Mosque to go up near New York's ground zero

reply to post by Good Intentions



Just for your information, which obviously you are ignorant about.

Early years of the Church of the East
The Church of the East traces its origins to the See of Seleucia-Ctesiphon in Mesopotamia, (present-day Iraq). Tradition holds the See to have been founded by Saint Thomas the Apostle (Tooma Shlikha), Saint Mari and Saint Addai in AD 33. Christian communities have existed in the regions of Assyria, Babylonia, and Persia from the first century. Official recognition was first granted to the Christian faith in the fourth century with the accession of King Yezdegerd to the throne of the Persian Sassanid Empire.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

Oh and btw, Mohammed supposedly had his "revelation" in 610 AD, almost 600 years after Chirstianity, and other religions had existed in the ME.



[edit on 8-5-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by davidmann
reply to post by Wondering302

 

I won't read one sentence of this thread, but I will reply.

What do Muslims have to do with 911, please?

Why do you expect anyone to reply if you won't read Any of our posts? Not sure why I'll even recognize yours but I'll kindly answer your question:

They attacked us.

Thanks

Also, I'd like to add, I find it hard to believe you didn't read any posts in this thread considering you added me as a Foe on here...why? Did you read a post of mine?

[edit on 8-5-2010 by GorehoundLarry]

They shouldn’t build the mosque; in fact people shouldn’t build any separate religion building anywhere anymore.

The reason I say this, is because by building those symbols of political movement they just keep continuing separating humankind. The fear of loosing their belief in a god, prophet, or some kind of unhuman power that helps people to go trough their lives, is a basic territorial instinct. This fear always going to cause wars and terror.

Let’s build one big market or building, where every spiritual or heavenly belief can be practioned. All the religions, all together in one place, open to everyone. This would be also a monument for all the people that have died in the name of religion trough our history. People could see that they don’t have to be afraid to be forced to change their god or way of living. Learn more about other religions and maybe in the future become one religion mixed with the separates ones of today. This place would also never been attacked by fanatics who thinks their way of living is the only good one, because it would means they would destroy their own god.

It would become a world where religion never going to cause problems anymore, only the other well known characteristic things of the human kind .

Originally posted by mararas
.........
The reason I say this, is because by building those symbols of political movement they just keep continuing separating humankind. The fear of loosing their belief in a god, prophet, or some kind of unhuman power that helps people to go trough their lives, is a basic territorial instinct. This fear always going to cause wars and terror.
.........

Why is it that people like you make this kind of claim yet you ignore, and completely forget the fact that ATHEISM through Communism murdered more people around the world than all World Wars, and every major conflict and wars put together?.....

ATHEISM has murdered more people in recent history than ANY religion....

[edit on 8-5-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by Good Intentions

Originally posted by 23refugee

Originally posted by Good Intentions
reply to post by 23refugee

 

Are you seriously saying that Muslims are the only religions with some people against homosexuality?

Are you seriously equating Christianity's current disapproval with public execution?
There sure was quite an outcry in the Christian world when an African contry tried to establish the death penalty for homosexuality.
Didn't hear a thing in any media from your average American Muslim about rescuing gays from those "few" countries and that "1-5 percent" of extremists. Only the gays spoke up. That is the very definition of standing by watching.
Your solution seems to be for me to stay in the Eastern world and avoid those extremists views.
No problem with that.
But somehow, I'm sure I'll be considered the bigot if I speak out about those views gaining a foothold here.

edit to add; By no means do I think every Muslim has an extremist view. They're just as nice as to my face as anyone else who disapproves of me. I'm not that bothered by preaching, doesn't matter who's doing it. But to deny any correlation between Islam and the death penalty for homosexuality in many Muslim countries is disingenuous.

[edit on 8-5-2010 by 23refugee]

I was saying that Muslim's are not the only religion who have some against homosexuality, Christianity being an example.

"Are you seriously equating Christianity's current disapproval with public execution?" No, I am equating Christianity's current dissaproval with the Muslim's current dissproval, on the grounds that both images are effected by a few extremists.

Also, maybe you didn't here anything in the media, because the media isn't exactly unbiased. But let's say it was, just because someone doesn't make it on T.V. to speak their thoughts, doesn't mean they don't have those thoughts. Where were you on the media, I didn't see you their outcrying against it, therefore you are standing by watching.

I didn't say to avoid the western world, I said nobody is forcing you to move there, convert to Islam, in order for you to have to convert back to whatever, recieving their harsh penalties. If you decided to convert to Islam here in the United States, nobody would have a problem if you changed your mind and converted back to Christianity. You would not be excucuted, as you would in some cultures.

"But to deny any correlation between Islam and the death penalty for homosexuality in many Muslim countries is disingenuous." Who's denying correlation? Yes there is correlation between Islam and death penalty for homosexuality. There is also correlation between Churches and Pope's raping little boys. However correlation does not prove causation. It is not the religion that did it, it is the invidividuals, or particular culture.

Why are you changing this to a debate on homosexuality anway? There are way too many examples on both sides to list them. If I could sit here and think I could probly find over 100 correlations between religions and certain events. However, the correlation we are discussing, is Islam, and terrorist attacks.

Listen, I do not think it's okay for anybody to execute someone because they choose to live their life a certain way. I am just saying that you cannot blame a whole religion, for what a certain culture does. How would you like to be accused of being a rapist, because a pope raped a little boy?

Edit: Many typos, and clarification

[edit on 8-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 8-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 8-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 8-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

Is it not true that in countries where Islam outnumbers other faiths, their religious views are enshrined into law, often by religious leaders?
How is this not causation?
Many cultures still have a problem with gays, yet only theocracies are putting them to death.
If you'll remember, homosexuality entered the debate when you assured me that Islam had no intentions of ever ruling me.
As for that last little jab, diparaging a religious figure held sacred by millions seems hypocritical considering your admonishments against religious intolerance.
Either way, I'm confident I would handle that accusation with more grace than you would were I to accuse you of being a pedophile because someone married a 9 year old girl.
Note the lack of Catholics, extremist or otherwise, demanding your head.

[edit on 9-5-2010 by 23refugee]

[edited for double post]

[edit on 8-5-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by 23refugee
Is it not true that in countries where Islam outnumbers other faiths, their religious views are enshrined into law, often by religious leaders.
How is this not causation?
................

Fundamentalist Islamic countries have also a history of using every mean at their disposal to get rid of other religions from the areas they conquered by force.

This has been true since Mohammed set forth to unite all tribes and make them follow Islam by any way, and then to spread Islam around the world by force.

Thank you ATS for reminding me how racist, biggoted and ignorant mankind can be.

I could talk about the very first ammendment to the US constitution but others have already brought that up only to be told that is isn't a first amendment issue. That's funny...

So you know what the real issue is?

YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT BE OFFENDED.

Aww, a family member died in the WTC on 9/11. I DON'T CARE.

A mosque close to ground zero offends you. I DON'T CARE.

YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT BE OFFENDED.

but hey, when they come to round you up next. I'M GOING TO LAUGH.

Please all humans, kill yoursevles now.

Originally posted by Jean-Luc


Aww, a family member died in the WTC on 9/11. I DON'T CARE.

Well let me be the first to say,

We don't care what you think and we don't care that you don't have respect for the dead.



Thanks.

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry

Originally posted by Jean-Luc


Aww, a family member died in the WTC on 9/11. I DON'T CARE.

Well let me be the first to say,

We don't care what you think and we don't care that you don't have respect for the dead.



Thanks.

seems from your avatar you don't either.

why respect people who no longer exist. what will they be offended?

just a reminder. I have never offeneded anyone ever, neither have you. People can however CHOOSE to take offense at the things I say. But I'm not doing the offending. The act of being offended happens inside ones own mind.

Originally posted by Jean-Luc

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry

Originally posted by Jean-Luc


Aww, a family member died in the WTC on 9/11. I DON'T CARE.

Well let me be the first to say,

We don't care what you think and we don't care that you don't have respect for the dead.



Thanks.

seems from your avatar you don't either.

why respect people who no longer exist. what will they be offended?

just a reminder. I have never offeneded anyone ever, neither have you. People can however CHOOSE to take offense at the things I say. But I'm not doing the offending. The act of being offended happens inside ones own mind.

This is why I make my point that we should let them build the mosque then hijack one of their camels and fly it into the mosque when they are all kneeling and facing mecca or whatever it is they claim to be doing to take all of those smoke breaks at work.

I realize that an action like that would cut down the number of taxi cabs and quickie mart employees available, but that is a sacrifice worth making.

I typed "Islam terrorism" into Youtube to try to find some examples of Muslims condemning extremism. Here's one from the first page of search results, they all condemn extremism btw.



The Muslim community has taken a clear stand against terrorism and one of the goals for the new mosque is to "serve as a major platform for amplifying the silent voice of the majority of Muslims who have nothing to do with extremist ideologies. It will counter the extremist momentum." [source: OP article]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by ForAiur]

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


So how come churches and worship have existed in Soviet Russia. I am so fed up of people who know nothing about communism apart from Fox news!

You cannot discriminate against any religion in the land of the free. ISLAM did not destroy the twin towers. People did - terrible people.

America should never fight ignorant fundamentalism with their own ignorant fundamentalism.

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Tiger5]

By the reasoning in many of the posts here, we should remove all churches from the USofA as well.

If we can't have a mosque because of what some weirdos have done in the name of Islam by their twisted interpretation, then we should apply the same argument on the base of those twisted people who kill abortionists or firebomb clinics in the name of the christianity.

Originally posted by Jean-Luc

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry

Originally posted by Jean-Luc


Aww, a family member died in the WTC on 9/11. I DON'T CARE.

Well let me be the first to say,

We don't care what you think and we don't care that you don't have respect for the dead.



Thanks.

seems from your avatar you don't either.

why respect people who no longer exist. what will they be offended?

just a reminder. I have never offeneded anyone ever, neither have you. People can however CHOOSE to take offense at the things I say. But I'm not doing the offending. The act of being offended happens inside ones own mind.

Wrong. You have indeed offended many individuals, especially with that post that shows disrespect the massacred. Me? You goddamn right I've offended people! Pretty much every person on this website, lol. Sorry, but everyone offends Everyone in one way or another.

As for my avatar, what're you talking about? It's from the remake of Dawn of the Dead. How is that disrespecting the dead?

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by Good Intentions
Already been done. Google churches in Iraq, and then middle-east while your at it. Also, if you go a couple pages back in this thread, there are examples presented for you.

For crying out loud... The Middle East was not always Muslim, (even with Islamization by force, and compulsory with the taxes non-muslims have to pay there are still other religions including Christian people in many parts of the ME) and CHRISTIANITY was in a lot of places in the Middle East... Those were not just built now....

Chirstianity existed in many places in the ME before the expansion and invasion of Islam in case you didnt know...

BTW, just like they want to build a mosque next to ground zero, how about we build a Christian/Catholic church now in a Muslim sacred area....


[edit on 8-5-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

And there are ones built after this as well. Your telling me every single church in the middle east is from before the expansion of Islam?

And if you go back to the post I was reffering to, I'll go and find it for you and edit this post with the link in, there are examples of talks about building more churches, even in sacred areas. (Edit to add here: I skimmed through about the last 10 pages and could not find the link. Not about to read 15 pages of posts to find it, so sorry I could not get the link for you. It is there for you however, if you wish to go and find it in this thread)

Ground zero is not a sacred religious area however. So why would we be talking about building a Church in a Muslim sacred area, because they are bulding a Mosque near a place where people of all religions were murdered?

If you honestly think that because the attackers were Muslim, that makes the grounds sacred to all other religions, then I will use your logic against you. Hypothetical Scenario: A group of Catholic/Christian-extremists, such as the whole Huntaree militia issue, murdured many people in their neihboorhood.
Since the attackers where Catholic/Christian, building a church in that area will not be tolerated, despite the fact that most Catholics are not this way, and despite the fact that now the Catholics would now have limitted freedom to express their religion, because of the fact that non-Catholics, cannot look past the labels the attacking group carried, rather then the group themselves.



[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


What am I ignorant about, I never said every church was built after the expansion of Islam. There were churches built after 600A.D., and there are plans to build more. Still doesn't have anything to do with building a Mosque at Ground Zero.

Ground zero is not a every-religion-but-Islam sacred land. 9/11 victims were from all races and relgions, and ground zero lies within the United States of America, which under the constitution, we are all free to practice religion. Regardless of how other countries policies of freedom of religion, the topic of this article is a Mosque near Ground Zero, in the United States.

Originally posted by 23refugee
Is it not true that in countries where Islam outnumbers other faiths, their religious views are enshrined into law, often by religious leaders?
How is this not causation?
Many cultures still have a problem with gays, yet only theocracies are putting them to death.
If you'll remember, homosexuality entered the debate when you assured me that Islam had no intentions of ever ruling me.
As for that last little jab, diparaging a religious figure held sacred by millions seems hypocritical considering your admonishments against religious intolerance.
Either way, I'm confident I would handle that accusation with more grace than you would were I to accuse you of being a pedophile because someone married a 9 year old girl.
Note the lack of Catholics, extremist or otherwise, demanding your head.

Their religious view are shrined in to law because they prefer a Theocracy. Yes, it is a religious leader, who is a leader, in other words person, not a religion. The causation is the leader/group of leaders of a country. The correlation is religion. I ask you, do people kill people, or do guns kill people?

Sure, certain cultures/countries/theocracies, are putting them to death. The Muslim in the United States, or England, or Spain, or 2 blocks from ground zero, are practicing their religions just as anyone else would practice Chrstianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and they are NOT putting anybody to death, nor are they involved in the act because they are from that religion.

No, homosexuality entered the DEBATE when you started arguing about homosexuality policies, by saying "if we could hear from the gay men who where executed". I was not debating homosexuality, I used homosexuality as an example of correlation and causation, to prove my point that the acts of one do not represent the group he belongs to. I could have picked any other example, yet it doesn't matter which act I chose, because either way, the act done by a person that belongs to a religion, does'nt make the religion at fault. You however, took that one example, and decided to start a whole new debate on it.

That leader is not held sacred by all Muslims, it is held sacred by many that live in those cultures/country/theocracy. Those countries are by far not the only place containing Muslims. Once again, because a certain culture/country act a certain way, doesn't mean you can paint a whole religion with the same brush, including people who live here in the U.S. to get away from that religous intolerance.

And why did you pick ONE example of a Catholic/Christian fault, that isn't even that bad compared to others, and compare it to alll cases of Muslim fault? There were many accusations of rape, and other things done wrong by the church as well. Either way, no matter what the case is, you cannot paint everyone with the same brush.

Yes, I don't see any Christans/Catholics extremists demanding my head. Nor do I see any Muslim extremists demanding my head. AND NEITHER DO YOU. If you are not living in those countries/cultures you speak of, why are you claiming that they are demanded your head, or trying to rule you? I mean the only way for that to happen, is if you went there and converted to Islam. And if you did, that is obviously something you know will happen, so as long as you don't force yourself into the situation, you have NOTHING to worry about.

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

[edit on 9-5-2010 by Good Intentions]

Hopefully oil is found on Mars (this is just me speculating) and then the Middle-east can be blown off the face of the earth...there'd be no reason to put up with the bull# and hate that comes forth from that area.

Did we not learn anything from the Chamberlain policy of appeasement? Instead of tranquilizing the rabid wolve....we just throw it the scraps it wants.

Originally posted by HolgerTheDane
By the reasoning in many of the posts here, we should remove all churches from the USofA as well.

If we can't have a mosque because of what some weirdos have done in the name of Islam by their twisted interpretation, then we should apply the same argument on the base of those twisted people who kill abortionists or firebomb clinics in the name of the christianity.

That is not the debate...it is whether a Mosque should be allowed to be built at the doorstep of ground zero.

What would you think will happen if a bunch of white christians move to Mecca and try to build a church there in the middle of the city?

That's my view. I don't care about the rest of the country; build your mosque wherever (I'm sure there are mosques in NYC anyways), but to go and basically - and perhaps not purposely - # on the American public is such a way as they propose is just stupid, and disrespectful.