Obama supports Ground Zero mosque. Religious freedom or is he being too PC?

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.The story: Controversy swells as Obama supports Ground Zero mosque

quote:

---

US President Barack Obama's endorsement of a controversial plan to build a mosque just blocks from Ground Zero poured fuel Saturday on a raging debate over religious freedom and sensitivities over the 9/11 attacks.

---

Obama's main point is this:

quote:

---

"This is America," Obama said, "and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are."

---

But critics have offered this in rebuttle:

quote:

---

Obama "has abandoned America at the place where America's heart was broken nine years ago, and where her true values were on display for all to see," the group said.

​

"Now this president declares that the victims of 9/11 and their families must bear another burden. We must stand silent at the last place in America where 9/11 is still remembered with reverence or risk being called religious bigots."

​

Building the mosque "is a deliberately provocative act that will precipitate more bloodshed in the name of Allah," the group claimed.

---

Personally, I could care less if a mosque was built on ground zero. I don't think ground zero is anything more that a piece of property where something bad happened once. This personal attatchment to this piece of land as some kind of representation of freedom and America, to me, seems rather pointless.It's terrible what happened to those buildings, and worse what happened to the people in them. But that's it really. Why the constant reminder of what happend that day and the treatment of this property as holy ground?Do we run the risk of turning ground zero into a quasi-Jerusalem? Seems like not allowing the mosque gives priority to the rights of Christians and Jews before the rights of the common citizen, be them from any religious or secular background.Thoughts?- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

A friend of mine made a good point. While yes, there is freedom of religion and the mosque can't be stopped from being built, people are sensitive about it.Now, asking Muslims to acknowledge this is the same as when they ask us (normal people) to be sensitive to their beliefs, such as, not showing an image of their prophet on TV.So I think they should build the mosque, but it would be awesome if across the street from the mosque someone built a giant poster of their prophet.Question is, would they accept someone doing that?- Oni

My point is that freedom is freedom, religious and speech.If they want religious freedom, then they can't get mad when someone is exercising freedom of speech. No one cares that they're offended, just as they don't care if the mosque offends others. Freedom is freedom.- Oni

But that's the question: do you think someone would be allowed to do it? They've censored every image on American TV, a highly doubt a poster would be allowed. Someone would point to the fact that it's offensive, but, when someone considers the mosque offensive the Constitution is thrown at them.- Oni

Should be allowed is one thing, but would they be allowed is my question. We've seen it censored on TV, what would suggest they'd allow a poster of it especially in front of a mosque.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

Why doesn't that apply equally for the people wanting to build the mosque? Shouldn't they choose not to do it?- Oni

I don't see how this addresses my point. The prophet has been censored on TV because it is offensive to muslims to show his image, however on the same show (South Park) they showed, I think, George Bush taking a shit on Jesus.In this situation, the mosque is considered offensive by MANY people. Rightfully so, they are still allowed to build their mosque.Freedom of religion protects them. But freedom of speech is ignored when the image of the prophet is concerned.It seems hypocritical. Why should we give a shit about how muslims feel when it comes to their prophet's image, but then they don't give a shit when it comes to the feelings of those who find the mosque offensive?- Oni

I agree, but shouldn't the Constitution protect us both?There are some who find the mosque offensive. There are some who find the image of the prophet offensive. But it seems like in the US the muslims and their feels are considered before the feelings of others for fear of, well, another ground zero somewhere else.- Oni

Agreed. But since it was American's insulting Muslims, Obama didn't speak up about it. He didn't make it a government issue, like he has in the case of the mosque. Right, but I just meant the way we favor one side's feelings over the other. There are people who sincerely feel the mosque is insulting, but we disregard those feelings in support of freedom of religion.I think Huntard is right in that we're just scared.- Oni

Because those fucktards are offended. But yes, I agree 1000%. It's because we've become pussies.- Oni

I wasn't arguing that, I was just pointing out the insensitivity from the Muslims building it.- Oni

Censorship is not restricted to just the government, many news, radio and TV stations censor material that they don't want aired. But the corporate spinelessness resulted in Trey and Matt being censored by Comedy Central. Granted, it wasn't the government doing it, but I think that would still be considered censorship.At least that's what the news called it.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

They are not sensitive to those who feel it's offensive.I agree that they shouldn't feel offended, but then again, I also feel Muslims shouldn't be offended by us airing and image of their prophet. Agreed.- Oni

But that fact that they are building regardless of how others feel is them being insensitive.- Oni

Ok, arrogant works too.- Oni