Religious Blackmail

[LexusLover]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100909/ap_on_re_us/us_nyc_mosque_imam

Thu Sep 9, 4:14 am ET
“NEW YORK – The imam behind a proposed Islamic community center and mosque near ground zero cautioned Wednesday that moving the facility could cause a violent backlash from Muslim extremists and endanger national security.

“Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf told CNN that the discourse surrounding the center has become so politicized that moving it could strengthen the ability of extremists abroad to recruit and wage attacks against Americans, including troops fighting in the Middle East.”
……….
Rauf, 61, has largely been absent since the debate over the center erupted earlier this year. He has been traveling abroad, including taking a State Department-funded 15-day trip to the Middle East to promote religious tolerance
______________ End of Quoted Material_____________

Apparently, his “promotion” was a waste of time (on the U.S. taxpayers' dime).

“Religious tolerance” would be to accept the FACT that a majority of the U.S. CITIZENS, who are Christians BTW, do not want the mosque where this Trojan Horse is planned to be built.

The current administration (State Department/Hillary) send this guy overseas to quell anger at U.S. and he comes back with the BLACKMAIL message from the "tolerant Muslim" community!

[blowpop]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

“Religious tolerance” would be to accept the FACT that a majority of the U.S. CITIZENS, who are Christians BTW, do not want the mosque where this Trojan Horse is planned to be built.

I think you're unclear on the concept of religious tolerance. Religious tolerance has nothing to do accepting the tyranny of the majority, just because that majority has a religion in common.

That's pretty much the opposite of religious tolerance.

[boardman]

Han Solo: Bring 'em on, I'd prefer a straight fight to all this sneaking around.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by blowpop

I think you're unclear on the concept of religious tolerance. Religious tolerance has nothing to do accepting the tyranny of the majority, just because that majority has a religion in common.

I am absolutely clear on the concept of religious tolerance .... and ...

I said nothing about "tyranny of the majority" .... you seek to slant the discourse to make that an issue .....

A majority of the voters selected Obaminable to be President for four years .... I do not view that as "tyranny" simply because I disagree with the decision of the majority ....

If this ... He-Mom ... ram rodding the Mosque aka "community center" through was true to his beliefs as to "tolerance" he would accept the FACT that a majority of the citizens of the United States believe that the Mosque ought not to be built on the location selected and be "tolerant" of the feelings that generate that belief ... and relocate the site.

To attempt to turn the discussion into one of the majority of the citizens of the U.S. failing to be "tolerant" of religious beliefs is purely spurious when that same "majority" believes the developers have a legal right to build it where they wish.

Having lived many years in San Antonio I was always mindful that it was inappropriate, although LEGAL, for me to walk into "Maria's Cantina" out on far South Presa and yell: "Remember the Alamo"! And based on your logic of the "tyranny of the majority" I could make a case for my right to say it while the "majority" in the bar were shooting, stabbing, and kicking my ass. And in that context I could say those doing so were not being "culturally tolerant" of me as a stupid, insenitive Gringo.

[Trnch]

Hey Lexus now you just need to go to a bar in the Brothers Neghborhood and yell out the "N" word.

For someone that is on this board and claims religious rightouness should have their head examined. Stop living in fear, thats what your government wants out of you.

Plus I do not believe you went to that bar. They were shooting you, stabbing you, and kicking your ass and you lived? Yeah Right!

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Trnch

Plus I do not believe you went to that bar.

LL wrote: "...I was always mindful that it was inappropriate,...."

Trnch, ... yes, and I've been in "more serious" places ... and you made my point in your knee-jerk response .... I didn't shoot off my mouth and/or otherwise engage in activities that created a negative or "unfriendly" environment. I recognized that "the majority" of those in "the room" would be offended by certain behavior and attitudes and that irrespective of my "legal rights" that it was inappropriate, if not down right UNHEALTHY, for me to do and say INCITEFUL things, whether it got me shot, stabbed, or kicked, or not. So...I didn't get shot, stabbed, or kicked in that bar.

As for "the Alamo" ... contrary to many, I viewed from an historical (factual) point that the engagement on both sides was ignorant and foolish .... and a lesson or two from the incident can be projected into the controversy over "the Mosque" ... I think "the defenders" of "the Mosque" have made an error in judgment and continue to do so, and I think those "protesting" also.

[Trnch]

Those that are so entrench in that mosque event are sheeple. The media and government needed to creat a climax and distraction to what is about to happen to our economy and they found it.

I just can not believe more folks are pissed off over a stupid religious symbol and not raising cane toward the real terroisist.............Wall Street and the Too Big To Fail Corporations/Institutions.

Of course you can say what ever you want in these United States, but the Constitution does not cover Stupidity.

[blowpop]

LL, the Tyranny of the Majority is a specific concept in history. It is when the majority uses their power to take away the rights of a minority. Many of the checks and balances in a democracy exist to prevent this from happening.

Freedom of religion exists in the USA. For all religions. Even if some of its members have done something reprehensible.

Tolerance is not defined as caving to those who disagree with you. Tolerance means that you respect their right to hold a different opinion.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Trnch

The media and government needed to creat a climax and distraction to what is about to happen to our economy and they found it.

I just can not believe more folks are pissed off over a stupid religious symbol and not raising cane toward the real terroisist.............Wall Street and the Too Big To Fail Corporations/Institutions.

Historically, governments, just people, and organized groups of people have sought to "project" attention or "distract" focus from the realities with which they would otherwise be required to face, by selecting individuals or even groups of individuals to blame for some negative situation or incident in order to avoid the necessity of dealing with it.

Some focus on "a stupid religious symbol"...
...

others pick "Wall Street and the Too Big To Fail Corporations/Institutions."

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by blowpop

LL, the Tyranny of the Majority is a specific concept in history. It is when the majority uses their power to take away the rights of a minority. Many of the checks and balances in a democracy exist to prevent this from happening.

Freedom of religion exists in the USA. For all religions. Even if some of its members have done something reprehensible.

Tolerance is not defined as caving to those who disagree with you. Tolerance means that you respect their right to hold a different opinion.

BP: "Tyranny of the Majority" is a catch phrase that someone uses to describe a decision that was made by the majority of the people qualified to make that decision when that someone lost the decision in the vote.

Don't preach to me about "minority rights" and defending them. I suspect I was doing that before you were born. Just saying.

Contrary to your bullshit about "freedom of religion" ... etc., etc. "we" do not have absolute "freedom of religion" in this country. There are limitations, just as there are with "freedom of speech" ....

Hiding behind some religious book or label in order to practice one's "beliefs" in a manner that is contrary to the morays of the socity in which one lives is .... offensive to the mainstream in that society. To cow down to extremists who will try to kill us because we do not agree with their "beliefs" that are contrary to our morays in this society has nothing to do with "religion" ... it has to do with some wimpy, pussy notion that if we are nice to people they will be nice back to us .... ALL THE TIME.

When I interact with other cultures within their native environment, I do NOT tell them how to live and that there is a "better way" of doing things, unless I am asked, or that is the purpose for my presence in the first place. Secondly, I attempt to "blend into their environment" without compromising my personal beliefs and standards. That means I do not impose my personal beliefs and morays on them or their country, and I certainly do not "get in their face about it."

The same when I visit my friends' and neighbors' homes, or even my family's homes. And I am a firm believer in:

"Good fences make good neighbors."

[blowpop]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

BP: "Tyranny of the Majority" is a catch phrase that someone uses to describe a decision that was made by the majority of the people qualified to make that decision when that someone lost the decision in the vote.

The phrase "tyranny of the majority" originates with Alexis de Tocqueville in his Democracy in America and was further popularized by John Stuart Mill, who cites de Tocqueville, in On Liberty; the Federalist Papers frequently refer to the concept, though usually under the name of "the violence of majority faction," particularly in Federalist 10.

(Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority)

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Don't preach to me about "minority rights" and defending them. I suspect I was doing that before you were born. Just saying.

You don't have to remind me of your high opinion of yourself. But I do appreciate the effort.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Contrary to your bullshit about "freedom of religion" ... etc., etc. "we" do not have absolute "freedom of religion" in this country. There are limitations, just as there are with "freedom of speech" ....

I don't recall saying anything about "absolute". But I'm pretty sure that religious organizations are allowed to place community centers or houses of worship in locations where the landowner permits it.

I'm curious. While we're condemning entire religions over the acts of a few lunatics... Does your crusade to restrict houses of worship that may offend folks include protesting Catholic churches that are placed anywhere near schools or parks or places where children play? Because I'm pretty sure that Catholic priests have raped thousands of little kids over the years.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Hiding behind some religious book or label in order to practice one's "beliefs" in a manner that is contrary to the morays of the socity in which one lives is .... offensive to the mainstream in that society.

"Moray?" As in eel? I'll assume you meant "mores", or societal norms. And I don't recall that restricting the locations where religious groups can build is part of our society's norms.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

To cow down to extremists who will try to kill us because we do not agree with their "beliefs" that are contrary to our morays in this society has nothing to do with "religion" ... it has to do with some wimpy, pussy notion that if we are nice to people they will be nice back to us .... ALL THE TIME.

I don't think anyone's asking you (or anyone else) to agree with their beliefs. All you have to do is respect their right to hold them. And I don't care whether or not your eels approve.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

When I interact with other cultures within their native environment, I do NOT tell them how to live and that there is a "better way" of doing things, unless I am asked, or that is the purpose for my presence in the first place.

I don't think the Moslems who wish to build this center are trying to tell you how to live. But that's a very dramatic straw man.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Secondly, I attempt to "blend into their environment" without compromising my personal beliefs and standards. That means I do not impose my personal beliefs and morays on them or their country, and I certainly do not "get in their face about it."

Very good point. I'd hope that you'd hold yourself to the same high standards when dealing with your fellow Americans, no matter their religion.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

The same when I visit my friends' and neighbors' homes, or even my family's homes. And I am a firm believer in:

"Good fences make good neighbors."

And they no doubt keep the eels where they need to be kept.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by blowpop

The phrase "tyranny of the majority" originates

All you have to do is respect their right to hold them. And I don't care whether or not your eels approve.

I don't think the Moslems who wish to build this center are trying to tell you how to live.

Very good point. I'd hope that you'd hold yourself to the same high standards when dealing with your fellow Americans, no matter their religion.

I put the "spelling" remarks aside, ....

... the concept of the majority "tyranny" predatd "America" .... but the application of phrase has been .... stretched somewhat ... and as a "catchy phrase" sounds "good" ....

Madison did have his critics, and in part that is being show today, we hear daily of the "rich" being the targets of income and property redistribution.

As for "their right to hold them" .... the discussion has nothing to do with their "religious" beliefs....and that's why the argument for the Mosque for the Muslims is ... bullshit .... fortunately we have laws that prohibit sex offenders from being within certain distances of schools and playgrounds where children are likely to be ... we can extend that discussion to an illogical conclusion, if a "conclusion" is ever reached.

As for the Catholic Church, whatever roll it plays in allowing extreme elements within the Church to participate in raping and assaulting others then the Catholic Church ought to be held accountable, and if they the Church cannot control its own priests (and leaders) then their location ought to be restricted until the Church isolates those who are doing so and turns them over to the appropriate authorities for punishment. So far I think the Catholic Church, and those leaders in the Muslim faiths have done a crappy job of "cleaning up" their outlaws.

The discussion about the Mosque/"community center" has to do with what is appropriate ..... and now the threat of violence by the one pushing for its location. Since we are reflecting on history: That's how Europe finally was engulfed by Hitler. It was less "painful" for the countries just to sign themselves over to the Germans.

It is now preached that putting the Mosque where the imam wants it ...

... is in our national security interest.

If that is how you want live, then perhaps you do not "fit" in this country.

I rarely know or care what is anyone's religion or religious beliefs. I am usually more concerned about the way they treat others and respect others' concerns and perspectives, irrespective of their "right" to do that which they wish to do.

[blowpop]

I'd forgotten how disjoint your logic can be.

You're right. The concept of "Tyranny of the majority" has been around for a long time. But it's an important one - without it, we end up with mob rule. Laws and rights become irrelevant whenever the majority decides as much.

You'll notice how important this concept was to the founding fathers by their requirements of a supermajority for certain key governmental decision, and by the balance of powers between the three branches of government.

And this argument has everything to do with religion, religious beliefs, and whether or not America is a land for all Americans or simply those that conform to some restricted version of Christianity that is deemed (by who?) to be the American "moray".

That sort of bigoted crap is precisely the mindset that is tearing our country apart. Some folks are compelled to find an "us vs them" in every possible corner, trying to marginalize the "them" because they're not like the "us".

The result is the situation in Iraq, where the different factions hate each other, and are murdering each other based on a religions schism that is over a thousand years old.

Isn't it time to grow up, and not let a difference in belief in superstitious mythology create rifts in our society? If you want to worship your version of the sky god in one building and Abdul wants to worship his version of the sky god in anther, why does it matter, as long as you and Abdul both respect each others' rights?

[eagle]

I dont see nothing wrong for the HOLY mosque to be build near the twin towerd..

Don't blame the 1.1 billion muslims for the terrorist attack, they didnt do it 19 criminals did.

Mmmm by the way i am not a muslim.

[eagle]

Freedom of religion in America? who are you trying to kiddin boy?