Posted on 08/23/2010 3:28:07 PM PDT by mnehring
Rep. Ron Paul (R., Texas) has issued a lengthy statement condemning “neo-conservative” opposition to the Park51 project. “This is all about hate and Islamaphobia,” said Paul:
It has been said, “Nero fiddled while Rome burned.” Are we not overly preoccupied with this controversy, now being used in various ways by grandstanding politicians? It looks to me like the politicians are “fiddling while the economy burns.”
The debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque.
Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be “sensitive” requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from “ground zero.”
Just think of what might (not) have happened if the whole issue had been ignored and the national debate stuck with war, peace, and prosperity. There certainly would have been a lot less emotionalism on both sides. The fact that so much attention has been given the mosque debate, raises the question of just why and driven by whom?
In my opinion it has come from the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia and are compelled to constantly justify it.
They never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars.
Paul seems to flirt with the Imam Rauf line that American foreign policy in the Middle East invited the September 11 attacks:
If it became known that 9/11 resulted in part from a desire to retaliate against what many Muslims saw as American aggression and occupation, the need to demonize Islam would be difficult if not impossible.
There is no doubt that a small portion of radical, angry Islamists do want to kill us but the question remains, what exactly motivates this hatred?
If Islam is further discredited by making the building of the mosque the issue, then the false justification for our wars in the Middle East will continue to be acceptable.
Meanwhile, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) is breaking ranks with Harry Reid and supporting the Park51 project:
“The mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, has given his assent to this center and I support his decision,” Durbin said Sunday. “The politicians like Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin who try to divide America with fear and hate over this issue betray the diversity which makes our nation great and the Constitution which they profess to honor.”
Neither am I; there is but one Great One, even if he sounds like a whimpy little guy! :)
I’m just some jerk with a blackberry phone.
That's OK, you have your Crackberry, I'm a geek with a custom-cooked ROM on WinCE! Geeks and Jerks Unite!
If that’s your interpretation could be propose the building of a christian place of worship to at least tie this up in court to at least prolong this building of the mosque? On your side guy..
That's one possible approach. I know in Seattle, there are zoning restrictions on community halls and churches, in terms of where they can be built. I'd assume NYC has the same type of zoning laws. If it's a blanket restriction on community halls and churches in an area, then I don't see how the RLUIPA is being violated in the least.
Here is a little monkey wrench to the argument, remember, they are selling it as a ‘cultural center’ that happens to have a mosque in it (like a chapel in a hospital), not a mosque itself. I don’t see RLUIPA protecting cultural centers.
Can we FINALLY be done with this stupid little assclown?
The problem with Islam it was never reformed in a meaningful, global sense like other religions. Most importantly, there is no separation of church and state in their official world view. That’s a fundamental problem that makes Islam, as you stated, a political ideology incompatible with American Democracy. Many Muslims re-interpret the theology to one degree or another on their own into something that allows them to get along without blowing up buildings. The question is have they made that basic shift in their thinking away from theocracy. The Park51 Imam has not. Instead he preaches watered-down, superficially Westernized Shariah that assumes every Muslim wants to live under government-enforced religious laws as soon as they get the chance. This guy still doesn’t get the Constitution even when he’s hiding behind it. That’s why he deserves to be tolerated (as in ok send him on a tour or two if it helps calm the violent psychopaths in the ME for the moment) rather than celebrated (as in Yayyy let’s help him build a fancy super symbolic mosque).
Well, thanks for your inpiut, but just because you hate somebody doesn’t mean it’s about hate for the rest of us. I LOVE Boeing, but that doesn’t mean I’d support building a 15 story Boeing satellite office overlooking the Hiroshima Atomic Bomb Dome.
A sense of shame requires a reasonable amount of sanity and at least some level of being able to deal with reality...
Pretty much rules out Paul supporters...
He is exactly what Lenin meant when he coined the term “useful idiot.”
Sorry, Ron, but this is about theocracy versus religious freedom.
It’s about decency versus rudeness.
It’s about honor versus desecration.
Why doesn’t Ron Paul think his way through some of this stuff for a change?
Actually, the Constitution says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
Islam is not a religion. It is a theocracy and as such it violates prohibitions regarding treason against the United States. “Treason against the United States shall consist ...in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
Paul will pop up in the 2012 election and help get the Marxist/Muslim elected again.
“He is exactly what Lenin meant when he coined the term “useful idiot.”
Sir you hit that one out of the park, 100% Correct!
I noticed that too. The ron paul followers on FR are no where to be found on this thread. Yet they spend hours upon hours on Palin threads trying to smear Sarah Palin.
Again? err...um... Ron Paul did not run in the 2008 general election. I know you think that Ron Paul is evil but that's no excuse for making things up.
I guess that I don’t know the constitution as well as I thought.Can anybody tell me where this idea that a religious building can be built ANYWHERE?
If we are talking 1st amendment, It says “Congress shall pass no law...” Yet, Church buildings have been subject to MANY laws: i.e. Zoning and Building codes.
The “Free exercise” clause? Try opening up a church (in say Dearbornistan) which practices mass ritual hog slaughtering and burnt offering.
The 1st amendment(perhaps wrongly) has been held to be limited as to time and place, etc. I think that a huge mosque at the scene of an atrocity perpetrated by Islamists, in the name of Islam, is tantamount to shouting FIRE in a crowded theater.
Or, am I missing some other provision?
DG
(Revisiting thread) LOL! GRRRREAT FReeper humor in a thread of great posts. Thanks, kanawa! LOL!
I know that. I meant that if Paul runs in 2012 he will split the vote and keep the muzzie in the White House.
Another freeper who apparently wants to expand the tyranny of zoning still further! Do you also think that the zoning laws should discriminate against people if they vote the "wrong way?" If not, what precise limits, if any, do you plan on the reach of the zoning bureucrats.
If Paul runs? Well maybe....but he hasn’t run in a general presidential election for more than two decades (when a Republican won btw) so it would be a break from the pattern. Interestingly, those who oppose him running argue out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, they condemn Paul as a leftist but on the other they argue that will capture conservative votes and help the Democrats. Which is it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.