Should the Mosque at Ground Zero be allowed

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Should the Mosque at Ground Zero be allowed?

Poll ended at Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:39 am

Yes. It is legal and they have every rite.
11
26%
No - Give the area national park status to put an end to the issue.
16
37%
No - This should not be allowed even if it is legal.
16
37%
 
Total votes : 43

Postby Rip Rokken » Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:00 am

BobbyinTN wrote:Rip, I love your opinions on this subject.

Man, the Bible sure is misogynistic, ain’t it? LOL


LOL - well again, to believe all those things you mentioned you have to dispense with the thought that all scripture is God-breathed. Or at least that our most used translations accurately describe the author's intent.

I'm surprised nobody's asked me about my current signature yet.
Image
User avatar
Rip Rokken
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9203
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:43 pm
Location: Vadokken City

Postby BobbyinTN » Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:03 am

Rip Rokken wrote:
BobbyinTN wrote:Rip, I love your opinions on this subject.

Man, the Bible sure is misogynistic, ain’t it? LOL


LOL - well again, to believe all those things you mentioned you have to dispense with the thought that all scripture is God-breathed. Or at least that our most used translations accurately describe the author's intent.

I'm surprised nobody's asked me about my current signature yet.


So Rip, tell us about your current signature. LOL

And I don't believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Anything that man has touched can not be completely holy. There are some beautiful words in the Bible, but to think one has to live by it completely is kinda crazy to me.
User avatar
BobbyinTN
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:12 am

Postby Rip Rokken » Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:50 am

BobbyinTN wrote:
Rip Rokken wrote:I'm surprised nobody's asked me about my current signature yet.


So Rip, tell us about your current signature. LOL


They are two totally contradictory statements.

BobbyinTN wrote:And I don't believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Anything that man has touched can not be completely holy. There are some beautiful words in the Bible, but to think one has to live by it completely is kinda crazy to me.


Neither do I anymore, and I wanted to more than anything. After believing without hesitation since I was a child, I got to a place a couple of years ago where nothing I saw in Christendom today, or most importantly, in my lifetime of personal experience, could sustain my belief any further. That was probably the scariest time of my entire life.
Image
User avatar
Rip Rokken
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9203
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:43 pm
Location: Vadokken City

Postby Rip Rokken » Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:52 am

stevew2 wrote:I dont understand your gay bingo


Sure you do, and your butthole is the free space.

Image
Image
User avatar
Rip Rokken
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9203
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:43 pm
Location: Vadokken City

Postby parfait » Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:55 am

For fucks sake. It's simple: If it's not illegal to build it there, then they can.

And Stevew, if you're joking, which I hope for your own sake you are; then you're a funny motherfucker. Pure gold, dude!
User avatar
parfait
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1527
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:38 pm
Location: France

Postby Rip Rokken » Fri Aug 20, 2010 7:07 am

Monker wrote:
Rip Rokken wrote:I'll just be blunt -- as much as our modern society doesn't want to face it, there's no way to get around the fact that according to the Bible, homosexuality is a sin, just the same as murder, lust, etc. etc. etc.


So what. It's not up tanybody in society to judge people with the law of God. In fact, you are commanded NOT TO.


You didn't read the next part of my post apparently, because that's exactly the point I made. :)

Monker wrote:
Rip Rokken wrote: There is absolutely no way to use the Bible to justify homosexuality.


I'm not. But, I also feel that using that against somebody and quote scripture in a thinly veiled personal attack is also wrong, and very hypocritical.


2 Timothy 3:16 -- All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.

So if a person believes that, then it's perfectly ok to use the Bible to do so. But I don't think anyone saw where I was really coming from in all this, and judging or attacking anyone was the last thing I was trying to do.

Monker wrote:
Rip Rokken wrote:So on a faith level, I think the majority of people find whatever is comfortable, or if we are miserable people to start with, we find expressions of faith that keep us miserable.


That is human nature. Many people get an opinion in their head and they only allow things into their head that support that opinion, and ignore everything else. That is just the way people are, I think...about everything, not just the Bible.


Of course it is, and I agree 100%. We all see and interpret the world thru filters. The Black Panthers for example are going to see everything thru the filter of racism, so you'll never be able to convince them the white folk are anything but devils with hidden motives for anything good they do. Christians see the world thru their own filter, and interpret God's handprint on everything, whether it makes sense or not. And we all tend to filter out the things that threaten our belief system.
Image
User avatar
Rip Rokken
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9203
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:43 pm
Location: Vadokken City

Postby stevew2 » Fri Aug 20, 2010 12:39 pm

parfait wrote:For fucks sake. It's simple: If it's not illegal to build it there, then they can.

And Stevew, if you're joking, which I hope for your own sake you are; then you're a funny motherfucker. Pure gold, dude!
you ll never know lol
User avatar
stevew2
MP3
 
Posts: 13073
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:20 pm
Location: Maryland

Postby stevew2 » Fri Aug 20, 2010 12:44 pm

Rip Rokken wrote:
stevew2 wrote:I dont understand your gay bingo


Sure you do, and your butthole is the free space.

Image
Bobby number is B 69
User avatar
stevew2
MP3
 
Posts: 13073
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:20 pm
Location: Maryland

Postby steveo777 » Fri Aug 20, 2010 12:49 pm

WTF is up with people who are voting yes? Do they really think that building this there is the right thing to do?

I guess idiots don't understand the difference between what is legal and what is inappropriate. :evil:
User avatar
steveo777
MP3
 
Posts: 11311
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 12:15 pm
Location: Citrus Heights, Ca

Postby donnaplease » Fri Aug 20, 2010 7:00 pm

I think the fact that they are talking about dedicating this building on the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks is further evidence that the proponents of this building are not considering the effects that the attacks had on the American public. It is a slap in the face to those that have reservations about the true significance of the building and it's location. Given the purported history of the Imam with regard to his comments about 9/11 and America, it is even more suspect. This is not about the right to practice one's religion - I haven't heard or seen anyone suggest that. I can imagine that the families of the victims may feel like they are being attacked all over again, and that breaks my heart. :(
User avatar
donnaplease
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3435
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:38 am
Location: shenandoah valley

Postby Melissa » Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:52 pm

donnaplease wrote:I think the fact that they are talking about dedicating this building on the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks is further evidence that the proponents of this building are not considering the effects that the attacks had on the American public. It is a slap in the face to those that have reservations about the true significance of the building and it's location. Given the purported history of the Imam with regard to his comments about 9/11 and America, it is even more suspect. This is not about the right to practice one's religion - I haven't heard or seen anyone suggest that. I can imagine that the families of the victims may feel like they are being attacked all over again, and that breaks my heart. :(


Yep: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIlCiX0LIqA

I agree and it has nothing to do with the right to practice their religion. It's the location that is nothing but completely ANTAGONIZING to the thousands of survivors of the thousands who died RIGHT THERE. The Twin Towers are not the only location of "Ground Zero", so sick of seeing people use that as the excuse, just because it's not right where the Twin Towers stood. Doesn't matter. The destruction from what happened that day when both finally came down covered a HUGE area, that proposed site included. So putting it THERE is nothing but a huge slap in the face to the survivors of all who died as well as a huge victorious f*ck you to this entire country. JMO of course.
Melissa
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5542
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:00 pm

Postby Michigan Girl » Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:17 pm

I concur w/the above two listed ladies and anyone else who voiced the same...this has nothing to do w/rights, imo, and everything to do w/tact. Anyone remember what that means? Tact~A KEEN SENSE OF WHAT TO SAY OR DO TO AVOID OFFENSE..SKILL IN DEALING W/difficult or delicate situations. a sense of what is appropriate, tasteful or aesthetically pleasing...I hope we've learned something here! This is a heartless move! ;)
Michigan Girl
MP3
 
Posts: 13963
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:36 am

Postby Melissa » Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:29 pm

Michigan Girl wrote:I concur w/the above two listed ladies and anyone else who voiced the same...this has nothing to do w/rights, imo, and everything to do w/tact. Anyone remember what that means? Tact~A KEEN SENSE OF WHAT TO SAY OR DO TO AVOID OFFENSE..SKILL IN DEALING W/difficult or delicate situations. a sense of what is appropriate, tasteful or aesthetically pleasing...I hope we've learned something here! This is a heartless move! ;)


Exactly. It's "offensive" to them to see the words "Merry Christmas" in stores that time of year, so this country let it's balls shrivel up and caved in to not putting signs like that up so as not to "offend" them :roll: yet we're not supposed to say anything about one of their worship sites being built on top of the ashes of people who died by extremists killing them in the name of THEIR religion. Well too bad, people are speaking and I'm glad. This country NEEDS to get it's balls back, it's circling the drain enough already.
Melissa
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5542
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:00 pm

Postby Rip Rokken » Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:37 pm

Melissa wrote:
Michigan Girl wrote:I concur w/the above two listed ladies and anyone else who voiced the same...this has nothing to do w/rights, imo, and everything to do w/tact. Anyone remember what that means? Tact~A KEEN SENSE OF WHAT TO SAY OR DO TO AVOID OFFENSE..SKILL IN DEALING W/difficult or delicate situations. a sense of what is appropriate, tasteful or aesthetically pleasing...I hope we've learned something here! This is a heartless move! ;)


Exactly. It's "offensive" to them to see the words "Merry Christmas" in stores that time of year, so this country let it's balls shrivel up and caved in to not putting signs like that up so as not to "offend" them :roll: yet we're not supposed to say anything about one of their worship sites being built on top of the ashes of people who died by extremists killing them in the name of THEIR religion. Well too bad, people are speaking and I'm glad. This country NEEDS to get it's balls back, it's circling the drain enough already.


I think it's a set up. Once it's built, Gov. Schwarzenegger will hire Stallone and Lundgren to go take it out.

Image
Image
User avatar
Rip Rokken
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 9203
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:43 pm
Location: Vadokken City

Postby Behshad » Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:35 am

Melissa wrote:
donnaplease wrote:I think the fact that they are talking about dedicating this building on the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks is further evidence that the proponents of this building are not considering the effects that the attacks had on the American public. It is a slap in the face to those that have reservations about the true significance of the building and it's location. Given the purported history of the Imam with regard to his comments about 9/11 and America, it is even more suspect. This is not about the right to practice one's religion - I haven't heard or seen anyone suggest that. I can imagine that the families of the victims may feel like they are being attacked all over again, and that breaks my heart. :(


Yep: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIlCiX0LIqA

I agree and it has nothing to do with the right to practice their religion. It's the location that is nothing but completely ANTAGONIZING to the thousands of survivors of the thousands who died RIGHT THERE. The Twin Towers are not the only location of "Ground Zero", so sick of seeing people use that as the excuse, just because it's not right where the Twin Towers stood. Doesn't matter. The destruction from what happened that day when both finally came down covered a HUGE area, that proposed site included. So putting it THERE is nothing but a huge slap in the face to the survivors of all who died as well as a huge victorious f*ck you to this entire country. JMO of course.


Even though there were many muslims who died there ? :roll:
Image
User avatar
Behshad
MP3
 
Posts: 12584
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:08 am

Postby Melissa » Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:48 am

Behshad wrote:Even though there were many muslims who died there ? :roll:


Did I single them out and say "except the Muslims who died there too"? NO, I didn't. You must have missed where I said ALL who died there.
Melissa
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5542
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:00 pm

Postby Michigan Girl » Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:01 am

That's ridiculous ...what about the Catholic's who died there, then?! This should be about ALL AMERICAN'S and AMERICA ...not religion! And someone who has the best interest of the people, all people, should be knocking some heads...;)
Michigan Girl
MP3
 
Posts: 13963
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:36 am

Postby conversationpc » Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:04 am

parfait wrote:For fucks sake. It's simple: If it's not illegal to build it there, then they can.


Duh...That's what everyone's been saying.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby conversationpc » Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:13 am

Best statement I've heard on this issue yet...

From Dr. Tony Beam on The Christian Post...

But if no criminal activity can be proven and no terrorist connection can be made, we must not call upon the forces of any government to prohibit the project. Freedom means being free to be wrong without being forced to be right by the strong arm of government. I am personally offended by those who think building this mosque on this particular site is a good idea. But I would rather be personally offended by a bad idea than to be part of the government enforcement of what it thinks is a good idea.

The President is certainly politically tone deaf on this issue but he also happens to be constitutionally correct. As Christians, we must not allow our emotions to guide our thinking when it comes to the understandably visceral response we have when we think about what happened on 9/11. Part of what makes our country different from every other country in the world is our ability to be offended without taking our offense out on those who have the right to be wrong. We should condemn the building of this mosque near hallowed ground. We should use all of our powers of persuasion to convince the owners of the property that nothing good can come from raising a symbol of the religion that inspired the death of so many within site of their final resting place.

But when all the arguments have been made and all the pleading has been exhausted, we must respect and revere the fact that we live in a country where religious freedom and the right to private property must be protected even at the expense of our hurt and anger.


http://www.christianpost.com/article/20 ... index.html
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby S2M » Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:17 am

This debate has become the Abortion debate. To the proponents of the Mosque it has become about 'rights', the decency factor has taken the back seat...look at it this way...I have the RIGHT to that subway seat, but the DECENT thing to do is give it to the senior who can barely stand....A woman has the RIGHT to do do with her body what she chooses, however, the DECENT thing to do is not make that life growing inside her pay for HER mistake....the Muslims have religious RIGHT to build that Mosque, but the DECENT thing to do is not build it there....and shouldn't Muslims start acting DECENT? They're fucking hated enough already....
Tom Brady IS the G.O.A.T.
User avatar
S2M
MP3
 
Posts: 11981
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:43 am
Location: In a bevy of whimsy

Postby Melissa » Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:40 am

That article above is good. And pretty much says the same points I tried to make... that IS hallowed ground, and it would not HURT them to place it just a BIT further away so that it's not on top of THAT ground. Whereas just the thought of it being placed on that ground IS HURTING many surviving loved ones of the dead who weren't even "lucky" enough to have body parts to bury. And it's sad people can't even just see the sensitivity of that.
Melissa
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5542
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:00 pm

Postby Rhiannon » Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:42 am

S2M wrote:the DECENT thing to do is not make that life growing inside her pay for HER mistake....


"HER" mistake... LOL, you're funny.
Rhiannon
MP3
 
Posts: 10829
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Postby Behshad » Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:42 am

Michigan Girl wrote:That's ridiculous ...what about the Catholic's who died there, then?! This should be about ALL AMERICAN'S and AMERICA ...not religion! And someone who has the best interest of the people, all people, should be knocking some heads...;)



My point is , we wouldn't have this hoopla , if they were building a church there.


And smelly , how do u see a mosque being build a block away from the GZ as a slap in the face to the victims family ?!
Image
User avatar
Behshad
MP3
 
Posts: 12584
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:08 am

Postby steveo777 » Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:55 am

Behshad wrote:
Michigan Girl wrote:That's ridiculous ...what about the Catholic's who died there, then?! This should be about ALL AMERICAN'S and AMERICA ...not religion! And someone who has the best interest of the people, all people, should be knocking some heads...;)



My point is , we wouldn't have this hoopla , if they were building a church there.


And smelly , how do u see a mosque being build a block away from the GZ as a slap in the face to the victims family ?!


That's why I said let's be fair and allow NO churches there. Religion got us this problem, actually.
User avatar
steveo777
MP3
 
Posts: 11311
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 12:15 pm
Location: Citrus Heights, Ca

Postby Melissa » Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:56 am

Behshad wrote:
Michigan Girl wrote:That's ridiculous ...what about the Catholic's who died there, then?! This should be about ALL AMERICAN'S and AMERICA ...not religion! And someone who has the best interest of the people, all people, should be knocking some heads...;)



My point is , we wouldn't have this hoopla , if they were building a church there.


And smelly , how do u see a mosque being build a block away from the GZ as a slap in the face to the victims family ?!


Already explained, lol.
Melissa
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5542
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:00 pm

Postby Behshad » Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:02 am

Melissa wrote:
Behshad wrote:
Michigan Girl wrote:That's ridiculous ...what about the Catholic's who died there, then?! This should be about ALL AMERICAN'S and AMERICA ...not religion! And someone who has the best interest of the people, all people, should be knocking some heads...;)



My point is , we wouldn't have this hoopla , if they were building a church there.


And smelly , how do u see a mosque being build a block away from the GZ as a slap in the face to the victims family ?!


Already explained, lol.



So you'd be ok with a church or even a 7-11 being built there ?! :P
Image
User avatar
Behshad
MP3
 
Posts: 12584
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:08 am

Postby steveo777 » Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:08 am

Behshad wrote:
Melissa wrote:
Behshad wrote:
Michigan Girl wrote:That's ridiculous ...what about the Catholic's who died there, then?! This should be about ALL AMERICAN'S and AMERICA ...not religion! And someone who has the best interest of the people, all people, should be knocking some heads...;)



My point is , we wouldn't have this hoopla , if they were building a church there.


And smelly , how do u see a mosque being build a block away from the GZ as a slap in the face to the victims family ?!


Already explained, lol.



So you'd be ok with a church or even a 7-11 being built there ?! :P


Sure, why not...........

Image
User avatar
steveo777
MP3
 
Posts: 11311
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 12:15 pm
Location: Citrus Heights, Ca

Postby S2M » Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:08 am

Behshad wrote:
Melissa wrote:
Behshad wrote:
Michigan Girl wrote:That's ridiculous ...what about the Catholic's who died there, then?! This should be about ALL AMERICAN'S and AMERICA ...not religion! And someone who has the best interest of the people, all people, should be knocking some heads...;)



My point is , we wouldn't have this hoopla , if they were building a church there.


And smelly , how do u see a mosque being build a block away from the GZ as a slap in the face to the victims family ?!


Already explained, lol.



So you'd be ok with a church or even a 7-11 being built there ?! :P


I think they're calling them 9-11s now...
Tom Brady IS the G.O.A.T.
User avatar
S2M
MP3
 
Posts: 11981
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:43 am
Location: In a bevy of whimsy

Postby Melissa » Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:12 am

Behshad wrote:So you'd be ok with a church or even a 7-11 being built there ?! :P


Nope. With the way families and friends of those lost have expressed their feelings on that spot, I don't think anything should be built there. And interestingly enough, I work with a Muslim (and have for over 13 years now) and she told me there are even many Muslims (herself included) saying this is not a good idea at all. If that doesn't speak volumes, I don't know what does.
Melissa
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5542
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 12:00 pm

Postby Behshad » Sat Aug 21, 2010 4:18 am

Melissa wrote:
Behshad wrote:So you'd be ok with a church or even a 7-11 being built there ?! :P


Nope. With the way families and friends of those lost have expressed their feelings on that spot, I don't think anything should be built there. And interestingly enough, I work with a Muslim (and have for over 13 years now) and she told me there are even many Muslims (herself included) saying this is not a good idea at all. If that doesn't speak volumes, I don't know what does.


Well you'd be glad to know that there is a 7-11 around the area that not only is owned by Apu from Bombay , but he sells 9/11 t-shirts and coffee mugs. That's a slap in the face , not a mosque or church or any holy buildings.
Image
User avatar
Behshad
MP3
 
Posts: 12584
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:08 am

PreviousNext

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests