Originally posted by lee anoma
but the Bill of Rights is the Bill of Rights.
Just because it protects freedom of religion, and attempts to separate state from religion, doesn’t mean people can accurately claim their religion
is being oppressed just because they have to build a religious centre further away, from the towers, than 45-51 Park Place.
Islam does not dictate that a Mosque will be built in this location. And not building a Mosque in this location does not mean people aren’t free
to practice whatever they believe.
Here’s a concept you’ll understand: Imagine if a Christian community wanted planning permission to build a church in a warehouse. Refusing the
planning permission does not mean they (as property entitled U.S citizens) are not free to worship there (as if it was a church).
In practice they could even, probably get away, with using the shops as a Church (barring any structural changes).
Not granting planning permission for this location as a church, merely restricts the erection of permanent structures, but would not (in law) restrict
people perpetually worshiping their (even if they needed to use more than one temporary structure!!).
But if there was a legal ruling to grant planning permission, the implication would be that any religion, could build any religious structure, of
any dimension, ANYWHERE.
If so, the next obvious, stage would be for developers to build “religious buildings” on restricted land (like a national park) as a way of
changing their use to others purposes. Can you imagine the creed of e.g. the “Organised Office Based, Building Development Faith” I bet it would
dictate that either: a house, office, or apartment be built in every acre it occupies!!!
If the grounds are so sacred, why build a Mall on top of it?
The people who died on 9/11 were generally pretty Christian or secular lot. A Mall is a 100% secular use of land, and the use of land for a Mall
(barring churches of course!!) is perfectly within Christianity.
I tend not to think of the land as “sacred”, but more as “emotionally sensitive”. It’s use should therefore be either a public park, or much
the same as before (a Mall is close to both).
You act as if you are patriotic yet smash the basic rights of certain Americans because you fear a message of tolerance??
No, most people agree with freedom of religion. I just disagree with freedom to build what you like, wherever you like. After all, if the absence of
Mosques prevents them from worshipping, then either their faith isn’t strong enough, or otherwise the religion could be forced to concede, that the
absence of any (naturally occurring) Mosque, is itself, a work of God!!! Theological problem being: why would an act of God, prevent you worshiping
Anyway we both know the public anger comes from a wide of issues; and is supported by people with a range of high & low IQ's. The reasons for the
anger are diverse, and in a fairness always valid. After all: one person, one vote.