Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 240B
By this logic, every American should be required to carry a gun, especially if they don’t like it. After all, it is part of American tradition and law.

How does that analogy apply to the many, many conservatives who not only condemn the building of the mosque but want to BAN the right of a PRIVATE owner to build it?

47 posted on 08/18/2010 7:02:47 AM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: Captain Kirk
How does that analogy apply to the many, many conservatives who not only condemn the building of the mosque but want to BAN the right of a PRIVATE owner to build it?

Do they have a club? They could call it "Conservatives For Socialism"...

50 posted on 08/18/2010 7:07:33 AM PDT by detritus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: Captain Kirk

Nobody opposes the building of the mosque. The controversy is about the sensitive nature of the location of the mosque. How many Americas have been denied the permit to open a BBQ place because it was too close to a mosque?

We can’t have a policy, enforced by the state, of one-way sensitivity. We can’t have a situation, enforced by law, that allows Muslims to do whatever they want to do and then forces Christians and all Americans to tip-toe around them. And that is exactly where we are headed now.

You will have to clarify your remarks. I don’t understand your point.


60 posted on 08/18/2010 7:27:28 AM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

To: Captain Kirk

Hmmmm...what is your definition of “many, many?” Can you back it up with a cite or two?

Also, I think it would be fair to say that most, if not all, of the people who wish to prevent the build with law see it as an enemy action in a time of war, rather than the establishment of a place of worship. Even if you disagree with them on whether it should be built, would you make a case that private property rights extend to enemy operators in a time of war? And if so, wouldn’t it be cruciial that we establish exactly which one of the two this is before proceeding with construction?


110 posted on 08/18/2010 10:14:43 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Anyone who says we need illegals to do the jobs Americans won't do has never watched "Dirty Jobs.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson