Park51 or the "Ground Zero Mosque"

[Laurens]

All it takes then is a few fanatics becoming politically involved and those, otherwise less confrontational fundies will soon show support. Do you want to take that chance?

What, the chance that you've just asserted will happen without providing any proof?

Are you aware that being an advocate of Sharia law doesn't necessarily mean wanting to live under Taliban-like conditions. Do you realise that there are different interpretations?

But if there was ever some referendum or something on it, you'd voice your opinion right?

Of course, and I would if there was one on Sharia law, however I wouldn't carry out any kind of terrorist plot.

I honestly do not know of any Jewish group that wants to impose its legal system. Not even Israel is a theocracy.

You're very good at ignoring the relevant stuff and responding to the remarks I've made that don't really make much difference to my points. There are plenty of Christians who do want their beliefs to affect legislation, are they a threat?

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

The Tea Party (and a lot of other Republicans) want to turn the US in a Christian theocracy. There was a guy who wanted to have a registry of atheist to keep tabs on them like criminals.

 

[Prolescum]

​

 

[Laurens]

The thing that gets me is that 'critics' (to use a polite term) of Islam such as Dogma's Demise, go after what are essentially non-issues. Park51 and Sharia advocates in Britain aren't really much of an issue if you ask me, people here aren't going to sit and give up their democracy to theocratic dictators (and lets face it, it isn't even going to come to that). Now there are real problems such as Pakistan allowing Taliban forces to regroup, retrain and rearm on their soil in order to continue their insurgency in Afghanistan, and very probably being complicit in sheltering Osama Bin Laden. Places such as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, that give shelter to, and support for terrorists and radical Islamic militia are a real problem in terms of international security.

What we have instead is people moaning about immigration, offensive buildings, and the non-existent threat of Islamic domination in Europe...

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Hey I never said Pakistan wasn't a problem, but what do you want me to do about it? That government is like one big inoperable tumor.

 

[Laurens]

Hey I never said Pakistan wasn't a problem, but what do you want me to do about it? That government is like one big inoperable tumor.

I wasn't asking you to do anything about it, I'm just explaining what a real problem looks like.

Park51 and the non-existent threat that European democracy will be subjugated by Islamic Sharia aren't really issues worth bothering with.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

The thing that gets me is that 'critics' (to use a polite term) of Islam such as Dogma's Demise, go after what are essentially non-issues. Park51 and Sharia advocates in Britain aren't really much of an issue if you ask me, people here aren't going to sit and give up their democracy to theocratic dictators (and lets face it, it isn't even going to come to that). Now there are real problems such as Pakistan allowing Taliban forces to regroup, retrain and rearm on their soil in order to continue their insurgency in Afghanistan, and very probably being complicit in sheltering Osama Bin Laden. Places such as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, that give shelter to, and support for terrorists and radical Islamic militia are a real problem in terms of international security.

What we have instead is people moaning about immigration, offensive buildings, and the non-existent threat of Islamic domination in Europe...

See, what it seems to me to be is a bunch of white people complaining about non-white people living in "their" country, and in other countries that they consider to be "for white people." They don't give a shit what happens in Pakistan because it is brown people hurting brown people, and only white people are worthy of protecting. So female genital mutilation in Saudi Arabia? Who cares! Muslims booking a pool for 90 minutes on a Sunday morning for private swimming? AN OUTRAGE!

Look at the signs:

"You can build a mosque at ground zero when we can build a synagogue in Mecca"?!?! The assumption is that "you" is some sort of alien interloper who came from Saudi Arabia to build a mosque in NYC for no good reason, and the equivalent would be for a bunch of Americans to start building random religious buildings in Saudi Arabia. The comparison is on its face bigoted, because the "you" in this case is a bunch of Americans with a long history of living in the area. That Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf that the bigots are so angry about? He's lived in NYC since the 1960s, and has spent his life working on building bridges between Muslims and non-Muslims, including working for the government after 9/11. SCARY!! His mosque is less than a mile from the WTC site. He and his congregation aren't interlopers working on celebrating terrorism, they are New Yorkers who were as much victims of 9/11 as any other NYC resident (and more so than Pat Condell or the vast majority of the anti-Park 51 bigots) who want a swimming pool and additional prayer space.

The truth is that the bigots simply hate Muslims/Arabs/Africans/African-Americans/non-natives, and everything else is smokescreen to justify their bigotry. And I think their real fear isn't "Sharia law" or "terrorism" as much as they are afraid of Muslims integrating into non-Arab societies as equal and respected citizens. People who are anti-immigrant especially gain some sort of feeling of status as long as immigrants are second-class citizens, especially in the current economic conditions. Since very few people are moving up the economic ladder, they cling even harder to their place on the social ladder. Even the most impoverished white people get to at least claim the lowest rung of the highest-status ladder. If non-whites start getting treated like "regular people" then that bottom rung starts getting awfully crowded.

 

[Dogma's Demise]

See, what it seems to me to be is a bunch of white people complaining about non-white people living in "their" country, and in other countries that they consider to be "for white people." They don't give a shit what happens in Pakistan because it is brown people hurting brown people, and only white people are worthy of protecting. So female genital mutilation in Saudi Arabia? Who cares! Muslims booking a pool for 90 minutes on a Sunday morning for private swimming? AN OUTRAGE!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

This doesn't even warrant a response anymore, this warrants open mockery...

If you think Pakistani vs. Pakistani violence or Saudi vs. Saudi violence and oppression isn't criticized, you haven't been paying attention one bit. Next thing you know you'll me tell me that anti-Sharia is code word for anti-brown or some shit, similar to a white supremacist drone, only on the opposite side of the coin.

 

[Prolescum]

It became apparent to me that DD not only gets most of his information from YouTube, but also his jibes (anti-Sharia is code word for anti-brown).

DD, I posted that video above for you. Let us know what you think.
I know it's somewhat of a sidetrack, but I think it will benefit the conversation in the long run.

 

[Dogma's Demise]

It became apparent to me that DD not only gets most of his information from YouTube, but also his jibes (anti-Sharia is code word for anti-brown).

That's basically a parody of "anti-racist is code word for anti-white". It's the mantra used by white supremacists on the Internet who think there's some calculated effort, some worldwide conspiracy to weed whites out of existence by tolerating racial diversity. (Yeah I know, it doesn't make sense. :lol: But that's what they believe.)

It's just as stupid as saying that those who oppose Sharia are secretly racists. It's a willful refusal to admit that people really do have objections to this legal system.

He knows damns well that if every Muslim was white I'd still oppose Sharia and he knows I defend ex-Muslims (many who are not white) and he knows I think the Saudis and Pakistanis are oppressed by their governments and he knows I defend the West even though many non-whites live in it.

DD, I posted that video above for you. Let us know what you think.
I know it's somewhat of a sidetrack, but I think it will benefit the conversation in the long run.

Yeah it's a great video, now I would like you to apply that critical thinking and round up all the links I provided, and tell me how much % of them are YouTube videos?

 

[Laurens]

It's just as stupid as saying that those who oppose Sharia are secretly racists. It's a willful refusal to admit that people really do have objections to this legal system.

I don't remember calling you a racist because you oppose Sharia. Any one else remember saying anything of the sort?

 

[Prolescum]

That's basically a parody of "anti-racist is code word for anti-white".

I know what it is.

DD, I posted that video above for you. Let us know what you think.
I know it's somewhat of a sidetrack, but I think it will benefit the conversation in the long run.

Yeah it's a great video

Okay I expected more but never mind. So if you've watched it, would you consider yourself a critical thinker by the standards of the video?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

It's just as stupid as saying that those who oppose Sharia are secretly racists. It's a willful refusal to admit that people really do have objections to this legal system.

I don't remember calling you a racist because you oppose Sharia. Any one else remember saying anything of the sort?

The stupid in this instance is that everyone here is against Sharia. The non-bigots here don't start crying "Sharia Law! Run for your lives" when Muslims go swimming.

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Okay I expected more but never mind. So if you've watched it, would you consider yourself a critical thinker by the standards of the video?

I'm not in a position to answer that question. You know people give biased answers about themselves. It's like asking would you vote for yourself as president.

 

[Prolescum]

Okay I expected more but never mind. So if you've watched it, would you consider yourself a critical thinker by the standards of the video?

I'm not in a position to answer that question.

Yes you are, the question is simple enough.

You know people give biased answers about themselves.

You only have to be honest about it. Do you consider yourself a critical thinker by the standards of the video?

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Sorry but I'm not going to play your game because I can see where this is going. No matter what I answer (Yes/No/Maybe) you're going to use it as a personal attack.

 

[australopithecus]

We saw where it was going as soon as you posted this thread, yet we still played along. Return the courtesy.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

Sorry but I'm not going to play your game because I can see where this is going. No matter what I answer (Yes/No/Maybe) you're going to use it as a personal attack.

If you could think critically and see flaws within your own reasoning, then you would have dropped this nonsense a while ago. And when we ask you to step back and review your statements and logic, in the end the only thing you care about is not whether your reasoning is sound, but if you will be placed in a situation where you will look bad.

You already answered the question, in more or less words.

 

[Prolescum]

Sorry but I'm not going to play your game because I can see where this is going. No matter what I answer (Yes/No/Maybe) you're going to use it as a personal attack.

I'm not the one who goes around calling people dishonest fucktards and fucking immoral cunts.

No, I was hoping we could walk through your reasoning together using the video as an aid. If you'd said yes, as I'm sure you know, I would've pointed out appropriate parts of your posts to show why you are wrong in the hope that you see reason; if you'd said maybe or no, then I would've ask that we review each of your arguments, guided by the standards set.

Your refusal to "play the game" is still progress; it's a tepid admission that you haven't looked at your views critically.

You fancy doing it, then?

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Well it was dishonest, I mean think critically now, the meaning of that sentence changes when you take it out of the discussion and when you don't include the previous sentence. So can you be honest and admit it was a partial quote-mine or not?


Also, can you at least concede that this cultural center has not really been successful at establishing "inter-faith dialog", that some of the victims' relatives did not take it too kindly.

Can you also concede on a point of etiquette, you shouldn't piss people off by reminding them (whether accidentally or intentionally) of the tragedy they've been through?


And finally, can you also concede that 9/11 would have almost certainly never happened if not for Islam?