Some concept designs were posted upthread and they look nothing like a mosque. It includes a prayer space, but it sounds like it will be a moderately tall office building and that’s it.
I’m pretty sure there isn’t a minaret, though I’m not positive.
There are multiple mosques in my Brooklyn neighborhood, and none of them have minarets. They’re all storefront mosques, just like the storefront churches you see in many big cities.
A mosque (or masjid) is any place where Muslims worship. They are no more required to have minarets or loud muezzins than Christian churches are required to have steeples and bells. Some sects refuse to build them at all, in fact.
In places like the US, the call to prayer is typically played more quietly, or not at all. Sometimes the muezzin will just stand in front of the doors and say it.
Just another item that will further divide the country and shows how brainwashed people have become. To me, it’s a no brainer, and we should not allow them to build it there. But again, most have allowed “political correctness” to cloud their thinking.
The Murrah building wasn’t attacked by anyone invoking a religious purpose. That would be like saying any crime committed by a Christian/Muslim/Jew was religious in intent.
But if you had asked an honest question about a Fred Phelps church located next to the murder of 1000’s of gays, then hell fucking yes I would object.
No, I’ve allowed the Constitution to cloud my thinking.
The First Amendment. Look into it. Congress shall make no law…
I’m sorry, but you have the U.S. mistaken for someplace without guaranteed freedoms of religion and speech.
No brainer seems appropriate, then.
In other words, in your view the problem isn’t terrorism. The problem is Islam itself.
If comparing the Kansas City bombing to the 9/11 attacks is dishonest, how does one characterize the comparison of this mosque to Westboro Baptist?
Is that what I said? Did I blame all of Christendom based on Fred Phelp’s church?
You appear to be saying that the Cordoba group is the exact same thing as the 911 bombers. That’s like saying the Catholic Church is the exact same thing as the abortion clinic bombers.
Can’t you see that your argument isn’t rational?
No no, he’s been saying that WE DON’T KNOW they’re not the same and some nebulous someone should investigate just to make double-secret-sure that Cordoba House isn’t a al-Qaeda front, but somehow the forces of political correctness are preventing this from happening.
Well, let’s see.
Your analogy was–Westboro Baptist:killing gays::Cordoba House:9/11.
But how does that work exactly? After all, the Cordoba House guys aren’t part of Al Qaida, aren’t terrorists, don’t celebrate the death of Americans, and so on.
So the only way Cordoba House could be the equivalent to Westboro Baptist, is if every Muslim is equivalent to Fred Phelps.
In other words, you really mean–Westboro Baptist:killing gays::Islam:9/11. Correct?
I was addressing the idea that the Murrah building was destroyed for religious reasons because Mcveigh was a Christian. It was not. If it was, I would object to a Church associated with the violence being built near the grounds. I gave an example of Fred Phelp’s church.
I have not objected to the mosque but I do acknowledge that the money to build it is beyond it’s resources. I also acknowledge the sensitivity of the area. It’s not up for discussion that many people in New York feel this way. The idea that the money trail be established to assuage those concerns is a logical step for a community center designed to bridge cultural gaps.
Suppose I want to be deliberately stupid and say I disagree that it’s a no-brainer. How would you describe the reasoning that led you to that statement? Is it different than reasoning that’s already been posted in this thread? If so, I’d like to hear your argument, and if not, I’d like to know which other poster best describes your reasoning.
Ahh! “Political correctness,” the meaningless phrase that is trotted out when one wishes to indicate that one wants to say nasty things, but does not actually wish to be held accountable for the hatred or illogic that one would display in such statements.
There is no logical reason why a group that has functioned in a section of Manhattan for nearly thirty years, serving people who have lived there nearly forty years, should be prohibited from building a community center in that same neighborhood–one that will not even be visible from the WTC location–simply because some other people of a different sect of their religion did something bad. Unreasoning hatred works as a “reason,” but that would require one to expose one’s ideas to actual analysis. It is much better to claim that one “cannot” say the right thing because of some vaguely mentioned “political correctness.”
I don’t normally say I’m proud to be an American (usually I say I’m lucky to be an American) but your statement made me proud of Americans.
Unless the bar has been lowered drastically since the last time I looked, there’s not much pride to be found in *not *being a frothing xenophobic douche. To paraphrase Chris Rock, “Hey, I don’t shit on Muslims ! - What do you want, a cookie ?!”