"Ground Zero Mosque", Idiotic debate Options

[thefunkyredcaboose]

Anyone else think this whole debate is as asinine as I do? It isn't at Ground Zero and it isn't a Mosque.

Americans...

[sh4rpz]

I read about this a few months back. Can I just ask quickly if the Mosque being built at ground zero, or not? What is the factual info about the site and where it is etc?

Edit: Just read that it is 2 blocks away from Ground Zero. Anyone can confirm this? http://abcnews.go.com/WN/president-obama-s...ory?id=11401964

This post has been edited by sh4rpz: Aug 23 2010, 6:51 am

[Sakhmet2]

I read about this a few months back. Can I just ask quickly if the Mosque being built at ground zero, or not? What is the factual info about the site and where it is etc?

A quick question, with a long answer.

1. as said above, it's not a "mosque". It is a [http://wallwritings.wordpress.com/2010/08/18/right-wing-blogger-provoked-attack-on-islamic-center/]Muslim community centre with a prayer room[/url], or "Islamic Center". It will also have a basketball court, culinary school, swimming pool etc.
Officially this is known the Park51 project.
2. it's not at Ground Zero. It is several blocks away. The site was apparently picked from a map of Manhattan by a guy who won a reality show:
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/0...mosque_site.htm
As noted, there are fast food chains in the neighbourhood, also some kind of "gentleman's club" is within the same walking distance of Ground Zero. (One assumes from this that some booty to go with that shake shake shake is okay in this sacred precinct).

It is also a red herring to refer to "liberals" as being the ones discussing religious freedom:

Some liberals try to make this a religious freedom issue, not so subtly implying the opponent are bigots. It's dishonest and meant to stifle debate.

Some conservatives are in favour of it on the grounds of religious freedom, notably Grover Norquist:
http://dailyradar.com/beltwayblips/story/n...-will-hurt-gop/
Pat Buchanan critcized fellow conservative politician New Gingrinch for "political opportunism" for his stand: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/17/vi...al-opportunist/

But this is probaby the best and most fun summary to read:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...und-zero-mosque

Cordoba House, as it's known, is a proposed Islamic cultural centre, which, in addition to a prayer room, will include a basketball court, restaurant, and swimming pool. Its aim is to improve inter-faith relations. It'll probably also have comfy chairs and people who smile at you when you walk in, the monsters.
To get to the Cordoba Centre from Ground Zero, you'd have to walk in the opposite direction for two blocks, before turning a corner and walking a bit more. The journey should take roughly two minutes, or possibly slightly longer if you're heading an angry mob who can't hear your directions over the sound of their own enraged bellowing.
Perhaps spatial reality functions differently on the other side of the Atlantic, but here in London, something that is "two minutes' walk and round a corner" from something else isn't actually "in" the same place at all. I once had a poo in a pub about two minutes' walk from Buckingham Palace. I was not subsequently arrested and charged with crapping directly onto the Queen's pillow. That's how "distance" works in Britain. It's also how distance works in America, of course, but some people are currently pretending it doesn't, for daft political ends.
New York being a densely populated city, there are lots of other buildings and businesses within two blocks of Ground Zero, including a McDonald's and a Burger King, neither of which has yet been accused of serving milkshakes and fries on hallowed ground. Regardless, for the opponents of Cordoba House, two blocks is too close, period. Frustratingly, they haven't produced a map pinpointing precisely how close is OK.

This post has been edited by Sakhmet2: Aug 23 2010, 7:31 am

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

1. as said above, it's not a "mosque". It is a [http://wallwritings.wordpress.com/2010/08/18/right-wing-blogger-provoked-attack-on-islamic-center/]Muslim community centre with a prayer room[/url], or "Islamic Center". It will also have a basketball court, culinary school, swimming pool etc.
Officially this is known the Park51 project.
2. it's not at Ground Zero. It is several blocks away. The site was apparently picked from a map of Manhattan by a guy who won a reality show:
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/0...mosque_site.htm

It is also a red herring to refer to "liberals" as being the ones discussing religious freedom:

Some conservatives are in favour of it on the grounds of religious freedom, notably Grover Norquist:
http://dailyradar.com/beltwayblips/story/n...-will-hurt-gop/
Pat Buchanan critcized fellow conservative politician New Gingrinch for "political opportunism" for his stand: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/17/vi...al-opportunist/

But this is probaby the best and most fun summary to read:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...und-zero-mosque

Last I checked, there is also a mosque at the location. Just because there's a lot of other stuff, doesn't disqualify it from being a mosque.

[Sakhmet2]

Last I checked, there is also a mosque at the location. Just because there's a lot of other stuff, doesn't disqualify it from being a mosque.

It kind of does. Just like a prayer room in a YMCA/YMHA does not make the building a church or synagogue.

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

It kind of does. Just like a prayer room in a YMCA/YMHA does not make the building a church or synagogue.

At the same time, no one goes around calling the YMCA a Christian or Jewish center. They stamped the place with the Islamic label, they can reap the whirlwind of the decision.

[thefunkyredcaboose]

At the same time, no one goes around calling the YMCA a Christian or Jewish center. They stamped the place with the Islamic label, they can reap the whirlwind of the decision.

Yes, but that doesn't give the media the free right to lead the story by claiming it is a Mosque. That is the problem.

"Community Center two blocks from Ground Zero" just doesn't have the same alarmist ring to it.

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

Yes, but that doesn't give the media the free right to lead the story by claiming it is a Mosque. That is the problem.

"Community Center two blocks from Ground Zero" just doesn't have the same alarmist ring to it.

I would point out that proponents of the project, such as Nancy Pelosi, are calling it a mosque as well.

Also, the building is already in use as a Muslim prayer space. Strangely, there's nothing that would tell one that this is the case if you were to walk past the building.

And for what it's worth, calling it a Muslim Community Center instead of a mosque still would have the same alarmist ring to it.

[thefunkyredcaboose]

I would point out that proponents of the project, such as Nancy Pelosi, are calling it a mosque as well.

Also, the building is already in use as a Muslim prayer space. Strangely, there's nothing that would tell one that this is the case if you were to walk past the building.

And for what it's worth, calling it a Muslim Community Center instead of a mosque still would have the same alarmist ring to it.

Anyone calling it a mosque is inaccurate, no matter what side of the debate they are on. Putting a chapel in a Hospital doesn't make it a church, just as having a mosque in the community center doesn't make it a mosque.

Either only has an alarmist ring if your perspective is one that is alarmed by Islam in general, which is really the whole point of my argument.

If Americans treat Muslims as great as you claim, what is the big deal with this one building? Things surely aren't as bad as they may be elsewhere, but that is just one big "See? At least we aren't doing THAT" argument that seems to ignore the present situation.

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

Anyone calling it a mosque is inaccurate, no matter what side of the debate they are on. Putting a chapel in a Hospital doesn't make it a church, just as having a mosque in the community center doesn't make it a mosque.

Either only has an alarmist ring if your perspective is one that is alarmed by Islam in general, which is really the whole point of my argument.

If Americans treat Muslims as great as you claim, what is the big deal with this one building? Things surely aren't as bad as they may be elsewhere, but that is just one big "See? At least we aren't doing THAT" argument that seems to ignore the present situation.

Did you miss the link to the actual Park51 site where it specifically states that there will be a mosque? They're not calling it a chapel, not calling it a prayer room, they're calling it a mosque. So apparently, they were all getting it right and it's people who are claiming that there isn't going to be a mosque who are obfuscating the truth.

And again, even opponents of the project are claiming they have a legal right to build it. But why do it? You yourself said it probably wasn't a smart thing to do. The community doesn't want it there. But in the name of peace and understanding, they're going to build it anyway?

Sorry, when you know in advance that your plans are going to have the direct opposite effect of the stated purpose of said plans, I call bullshit on the reasoning for the place.

[thefunkyredcaboose]

Did you miss the link to the actual Park51 site where it specifically states that there will be a mosque? They're not calling it a chapel, not calling it a prayer room, they're calling it a mosque. So apparently, they were all getting it right and it's people who are claiming that there isn't going to be a mosque who are obfuscating the truth.

The point is that the structure isn't just a mosque. I know there will be a mosque, I've acknowledged that, but have you watched any of the news reports? You will hear them talk of a thirteen story mosque and that simply isn't accurate! To call the whole building a mosque is to completely sway the story. I'm through arguing that point though, if you can't understand my beef with that now then there is no reason to keep harping on it.

As for whether it is stupid or not, I think the key there is whether the reason people are upset is legitimate or not. I don't think it is, and clearly you do and that is where we differ.

I still don't think it is possible to oppose it without believing that all of Islam should be held responsible for 9/11. If someone would make an argument for me where that isn't the ultimate implication then that would be great. As it stands, I have a huge problem with it, just like I do with those who would hold all of Christianity accountable for pediphile priests, bombed abortion clinics, the slaughter of the crusades, and Eddie K stealing from his bandmates.

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

The point is that the structure isn't just a mosque. I know there will be a mosque, I've acknowledged that, but have you watched any of the news reports? You will hear them talk of a thirteen story mosque and that simply isn't accurate! To call the whole building a mosque is to completely sway the story. I'm through arguing that point though, if you can't understand my beef with that now then there is no reason to keep harping on it.

As for whether it is stupid or not, I think the key there is whether the reason people are upset is legitimate or not. I don't think it is, and clearly you do and that is where we differ.

I still don't think it is possible to oppose it without believing that all of Islam should be held responsible for 9/11. If someone would make an argument for me where that isn't the ultimate implication then that would be great. As it stands, I have a huge problem with it, just like I do with those who would hold all of Christianity accountable for pediphile priests, bombed abortion clinics, the slaughter of the crusades, and Eddie K stealing from his bandmates.

I would ask whether you've seen the news reports where people claimed there was no mosque there at all? Because I've seen those too. If you're telling me that news coverage sucks, you're preaching to the choir. It's frustrating having to read 15 different accounts of the same thing just to figure out what is actually true.

And the issue you're having is you're asking people to think rationally about something that's hitting them on a visceral level. The fact that we are coming up on the 10th anniversary and so little has been accomplished has added to that nerve being exposed and rubbed raw.

Believe me, as a Catholic, I'm tired of having to take every snide comment about my religion in stride because there's not much else that can be done. So, far be it from me to hold the many responsible for the actions of the few. But that still doesn't mean I'm going to change my opinion that this was a poorly conceived idea from the get go for a group that is supposedly preaching peace and harmony. There are other ways to accomplish the goal they've set without pissing off an entire community.

The fact that they don't seem to give a damn who they hurt, despite the reasoning given for the place, doesn't speak well of them or their intentions. When the actions start matching the words, I'll be more inclined to believe them.