Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Why do freedom loving tea partiers want to throw away the 1st amendment?
Fear and xenophobia (some help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia) 38 61.29%
Other 24 38.71%
Voters: 62. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-27-2010, 04:41 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
4,897 posts, read 8,317,746 times
Reputation: 1911

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by brattpowered View Post
This post only goes to show how potent the far right media propaganda machine is. "Ground Zero Mosque" makes it sound like it is being built upon the ashes of 3000 dead Americans, not just somewhere else in the neighborhood.
So true. Their propaganda always twists the truth to advance their ideological agenda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2010, 10:07 AM
 
Location: Inis Fada
16,966 posts, read 34,715,420 times
Reputation: 7723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801 View Post
By the way, just for information's sake: There was once a Muslim community in lower Manhattan along Washington Street, way back in the 50's and 60's. It was called Little Syria for the residents' country of origin, and they had their shops along there and were often seen outside smoking their hookahs. The neighborhood was razed to make way for the original World Trade Center.
Little Syria was not razed to build the WTC.

Gotham Gazette -- History Of Arab New York (http://www.gothamgazette.com/commentary/107.history_arab.shtml - broken link)

"The earliest immigrants that we would call Arabs had Turkish passports because of the reach of the Ottoman Empire. But most spoke Arabic and came from Syria and what is now Lebanon. The majority were not Muslims but Catholics, divided among Maronites and Melchites. There were Syrian Orthodox and Syrian Jews. Once here, they were known as Syrians.

This is the community that settled on Washington Street. From the late 19th century until the building of the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel in the 1940s, Manhattan's Little Syria was home to countless immigrants from Syria and Lebanon, again most of them Christian. They were bankers and publishers as well as manufacturers and importers of lace, linen, embroideries and lingerie"



"In 1920, half of all Syrian and Lebanese immigrants in the U.S. lived in New York City. And half of those lived in South Ferry. Meanwhile, the original community on Washington Street faded until the construction of the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel in the 1940s ended the community for good."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 10:26 AM
 
7,871 posts, read 10,129,761 times
Reputation: 3241
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
Apparently, liberalism demands that the liberal abandon all forms of common sense ... because analyzed closely, the liberal agenda is devoid of even the slightest morsel of reason.
What an incredibly stupid thing to say.

Quote:
The sight of liberals marching side by side, hand in hand with Muslims, and championing the Muslim cause leaves the sane mind boggled and confused. The irony is so thick, and the contradiction so overt, it's indescribable. Plainly put, it is simply unreasonable.
Spare us your faux outrage. "Liberals" (whatever that means) as well as "conservatives" (whatever that means) include those that disagree with the construction of this mosque, and those that agree with it. This is not, and never has been, a "liberal" vs. "conservative" issue. I wonder what happens in your brain to conflate it so.

Those that support, or at least are willing to tolerate the mosque some blocks away from Ground Zero understand that they have the right to build it. They understand that not all Muslims are terrorists, nor should they be considered or treated as such. They understand that it is not right nor reasonable to cite the awful tragedy of 9/11 as an excuse for bigotry and discrimination. They, unlike you, are not suspectible to emotional appeal arguments based in bigotry. This is not a "liberal" idea, necessarily.


Quote:
With the steadfast support of feminism, gay rights, minority civil rights
Hold on right there mister. What civil rights AREN'T enacted to protect against the tyranny of the majority? That's the whole idea of having them!

My goodness what a zealot you are.


Quote:
, and sexual freedom as their core identity

I rather think letting people live their lives as they wish, as long as they don't harm or infringe the rights of others is an AMERICAN core identity and an inherently conservative concept.


Quote:
, it's unimaginable how the liberal can reconcile this support of a faith that deplores those fundamental core values in ALL it's manifestations.
Indeed, because IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT AT ALL. It has to do with respecting the values embodied in the Constitution of the United States. People are not to be persecuted for their religious beliefs - that includes beliefs that you or I may not agree with.

Quote:
An intolerant faith which is without question the most inflexible regarding sexuality ... the most oppressive with regard to women ... a faith that advocates the stoning to death of homosexuals .. and a faith that is unapologetically hostile to the very idea of personal freedom, and intolerant of alternative views .... the liberal Muslim cannot exist anymore than a lion can be a vegetarian, or a child molester a good baby sitter.
I know MANY "liberal" Muslims, as well as some good babysitters. Child molesters, on the other hand, should be shot.


Quote:
These two ... the liberal and the Muslim are quite literally opposites in every measurable sense ... and were Muslims ever to become the majority in America, the first actions to be witnessed would be the institutionalized implementation of Sharia Law
Wrong. That pesky Establishment clause that organizations like the ACLU fight so hard to preserve prevents such a thing from ever happening. Unless, of course, Christian fundamentalists get their way and create legal precedent for Sharia law by eroding that protection. It's the "liberals" that are fighting to keep religion - ALL RELIGION - out of government.


Quote:
, and a ruthless and bloody purge of everything and everyone associated with the liberal community next.


Quote:
So when someone suggests the impossibility of reasoning with a liberal, this is far less an opinion than it is an accurate observation. The liberal-Muslim alliance is an example of severe mental dysfunction, and a marriage of the deceived and the deceiver.
I think it is impossible for you to understand that "liberals" are acting on core American principles of free speech and free religion. I despise the KKK, for instance, but I would go to court tomorrow and argue for their right to free speech. I take it your are not a fan of Thomas Jefferson, eh?

Quote:
There are only two possible explanations
Only in your twisted, narrow Universe.

Quote:
... the liberal embrace of the Muslim cause is evidence of severe mental illness ... or the liberal truly does despise western civilization so much that they consciously choose the philosophy of they enemy of thy enemy is my friend, hoping that after the Islamic overthrow of western society, they will be able to circumvent the Muslim threat to themselves at a later date, or are relying on some form of special dispensation for their contributions.
Or, it's you that doesn't have a clue regarding their adherence to the core principles of American society. We don't censor speech just because we disagree with it.

I'm not sure you are really an American, since you seem to have no knowledge of appreciation of the principles on which this country was founded. You seem to have far more in common with Muslim fundamentalists than any American "liberal."


Quote:
I've got news for the gays and feminists and atheists out there ... an Islamic USA would be your greatest nightmare come true. As the old saying goes ... be careful what you wish for ... as you may get it.
And a swipe at the feminists too. How much liquid Geritol did you suck down today?

Quote:
There is no other rational explanation.
We certainly aren't going to see any from you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 06:52 AM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,580 posts, read 84,777,093 times
Reputation: 115100
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhBeeHave View Post
Little Syria was not razed to build the WTC.

Gotham Gazette -- History Of Arab New York (http://www.gothamgazette.com/commentary/107.history_arab.shtml - broken link)

"The earliest immigrants that we would call Arabs had Turkish passports because of the reach of the Ottoman Empire. But most spoke Arabic and came from Syria and what is now Lebanon. The majority were not Muslims but Catholics, divided among Maronites and Melchites. There were Syrian Orthodox and Syrian Jews. Once here, they were known as Syrians.

This is the community that settled on Washington Street. From the late 19th century until the building of the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel in the 1940s, Manhattan's Little Syria was home to countless immigrants from Syria and Lebanon, again most of them Christian. They were bankers and publishers as well as manufacturers and importers of lace, linen, embroideries and lingerie"



"In 1920, half of all Syrian and Lebanese immigrants in the U.S. lived in New York City. And half of those lived in South Ferry. Meanwhile, the original community on Washington Street faded until the construction of the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel in the 1940s ended the community for good."
Hmmm, that's what I read in a newspaper article the other day (so it MUST be true, lol.)

Thanks for the info. I'll try to hunt down the article I read.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 07:14 AM
 
10,793 posts, read 13,544,828 times
Reputation: 6189
Quote:
Originally Posted by brattpowered View Post
Aren't the tea partiers hell bent on "restoring" our country to strict constitutional rule? If so, how can so many of them be against building a community center or place of worship on privately owned land anywhere in this country? All I've seen are arguments that Saudi Arabia won't allow Christian Churches, but is a Christian version of Saudi Arabia really what these freedom-loving constitutionalists are aspiring to??

How come so many tea partiers are willing to throw their principles out the window by either opposing the free exercise of religion or working to establish their own as the state sponsored one?

Maybe I'm missing some bizarro-world excuse that shows that opposing the free exercise of religion is actually pro-constitution (a la "Liberals are the real racists"). Help me out here.

Stop trying to make it seem like a Tea Party Issue. This issue is shared by a wide spectrum of people. There is something inherently wrong and distasteful and insensitive to build a Mosque over the site where Islamic maniacs killed 3000 of our people! Not a a lot of Tea Party people in NY City....and a lot of them are pissed off!

So just cut the Tea Party crap on this one. It does not apply.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
25,826 posts, read 20,700,795 times
Reputation: 14818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgoldie View Post
Interesting point about Daisy Khan, the woman behind this proposed islamic center and wife of the Imam. I read that she is the niece of the Westbury mosque's imam that has been investigated for terrorist activity.
Another interesting point about this woman: she is an advisory member of the National September 11 Memorial and Museum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:36 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,480,794 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by brattpowered View Post
Aren't the tea partiers hell bent on "restoring" our country to strict constitutional rule? If so, how can so many of them be against building a community center or place of worship on privately owned land anywhere in this country? All I've seen are arguments that Saudi Arabia won't allow Christian Churches, but is a Christian version of Saudi Arabia really what these freedom-loving constitutionalists are aspiring to??

How come so many tea partiers are willing to throw their principles out the window by either opposing the free exercise of religion or working to establish their own as the state sponsored one?

Maybe I'm missing some bizarro-world excuse that shows that opposing the free exercise of religion is actually pro-constitution (a la "Liberals are the real racists"). Help me out here.
YOU NEED HELP UNDERSTANDING????

easy

they are not against ANY muslim center..they are against THIS center, who's leader (pastor if you will) preaches the take over of america and sharea law in the usa
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:44 AM
 
Location: Long Beach
2,347 posts, read 2,784,571 times
Reputation: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by brattpowered View Post
Aren't the tea partiers hell bent on "restoring" our country to strict constitutional rule? If so, how can so many of them be against building a community center or place of worship on privately owned land anywhere in this country? All I've seen are arguments that Saudi Arabia won't allow Christian Churches, but is a Christian version of Saudi Arabia really what these freedom-loving constitutionalists are aspiring to??

How come so many tea partiers are willing to throw their principles out the window by either opposing the free exercise of religion or working to establish their own as the state sponsored one?

Maybe I'm missing some bizarro-world excuse that shows that opposing the free exercise of religion is actually pro-constitution (a la "Liberals are the real racists"). Help me out here.
It has been very well established that the Tea Party and their supporters are little more than middle-age white folks who are certainly are xenophobic and gringoistic. They really don't care about America...they care about their middle-aged white folk problems, and other super Conservative and super Christian values-which in all irony would destroy America as sure as I'm sitting here right now.

The Tea Baggers be damned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:46 AM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,580 posts, read 84,777,093 times
Reputation: 115100
[quote=workingclasshero;15248933]YOU NEED HELP UNDERSTANDING????

easy

they are not against ANY muslim center..they are against THIS center, who's leader (pastor if you will) preaches the take over of america and sharea law in the usa[/quote]

I have seen nothing to verify that this is true. He says quite the opposite, although I know some people are going to swear he's just saying that to trick us all. {{JARRING CHORD}}

But let's pretend for a minute that this is true. So what? Do you really think that someone babbling about how their religion should rule the government is any real threat to the United States' Constitution and the people who believe in no state religion? Do you think there is really a likelihood of that happening, especially in New York City of all places????

NYC has 650K Muslim residents. Where are their voices now calling for Sharia Law here? Who is listening besides some possible believers? Why haven't these huge numbers of Muslims risen up and made their intentions known? Why haven't we had more attempts at terrorism than the few we've had since 9/11? If these people are so scary and so powerful that they would easily be able to usurp the government of our largest city, why haven't they done so?

Exactly what is it that you are afraid of?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 10:01 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,480,794 times
Reputation: 9618
[quote=Mightyqueen801;15249076]
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
YOU NEED HELP UNDERSTANDING????

easy

they are not against ANY muslim center..they are against THIS center, who's leader (pastor if you will) preaches the take over of america and sharea law in the usa[/quote]

I have seen nothing to verify that this is true. He says quite the opposite, although I know some people are going to swear he's just saying that to trick us all. {{JARRING CHORD}}

But let's pretend for a minute that this is true. So what? Do you really think that someone babbling about how their religion should rule the government is any real threat to the United States' Constitution and the people who believe in no state religion? Do you think there is really a likelihood of that happening, especially in New York City of all places????

NYC has 650K Muslim residents. Where are their voices now calling for Sharia Law here? Who is listening besides some possible believers? Why haven't these huge numbers of Muslims risen up and made their intentions known? Why haven't we had more attempts at terrorism than the few we've had since 9/11? If these people are so scary and so powerful that they would easily be able to usurp the government of our largest city, why haven't they done so?

Exactly what is it that you are afraid of?
not afraid...but I dont want a hate group in the city anymore than I would want anyother hate group there

an example...if a group (or religion) wants a 'place' to practice their 'states rights' agenga...I have no problem...but if they are saying 'white supremacy' and 'get rid of' the non-whites then I have a problem

...if a group (or religion) wants a 'place' to practice their 'black rights'' agenga...I have no problem...but if they are saying 'black supremacy' and kill the crackers and their babies....then I have a problem

...if a group (or religion) wants a 'place' to practice their "globalization" agenga...I have no problem...but if they are saying end soverncy and get rid of the constitution...... then I have a problem

...if a group (or religion) wants a 'place' to practice their "guns are bad" agenga...I have no problem...but if they are saying 'ban all guns' and 'get rid of' the 2nd amendment................then I have a problem


I have no problem allowing ANYONE free speech...I do have a problem when they want to OPRESS my rights with theirs
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:12 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top