayton Daily News reported

However, Sugarcreek Township Administrator Barry Tiffany insisted, "I can tell you that religion was never brought into it by the board at any time."

The end. This is NOT a religious issue. However, WND tried to make it one.

Can anyone provide any evidence that the board was secretly influenced or bribed to lie about the reason why they were denied? Is there any evidence pointing to the board members hating Islam?

[edit on 31-1-2008 by greeneyedleo]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 06:45 PM
reply to post by greeneyedleo

The fact that it was a WND story in the first place should have been enough to say "BS!" ..... but some people never learn... OP .. talking to you here.. the WND is NOT a news source.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in