It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

If you like private property you should be for the NY Mosque

page: 1
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   
I got into a heated Debate with a friend today. He is against the Mosque near Ground Zero because it is, as he says, a symbol of fanatical Islam at a sensitive site. I told him I have no idea who had the stupid idea to give Arabs land there, but it is their Constitutional Right not only to build places of worship but more importantly to purchase property. If others failed to purchase the property, that is not the Muslims problem. We got into a very heated and angry Debate in which I finally coaxed the admission out of him that fanatical muslims should not have the right to buy private property.

To which I responded: If you suppress their freedom, you are behaving just like "them".

Im still angry. My friend thinks Im naively unaware of the dangers of extreme Islam - which is totally untrue.

Those who have a problem with this: You should have purchased the property. You FAILED to. Now you"re whining. Get over it. In my Country whoever purchases property owns it and can do whatever he wants there.


[edit on 14-8-2010 by Skyfloating]




posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Exactly.

It seems some Americans seem perfectly content to give up property rights, religious rights, privacy rights, etc all in the name to fight those oppressive terrorists
.

I feel less worried about terrorists and increasingly worried about my fellow country men and women just throwing away our rights in the name of freedom.

What a joke.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Excellent post. You have nailed it to a "T". I have been staying out of these discussions because there is almost no point talking to people about this matter.

You are very right in that the people building this building have gone through all of the appropriate planning committees and have received all of the proper permits. They are doing the work on land that they own with their own money. Seems to me that noone has broken any laws in this matter and there is no reason to complain.

It is amazing to me the level of duplicity in Americans. They so desperately want freedom protected when it comes to *their* rights, but not when it comes to the rights of people they don't like.

I cannot stand hypocrites.

[edit on 8-14-2010 by rogerstigers]



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

If Americans failed to purchase the property, that is not the Muslims problem.


I don't think you meant to imply that Muslims are not Americans. I believe the builders of the mosque are Americans of the Muslim faith.

Beyond that petty little correction, I think you have an important point.

In addition to the right to hold property, I believe freedom of religion is also considered a fundamental right of citizenship.

The idea of a mosque at Ground Zero makes me uncomfortable, but I can think of no legal or moral or ethical reason why they can't build there.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Thank you, Skyfloating!

This is exactly the point I was trying to make in the other thread!

If people are against this mosque being built, for whatever reason, then they are basically saying it's ok for the government to step in and say what people can or cannot build on their own private property. It's a ludicrously hypocritical stance for many to be making, both members of ATS and politicians.

Star and Flag for this very well-written common sense approach to the subject. We need to drop all of the religious fear-mongering and focus on the legal ramifications of this mosque being built.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
And we should be talking about an Islamic Community Centre being built near ground zero that will house a mosque as well a day care facilities and a swimming pool. The construction is a lot more than a mosque.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Another good point, Skyfloating. Carl Paladin, the person running for governor of NY, says he would us eminent domain to block the Islamic center in lower Manhattan. Isn't he brilliant?!



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   
I kind of dislike how in your post you stated "Muslims" and "Americans" as two separate things... seems kind of offensive if you ask me.


Otherwise I see your point and it makes good sense.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBloodRed
 


Oops...true. Good catch. Missed that in the details. No need to call out Arabs either.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Correction: If you like private property you should be for ALLOWING the NY Mosque. Not necessarily for it, but for allowing it. They are complete idiots for wanting to open it on 9/11. Absolute insanity. 9/12 may make some kind of sense for "moving past 9/11" but probably not that day either. Maybe 10/1 would make more sense.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Edit-Note:

You guys are right. I edited the post replacing the word "Americans" with "others". The friend told me today that the property was bought by Saudis, thats why I typed it the way I did. But I did not mean to say that muslims are not Americans.

[edit on 14-8-2010 by Skyfloating]



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sestias
The idea of a mosque at Ground Zero makes me uncomfortable,


Me too. I guess the people who bought it did it for the Symbolism it represents to them.

But the alternative (banning it) makes me even more uncomfortable.


[edit on 14-8-2010 by Skyfloating]



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
If that is even the intent, symbolism only has power if we give it power


Was it really the Saudis who bought the land? Or was it Americans? I haven't seen whether or not this fact has been substantiated.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
If that is even the intent, symbolism only has power if we give it power


Excellent point there Lucidity. The mosque means nothing to me, because the symbolism of a religious building means nothing to me.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


The Mosque means nothing to me, but it means something to others.

I think it would be interesting to find out who exactly owns the property.

But even if it were the most insane person alive - he still has the right to own property if he acts in accordance with the law.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
The government already legislates what can be built, or cannot be built in certain situations....this is no different. It shouldn't be built there at all, but in the name of political correctness, by all means....screw America, help the muslims some more. Brilliant plan actually, they flip us off, get Commrade Obama to sign off on it, then wait for someone to do something so that CAIR, the ACLU and other terrorist extortionist organizations can sue...brilliant plan.....and the enablers here are just rejoicing one further slap to America.........epic fail.



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
The government already legislates what can be built, or cannot be built in certain situations....this is no different. It shouldn't be built there at all, but in the name of political correctness, by all means....screw America, help the muslims some more. Brilliant plan actually, they flip us off, get Commrade Obama to sign off on it, then wait for someone to do something so that CAIR, the ACLU and other terrorist extortionist organizations can sue...brilliant plan.....and the enablers here are just rejoicing one further slap to America.........epic fail.


I think you are missing the point. Not many people like the idea of the Mosque being built there from a symbolic point of view. We just don't want to see our laws corrupted because of the beliefs of a very small group of people. (I know, my argument falls apart in the face of congress.. *smirk*)

Next thing you know, they'll want to prevent any Catholic Church from being built within 2 miles of a school, huh?



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by adifferentbreed
 


So you oppose private property rights then?



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
No, I don't oppose private property rights.......however using that as an example here isn't that good of an arguement. The government in some instances does legislate what can be built where already. Why should this be no different?



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
No, I don't oppose private property rights.......however using that as an example here isn't that good of an arguement. The government in some instances does legislate what can be built where already. Why should this be no different?


Simply put, lack of power on the part of muslim-haters. Take for example the town I live in. They went out of their way to pass a special ordinance preventing "Adult novelty" stores from being built within 5 miles of a church, schoool, or playground. This had the rather interesting effect of completely preventing the store from being built within city limits.

Interestingly enough, they couldn't legally prevent it from being built any other way. They were following all building planning and permitting laws.

In the end, the moral conservatives won that fight because they had managed to gain control of the city council. I am guessing that the anti-islamic people don't have enough control of NYC City Council to win this one.

[edit on 8-14-2010 by rogerstigers]




top topics



 
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join