Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Obama supports Ground Zero mosque. Religious freedom or is he being too PC?
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 46 of 406 (574577)
08-16-2010 6:07 PM


This Salon report gives some background on how the current controversy started.

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 47 of 406 (574621)
08-16-2010 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by slevesque
08-15-2010 3:11 PM


More issues with this post
You are presenting these points as if they are from the author of the article.
None of these points are in the article.
In the article the word married is not used. Nothing about home at all. All of these points come from the second link you provided not the first article. The second link has a list of a number of things that are separate and not from the article or a book by the same author. This link is from a website from a born againer. You can tell from her description of herself that the site is rife with bias.
So therefore in the post where you criticized me for expecting you to stand behind your post and you claim this info came from a researcher.
How can I vouch for their accuracy, when I'm not the one who did the research ? However, Philip Jenkins is professor of history and religious studies at Penn State University, he wrote a book about ''The myth of the pedophile priest'' as he calls it.
Now I find out that none of this came from him. These claims are from a Father Dwight Longenecker. There are a number of problems with your post. First of all you present the points as your own. They are not. Yes you post a link to the place where you got them, but you should have put them in a quote box so that readers could see they were not you points. Then you presented info as if it came from university professor and from his book. The good father is being very deceptive in claiming that these points came from Mr. Jenkins book. I would actually call it lying. That is why I questioned your source. I see you have no idea what the original source even said. So how about you go find support for the statements made by Longenecker.
There are 2 references to ephebophilia(notice how it is spelled) in Mr. Jenkins' book. Neither says homosexuals are more prone to it. You should no better than to post crap as some sort of authoritative source.
Oh how do I know what is in the book? I did something called research.
http://www.amazon.com/...sis/dp/0195145976#reader_0195145976
You might want to try it before you jump all over someone for asking for you to defend a spurious source you use.
The burden of proof is on you to show any legitimate reason to think his research is bullshit. Until then you are just showing your bias.
Gee it ain't his research you palmed off. Your post clearly showed your bias. I certainly am not showing any. All I want is facts. Go ahead and show me that the statements are backed by factual evidence. That is all I want.
PS.
Cut and pastes not put in a quote box are rarely a good idea.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by slevesque, posted 08-15-2010 3:11 PM slevesque has not replied

archaeologist
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 406 (574662)
08-17-2010 7:44 AM


This should be an interesting thread, I think.
I've even heard my liberal friends saying we shouldn't allow it because the families of the 9/11 victims don't want it.
not knowing whatothers have said, here are my thoughts:
the muslims are not dumb and they would know that seeking permission to build near ground zero would cause problems. they may have the right to build there but they should have enough sense to decide not to.
but arabs are known for building over important sites of non-muslims that way they can claim it is muslim hioly ground and bar others form it. we see this througout the middle east, especially in israel and where former byzantine churches had been built.
now i am thinking that the right to free religion does not include constructing buildings and such can be barred by the government if they so choose without worry. regardless of the precedent of previously constructive religious structures.

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by hooah212002, posted 08-17-2010 10:44 AM archaeologist has not replied
 Message 50 by DrJones*, posted 08-17-2010 12:06 PM archaeologist has replied
 Message 51 by jar, posted 08-17-2010 12:40 PM archaeologist has not replied
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-17-2010 11:55 PM archaeologist has not replied

hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 49 of 406 (574702)
08-17-2010 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by archaeologist
08-17-2010 7:44 AM


now i am thinking that the right to free religion does not include constructing buildings and such can be barred by the government if they so choose without worry. regardless of the precedent of previously constructive religious structures.
On what grounds, then, would the government have for not allowing a run down old Burlington Coat Factory to be turned into a religious center that is blocks away from ground zero?

"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise
A morning filled with 400 billion suns
The rising of the milky way"
-Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by archaeologist, posted 08-17-2010 7:44 AM archaeologist has not replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 50 of 406 (574711)
08-17-2010 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by archaeologist
08-17-2010 7:44 AM


but arabs are known for building over important sites of non-muslims
You do realize that arabs and muslims are not the same thing right?

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by archaeologist, posted 08-17-2010 7:44 AM archaeologist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by bluescat48, posted 08-17-2010 11:18 PM DrJones* has not replied
 Message 66 by archaeologist, posted 08-18-2010 5:13 PM DrJones* has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 51 of 406 (574717)
08-17-2010 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by archaeologist
08-17-2010 7:44 AM


archaeologist writes:
but arabs are known for building over important sites of non-muslims that way they can claim it is muslim hioly ground and bar others form it. we see this througout the middle east, especially in israel and where former byzantine churches had been built.
And Christianity is known for having destroyed religious sites, materials, writings and even customs of all other religions it encountered.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by archaeologist, posted 08-17-2010 7:44 AM archaeologist has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by subbie, posted 08-17-2010 12:47 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 52 of 406 (574718)
08-17-2010 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by jar
08-17-2010 12:40 PM


And Christianity is known for having destroyed religious sites, materials, writings and even customs of all other religions it encountered.
But that's okay, because Christianity is the One True Religion and the others are liars, frauds, cheats and baby eaters.
And Jesus told them to do that.
Except where he didn't, but they ignore that part because they don't like it.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by jar, posted 08-17-2010 12:40 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 53 of 406 (574818)
08-17-2010 11:18 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by DrJones*
08-17-2010 12:06 PM


You do realize that arabs and muslims are not the same thing right?
Yes, some Arabs are Muslims, but some Arabs are Christian.
Some Muslims are Arabs, but some Muslims are Persians, Pakistanis, Bengalis, Malaysians and several groups from Africa South of the Sahara.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by DrJones*, posted 08-17-2010 12:06 PM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by jar, posted 08-17-2010 11:22 PM bluescat48 has not replied
 Message 60 by Rrhain, posted 08-18-2010 1:31 AM bluescat48 has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 54 of 406 (574819)
08-17-2010 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by bluescat48
08-17-2010 11:18 PM


And these days an increasing number of WASPMs; White Anglo Saxon Muslims.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by bluescat48, posted 08-17-2010 11:18 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 55 of 406 (574822)
08-17-2010 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by archaeologist
08-17-2010 7:44 AM


the muslims are not dumb and they would know that seeking permission to build near ground zero would cause problems.
How would they know that? There've been mosques near Ground Zero for years and no-one complained, let alone tried to turn it into a national issue.
Of course, if the wingnuts had complained previously, it would have been the Blessed Saint George who'd have been explaining that the President doesn't have the power to cut the First Amendment out of the Constitution with his special Executive Scissors, and so back then it was in no-one's interest to make a fuss about it; just as no-one was demonstrating against high taxes until Obama lowered them; and just as no-one cared about "czars" until Obama followed the example of every other recent President by appointing them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by archaeologist, posted 08-17-2010 7:44 AM archaeologist has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 56 of 406 (574824)
08-18-2010 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Hyroglyphx
08-15-2010 8:14 AM


quote:
(Not my material)
What's next? An anyeurism if he keeps it up.
No, it is nothing like any of those things. Hitler was the cause of Auschwitz. Islam did not cause the terrorist attacks. GWB destroyed Baghdad. Islam did not destroy the towers. And there is a sushi place not too far from Pearl Harbor.
I guess the Muslim families who lost their loved ones in the terrorist attacks don't count for anything. What's that? Not everybody who died who died in the towers was non-Muslim? Actual Muslims were killed? How can that be? Everybody knows there aren't any Muslims in the United States let alone New York State or New York City and none of them ever worked in the World Trade Center. Everybody knows that they were warned about the attacks at least if not actually carrying out interference to prevent rescue workers from responding. There certainly weren't any Muslims among the rescue workers.
And because of that, there shouldn't ever be any locations where Muslims gather in the United States anywhere.
This has nothing to do with "insulting gestures." It is plain bigotry, pure and simple.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-15-2010 8:14 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 57 of 406 (574825)
08-18-2010 12:43 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by ringo
08-15-2010 12:37 PM


ringo writes:
quote:
My guess is that any new mosque in Colorado or Florida will have at least one idiot making the same complaint that it's an insult to 9-11 victims.
Your wish is granted. There's a mosque being built in Temecula, CA (just outside of San Diego, nearly 3000 miles from New York) that is being protested due to its "terrorist" implications (because any time two Muslims get together, they're plotting jihad, doncha know.)

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by ringo, posted 08-15-2010 12:37 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(1)
Message 58 of 406 (574826)
08-18-2010 1:02 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by slevesque
08-15-2010 1:50 PM


slevesque writes:
quote:
If terrorist christians had stunned an entire nation by killing thousands of people all at once, (in other words, an analog situation), then Mr. Jack's analogy would have been useable.
You mean you've forgotten about Timothy McVeigh? The largest terrorist act the country had ever seen was carried out by a Christian on somewhat religious grounds.
Christians seem to forget about all of the terrorist acts they carry out:
Waco
Atlanta Olympics bombing
Tiller murder
LA Jewish Community Center shooting
Oh...and then there was that whole Holocaust thing, the genocide of the American Indians, slavery, the invasion of Iraq by the United States, etc.
Yeah, Christians never carry out terrorist acts in the name of their god.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by slevesque, posted 08-15-2010 1:50 PM slevesque has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 59 of 406 (574828)
08-18-2010 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by slevesque
08-15-2010 3:11 PM


slevesque writes:
quote:
Priestly celibacy is not the issue - married men are more likely to abuse children than unmarried
Most child abuse takes place within the home.
You don't see any connection between those two? The reason married people (not just men) are more likely to abuse children than unmarried people is due to the access to the child. When the child you are going to abuse is sleeping in the room down the hall, it's much easier to carry it out than if you have to have a parent give you their child.
It's why though it is true that girls are more likely to be the victim of sexual abuse overall, when it comes to touching by someone that isn't the parent of the child, it's boys who are more likely to be victims. Why? Because we as a society don't have a problem with leaving our boys alone with other adults. Girls, however, tend to get looked after more.
quote:
Most of the cases of euphebophilia are homosexual in nature
Incorrect. While they tend to be between men and boys, they are not "homosexual" beyond a simplistic counting of penises and vaginas.
quote:
however the politically correct do not want this problem to be associated with homosexuality.
Incorrect. Instead, they have asked the abusers themselves whether or not they consider themselves gay or straight and the overwhelming majority of them identify as straight. It is because they cannot handle a relationship with a mature person of the opposite sex that they go for the androgyny of a younger person.
The real issue with the Catholic church's sex scandal isn't so much that it happened so much as it is the coverup that ran rampant within the Church: The refusal to bring any sort of punishment upon those who were found out to be abusing children, the shuttling of abusers from one diocese to another where they could find fresh meat, the refusal to notify authorities, etc.
There's a retreat just outside Albuquerque where I used to live that was used as a "treatment center" for priests caught abusing kids where they were kept for a while and then shipped out again.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by slevesque, posted 08-15-2010 3:11 PM slevesque has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-18-2010 1:39 AM Rrhain has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 60 of 406 (574829)
08-18-2010 1:31 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by bluescat48
08-17-2010 11:18 PM


bluescat48 writes:
quote:
Some Muslims are Arabs, but some Muslims are Persians, Pakistanis, Bengalis, Malaysians and several groups from Africa South of the Sahara.
In fact, most Muslims aren't Arabs. Indonesia is the largest group.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by bluescat48, posted 08-17-2010 11:18 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024