Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Pastor Terry Jones plans to burn multiple copies of the Koran on 9-11 anniversary (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   
Author Topic: Pastor Terry Jones plans to burn multiple copies of the Koran on 9-11 anniversary
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
But with some seven thousand separate religious bodies doing all sorts of odd things in the United States, I think it unfortunate that General Petraeus or anyone else in an official position bothered to take notice of this event.
What you're missing, hobsen, is the report that there has all ready been a protest in Afghanistan about this Koran burning. IOW, people have all ready taken notice of this "event" and are causing trouble, even before it happens. The likelihood (i.e. certainty) that it will cause more problems makes it something worth commenting on by officials.

quote:
By Islamic law, as the son of a Muslim father, Obama *is* actually considered a Muslim, just as under Halachic law, the son of a Jewish woman would be considered a Jew.
Except that being a Muslim is not a heritiary trait like being a Jew. The father must be a Muslim at the time his child is born for his child to be considered Muslim.

And, from what I've heard, Obama's father was no longer a practicing Muslim when Obama was born.

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Except that being a Muslim is not a heritiary trait like being a Jew. The father must be a Muslim at the time his child is born for his child to be considered Muslim.

And, from what I've heard, Obama's father was no longer a practicing Muslim when Obama was born.

And even that's irrelevant unless Obama is actually choosing to live by the tenants of Islamic Law. If he's not, then it's dictates don't apply and we have to go by the dictates of the law that he does live under- US Law, specifically, which implicitly says that his faith is whatever he chooses it to be.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Except that being a Muslim is not a heritiary trait like being a Jew. The father must be a Muslim at the time his child is born for his child to be considered Muslim.

And, from what I've heard, Obama's father was no longer a practicing Muslim when Obama was born.

And yet he chose to give his son a middle name that's simply loaded with religious significance. Curious. Was it a family name?


quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
And even that's irrelevant unless Obama is actually choosing to live by the [tenets] of Islamic Law.

Like I already said, if some Muslims considered him a Muslim, and he didn't live by the tenets of Islamic law, they could treat him as an apostate.

quote:
If he's not, then it's dictates don't apply and we have to go by the dictates of the law that he does live under- US Law, specifically, which implicitly says that his faith is whatever he chooses it to be
Thank you for demonstrating my earlier statement that the lefties on this board are stubbornly refusing to acknowledge the fact that Islam is a cultural identity more like Judaism, and not a mere religion like Christianity. I already stipulated clearly that I was NOT talking about Obama's religion. Yes, you can choose what faith you believe in. But being Muslim, like being Jewish, is not only about religious faith. It's a set of expectations placed on you based on circumstances not necessarily in your control.

[ September 09, 2010, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
And yet he chose to give his son a middle name that's simply loaded with religious significance.
In the same way, I imagine, that "Peter" is loaded with religious significance, and yet I'd imagine it's a name a lot of ex-Catholics have given their sons.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There are Jews named Peter, so clearly the name has appeal outside Christianity. Do Christians in the middle east choose to name their boys Hussein? Or would that be like an American black kid being named Jefferson Davis Jones?

Also, a middle name, applied to child of mixed origins, does suggest either a family connection, or political/religious intent.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
And even that's irrelevant unless Obama is actually choosing to live by the [tenets] of Islamic Law.

Like I already said, if some Muslims considered him a Muslim, and he didn't live by the tenets of Islamic law, they could treat him as an apostate.

quote:
If he's not, then it's dictates don't apply and we have to go by the dictates of the law that he does live under- US Law, specifically, which implicitly says that his faith is whatever he chooses it to be
Thank you for demonstrating my earlier statement that the lefties on this board are stubbornly refusing to acknowledge the fact that Islam is a cultural identity more like Judaism, and not a mere religion like Christianity. I already stipulated clearly that I was NOT talking about Obama's religion. Yes, you can choose what faith you believe in. But being Muslim, like being Jewish, is not only about religious faith. It's a set of expectations placed on you based on circumstances not necessarily in your control.

I don't contest that. I just say that it's not relevant unless you can actually show that he subscribes to that culture in the first place. As it stands, it may mean that he has an easy ticket in if he chooses to embrace it, but it's meaningless if he doesn't since he has other cultural options to subscribe to instead.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
There are Jews named Peter, so clearly the name has appeal outside Christianity. Do Christians in the middle east choose to name their boys Hussein? Or would that be like an American black kid being named Jefferson Davis Jones?

Also, a middle name, applied to child of mixed origins, does suggest either a family connection, or political/religious intent.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2008/02/28/hussein

It was his grandfather's name.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
There are Jews named Peter, so clearly the name has appeal outside Christianity. Do Christians in the middle east choose to name their boys Hussein? Or would that be like an American black kid being named Jefferson Davis Jones?

Also, a middle name, applied to child of mixed origins, does suggest either a family connection, or political/religious intent.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2008/02/28/hussein

It was his grandfather's name.

Thank you. There you have it -- family connection.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
I don't contest that. I just say that it's not relevant unless you can actually show that he subscribes to that culture in the first place.

Relevant to what?

Not relevant to his character, or to his faith. But it would be relevant to how he would be perceived and treated by people of that culture. Just as if some Christian suddenly discovered that his maternal grandmother was Jewish.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"But that's not what the Muslim-accusers mean, and even the normally educated conversants on Ornery seem to have a hard time wrapping their heads around the fact that "Muslim" is (like Jewish) an identity that extends far beyond the religious sphere."

Just to be clear, do you agree with my, or at least Ricky's, take on this? Or do you just mean that the people calling Obama a Muslim actually think that he is a Muslim? (I know that at least some people actually believe this, because I personally know some of them).

Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pete at Home:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
I don't contest that. I just say that it's not relevant unless you can actually show that he subscribes to that culture in the first place.

Relevant to what?

Not relevant to his character, or to his faith. But it would be relevant to how he would be perceived and treated by people of that culture. Just as if some Christian suddenly discovered that his maternal grandmother was Jewish.

It's not relevant to the average US citizen per the attempts to smear him by calling him a Muslim. While he technically may have connections to that culture, he isn't meaningfully a part of it, and thus trying to characterize him by it's standards is disingenuous.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
"But that's not what the Muslim-accusers mean, and even the normally educated conversants on Ornery seem to have a hard time wrapping their heads around the fact that "Muslim" is (like Jewish) an identity that extends far beyond the religious sphere."

Just to be clear, do you agree with my, or at least Ricky's, take on this?

Scrolling up ... not sure which you mean. I don't share Ricky's fears of anti-Muslim hate crimes resulting from this church incident. However I do see it as a symptom of a problem that very well may lead to hate crimes. But I suspect that the total number those hate crimes put together will be far less than the resultant killings in Afghanistan, both of joint task force troops and of Afghani civillians.

quote:
Or do you just mean that the people calling Obama a Muslim actually think that he is a Muslim?
I do believe that, although I haven't said anything that means that. I was just pointing out that they might be technically correct in one sense, but that is (agreeing with Pyr's last statement) irrelevant to the purposes of those calling Obama a Muslim.

quote:
(I know that at least some people actually believe this, because I personally know some of them).
So do I. Although the loudest one I know is considerably to the left of both you and Ricky.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
It's not relevant to the average US citizen per the attempts to smear him by calling him a Muslim.

Agreed. That's exactly what I said originally.

quote:
While he technically may have connections to that culture, he isn't meaningfully a part of it, and thus trying to characterize him by it's standards is disingenuous.
I'm not characterising Obama. I'm describing how he may be perceived, not how WE should see Obama. If I were doing this to discredit Obama, or to make inferences about his beliefs and allegiance, that would be disingenuous. I was simply pointing out a curious irony.

Of course, by the standards of Halacha, Mohammed was a Jew, but Arab Muslims don't like to be told that.

I know a kid who had a Jewish mom and a Muslim dad. That makes him a Jew according to Halacha and a Muslim according to Islam. If he converted to Christianity, then he would be, simultaneously, a Jew, a Muslim, and a Christian. [LOL]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Although the loudest one I know is considerably to the left of both you and Ricky.
Makes sense. Being so far Left would have to put him on the Right. [Smile]
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Scrolling up ... not sure which you mean.
Basically, do you agree that "the increased prevalence lately of using "Muslim" as a derogatory" is going on? I only asked because I thought Pyrtolin took your comment to mean that you think that Obama is a Manchurian Muslim candidate (which surprised me because I took your comment to be a "did-you-know" comment), but now I see that he was making more of a nitpick... I think.

quote:
I don't share Ricky's fears of anti-Muslim hate crimes resulting from this church incident.
Ricky said that he doesn't necessarily mean violence, but movements for discriminatory (the hateful kind) legal restrictions.

quote:
So do I. Although the loudest one I know is considerably to the left of both you and Ricky.
I know a guy like that, too. But he also thinks that Obama is, if not a lizard person himself, at least working for lizard Hilary Clinton and Queen Elizabeth... I also know a guy who went from atheist, antiwar, communist to, in about 3 weeks, hardcore Baptist capitalist who thinks that Obama is a Muslim, and that it is America's divinely ordained objective to subdue the Muslim population abroad and convert them to Christianity. People are strange...

But how far left am I? fly wouldn't answer this.

[ September 09, 2010, 03:47 PM: Message edited by: TommySama ]

Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
quote:
Scrolling up ... not sure which you mean.
Basically, do you agree that "the increased prevalence lately of using "Muslim" as a derogatory" is going on?
I have not personally observed that, but it would not surprise me. Haven't watched news. I think that the breadth of muslim words being so used has increased -- I've heard Mullah used like that since the 1980s, but now people are familiar with words like Imam and such. But I would anticipate a rise in the use of such terms, given the furor of the whole mosque debacle.

quote:
I only asked because I thought Pyrtolin took your comment to mean that you think that Obama is a Manchurian Muslim candidate (which surprised me because I took your comment to be a "did-you-know" comment)
Thank you. That's exactly what I meant.

quote:
I don't share Ricky's fears of anti-Muslim hate crimes resulting from this church incident.
----
Ricky said that he doesn't necessarily mean violence, but movements for discriminatory (the hateful kind) legal restrictions.

I missed that. Thanks. It would not surprise me if such incidents were on the increase, but I see the book burning as an effect and a symptom rather than a potential cause.

quote:
So do I. Although the loudest one I know is considerably to the left of both you and Ricky.
--------
I know a guy like that, too. But he also thinks that Obama is, if not a lizard person himself, at least working for lizard Hilary Clinton and Queen Elizabeth... I also know a guy who went from atheist, antiwar, communist to, in about 3 weeks, hardcore Baptist capitalist who thinks that Obama is a Muslim, and that it is America's divinely ordained objective to subdue the Muslim population abroad and convert them to Christianity. People are strange...

But how far left am I? fly wouldn't answer this

As best I can tell, you're an ecclectic, like me. Right of me on some issues, left on others, agreed on others. Ricky's a little left of me on some issues, and agreed on others. The guy I'm talking about seems like a spoof of a liberal. Says things like "families are stupid" and "I believe in Big Government."
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Tommy, check this out: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/09/AR2010090903264.html

Talk of genetic inferiority, in Germany? Now that is laying the foundation for discrimination.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Loony Pastor changed his mind, he is not going to burn the Qoran on 9/11.

He claims to have reached some sort of an understanding about the change of location for that mosque.

The Imam of that mosque says he was never in communication with that pastor.

who knows...

when will religion be outlawed?

Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Good for him. Sounds like he's not so looney after all.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A wild FRED PHELPS appears!

He uses ANGRY RANTING, it's super-effective!

Long story short, Pastor Terry Jones of the Dove whateveryoucallit church has started having reservations and second thoughts thanks to all the unwanted bad press and criticism, and has hinted that he might delay or even cancel the event. Which means that America's favourite crazy preacher the Reverend Fred Phelps, has vowed that if the Dove World Outreach Church doesn't burn a few hundred korans, then his own Westboro Baptist Church will step up to the plate and burn them instead.

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
still loony http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/09/florida.quran.burning/index.html?hpt=T1
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Thank you for demonstrating my earlier statement that the lefties on this board are stubbornly refusing to acknowledge the fact that Islam is a cultural identity more like Judaism, and not a mere religion like Christianity.
Well, this isn't strictly true, Pete. First of all, one is NOT "born a muslim" under muslim law. The Shahadah makes one a muslim, period (Islam is VERY one-pointed on this fact). This article is a bit venomous in its partisanship, but its facts are correct:
No One is Born a Muslim
Islam is indeed more that just a religion. Its a legal system, a means of social organization, etc., very similar to Judiasm. However, in terms of the ummah (membership), its pretty much exactly like Christianity.

Were I to travel to a Muslim state, I would be subject to Islamic law. That in no way makes me a Muslim, by their definition of anyone else's. If Obama has never proclaimed the Shahadah, then he has never been a Muslim (this usually happens at the onset of puberty, so its not likely that he was asked to mouth it as a young child, btw.)

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye
Member
Member # 6554

 - posted      Profile for flydye   Email flydye       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let's just check for a moment:

A religious figure attempts to do something which will incite thousands, if not millions of people who will be offended by his action, and by not backing down and compromising, he is threatening the good will and understanding between two religious and cultural groups.

Are we talking about Terry Jones or Iman Rauf? This is a two way street, not one way. I won't even touch upon the bigotry of low expectations, nor the enormous amount of ink spilt on how 'the Arab street' would explode from invading Iraq (hint: it didn't) Not supporting this guy and I wish he has an aneurysm soon so he'd shut up. (I am a hate filled Conservative. I'm allowed to do that)

Haven't we been here before? IIRC, a rumor went around the Muslim world back in 2007 or so that Gitmo guards flushed Korans down the toilet. There were some riots in Pakistan, but I don't recall a huge spike in American casualties. Yes, people bitched like crazy, but I don't blame them.

On an unrelated note, watched Donnie Deutch openly advocate having Obama send Federal Marshals down to arrest Jones to stop him.

I wonder if he'd feel the same if Bush had done that to flag burners? No? Hmm...

[ September 10, 2010, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: flydye ]

Posts: 702 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Flye, that reasoning looks a lot like the reasoning of the obtuse lefties who contrast the three thousand civillians killed INTENTIONALLY during 9/11 with the thousands killed as collateral damage during the subsequent wars.

The key word is intentionally. Rauf has blundered into the hornets' nest. Imam Jones intentionally sought out the hornet's nest in order to break it open while kids were playing in the park.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
A religious figure attempts to do something which will incite thousands, if not millions of people who will be offended by his action, and by not backing down and compromising, he is threatening the good will and understanding between two religious and cultural groups.
You miss the fundamental difference in basic intent behind the actions, and the basic nature of the actions themselves.

One is committing an actively destructive act with the primary intent to inflame hatred, and is being protested by those that seek a more peaceful relationship.

The other is doing a constructive act with the primary intent of providing much needed services to his local community, and is primarily being protested by those who want to create further division and strife.

I suppose they're similar if you ignore critical element of context.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks, Adam. It looks like I was mistaken, though hopefully I'll be able to find something that feels ... more reliable.

quote:
Originally posted by Adam Masterman:
quote:
Thank you for demonstrating my earlier statement that the lefties on this board are stubbornly refusing to acknowledge the fact that Islam is a cultural identity more like Judaism, and not a mere religion like Christianity.
Well, this isn't strictly true, Pete. First of all, one is NOT "born a muslim" under muslim law. The Shahadah makes one a muslim, period (Islam is VERY one-pointed on this fact). This article is a bit venomous in its partisanship, but its facts are correct:
No One is Born a Muslim
Islam is indeed more that just a religion. Its a legal system, a means of social organization, etc., very similar to Judiasm. However, in terms of the ummah (membership), its pretty much exactly like Christianity.

Not quite. Christianity doesn't impose any equivalent expectation to the rule that a Muslim man can marry a Christian woman, but not vice versa. I asked about this, and was told by Muslims that it was because the children of a Muslim man were Muslim. They also argued against my statement that Mohammed was Jewish (since his mother was Jewish) by saying that Islam was transmitted through his father. (I asked, how could that be, since Mohammed was the founder of Islam, and they said no, Islam has always been around). Not offering that hearsay as an authoritative source, just clarifying that I wasn't getting my info from sources your link would call "hateful," i.e. not Muslim sources.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye
Member
Member # 6554

 - posted      Profile for flydye   Email flydye       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:


The other is doing a constructive act with the primary intent of providing much needed services to his local community, and is primarily being protested by those who want to create further division and strife.

How condescending. If that is what you believe the goals or motives of the GZM protestors are, then you are either extraordinarily ignorant, or partisanly blind.

It's sad that NYC doesn't have any cultural centers, mosques, or other building sites. Terrible. [Roll Eyes]

Posts: 702 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gaoics79
Member
Member # 969

 - posted      Profile for Gaoics79   Email Gaoics79   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The other is doing a constructive act with the primary intent of providing much needed services to his local community, and is primarily being protested by those who want to create further division and strife.
I hold douche-bag #1 to the same standard I hold douche-bag #2. If he knew, or ought to have known (through the exercise of common sense), that building the mosque in that location would provoke public anger and hatred, then he should have chosen a different location, particularly if "building bridges" is truly one of his stated intents.

I'll say this for douche-bag #2: at least his actions, however destructive, are logical on their own terms. He is burning Korans for the express purpose of attacking Islam, knowing that this will provoke a violent reaction from Muslims. There is nothing inconsistent between his actions and the predictable consequences of those actions.

Whereas, in the case of douche-bag #1, he is doing something (building the mosque) which is provoking the exact opposite reaction from his stated intent.

Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye
Member
Member # 6554

 - posted      Profile for flydye   Email flydye       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jasonr:

Whereas, in the case of douche-bag #1, he is doing something (building the mosque) which is provoking the exact opposite reaction from his stated intent.

And if in fact he was true to his intentions, he would have backed down in the interests of 'building bridges'. He has not, which brings up uncomfortable questions as to his motives.

They are both media whores of the worst caliber.

Posts: 702 | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
And if in fact he was true to his intentions, he would have backed down in the interests of 'building bridges'.
This is an unsupported claim. Why do you think backing down would "build bridges?" Who do you think would be grateful to him?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Brian
Member
Member # 588

 - posted      Profile for Brian   Email Brian   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
They are both media whores of the worst caliber
Did Rauf call a press conference and announce that he was building a mosque on top of ground zero, and we could just suck it if we didn't like it?


My understanding is that he went to the LOCAL zoning board (or whatever) and got permission.
It wasn't until the national media whores (Rush, Hannity, Reed) got into the act that all of a sudden there are "millions" of people inflamed over the issue.

Remind me - what religion is ground zero consecrated to?

Posts: 359 | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Jason, it's not a mosque. It's a muslim version of a YMCA. And backing down could very well make things worse a this point.

quote:
I'll say this for douche-bag #2: at least his actions, however destructive, are logical on their own terms. He is burning Korans for the express purpose of attacking Islam, knowing that this will provoke a violent reaction from Muslims. There is nothing inconsistent between his actions and the predictable consequences of those actions.

Whereas, in the case of douche-bag #1, he is doing something (building the mosque) which is provoking the exact opposite reaction from his stated intent.

Since he isn't building a mosque, the fact that he's been misrepresented as building a mosque would be a superseding cause for all this anger. In other words, Rauf isn't the one striking the hornet's nest, you are, by calling a coed muslim YMCA a "mosque." (Not that a mosque should elicit all this anger, but that's beside the point).


quote:
Originally posted by jasonr:
quote:
The other is doing a constructive act with the primary intent of providing much needed services to his local community, and is primarily being protested by those who want to create further division and strife.
I hold douche-bag #1 to the same standard I hold douche-bag #2. If he knew, or ought to have known (through the exercise of common sense), that building the mosque in that location would provoke public anger and hatred, then he should have chosen a different location, particularly if "building bridges" is truly one of his stated intents.
Further more, know or ought to have known is a negligence standard. Negligence by its very nature is at least two orders of magnitude apart from an intentional, purposeful act. Three orders apart if you follow the model penal code.

1. Intentional/purposeful. (e.g. you blow up a plane to kill your wife -- your killing of your wife is intentional/purposeful)
2. Knowing. (e.g. you blow up a plane to kill your wife -- your killing of the other passengers is knowing, since you know that they will die as a consequence.)
3. Reckless. (e.g. you organize a drag-race down busy streets during rush hour)
4. Negligent. (e.g., driving drunk, you run a red light and hit a pedestrian)

At worst, Pastor Rauf's behavior is arguably negligent. (It's not even that, since there's the superseding intervening act of the twerps that have misrepresented Cordoba House as a "mosque" being built "at ground zero." In contrast, Imam Jones was actually seeking to elicit violent behavior.

Finally, your argument is also oblivious to the likely *results* of the behavior. Regardless of what certain lefties here have said, Rauf's construction is not likely to result in murder or mass violence. Imam Jones' actions are calculated as a self-fulfilling prophesy, to elicit both murder and mass violence.

Seems to me that if one is using the "same standard" to compare a putatively negligent, non-lethal automobile accident, to an act calculated to cause dozens of murders, that it's a pretty useless standard.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gaoics79
Member
Member # 969

 - posted      Profile for Gaoics79   Email Gaoics79   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Since he isn't building a mosque, the fact that he's been misrepresented as building a mosque would be a superseding cause for all this anger. In other words, Rauf isn't the one striking the hornet's nest, you are, by calling a coed muslim YMCA a "mosque." (Not that a mosque should elicit all this anger, but that's beside the point).
I have no idea if the Muslim religion considers a prayer space within a community centre to be a "mosque" within the meaning of the word.

In any event, the difference is inconsequential, unless you contend that somehow the public outcry would be negated if only people knew that it was a "Muslim YMCA with prayer space" as opposed to a "mosque".

The information you provided is common knowledge. The public knows what the building entails, including the fact that it is not purely a religious building, and this has made no difference in the reaction.

quote:
At worst, Pastor Rauf's behavior is arguably negligent. (It's not even that, since there's the superseding intervening act of the twerps that have misrepresented Cordoba House as a "mosque" being built "at ground zero." In contrast, Imam Jones was actually seeking to elicit violent behavior.
Rauf's prior behaviour may have been negligent. His current behaviour is certainly intentional. And I'll add to the list stupidity. It is certainly stupid of him to insist that the mosque will "build bridges" knowing what he now knows.

quote:
Finally, your argument is also oblivious to the likely *results* of the behavior. Regardless of what certain lefties here have said, Rauf's construction is not likely to result in murder or mass violence. Imam Jones' actions are calculated as a self-fulfilling prophesy, to elicit both murder and mass violence.
Fair point.

quote:
Seems to me that if one is using the "same standard" to compare a putatively negligent, non-lethal automobile accident, to an act calculated to cause dozens of murders, that it's a pretty useless standard.
As noted, there is an ongoing, willful component to Rauf's actions that are not negligent. Further, I don't presume that he did not foresee this reaction, or that his intentions are pure.

Finally, in answer to Tom's question, I don't think that cancelling the mosque will "build bridges", just like cancelling the book burning will not "build bridges" with the no-doubt "moderate" Muslims who intend to go on a rampage of mayhem and violence should he proceed. However, it might serve to douse the flames at least a little.

Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
However, it might serve to douse the flames at least a little.
Why? Who do you know who'd have their opinion changed?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JWatts
Member
Member # 6523

 - posted      Profile for JWatts   Email JWatts   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Book burnings are fundamentally a more hostile act than building a church. But it really doesn't matter, because in both these issues the people involved have a legal right to do what they want and everyone else should really butt out.

Leave the Muslim to build his building and the Christian to build his fire and stop giving them both all the Media attention and both of these will be non-issues within a week.

Posts: 4700 | Registered: Oct 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Rauf's prior behaviour may have been negligent. His current behaviour is certainly intentional. And I'll add to the list stupidity. It is certainly stupid of him to insist that the mosque will "build bridges" knowing what he now knows.
This isn't "stupid" Jason; in fact, the opposite approaches that. There is an outcry now, of sorts, probably inevitable and mostly (entirely?) outside of the community this center intends to serve. However, being a long term positive in a community *does* build bridges, regardless of initial reactions. Indeed, in the midst of such idiotic objections, a long-term demonstration of good citizenship is likely the *only* thing that will heal the breach. It worked for the Jewish cultural center, which was the explicit model for this project.
Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gaoics79
Member
Member # 969

 - posted      Profile for Gaoics79   Email Gaoics79   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Why? Who do you know who'd have their opinion changed?
I don't expect cancelling the book burning to change any opinions. It might prevent a riot though. Ditto if the mosque project is cancelled.

quote:
This isn't "stupid" Jason; in fact, the opposite approaches that. There is an outcry now, of sorts, probably inevitable and mostly (entirely?) outside of the community this center intends to serve. However, being a long term positive in a community *does* build bridges, regardless of initial reactions. Indeed, in the midst of such idiotic objections, a long-term demonstration of good citizenship is likely the *only* thing that will heal the breach. It worked for the Jewish cultural center, which was the explicit model for this project.
This mosque will never build bridges with anyone. It will never serve any community except the muslim community. It's naive to think otherwise.
Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
It will never serve any community except the muslim community. It's naive to think otherwise.
Why?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As I'm constantly asking the SSM-proponents, if the facts are on your side, then why do you need to misrepresent the facts to make your argument?

The so-called "Ground Zero Mosque" (GZM) is in fact a non-Mosque being built some distance from Ground Zero (YM&WMA).

quote:
Originally posted by flydye:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:


The other is doing a constructive act with the primary intent of providing much needed services to his local community, and is primarily being protested by those who want to create further division and strife.

How condescending. If that is what you believe the goals or motives of the GZM protestors are, then you are either extraordinarily ignorant, or partisanly blind.
You know I'm not partisan on this, Flye, since I argued several pages in the other direction, bringing to the table my concerns about possible Saudi funding (that's been de-bunked) and the Oslamist mythologizing of Cordoba (addressed to my satisfaction). So if I'm ignorant on this issue (I am ignorant on many issues), please enlighten me. What do you believe that the "GZM" builders' motives are, and why?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
jasonr, I think you're stubbornly glossing over the crucial element with the "ground zero mosque" - that people only ever got outraged because it was falsely portrayed as a "ground zero mosque" with the express purpose of generating outrage. Then you go on to explain that Rauf should have anticipated the rabble rousing misrepresentation...?
Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1