In a speech at the White House on Friday—the Muslim holy day—commemorating the start of Ramadan—the Muslim holy month—President Obama expressed support for the right of Muslims to build a mosque near Ground Zero in New York City and, in fact, at the site of a building that was damaged in the 9/11 attacks when part of one of the planes used by terrorists crashed into the building’s roof.
In his usual snippy tone President Obama stated:
Let me be clear: as a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances
By the next day, he was backpedaling, stating:
I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there.
Okay, so he’s a politician. You gotta expect flip-flops.
And non-denial denials, which is what his second remark was. He is deliberately not telling us what he thinks about the wisdom of building a mosque at Ground Zero. Let’s take him at his word on that. He may very well think it’s a great idea. Or he may not. We don’t know because he isn’t telling. He just wanted to take some of the political edge off his remark of the previous day.
I could even give him credit for defending a legal right on the part of Muslims to build a mosque on private property “in accordance with local laws and ordinances”—assuming two things: (1) That they actually have such a legal right (the First Amendment does not guarantee the right to build a place of worship anywhere you want) and (2) if he was backed into a corner and forced to answer the question.
Whether condition (1) obtains, I don’t know. But condition (2) didn’t.
He wasn’t backed into a wall and forced to answer the question. This wasn’t a press conference where Helen Thomas (or someone) sprang the question on him. It was part of his prepared remarks for a Happy Ramadan speech. This means that he chose to put in his oar on this issue. He didn’t have to do that. He chose to.
And he chose to for political reasons—to try to curry favor with the Muslim community.
It’s a calculated risk, because in making such remarks the President also opened himself up to critique on the issue, so if it results in a net loss of political capital for him, he deserves it. He invited it.
While it’s understandable that the President getting involved would focus the spotlight on him, I think that some light also should be shown on the people who are providing the property (presumably by selling it) to the mosque builders and on the mosque builders themselves.
Why do they want to build a mosque right there?
According to their website, they’re all about “improving Muslim-West relations.”
Hmmm.
Build a mosque—a place for Muslims to worship—within two blocks of the site of the worst Muslim terrorist attack in living memory—at the site of a building that was itself damaged as part of the attack.
Let’s flip some religious identities around.
Suppose that there was a Christian terrorist organization and that it attacked an iconic site in a major Muslim city—say, the Kaaba in Mecca—and in so doing not only destroyed the site but also killed 3,000 innocent people, overwhelmingly Muslim.
Then a group of Christians, who have set about “improving West-Muslim relations” announce that they want to build a Christian cultural center and church—a place for Christians to worship—just outside the former site of the Kaaba, at the spot where once stood a building damaged in the Christian terrorist attack.
Would any of us (a) think that this really would improve relations or (b) believe claims that this was the real motive (as opposed, e.g., to being a kind of covert Christian triumphalism)?
I know the Kaaba in Mecca isn’t a direct equivalent of the World Trade Center. It is more important to Muslims than the latter was to Americans—far more so, in fact. But the point remains the same. (And yes, I know that Saudi Arabia would never allow this, but we’re doing a thought experiment to tease out an underlying principle.)
I could understand Muslims wanting to build some kind of inter-religious discussion facility near Ground Zero as a way of allowing visitors to the area to hear the message, “We are Muslims and we don’t approve of what was done here. Please don’t judge our religion by this horrible atrocity.”
But that’s not the same thing as building a mosque—a place of worship for Muslims.
One would always have to suspect the motives of the builders-of-churches-near-the-demolished-Kaaba, as well as the motives of Christians who would go there to worship, and in the same way one must suspect the motives of the builders-of-mosques-near-Ground-Zero, as well as the motives of Muslims who would go there to worship.
Something smells rotten here because something is rotten here.
This is at best a colossally tone deaf and insensitive venture (particularly so for the families who lost loved ones in the 9/11 attacks, but also for all Americans).
At worst it is something far darker.
What are your thoughts?
The mosque is being built a block away from the site, not right next door.
In fact, there is another mosque a block away from the site that no one is complaining about.
Mosques in New York City: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=new+york+city+mosques&fb=1&gl=us&hq=mosques&hnear=New+York,+NY&view=text&ei=GG9qTNqqAZG8sQOmvKQr&sa=X&oi=local_group&ct=more-results&resnum=6&ved=0CEEQtQMwBQ
Nick…actually this poster get’s it right. He correctly sites the building to be occupied as “the site of a building that was damaged in the 9/11 attacks”. It is not a block away. It’s part of the attacked site.
The Kaaba is a very bad analogy. According to the linked Wikipedia article, it is the “holiest site in Islam”. Ground Zero was not even remotely a holy site.
While I agree that if “improving Muslim-West relations” is their goal, building the mosque would be unwise, I’m perplexed about the debate over whether they should have the “right” to build it. If it is indeed on private property and in accordance with local laws and ordinances, how are they going to be stopped? And how is that compatible with a Constitutional government?
There are probably more practicing Muslims in NY City than Catholics. So I think a Mosque is a good thing. Muslims have a Mosque at the Dome of the Rock, which once was the most important site for Jews. So it only seems logical to have a Mosque at the center of American capitalism. It must be Allah’s will. People need to get over their insensitivity and cultural bias towards Islam, and embrace the fact that Islam will soon rule the world.
haddad needs to get over his insensitivity and hatred for non-Muslims.
“There are probably more practicing Muslims in NY City than Catholics.” Evidence?
Mosques welcome in NYC. Christian Churches are not.
Where are the leftists screaming “religious freedom” about the former when they’re NOT speaking in defense of the latter?
Proof of bigotry.
“It must be Allah’s will… Islam will soon rule the world. ”
That’s the best argument against this mosque that I’ve seen yet.
BobCatholic,
Catholics are so fractured as a result of the priest and bishop scandals in Europe and America that it is doubtful if they could even muster enough unity to put a ‘Catholic’ Starbucks at Ground Zero. The lack of unity, moral decay among clergy, lack of zeal, and general apathy of Catholicism shows it is a religion incapable of being relevant in the 21st century.
Conservative Catholics are too busy on focusing on liberals and liberal Catholics, while we Muslims quietly advance our agenda. So instead of complaining about a Mosque at Ground Zero, see if you can set up your own ‘Catholic Starbucks’ or a statue of one of your popes.
I compute a 65% probability that haddad is not a Muslim, but a troll.
haddad’s post is the reason many Americans simply don’t trust islam and are suspicious of muslims.
I thank haddad for writing so candidly about the agenda of Islam. Our Lady of Victory pray for us!
I agree with Tim J.; I’d bet good money that haddad has posted here many times under various handles, and has claimed to be an adherent of several different religions.
>Haddad
“while we Muslims quietly advance our agenda.” If you are a Muslim, praytell, what exactly is your agenda? You seem to be in the know. Secondly, you “quietly” advance your agenda? More like a bull in a China shop you mean. And please don’t forget that the whole idea is to enter heaven. I would rather lose to Muslim’s on this earth and enter glory, then to sin by killing innocent people and win the earth. Just something to chew on for awhile Haddad.
Dan,
Child molesting priests and the Crusades is why many Americans don’t trust Catholics. Catholic marriages are in steep decline. So your statement is meaningless. America has been in accelerating spiritual, economic, and intellectual decline for the past 15 years. Americans are too busy smoking their pipes, drinking their beer, eating their pork, living a life of cowardice and ignorance. The bulk of American men are a bunch of over-sensitive emasculated mama’s boys growing up to be henpecked by their bitchy wives. Yet, because Satan has blinded their eyes they can not see they are living the ‘last days’ of Western Civilization. It is so amusing to watch Americans, especially Conservative Catholics, fall into the trap of the Hegel dialectic. America is crumbling and conservative Americans are fighting liberal Americans on how to arrange the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic. America has spent over 1 trillion dollars on the War on Terror and YET it can not find Osama bin Laden. If I were an American, I would not know if I should laugh or cry at this statistic.
Ah, the anti-Catholic bigotry spews out of the crater!
Mr Haddad,
You seem to be a very idealistic person. When you have suffered a little, when your eyes have gone dry because there are no tears left, when hope seems like a dirt, four-letter word, when you know something of love as the willing of the good instead of the will simply to win, when you whole heart longs to see a day where the peace passes all understanding and is not simply the silence of death, then you may begin to understand enough to comment on this issue. Until then, we will hear you another time.
The Chicken
Dear Haddad,
You do understand that the statement:
Child molesting priests and the Crusades is why many Americans don’t trust Catholics.
is a sample of the fallacy of composition (also known as the genetic fallacy). Right?
You might ponder something written by Chesterton (if I have my reference right):
“That though all lances split on you,
All swords be heaved in vain,
We have more lust again to lose
Than you to win again.”
The Chicken
Catholics are so fractured as a result of the priest and bishop scandals in Europe and America that it is doubtful if they could even muster enough unity to put a ‘Catholic’ Starbucks at Ground Zero. The lack of unity, moral decay among clergy, lack of zeal, and general apathy of Catholicism shows it is a religion incapable of being relevant in the 21st century.
One more thing:
How many times have Catholics heard the death knell of Catholicism proclaimed by people who have not studied history. If you knew anything about history, you would not be making such a bald-faced unsubstantiated claim.
The Chicken
The Chicken,
You incorrectly call me an idealist. I think this is a characterization of yourself. Your book says in Proverbs 13:12, “Hope deferred makes the heart sick, but a longing fulfilled is a tree of life.” I think that many Christians are ‘heart sick’ because they have no hope. I think many Christians blindly cling to a ‘hope’ that will never be fulfilled. You are much more the idealist than myself. Idealists as they grow old, fall into depression and despair, and finally realize that their peace will never come. They will then try to drown their sorrows and anxiety in alcohol. “Give beer to those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish”(Proverbs 31:6). See also Proverbs 31:4, “It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink: lest they drink, and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted.”
The Chicken,
If you believe that the Child Molestation scandal and subsequent cover-up is not contributing to the decline in stature of the Catholic church in the West, than you are truly an idealist. Muslims have studied history and KNOW the weaknesses of the Catholic church. By letting Protestants, Atheists, Liberals, and former Catholics attack the church it is only a matter of time before Rome shrinks to the point of irrelevance. All this makes it easier for the Muslim to clean up the spoils. Yes, the battle may take many years, but time is on our side.
The Chicken,
You should come to my office during lunch and watch the Protestants ‘evangelize’ the Catholics. The Protestants are too intimidated by Islam so they leave me alone. I love to watch the battle and only smile at the confusion that exists in Christianity.
“I love to watch the battle and only smile at the confusion that exists in Christianity. ”
Right… cuz Muslims live so famously in peace and harmony with one another, as in Iran, Iraq and Pakistan…
*wrenches tongue from cheek*
(I still don’t believe you’re a Muslim, BTW)
You incorrectly call me an idealist.
I said:
You seem to be a very idealistic person.
Is English not your native language? The two statements are not equivalent.
If you believe that the Child Molestation scandal and subsequent cover-up is not contributing to the decline in stature of the Catholic church in the West, than you are truly an idealist. Muslims have studied history and KNOW the weaknesses of the Catholic church. By letting Protestants, Atheists, Liberals, and former Catholics attack the church it is only a matter of time before Rome shrinks to the point of irrelevance. All this makes it easier for the Muslim to clean up the spoils. Yes, the battle may take many years, but time is on our side.
You really do not know history. I am an historian, by the way.
You should come to my office during lunch and watch the Protestants ‘evangelize’ the Catholics. The Protestants are too intimidated by Islam so they leave me alone. I love to watch the battle and only smile at the confusion that exists in Christianity.
You have addressed none of my points, but simply repeated your own rhetoric. You have had your say. Please, leave.
The Chicken
You really do not know history.
I really shouldn’t have said that. I apologize. I do not know what you know about history, but from the nature of your comments, you seem to not be making anything other than Wagnerian claims with no historical substantiation. Have you read about the Battle of Lepanto, for example? The history of the Catholic Church is extremely complicated and you have brought nothing other than very short-sighted commentary to the discussion, in my opinion.
Also, do you know the future? For all you know, there might be a plague that wipes out millions of people. Bacteria do not usually discriminate. Who knows. You have supplied no more than a superficial statement of your beliefs rather than any good analysis. For all you know, the next generation of priests may be so orthodox (there is evidence to support this) that the entire scandal may be seen as nothing more than a period of history. I am simply asking you, if you are going to use the scandal as evidence to the downfall of Western Civilization, that you put it in historical context and present better arguments that just, “Well, everybody knows…”
The Chicken
When this Muhammadan temple opens I hope there is a strong Christian presence opposing it and the false god worshiped therein.
-J. Prot.
“President Obama expressed support for the right of Muslims to build a mosque near Ground Zero in New York City and, in fact, at the site of a building that was damaged in the 9/11 attacks when part of one of the planes used by terrorists crashed into the building’s roof”.
And there was me thinking that Jimmy was a wise man
Don’t tell me Jimmy you really believe that Muslims terrorists carried out 9/11? Catch a grip. Read the facts and catch up with the rest of the living. Building a Mosque on or near the site of ground zero. Its all bull shit. The only reasion it has come up on the news is to keep you all in the fear zone where you have all been from Bush and his gang of paid USA terrorists put you there.
Please awake from your slumber.
The Chicken,
You may be correct that future Americans may forget about the Child Molestation scandal. However, this is because Americans have very short memories. BTW, the Catholic church could suffer from another scandal such as homosexual clergy, the ordination of women, or white Americans leaving once their is a black pope.
Regarding history, Christianity has much blood on its hands. Let me mention the French Wars of Religion( see Wikipedia article), the 30 years war, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the war between Irish Protestants and Catholics.
You have not addressed me with any specific question, so I can only assume that my comments about alcohol greatly upset you. Proverbs 20:1 says, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.”
Tim, I am amazed at the number of Catholics that speak ill of their faith most deafening. At least Shi’as and Sunni speak well of their faith.
Even after almost 69 years and long-time friendly relations, would anyone even consider building a Shinto shrine and Japanese cultural center adjacent to Pearl Harbor? Just because they have a right to do it doesn’t mean it should be done.
CATHOLICISM
There is not, and there never was on this earth, a work of human policy so well deserving of examination as the Roman Catholic Church. The history of that Church joins together the two great ages of human civilisation. No other institution is left standing which carries the mind back to the times when the smoke of sacrifice rose from the Pantheon, and when camelopards and tigers bounded in the Flavian amphitheatre. The proudest royal houses are but of yesterday, when compared with the line of the Supreme Pontiffs. That line we trace back in an unbroken series, from the Pope who crowned Napoleon in the nineteenth century to the Pope who crowned Pepin in the eighth; and far beyond the time of Pepin the august dynasty extends, till it is lost in the twilight of fable. The republic of Venice came next in antiquity. But the republic of Venice was modern when compared with the Papacy; and the republic of Venice is gone, and the Papacy remains. The Papacy remains, not in decay, not a mere antique, but full of life and youthful vigour. The Catholic Church is still sending forth to the farthest ends of the world missionaries as zealous as those who landed in Kent with Augustin, and still confronting hostile kings with the same spirit with which she confronted Attila. The number of her children is greater than in any former age. Her acquisitions in the New World have more than compensated for what she has lost in the Old. Her spiritual ascendency extends over the vast countries which lie between the plains of the Missouri and Cape Horn, countries which a century hence, may not improbably contain a population as large as that which now inhabits Europe. The members of her communion are certainly not fewer than a hundred and fifty millions; and it will be difficult to show that all other Christian sects united amount to a hundred and twenty millions. Nor do we see any sign which indicates that the term of her long dominion is approaching. She saw the commencement of all the governments and of all the ecclesiastical establishments that now exist in the world; and we feel no assurance that she is not destined to see the end of them all. She was great and respected before the Saxon had set foot on Britain, before the Frank had passed the Rhine, when Grecian eloquence still flourished at Antioch, when idols were still worshipped in the temple of Mecca. And she may still exist in undiminished vigour when some traveller from New Zealand shall, in the midst of a vast solitude, take his stand on a broken arch of London Bridge to sketch the ruins of St. Paul’s.
Thomas Babbington Macaulay
At least Shi’as and Sunni speak well of their faith.
Considering what could happen to someone who didn’t I’m not surprised.
Tim, Dan, and The Chicken,
One of your own Catholic Magazines encourages Catholics to come and learn more about their Muslim brothers during Ramadan.
Muslim-Catholic dialogue
Furthermore according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church,paragraph 841, Muslims together with Catholics, “adore the one, merciful God.”
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”
So it seems very clear that for you to remain good Catholics you should hold a much higher regard for Islam than you do.
You have not addressed me with any specific question, so I can only assume that my comments about alcohol greatly upset you. Proverbs 20:1 says, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.”
What I said was:
You have addressed none of my points, but simply repeated your own rhetoric. You have had your say.
I did not use the word “question”. I asked you to do certain things, such as use evidence that is not simply your mere opinion to make substantial arguments. You have not.
Regarding history, Christianity has much blood on its hands. Let me mention the French Wars of Religion( see Wikipedia article), the 30 years war, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the war between Irish Protestants and Catholics.
This fallacy is called, tu quoque, which means, “you too.” You do not address the history of Catholicicsm in any substantive way to show that Catholicism is in danger of immanent collapse, but rather simply point to history of wars that have nothing to do with the collapse of Catholicism in an attempt to say,”see, you guys are bad, too”. In fact, they argue against your point, since Catholicism survived each of those periods of history.
I repeat, you are doing nothing but repeating your own rhetoric.
This post, by the way, concerns building a mosque in New York, not trashing Catholicism.
The Chicken
The Chicken,
You seem to me a very angry person. Have you been drinking alcohol?
Regardless, America is pluralistic society so let Muslims build a Mosque. Maybe some Catholics, instead of being prejudiced, should read the Catechism of the Catholic Church,paragraph 841,and together with Muslims, “adore the one, merciful God.”
Chicken, you are trying to reason with a bratty child, whose parents probably don’t know what he is doing with their computer. It is best to ignore him, and just interact with the adults.
maybe it’s time to stop feeding the troll, aka, haddad.
He’s probably just a 12-year old boy on the internet without his parent’s permission.
The Chicken,
It seems to me that the Catholic Catechism puts Muslims in a more favorable light than those pesky Sedevacanists. Vatican II’s Declaration Nostra Aetate gave recognition to Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and Judaism. As you well know Arianism lasted 500 years before finally imploding. I doubt that Vatican II Catholicism will even last 200 years before imploding. The Ecumenical Vatican II Catholicism that you so prize, may just be an aberration on the time line of history. Even more amazing and amusing is that many conservative Catholics object to John Paul II being canonized.
Why Pope John Paul II should not be canonized
If he is canonized, it will be a public relations disaster of astronomical proportions.
Dan,
For a 12 year old, I have exhibited much more intellectual fortitude than you with your American and Catholic upbringing. You are living proof of the intellectual, emotional, and spiritual ineptitude of Americans. So go drink your beer, watch your TV, and slowly see America crumble before you.
haddad, the muslim terrorist bastards were buried with pig entrails.
Dan,
This is doubtful since they burned in a very hot fire. So again your inferior American and Catholic education shows that you are not a worthy intellectual opponent. Maybe you should refrain from making silly statements. Most likely you are an American infatuated with Glenn Beck, the former Catholic turned Mormon. He rants, gets paid lots of money, but has very little impact. So continue ranting, drink your beer, and sink Trillions of dollars into a war that you can’t win.
Personally, I think they should avoid building Catholic churches near schools, especially considering that the U.S. bishops have reported receiving allegations of abuse by 5,600 priests in 1950-2008, or 5.1% of the 109,694 U.S. priests active since 1950.
Source: The sources for these numbers are The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests and Deacons, by Karen Terry et al., prepared by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice (Washington DC: USCCB, 2004), with the annual implementation reports issued by the USCCB for 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.
Catholic priests have a higher molestation rate than any type of Muslim violence.
You seem to me a very angry person. Have you been drinking alcohol?
I don’t drink and if your weren’t just a drive-by poster, you would know why.
Your posting style sounds very similar to a poster we had here about a year-and-a-half, ago. You aren’t him, I trust.
In any case, whoever you are, you made your point. You are in favor of the mosque. If you are here just to mock Catholicism, please, that is not very charitable and it violates #1 of Da Rulz. I would not walk into your house and insult you. The very fact that you do, here, tells me (and I do not think you are a 12 years old, by any means) that you are not interested in doing anything but winning points.
The Chicken
I admit some of haddad’s observations of western decadence are not without substantial support, but Islam suffers from many weaknesses as well, not least among them is its need to threaten murder of apostates in order to maintain adherents.
C Matt,
Let me remind you of the Inquisition. Did not the Catholic church torture people to maintain adherents?
In fact, there is another mosque a block away from the site that no one is complaining about.
Which begs the question, why do they need this one? And was the current mosque built before, or after 9/11?
Regardless, I am unsurprisingly underwhelmed by the O’s lack of political savvy. For all the alleged slickness people claimed he had during the campaign, he has shown himself to be quite stupid by opening his mouth on this.
The Chicken,
Every religion, regardless if it Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, or Buddhism has had its violent periods. So to make a comment about violence is utterly meaningless. King David was commanded and subsequently honored for his destruction of Cananites. King Saul was rejected by God for not destroying all the Amalekites. So violence does not prove or disprove any religion.
My question is are you a historian or a historical revisionist, twisting history to promote your particular agenda. Catholics love to point out apostolic succession as proof of their divine right. However, the Didache says:
Therefore appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men who are humble and not avaricious and true and approved, for they too carry out for you the ministry of the prophets and teachers. (15:2)
So, it seems that perhaps the earliest document of catechesis instructs the early church congregations in a given city to appoint and ordain their own overseers (who are, of course in communion with overseers from other local churches). Moreover, if we have have local churches consecrating their own bishops, how does that jive with any straightforward theory of apostolic succession? Since you are a historian you can not ignore these facts. However, the American educational system is so anemic that it can only produce intellectual lightweights who will be slaughtered by intellectual heavyweights from the rest of the world. The Greeks and Romans both thought Democracy was ‘mob rule’ and new it would fail inevitable. Study history and you will see that a faulty system of government inevitably meets its demise.
shucks, I come back after being away a few months and there’s still anti-Catholic trolls here. Rather boring, but good for apologetics practice.
For laughs:
http://pigallah.blogspot.com
oops, sorry folks. I didn’t realized you had reached the “Do Not Feed the Troll” stage.
Tim,
But the fact is that the Catholic Church has a very high opinion of Muhammadanism. JP the Great kissed the Koran, Georgtown has a Muhammadan chapel, the church says Christians and Muhammadans worship the same God, etc. Benedict the Almost as Great dropped his opposition to Turkey becoming a member of the EU.
-J. Prot.
Hey, Mary Kay, welcome back. How have things been going? I occasionally drop in at your blog, but haven’t left a comment in a while. Hope all is well.
The Chicken
And Jeb can’t resist an opportunity to express his anti-Catholic bigotry.
Mr. Haddad,
Would you, please, read, Da Rulz. They are the Rules of the House for anyone conducting discussion in the comment box. You have been guilty of hobby-horsing (see Rule 1) for some time. If you wish to contribute to the discussion, either follow the rules or I will ask Jimmy to disinvite you to post.
The Chicken
Apparently Jimmy has some ax to grind with Obama. If it is private property and it obeys the local ordinances that it seems reasonable that either a Mosque, Shinto Shrine, Jewish Temple, Protestant church, or Catholic church can be built on this private property. I guess Muslims were more proactive than the other faiths. What Jimmy is showing is his personal bigotry and snippy tone towards Muslims. I am sure if they were building a Protestant or Catholic church on the property he would not be complaining about Obama’s snippy tone.
C. Matt,
Your write:
______
In fact, there is another mosque a block away from the site that no one is complaining about.
Which begs the question, why do they need this one? And was the current mosque built before, or after 9/11?
_____
This is a misuse of “beg the question.” Beg the question does not mean “raise the question.”
-JP
haddad,
maybe it’s time you go back to your Mommy. I’m sure she has some cookies and milk for you.
It’s nappy time, little boy, LOL!
Dan,
It looks like you just sobered up after a long bender. Okay now let me put the TV on Sesame Street so you can relearn your A,B,C.
C is for cookie.
That’s good enough for me.
JP the Great kissed the Koran, Georgtown has a Muhammadan chapel, the church says Christians and Muhammadans worship the same God, etc.”
John Paul II kissing the Koran should not have happened, I agree. The Muslim chapel at Georgetown is a scandal. However, it is true, by the strictest standards of orthodox theology, that Muslims and Christians worship the same God. See this article for more.
If anyone still wants to talk about the subject of the post, I would appreciate it if someone could explain to me on what basis Muslims can or should be prevented from building a mosque “on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances”. What are we supposed to do to stop them? Conduct another crusade?
I also don’t see that it’s fair to call Obama’s second statement a flip-flop or a “non-denial” denial. All he said was that there was no legal basis to stop the proposed building. He had no obligation to say whether he thought it a good idea. Was he wrong on the legal issue, and if so, how?
News Corp’s number-two shareholder funded ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ planner
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100820/bs_yblog_upshot/news-corps-number-two-shareholder-funded-terror-mosque-planner
Hi Chicken!
I’ll try to get back here a little more often. Tough times exacerbated by croaked computer. Catholic view: ideal time to go deeper into prayer whether or not one wants to./end thread hijack.
If you have a near-by university, they might have a surplus department and you might be able to find a surplus computer. I bought my first computer for $25 dollars, that way.
The Chicken
Why do we even allow even one mosque to exist in our contry, let alone this one the Muslims want to build near Ground Zero? These places are centers of Islamic subversion, training grounds for anti-Christian, anti-western hatred. Everyone of these places ought to be closed down and razed, and all of the foreign-born Muzzies deported back to their contry of origin. The ones born here should be told they have 1st amendment rights, but they’ll never be trusted as loyal Americans, unless they publically renounce Islam. And it wouldn’t hurt America, and the West in general, to tell the islamic countries to reign in their anti-American activities, especially bombing and assasinations, or Mecca and Medina will be turned into a glass slagheap.
Steve,
Clearly being raised on a diet of MTV and Xbox360 had dulled your thinking. America is a country of religious freedom, so Muslims have every right to propagate their message. So I argue that you are anti-American for not understanding this. Hey, why not have Americans shut down any institution that has a 30% homosexual clergy. What you fail to understand is the treachery of your Popes. Let me give you a small list. (Source: http://www.the-ten-commandments.org/catholic_church_error.html)
The history of the Popes records homosexuality, rape, murder, adultery, incest, drunkenness and selling religious offices and much more. The following examples are just scratching the surface as many of the Popes have been labelled as the most EVIL people in all history. To list all of the crimes from all the Popes in brief would be a list ten times bigger then this page. There is no way God would have this as His true Church. God flooded the Earth destroying all but eight people for far less then the atrocities of these Popes.
1. Pope Damasus I (366 – 384) for many various crimes. Persons who questioned any Church doctrine had their lands seized and family sacrificed through being tortured and burnt alive. Former female priests and their children were used as sex slaves to provide income for the Church. He was found guilty by 44 bishops of adultery but used his position to obstruct justice after which he murdered the bishops.
2. Pope Stephen VI (896 – 897) brought the dead body of former Pope Formosus (891 – 897) to trial, hacked off his decaying finger and had him dragged through the streets of Rome and thrown into the Tiber River.
3. Pope Sergius III (904 – 911) obtained his office by murder. He fathered several illegitimate children by Marozia who assassinated Pope Leo VI (928 – 929), and put her own teenage son (John XI) as Pope.
4. Pope John XII (955 – 964) is described in the Catholic encyclopaedia as a coarse, immoral man. The Catholic collection of the lives of the Popes, the “Liber Pontificalis” said: “He spent his entire life in adultery.” Catholic bishop Luitprand states that “he had no respect for single girls, married woman or widows – they were sure to be defiled by him.”
5. Pope Boniface VII (984 – 985) John XII and Leo VIII were described by the Bishop of Orleans as “monsters of guilt, reeking in blood and filth.”
6. Pope John XV (985 – 996) split the Churches finances among his relatives and was described as “covetous of filthy lucre and corrupt in all his acts.”
7. Pope Benedict IX (1033 – 1045) committed murders and adulteries in broad daylight, robbed pilgrims and was regarded as a hideous criminal. The people drove him out of Rome: The Catholic encyclopaedia says, “He was a disgrace to the chair of Peter.”
8. Pope Urban II (1088-1099) for many crimes against humanity. His worst was during 1096-1099 where approximately 10,000,000 innocent men, women and especially children were murdered and their property stolen under the legal approval of Pope “Blessed” Urban II. The wholesale slaughter of innocent people was for nothing more than greed which included Belgrade (1096), the chief city of Orthodox Church after Constantinople, Yugoslavia (1096), Turkey, Syria, Antioch (1098) and Palestine.
9. Pope Adrian IV (1154-1159) receiving profits from crime. England Monarchs paid the Roman Catholic Church an annual fee for the “legal” and perpetual enslavement of Ireland by Papal Bull Laudabiliter until the time of Henry VIII.
10. Pope Alexander III decreed in 1170 that wills had to be made in front of a priest, or excommunication (cutting off from Church and sentence to hell) would result.
11. Pope Innocent III (1198 – 1216) promoted the Inquisition, surpassing all his predecessors in killing over one million people.
12. Pope Boniface VIII (1294 – 1303) The Catholic encyclopaedia states, “Scarcely any possible crime was omitted – heresy, gross and unnatural immorality, idolatry, magic, simony … his whole pontificate was one record of evil.” Dante visited Rome and described the Vatican as a “sewer of corruption” and assigned Boniface VII, Nicholas III and Clement V to the “lowest parts of hell.” He proposed to be an atheist and in 1302 issued the “Unum Sanctum” officially declaring the Roman Catholic Church as the only true Church, outside of which on one can be saved.
13. Pope John XXIII (1410 – 1415) was accused by 37 clergy witnesses of fornication, adultery, incest, sodomy, simony, theft and murder. It was proved by a legion of witnesses that he had seduced and violated 300 nuns. He kept a harem at Boulogne of 200 girls. He was publicly called the devil incarnate. He has been called the most depraved criminal who ever sat on the papal throne.
14. Pope Eugene IV (1431 – 1447) condemned Joan of Arc to be burned alive as a witch, but Pope Benedict IV (1919) declared her a saint.
15. Pope Pius II (1458 – 1464) fathered many illegitimate children and taught others to do likewise.
16. Pope Paul II (1464 – 1471) maintained a house full of concubines.
17. Pope Sixtus IV (1471 – 1484) financed his wars by selling Church offices to the highest bidders.
18. Pope Innocent VII (1484 – 1492) fathered 16 illegitimate children by various women.
19. Pope Alexander VI (1492 – 1503) committed incest with his two sisters and daughter. On October 31, 1501 he conducted the worst ever sex orgy in the Vatican.
Source: (http://www.the-ten-commandments.org/catholic_church_error.html)
So look at the list. If you don’t have the stomach to read that list than take your anti-depressants. If, I were a Catholic and forced to trust in the Popes as my leader, I would be donut eating alcoholic doped up on anti-depressants.
So Bill912 do you have anything intelligent to say other than this is anti-Catholic bigotry. Are you so ignorant and jaded that you can’t refute these facts? Some of the facts come straight from the Catholic Encyclopedia.
The Chicken,
You claim to be an historian. I finally got the article to historian correct. Can you please show me where in history the Catholic Magisterium convened to approve the first 7 ecumenical councils? If the Catholic church did not convene them, does this not show that a centralized church teaching authority is a much later invention? Is it not possible that if the first 7 councils refuted Arianism, Pelagianism,and Nestorianism, that the subsequent Protestant councils refuted sacradotelism, Marian dogmas, simony, Papacy, and indulgences? Or as your good book says,’…A house divided against itself can not stand'( Matt 12:25). All I can say is Muslims have never had the level of controversy that you alleged Christians have.
Popes convene councils, not the Magisterium (Councils of Cardinals and Bishops). Each council had the approval of the Pope.
The Chicken
Popes convene councils, not the Magisterium (Councils of Cardinals and Bishops). Each council had the approval of the Pope.
The Chicken
Popes convene councils, not the Magisterium (Councils of Cardinals and Bishops). Each council had the approval of the Pope.
The Chicken
The Chicken,
Please read the Wikipedia link The First Council of Nicea
The link says: “The First Council of Nicaea was convened by Constantine I upon the recommendations of a synod led by Hosius of Cordoba in the Eastertide of 325. This synod had been charged with investigation of the trouble brought about by the Arian controversy in the Greek-speaking east.[10] To most bishops, the teachings of Arius were heretical and dangerous to the salvation of souls. In the summer of 325, the bishops of all provinces were summoned to Nicaea (now known as İznik, in modern-day Turkey), a place easily accessible to the majority of delegates, particularly those of Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Greece, and Thrace.
This was the first general council in the history of the Church since the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem, the Apostolic council having established the conditions upon which Gentiles could join the Church.[11] In the Council of Nicaea, “the Church had taken her first great step to define doctrine more precisely in response to a challenge from a heretical theology.”[12]
Observe that the link mentions that the council was convened by a bishop from Spain and the Emperor Constantine. Explain to me why the Pope did not convene it? Since you are an historian at a much regarded American Institution I expect a good answer. Also you seem very adept at logic. I believe a proof by contradiction shows that if the Pope did not convene the First Council it proves that Apostolic Succession as evidenced in the Papacy is an example of ancient fable or Medieval Historical Revisionism ( aka Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals ).
As I mentioned before from the Didache. “Therefore appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men who are humble and not avaricious and true and approved, for they too carry out for you the ministry of the prophets and teachers. (Didache 15:2)” So, it seems that perhaps the earliest document of catechesis instructs congregations in a given city to appoint and ordain their own episcopal overseers (who are, of course ostensibly in communion with overseers from other local churches). Moreover, if we have have local churches consecrating their own bishops, how does that jive with any straightforward theory of apostolic succession or centralized teaching authority?
Conclusion: I think as an historian you have a lot of explaining to do.
haddad, no one takes wikipedia as a credible source on controversial topics.
The Masked Chicken and others have shown their knowledge and credibility time after time on these threads. The same can not be said for you.
Mary Kay,
The Masked Chicken has referenced wikipedia numerous times. A notable study in the journal Nature suggested that in 2005, Wikipedia scientific articles came close to the level of accuracy in Encyclopædia Britannica and had a similar rate of “serious errors”. In historical sources it has also been found quite accurate.
Your issue is, like many American females is that your poorly educated, moody, hypersensitive, easily offended, and don’t know how to stay out of an argument that exceeds your academic level or interest. For you, faith is a feeling of being nice, kind, and trying to be a good person. For me according to your book it is the following: “And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force” (Matthew 11:12). So yes the kingdom still suffers violence and the violent take it by force. So MaryKay, as my dad says, ‘If you start a fight make sure you can finish it, otherwise don’t start one.’
So I want to see the intellectual heavies on this site putup or shutup. Otherwise I stand by my statement that America is filled with either intellectual pansies, gun toting alcohol swilling rednecks; or lazy bones looking for an entitlement.
Hadad, I’m too old to have been influenced by MTV. I’ve never liked rock music. Country music is more up my alley. I like Toby Keith’s song where he sings to Islamic terrorists that “We’ll put a boot up your —, courtesy of the red, white, and blue”.
HADDAD: THIS IS YOUR RULE 1 WARNING.
IF YOU CAN’T CUT OUT THE GROSSLY INSULTING LANGUAGE AND DISCUSS THINGS POLITELY YOU WILL BE DISINVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS BLOG.
Observe that the link mentions that the council was convened by a bishop from Spain and the Emperor Constantine. Explain to me why the Pope did not convene it
Haddad, please, look up the word, proxy.
That Bishop of Spin did not officially convene the council, but merely suggested it (or, rather, agreed with Constantine, who by the way, was not yet a Christian – he was baptized on his deathbed). Even if that Bishop had tried to convene it, it would not have been valid without the Pope’s approval. The Pope’s representatives did attend the Council with his tacit approval, thus officially sanctioning the Council.
Please, quit these tu quoque arguments. Also, you have made so many wrong and rash assumptions about the people on this blog, that one can only assume from that evidence that you are not arguing in charity, but merely for the sake of arguing. Your zeal is evident, but not your charity nor compassion.
Also, stay on topic. If you have something to contribute about the morality of building a mosque at ground zero, then I might be willing to discuss things with you. Otherwise, I am done, here.
The Chicken
haddad,
On a search and find on this thread, there was no instance of Masked Chicken refencing wikipedia. Debit one point for you.
Please note that I specified “on controversial topics.” Your (incompletely cited) reference was to science articles. Debit two points for you.
Your issue is, like many American females is that your poorly educated, moody, hypersensitive, easily offended, and don’t know how to stay out of an argument that exceeds your academic level or interest. For you, faith is a feeling of being nice, kind, and trying to be a good person.
That made me literally laugh out loud. As much as I’d like to give you points for the laugh, this statement is so ludicrous, so much a classic example of trolling to bait, so based solely on ignorant stereotypes that it doesn’t even meet the criteria for “poorly argued” – you’ve lost so many points you’ve busted the bank.
Haddad, thanks for both the laugh and for showing so clearly why it’s not possible to take you seriously.
“Your issue is, like many American females (sic) is that your (sic) poorly educated, moody, hypersensitive, easily offended, and don’t know how to stay out of an argument that exceeds your academic level or interest.”
The guys on the other thread were right: haddad is O’neil. Just pray for him.