If a mosque opens at Ground Zero on 9/11 next year,Obama can kiss the White House goodbye

[Mark B. Morrow]

This is your party symbol right?

 

It could be yours as well.

 

Now who wants to change the rules? This is a perfect example of you and your people wishing to mandate the behavior of others. I support civil unions but not marriage, as marriage is both a civil and religious matter, and for many the religious aspect out weighs the civil. The truth of the issue is that many want to force churches to accept same sex marriages. And please don't tell us that this won't be the case. Look at what has happened in the cases of religious groups and adoption, family planning, and abortion counseling.

 

Permitting equal treatment isn't mandating the behavior of others. No one is suggesting that heterosexuals shouldn't be able to marry or that they should enter in to same sex marriages. No religious group would be required to accept Gay Marriage or to perform one. Just like no religious group can be required to accept someone who does not hold to its tenants. This is a red herring argument. BYW I don't particularly care if you call all civil ceremonies Civil Unions so long as all the legal rights, responsibilities and benefits are the same. Would it bother you if Gays who marry in a church that recognizes their union call it marriage?

 

Why is that you say one thing:

 

"I have never had any objection to gun ownership"

 

and then in the next breath you buy it all back:

 

"I do support reasonable protections (restrictions) on gun availability."

 

So you are against any restrictions at all, even those regarding felons and the mentally ill?

 

And again....

 

"I have never suggested that some of the families of those murdered on 9/11 have no right to oppose this building or to have ill will towards Muslims in general."

 

 

When you really mean:

 

Don't bend to accomodate any group

 

Try using the whole thing... Don't bend to accomodate any group. Obey the Constitution. That second part you ignored is important. The Constitution is more important than any one group's feelings, no matter how heartfelt

 

You also ignored the part where I stated not all 9/11 survivors or families oppose the ICC. Are their feelings about their loss not as important to you?

 

I got a laugh out of this line... From the people who brought you political correctness! LOL!

 

"Do you want to have each of your views and actions examined to see if you are insensitive to others?"

 

For years now we have been conditioned to listen to idiocy and let it pass because speaking out was not politically correct. The "less is more" message is a lie, less is just less. The "high self esteem" movement has succeeded in making losers feel like winners, but in the end we needed the winners, not happy losers. Your people have so damaged the fabric of the country that our children will probably be the first generation to see a declining standard of living. The kind of gross stupidity that would not allow skimmers in the gulf because the water they return ed to the gulf wouldn't pass for tap water, is a perfect example of why the people are fed up with Washington. No longer should you expect us to suffer fools gladly.

 

What in the F@#k are you talking about? You think you can read the minds and divine the true intentions of people you have never met and yet your intentions should never be questioned. Just what gives you the idea that I support political correctness. it certainly can't be anything in the post you responded to where I supported the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT of Nazis and the KKK to protest. If our children are going to suffer a declining standard of living it is because your people have drastically shifted wealth to the wealthy in numbers not seen since the 1920s. I shall not suffer your foolishness gladly.

 

You can't even categorically say that the murder of 3000 was wrong. Instead you become an apologist for the attackers, offering your soft justification of their acts. Can you not grasp that some things are just wrong, and never justified?

 

The murder of 3,000 people in terrorist attacks was catagorically wrong and is unforgivable. Happy?

 

There is no justification and I didn't offer one. If I believed in a Hell I would like to see Bin Laden and all of his followers there.

 

You cannot deny that our choices of regimes we support can have consequences. No snappy retort to the fact that we funded Bin Laden and Saddam only to end up having to fight them? Come on Xr7, you can do better than that. At least be honest about the facts you choose to ignore.

 

Then again I guess that would be too much to ask of you.

 

 

 

Guess not... How the guilt must rend at your soul, knowing that the US is the source of all evil in the world.

 

I don't feel any guilt at all and I certainly do not believe that the US is the source of all evil in the world or even a significant source of evil.

 

That doesn't mean that I must be unquestioning as to everything the government does in the name of the people or that I can't believe that some decisions of our leaders are just wrong. I specified several in my previous post. I guess if you never questioned the decisions of our President and Congress, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Edited August 25, 2010 by Mark B. Morrow

[Edstock]

People like Limbaugh and the Foxhacks are too busy hating to understand this. These ignorant blowhards don't understand that it's American Muslims under 30 that are the future of Islamic reform.

 

And part of the future is the Taqwacore. It's become part of American Islam, and it's growing.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqwacore

 

http://www.taqwacore.com/

 

This is the exact opposite of Bin Laden and the Wahabists.

 

[Ford Jellymoulds]

KEEP MUSLIM EXTREMISTS OUT OF THE BIG APPLE THAT ARE ANTI-AMERICAN

 

DAILY MAIL (NOT FOX NEWS OR A COMEDY SHOW).....

 

 

 

The Islamic cleric behind plans for a mosque at Ground Zero in New York has claimed that the U.S. is worse than Al Qaeda.

 

 

 

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said that America was more culpable than the terrorist organisation because U.S.-led sanctions were responsible for the death of half a million Iraqi children.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than Al Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non-Muslims,' he said.Rauf is the driving force of plans to put a £70million mosque two blocks away from where the Twin Towers once stood.

 

 

 

 

 

 

His comments raise further questions over whether or not funding for the project will come from regimes that back terrorists, something the mosque leaders have refused to rule out.

 

 

A poll has showed that more and more Americans are taking an interest in the Ground Zero mosque, and that 62 per cent are now against the project compared to 54 per cent in July.

 

 

Rauf's comments drew condemnation from Debra Burlingame, head of 9/11 Families for a Strong America, who said they left her feeling disgusted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'This man is out there preaching politics and advancing anti-American propaganda,' she said.

 

 

In the interview, Rauf said that any debate about Islam was hampered because Western audiences have yet to appreciate the damage they have inflicted on Muslims.

 

He said: 'What complicates the discussion, intra-Islamically, is the fact that the West has not been cognizant and has not addressed the issue of its own contribution to much injustice in the Arab and Muslim world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rauf's comments, which emerged on a conservative U.S. blog, came as a poll showed that more and more Americans are taking an interest in the Ground Zero mosque, and that the majority oppose it.

 

Some 85 per cent of those questioned said they are following news stories about the project, a 34-point jump from a month ago.

 

Some 62 per cent are now against the project compared to 54 per cent in July.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rauf's comments drew condemnation from Debra Burlingame, head of 9/11 Families for a Strong America, who said they left her feeling disgusted.

 

'This man is out there preaching politics and advancing anti-American propaganda,' she said.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz0xas9sUG4

Edited August 25, 2010 by Ford Jellymoulds

[mustang_sallad]

you gotta like the guy with the sign about a synagogue in Mecca. So basically, he thinks America should base it's sense of freedom on middle eastern countries. Way to go! What the hell is all this talk about "American Freedom", "freedom fries" and those pesky "freedom haters"! The same people who were chanting these slogans a few years ago now seem to be saying "freedom... but only if you're white and christian like me!"

 

The planned mosque is TWO CITY BLOCKS AWAY! That's not right next to ground zero... look at it on Google Maps. Where would we draw the line? If it was 3 blocks? 5 blocks?

 

Newt Gingrich is a twat, saying its the equivalent of Nazi's putting up a sign next to a Holocaust memorial... No, it's like putting a YMCA next to a Holocaust... Islamists are to Islam as Nazis are to Christians. Do any of the Christians on this forum wish their religious beliefs were associated with the actions of Nazis or the KKK?

 

Banning this mosque is only going to fortify the Anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world and give those extremists more ammunition in their drive to recruit impressionable youths around the world. This is would be a serious dumb-ass move.

[grbeck]

You can not just sell a gun over the internet, you still have to ship it to a dealer with an FFL. A car is not the same as a gun, cars have to have a title, which means it likely isn't stolen, same can't be said for guns.

 

Federal Firearm License requirements do not apply to a private party selling a used gun to someone who also lives in that state.

 

Just because the seller (a private seller, remember - not a registered dealer) and the buyer initially make contact over the internet does not mean that the gun is then shipped via the internet. The buyer can drive to the seller's house or arrange to meet the seller somewhere to make the sale. It's easy to find local sellers with the internet.

[goinbroke2]

A lot of people died on 911.

Extreme islamist were responsible.

Islamist have built mosques on Christian foundations they have destroyed as a "gotcha"

 

These three things together would be enough to make anyone think maybe it would be a little insensitive or outright provocative to build a mosque near the 911 site. Either the ones who want to build it never realised it would be taken as an offence (at which point they would have had second thoughts and probably decided to move the location) or two, they just don't care because it is intended to be a snub.

 

Either way, yes it is legal and yes they can build it. But there is no way in hell you'll convince me it was "coincidence" that they chose a site so close to ground zero. If it was coincidence, and they were really caring, sensitive muslims, they would of realised after all the uproar that perhaps it does make people mad. Right or wrong, people are upset.

 

Any sensitive person would of been cognizant of the tension that their actions were causing.

 

They too read the papers, watch the news. They know there are people who are extremely angry.

 

If they want a mosque, they should build it. But if all the mosque does is cause anger and resentment, what's the point? Are they hoping that it will be defiled or damaged so they can use that as a reason for further action? Why win the battle if ultimately you will lose the war?

 

This makes no sense whatsoever. Nobody is going to invest millions of dollars in something they know will cause such controversy and be subject to vandalism unless it is planned to be a snub.

 

Cordoba house indeed

[Ford Jellymoulds]

DAILY EXPRESS (NOT FOX NEWS OR A COMEDY SHOW)

 

A GRIEVING British mother who lost her son in the 9/11 terror attacks has written an emotional letter to President Barack Obama over plans for a mosque at Ground Zero

 

Mr Obama has told American Muslims they have the “same right to practise their religion as everyone else in the country”.But Patricia Bingley, 76, has pleaded with the president to withdraw his support for the controversial mosque, telling him: “Please Mr Obama, as a parent and an American, don’t let this happen.”

 

Mrs Bingley’s only son Kevin Dennis, 43, had worked in the City of London but was recruited to work as a stockbroker in New York.

 

He died in the World Trade Center’s North Tower during the atrocity. Mrs Bingley, who lives in Clacton-on-Sea, Essex, said yesterday: “There isn’t a day goes by when I don’t think of that day, even though it is nearly nine years ago. It’s the first thing I think about each morning and the last thing I think about before I fall asleep each night.

 

“For anyone to even think of putting a mosque anywhere near the site of the Twin Towers is so very, very insensitive. For the US President to give it his support is a sad indication of how he has misread the feelings of those people who have lost sons and daughters, husbands and fathers in the attack.”

 

The mosque is part of a 15-storey Islamic cultural centre due to be built two blocks from Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan. Mr Obama’s backing for it, made to Muslims at a White House dinner, brought a rebuke from many fellow senior Democrats. Mrs Bingley added: “As a parent I feel it is important I stand up for Kevin’s right, to protect his memory and to ensure he and all the other innocent victims are shown the right sort of respect.

 

“I’m asking the president to do the unthinkable and to consider how he would feel if he lost one of his daughters to such a horrible, horrible attack. I understand why he has said what he has and I can hear in his words the way he is trying to mend fences between people of different religions and that is an admirable quality.

 

“But I’m asking him to consider further the impact on us, the relatives of those who died, and our feelings now.”

 

LINK

 

You my dear have NO rights at all in the USA, their is NO FREEDOM in the USA the Muslims rule the roost have all the RIGHTS under Obama as he lets them shit all over the majority 3,000 Non Muslims that died in 911. Muslims want this to cause maximum trouble thats why they want it built on 911's door step to cause maximum trouble. If it was built elsewhere there would be no trouble and no problems, and that what upsets Muslims who are troublemakers who can't meet in the middle and build it elsewhere. All sides would be happy but Muslims don't want you to be happy or settle the problem fairly.

 

 

[grbeck]

DAILY EXPRESS (NOT FOX NEWS OR A COMEDY SHOW)

 

A GRIEVING British mother who lost her son in the 9/11 terror attacks has written an emotional letter to President Barack Obama over plans for a mosque at Ground Zero

 

Mr Obama has told American Muslims they have the “same right to practise their religion as everyone else in the country”.But Patricia Bingley, 76, has pleaded with the president to withdraw his support for the controversial mosque, telling him: “Please Mr Obama, as a parent and an American, don’t let this happen.”

 

Mrs Bingley’s only son Kevin Dennis, 43, had worked in the City of London but was recruited to work as a stockbroker in New York.

 

He died in the World Trade Center’s North Tower during the atrocity. Mrs Bingley, who lives in Clacton-on-Sea, Essex, said yesterday: “There isn’t a day goes by when I don’t think of that day, even though it is nearly nine years ago. It’s the first thing I think about each morning and the last thing I think about before I fall asleep each night.

 

“For anyone to even think of putting a mosque anywhere near the site of the Twin Towers is so very, very insensitive. For the US President to give it his support is a sad indication of how he has misread the feelings of those people who have lost sons and daughters, husbands and fathers in the attack.”

 

The mosque is part of a 15-storey Islamic cultural centre due to be built two blocks from Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan. Mr Obama’s backing for it, made to Muslims at a White House dinner, brought a rebuke from many fellow senior Democrats. Mrs Bingley added: “As a parent I feel it is important I stand up for Kevin’s right, to protect his memory and to ensure he and all the other innocent victims are shown the right sort of respect.

 

“I’m asking the president to do the unthinkable and to consider how he would feel if he lost one of his daughters to such a horrible, horrible attack. I understand why he has said what he has and I can hear in his words the way he is trying to mend fences between people of different religions and that is an admirable quality.

 

“But I’m asking him to consider further the impact on us, the relatives of those who died, and our feelings now.”

 

LINK

 

You my dear have NO rights at all in the USA, their is NO FREEDOM in the USA the Muslims rule the roost have all the RIGHTS under Obama as he lets them shit all over the majority 3,000 Non Muslims that died in 911. Muslims want this to cause maximum trouble thats why they want it built on 911's door step to cause maximum trouble. If it was built elsewhere there would be no trouble and no problems, and that what upsets Muslims who are troublemakers who can't meet in the middle and build it elsewhere. All sides would be happy but Muslims don't want you to be happy or settle the problem fairly.

 

 

 

It's not going to be the President's decision as to whether this mosque gets built in lower Manhattan. Ultimately, it is a state and local issue. Blaming him is useless.

[RangerM]

The planned mosque is TWO CITY BLOCKS AWAY! That's not right next to ground zero... look at it on Google Maps. Where would we draw the line? If it was 3 blocks? 5 blocks?

 

 

Banning this mosque is only going to fortify the Anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world and give those extremists more ammunition in their drive to recruit impressionable youths around the world. This is would be a serious dumb-ass move.

Noone is banning anything.

 

And you're right, the mosque is two blocks away.

 

As far as I'm concerned it should be built ON Ground Zero.

[grbeck]

Permitting equal treatment isn't mandating the behavior of others. No one is suggesting that heterosexuals shouldn't be able to marry or that they should enter in to same sex marriages. No religious group would be required to accept Gay Marriage or to perform one.

 

Not true. When the state recognizes a marriage as legal, others are required to recognize it in a variety of ways. That is why gay marriage advocates are pushing for it. They want more than just a piece of paper...they want the benefits that go with that paper, and one of the benefits is that others are required to recognize the union for legal purposes. So, yes, you are mandating the behavior of others, whether you admit it or not.

[suv_guy_19]

Not true. When the state recognizes a marriage as legal, others are required to recognize it in a variety of ways.

 

That still isn't mandating your behaviour. Aside from that, it's irrelevant. It doesn't affect your life, and it has nothing to do with you...much like the Mosque.

[Edstock]

Did you spend the weekend rocking out to the Mosquetard anthem “Keep Your Hands To Yourself”? Well then maybe you’ve already noticed this special part of the video, at 0:39, when the Doofus Forces of Justice raise this banner in support of “Groud Zero, the monument to terrorism!”

 

http://wonkette.com/417619/dumb-hick-mosque-haters-cant-even-spell-ground-zero#ixzz0xRdOhVil

 

"Groud Zero", of course, makes sense from their perspective.

[xr7g428]

Mark, the green and red give your post that Christmas cheer we need so badly in the middle of summer.

 

There is so much double speak in use that it doesn't surprise me that you can't see it any more.

 

This statement : "I have never had any objection to gun ownership"

 

is inaccurate in your case, (and in mine as well). What you really mean is that you do not object to gun ownership except in cases where you do object.

 

I appreciate that you tried:

The murder of 3,000 people in terrorist attacks was catagorically wrong and is unforgivable. Happy?

 

 

And I bet for about 15 seconds you might have meant it... but old habits die hard.

You cannot deny that our choices of regimes we support can have consequences. No snappy retort to the fact that we funded Bin Laden and Saddam only to end up having to fight them?

 

Face it, you feel that they were justified, at least in part, to retaliate by murdering 3000 innocent people. I reject your argument. There is no justification for what they did. None. I do not excuse criminals by sharing the blame with the innocent.

 

When will you come to grips with the fact that we have been attacked by a religion. This morning that same religion murdered another 20 people. A religion is just as deadly as a political group, history makes that point very clear. We cannot simultaneously shelter them as a religion and fight them as enemies.

[Mark B. Morrow]

Mark, the green and red give your post that Christmas cheer we need so badly in the middle of summer.

 

The color changes were for the sake of clarity, but I am glad it brightened your day.

 

There is so much double speak in use that it doesn't surprise me that you can't see it any more.

 

This statement : "I have never had any objection to gun ownership"

 

is inaccurate in your case, (and in mine as well). What you really mean is that you do not object to gun ownership except in cases where you do object.

 

Wow, that is some parsing. Allow me to further clarify, I have never had any objection to legal gun ownership.

 

Am I to understand that you do support some restrictions on gun ownership?

 

If so what restrictions do you favor and how would you enforce them?

 

I appreciate that you tried:

 

And I bet for about 15 seconds you might have meant it... but old habits die hard.

 

I certainly did and do mean it. Unjustifyable does not equal inexplicable.

 

 

Face it, you feel that they were justified, at least in part, to retaliate by murdering 3000 innocent people. I reject your argument. There is no justification for what they did. None. I do not excuse criminals by sharing the blame with the innocent.

 

I never argued that they were in any way justified. Any perceived wrongs they claim against America, in no way justifies intentionally killing innocent people with airplanes, bombs or guns. The victims of 9/11 have NO SHARE in the Blame for the killings. That goes solely to the hijackers and their terrorist superiors.

 

Recognizing that the terrorists claim a justification is not the same as accepting their actions as justified Hitler claimed a justification too. If you are angry about American policy, you don't fight it by killing innocent people minding their own business.

 

Ignoring the facts, as you have, as to mistakes in our foreign policy over the years will only result in making more of these errors. Yes, I think funding Bin Laden and Saddam were errors. Those errors do not justify 9/11. I don't know that I can be any clearer about that.

 

You still haven't answered the questions about our dealings with Bin Laden and Saddam. Do you have an answer?

 

When will you come to grips with the fact that we have been attacked by a religion. This morning that same religion murdered another 20 people. A religion is just as deadly as a political group, history makes that point very clear. We cannot simultaneously shelter them as a religion and fight them as enemies.

 

We were attacked by a small sect claiming to represent an entire religion. Many of the people they killed today were Muslims. Are you willing to hold Christianity to the same standard?

[xr7g428]

Lets take on gun control in some other thread. Suffice to say that most of the gun control laws I object to make it more difficult for the law abiding to purchase and own guns, while having little impact on the criminal element. Criminals don't have much in the way of gun rights. The Pelosi Reid Obama Democrats want to make sure that the law abiding don't have the upper hand.

 

So if I give $5 today and tomorrow you mug me, then that was my fault for giving you the $5?

 

I know that you have a lot more faith in the infallibility of government than I do, but surely even you do not expect the people in government to be prescient? I will keep that in mind as I cast my opinions of the Obama administration: able to see the future, and in spite of that fact, they did this?

 

So you are telling me that you were opposed to Charlie Wilson's war? Would be better off today if we had let the Russians prevail in Afghanistan, and the Iranians over run Iraq? Good question.

 

Islam is not one homogeneous religion. Just like Christianity. If a sect of Christians, like say the IRA, devoted themselves to a war on the US I would be just as opposed and were I involved with the Christian church, I would do my damnedest to make sure that I made it abundantly clear that the IRA was not a part of my religion. Americans of Japanese heritage were some of the fiercest fighters in WWII. They wanted to make the point that their loyalties were with the USA. America has a big heart and following 911 a lot of Americans went out of their way to show support for the Islamic community in the US. Amazingly the effort has not been reciprocated. That lack of repudiation over the past decade has caused a shift in the way Islam is seen in the US. This mosque, (and please stop denying it is a mosque) is just a little more salt in the wound.

 

The single common denominator to the Islamo-Fascists is the Muslim religion. Can you deny that?

 

So much of the issue is that political correctness has denied our ability to even put a name to the enemy. Calling them Muslims is inaccurate, and too broad. Calling them terrorists is also inaccurate, and also too broad. Fascist is close but so few understand the meaning of the term in a general sense that it confuses more than it identifies. How can we effectively fight an enemy that we can't even name? Sounds like something out of a Harry Potter book.....

[Imawhosure]

Lets take on gun control in some other thread. Suffice to say that most of the gun control laws I object to make it more difficult for the law abiding to purchase and own guns, while having little impact on the criminal element. Criminals don't have much in the way of gun rights. The Pelosi Reid Obama Democrats want to make sure that the law abiding don't have the upper hand.

 

So if I give $5 today and tomorrow you mug me, then that was my fault for giving you the $5?

 

I know that you have a lot more faith in the infallibility of government than I do, but surely even you do not expect the people in government to be prescient? I will keep that in mind as I cast my opinions of the Obama administration: able to see the future, and in spite of that fact, they did this?

 

So you are telling me that you were opposed to Charlie Wilson's war? Would be better off today if we had let the Russians prevail in Afghanistan, and the Iranians over run Iraq? Good question.

 

Islam is not one homogeneous religion. Just like Christianity. If a sect of Christians, like say the IRA, devoted themselves to a war on the US I would be just as opposed and were I involved with the Christian church, I would do my damnedest to make sure that I made it abundantly clear that the IRA was not a part of my religion. Americans of Japanese heritage were some of the fiercest fighters in WWII. They wanted to make the point that their loyalties were with the USA. America has a big heart and following 911 a lot of Americans went out of their way to show support for the Islamic community in the US. Amazingly the effort has not been reciprocated. That lack of repudiation over the past decade has caused a shift in the way Islam is seen in the US. This mosque, (and please stop denying it is a mosque) is just a little more salt in the wound.

 

The single common denominator to the Islamo-Fascists is the Muslim religion. Can you deny that?

 

So much of the issue is that political correctness has denied our ability to even put a name to the enemy. Calling them Muslims is inaccurate, and too broad. Calling them terrorists is also inaccurate, and also too broad. Fascist is close but so few understand the meaning of the term in a general sense that it confuses more than it identifies. How can we effectively fight an enemy that we can't even name? Sounds like something out of a Harry Potter book.....

 

 

It is very sad Xr that our government has managed to remove the planes flying into our towers from regular media; on the notion that it will be upsetting to children. And yet, they broadcast the dying people in concentration camps during WWII. All emaciated, all look like walking skeletons.

 

If for no other reason, we should be incensed at the control of the media by the government. But truth be told, if the propoganda was reversed, and it was played consistently while telling America who did it, I have a feeling we would have a much LARGER percentage of the population who would want certain parts of the Middle East turned to glass.

 

In my humble opinion, this is exactly why it has been removed from easy viewing. Back in the 40s, these types of things were on to steel our population to continue the fight. Today, if our people wanted, they would just demand 2 or 3 planes, 2 or 3 bombs, and problem solved. Government doesn't want that kind of pressure, so we have what we have.

 

I am waiting to see what our citizens think when Iran and Israel get into it. Especially when they discover we are bound by treaty to defend Israel! I also wonder if our government will then demonize radical Islam to steel us, or will it be another POLICE ACTION that the liberals like to call war when it is their guy in office pulling the trigger, lol.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Young Muslim Terrorists that were brought up all their lifes in mosques and brainwashed in mosques with the muslim faith that flew Boeings into the Twin Towers because they would get rewarded by their God for killing 3.000 Americans, now gets a brand new mosque to practice their evil poisenous faith on the doorstep of 911 as reward for services rendered blessings of President Obama. America is sick in the head if they allow this mosque to be build on 911's door step.

 

As far as l am concerned these young 18-30 year olds 9/11 MUSLIM bombers can all go and rot in hell.

 

 

 

Same goes for the 6 young 18-30 year old British born & bred Muslims that learned practiced their religious hatred in the mosques of Britain, l hope they rot in hell as well.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2010 by Ford Jellymoulds

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Never Forget the 3,000 that got murdered by MUSLIMS, don't build the mosque on ground zero's door step show common sense and peace build it elsewhere.

 

Never Forget those that were murdered on 911 by Muslims.

 

 

[Edstock]

Young Muslim Terrorists that were brought up all their lifes in mosques and brainwashed in mosques with the muslim faith that flew Boeings into the Twin Towers because they would get rewarded by their God for killing 3.000 Americans, now gets a brand new mosque to practice their evil poisenous faith on the doorstep of 911 as reward for services rendered

 

You're losing your mind. You say that the the young Muslim terrorists that were brainwashed into flying into the Twin Towers are getting a new mosque to pray in as a reward for services rendered? Jelly, they're DEAD. They aren't practicing anything anymore. Whatever you're doing, try using less of it, dude.

 

[Ford Jellymoulds]

LOL very funny HA HA Ed, please come something new and original when you insult somebody on BON Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn

MMMmmmmm typical Ed Stock put down been used a million times before on BON by Ed Stock on those that don't agree with Ed Stocks narrow view of the world. Glad to say l won't lower myself to your low levels by trading insults.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjS0Novt3X4

 

 

Never Forget 9/11, please show some respect for those Non Muslims that died in 911, nobody is against a mosque just build it somewhere else and keep the peace everybody is a winner with no troublemaking protests required. Keep the peace.

Edited August 26, 2010 by Ford Jellymoulds

[Edstock]

LOL very funny HA HA Ed, please come something new and original when you insult somebody on BON Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn

Dude, your statement I quoted doesn't make sense. It appears you cannot put logical thought together. Let's take it line-by-line:

 

Line 1: Young Muslim Terrorists that were brought up all their lifes in mosques and brainwashed in mosques with the muslim faith that flew Boeings into the Twin Towers It appears you are talking about the terrorists that carried out 9-11

 

Line 2: because they would get rewarded by their God for killing 3.000 Americans, Ditto

 

Line 3:now gets a brand new mosque to practice their evil poisenous faith on the doorstep of 911 Seems that you're still referring to them, because no other people are referred to.

 

Line 4: as reward for services rendered Again, nobody else is mentioned as the people who carried out these "services".

 

Now Mohammed Atta and his gang were evil, twisted men. But, they are dead, and cannot practice "their evil poisenous faith". That would be a miracle indeed, and Allah doesn't work that way.

[grbeck]

That still isn't mandating your behaviour. Aside from that, it's irrelevant.

 

If the state recognizes a marriage as legal, then you must do so as well, and, in some cases, face certain sanctions if you don't.

 

It's very relevant, as the original point was that legalizing gay marriage was not forcing others do anything differently. This is not true.

 

It doesn't affect your life, and it has nothing to do with you...much like the Mosque.

 

Not a valid example. A valid example is banning gun ownership among private individuals. The fact that they own a gun has no effect on you, and is none of your business.

Edited August 30, 2010 by grbeck

[Mark B. Morrow]

If the state recognizes a marriage as legal, then you must do so as well, and, in some cases, face certain sanctions if you don't.

 

It's very relevant, as the original point was that legalizing gay marriage was not forcing others do anything differently. This is not true.

 

 

Other than being required to refrain from discrimination, what are opponents to Gay Marriage being ask to do differently?

 

Do you have any examples?

 

No one has yet come up with a logical argument as to how Gay Marriages have any effect on Heterosexual Marriages.

 

Opponents can still believe that it is wrong for gays to marry just like racists can still believe that interracial marriages are wrong.

 

No religion will be required to marry Gays just as no religion is required to perform interfaith marriages.

 

Religious institutions will still have the right to excommunicate anyone who does not hold to the rules of the faith.

[goinbroke2]

Young Muslim Terrorists that were brought up all their lifes in mosques and brainwashed in mosques with the muslim faith that flew Boeings into the Twin Towers because they would get rewarded by their God for killing 3.000 Americans, now gets a brand new mosque to practice their evil poisenous faith on the doorstep of 911 as reward for services rendered blessings of President Obama. America is sick in the head if they allow this mosque to be build on 911's door step.

 

Hey Ed (and I'm not taking sides here)

My take on it was; "Young Muslim Terrorists that were brought up all their lifes in mosques and brainwashed in mosques with [the] muslim faith [that] flew the boings...etc, etc, etc"

 

I think he meant it as "terrorist who grew up with a faith, that was also responsible for flying planes into...."

He was saying the muslim faith is what caused the carnage.

 

So it should of read;

"young terrorist who grew up in mosques, were brainwashed by the very same faith that was responsible for flying planes into the towers promising those who did, would get rewarded by their God. Now, the muslims get a brand new mosque to practise the same faith on the doorstep of 911 as a reward for services rendered...blah, blah, blah"

 

Perhaps I understood it more clearly because I seem to be able to follow 6 paragraph's of words without a period or comma to be seen? I think it's just the way he rants.

 

I was impressed though, not a single mention of "classic f-150's" or "classic silverado's" anywhere!

 

 

Damn Jelly, you remind me of a mess dinner I was at one time. A Brit and an American were arguing over "to MAE to" and "to MAH to".

The Brit said "listen here, we INVENTED the language".

The American said "Y'all mighta invented the language, but WE made it user-friendly"

 

 

(course this coming from the guy who calls a potato a "puh tay tuh") :huh:

[xr7g428]

Mark, I won't ask you if you have any gay friends, because on this board... One of my best friends, and long time business associates, is gay. He is very active in the gay community and over a long period of time I have become much more aware of the issues that effect the community. It is difficult to be accepted, or really trusted, as a straight person in the gay community, but over time I have found acceptance. Some of the the things they deal with are appalling. I won't get into that here, but within the community gay marriage is seen very differently from civil unions. There is almost universal support for civil union within the community, but the opinion on gay marriage is much more divided. I can't speak for the gay community any more than I can speak for the straight community, but I do have at least a little insight into the issue.

 

While civil unions may grant all of the legal benefits of marriage, it doesn't feel equal to marriage. Many gay people have been ostracized from their extended family. Their relationships are not accorded the same respect as their straight brothers and sisters. These gay people want and crave the acceptance that they feel only a "real" church wedding can provide. They are asking government to step in to force the churches to accept the lifestyle, to allow them to marry in the church, and to help them achieve the recognition they desire. I understand their motivation, and I sympathize with their need for acceptance, but I don't think forcing the churches to do this is within the bounds of what government is about. Many in the the gay community feel the same way. Like so many issues, the truth is in the details.

 

While you say that government will not do this, all you have to do is to look at how government has treated the religious based adoption agencies to see that the government will most certainly step in. The last Catholic adoption agency in Britain was just order to close or begin offering adoption services to same sex couples. The same thing has happened in the US. These are not government funded groups. So the government does tell the churches how they will will have to behave.