By Conrad Goeringer
PATTERSON: STATE ASSISTANCE FOR ISLAMIC CENTER IF SUPPORTERS
WILL RELOCATE MOSQUE PROJECT
Atheists: Schema is Unconstitutional, Taxes
Nonbelievers to benefit religion
New York Gov. David Patterson has announced a quid pro quo plan
that would offer state aid — including a discount on the price of
public land — if Muslims seeking to build a $100 million Islamic
Center near Ground Zero in Manhattan would move their project to
appease opponents of the project.
“If the sponsors were looking for property anywhere at a distance
that it would be such that it would accommodate a better feeling
among the people who are frustrated, I would be looking to provide
them with the state property that they need,” Patterson declared. The
so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” is a 13-story Islamic Cultural Center
called Cordoba House, that would include meeting rooms, performing
arts center, restaurant, swimming pool, gym, basketball court and
a “prayer space” — although some are denying that the site would
be a mosque. The project recently cleared another hurdle when the
city’s Landmarks Commission ruled that there were no historically
significant structures on the property. The site is about two
blocks from the Ground Zero location of the former World Trade
Center, and was previously home to the Burlington Coat Factory.
Legal experts gave Patterson’s surprise proposal a chilly reception,
pointing out that the scheme violated the constitutional separation
of church and state.
“They’re really giving government aid to religion,” waned Boston
University School of Law Professor Jay Wexier. “The aid is the
break between the fair market value and whatever they’re selling
it for. That’s almost like giving a bunch of money to a mosque.”
Dr. Ed Buckner, President of American Atheists, also warned of
legal difficulties with Gov. Patterson’s proposal. “Whatever his
intentions, Governor Patterson has no right to use public money or
other taxpayer resources to assist ANY religious group to build a
house of worship”
“Government must stay out of the business of subsidizing mosques,
churches, temples, and synagogues. This amounts to imposing a
‘religion tax’ on the public, including on millions of Atheists,
Freethinkers, agnostics, Humanists and other non-believers. In
fact, the various income and property tax exemptions afforded
religious organizations are already massive–and we think
unconstitutional–subsidies of religion.”
Indeed, Patterson’s offer further muddies the political waters in a
already-complicated and emotionally charged situation. Opponents of
the mosque project have staged vocal protests at government meetings,
charging that the project insults the memory of the thousands of
people who died in the 9/11 attacks. The planned community center
has been described as an affront to the country, in part due to its
proposed location; but mosque construction has come attack across
the country from Virginia and Tennessee to California. Construction
sites have been threatened, and angry crowds have spoken out at
local government meetings against the proposed projects.
Patterson’s offer, though, has been viewed as a sort of mediation
between project managers and opponents. Unfortunately, his plan
appears to violate the constitutional separation of government
and religion.
Sigh. I’m against the mosque due to proximity and because I have trouble with the fact that, even if it were to essentially act like a YMCA and otherwise be secular friendly, it’s being headed by Muslims who supposedly are quite supportive of Sharia (even if they may denounce the violence it demands). It feels too close to Ground Zero given the current tensions between Islam and the West at large, America in particular, and would feel like a slap in the face to me and those that died that day for nothing close to resembling an even half assed reason.
But… seriously… wtf with protests elsewhere? I sure as hell don’t want to see Islam worm its way into our society like it’s doing in the UK and England, but why would our otherwise best allies in such a potential fight have to be in it for every wrong reason?
CPT_BRUMBL3Z,
The goal of the religious fundamentalists is to make lower Manhattan a Christian holy site and to support the view that the US is at war with the entire Muslim world. If you’re not sure about the truth of that statement, look up what Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, and John McCain have said about it. They want a clash of civilizations, they see all Muslims as guilty, and they hope the clash will revive their view of the US being a “Christian country.”
.
The fact is, 9/11 was a CRIME committed by a few dozen religious extremists, just like the sarin gas attacks on Tokyo’s subways. It was not an act of war between one civilization and another, unless you see Al Quaeda as representing the entire Muslim world.
.
If we support the people who want to ban non-Christian religions from lower Manhattan, we support them turning the place into an “official” holy site, a government-supported shrine to the anti-Muslim Crusade. Similarly, if we support Patterson’s idea to just hand them our cash, we undermine our Constitution. Let them build in accordance with the law, and with their own money.
I’m actually quite upset that the crazy rightwing fuckwits have decided to make the wrong kind of stink about this. If the whole debate and argument and protest was basically, “Out of respect, build it elsewhere, the tensions between people is still too great” instead of this fucking holy war, I’d have made an effort to be part of the protests. I do not trust Islam, especially given how England has been dealing with it because they have just as many stupid fringe assholes as we, only theirs seems to be on the left who think political correctness and tolerance of hate is more important than freedom of expression. I want to see Cordoba House respectfully move itself to another location, something of a one mile radius would feel far more comfortable to me.
Any bets on Dave and Mr. Ed remaining silent on the presidents comments WHILE he was celebrating Ramadan? I can guarantee neither of them or AA will file and formal complaint.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41060.html
Remember now, presidents lose their 1st Amendment rights when they are acting in the elected office.
Alright,
I personally think let them, they are attempting to give back to community around where twin towers went down. As an Atheist, while I don’t support religion I also don’t feel the need to give one priority over the next.
As far as being offended… If they build it there I can’t imagine why people are offended, seesh it’s a community center… get over your selves. “Oh it’s a spit on America…” it’s only a spit if you can be some level of tolerant.
I think we should be careful not to act like we think Christian churches littering our nation isn’t still a problem. I can just see media people saying ‘Since there are still only a few mosques in the USA compared to the flood of Christian churches we have here, are Atheists taking sides against Muslims now? Are Atheists now in support of building new churches now?’
I’d say no, because any violence-obsessed religion that relies on terorism and overwhelming numbers to bully everyone else into obeying, is something Atheists will always oppose.
I think we should say we oppose the building of ANY kind of place of worship anywhere, until at least one god is found for real, and even THEN, it shouldn’t be put on public land.
Placate the Angry By Ignoring the Constitution? Nope.
U.S. Constitution – Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
I…. I have to agree with phreedm? Awwww man….
But, he does have a point. They can go through the proper governmental channels to build on purchased land, it’s fair. If you don’t like the churches, stay out of them.
(It’s a shame, though. Early Christian architecture is amazing. Unlike the shoddy wooden steepled things they construct now.)
Phreedm, I love how your whole attempt at making a point is thrown back into your face by the very same amendment you quoted. The same line that says government will not favor religion says Joe can be the opinion that no place of worship should be built anywhere whatsoever.
I also see you’re a master at quote mining. Can you stop wasting yours and our time and bandwidth and leave?
CPT_BRUMBL3Z says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, …or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
It’s a fact of life, that we always accuse others of the very thing we’re guilty of…
You quote mined someone who made an OPINION that WE as the ATHEIST COMMUNITY should just up and say we object to any religious building from hereon out. You made it look like his OPINION was his DEMAND that GOVERNMENT take up that proposition. You’ve purposely misrepresented Joe’s opinion and made an unfounded accusation. You can’t win debates with lies.
And now, in your Babble addled brain, are trying to rationalize that I do exactly what you do that by inference you, in turn, do not. You need psychological help. Badly.
I can’t believe I’m going to do this, but…
I’m with phreedm on this one, CPT. Joe’s opinion WAS that we oppose building places of worship, with the additional feeling that “christian churches littering our nation [is] still a problem.” Not that I disagree, but his point is pretty darn clear.
And while I tend to think phreedm is a bit brain-lite, I think his putting the title of the post and Joe’s comment together was meant more to emphasis the irony of Joe’s comment.
Wow, that was painful…
I don’t understand what you’re in support of, Phoenix. We’re all free to show our opinion. That’s the first amendment. It’s that same amendment that demands government remain apathetic to religion, neither for nor against, neither supportive of or restrictive with. Phreedm quotemined to make it look like Joe was being a hypocrite. I happen to strongly believe all the wasted resources and money on churches should go towards having built schools or libraries or community centers or homeless shelters or any other many good things. That doesn’t mean I want the government to make that a reality, because if they made the effort to, I’d be inclined to ally with the religious nutters themselves in protest.
We as ATHEISTS can and could and likely should protest any kind of church in favor of something useful. Not we as Americans or we’d be no better than assholes like Newt Dickrich.
CPT, you mistake me as disagreeing that he has an opinion rather than the actual content of the opinion. It IS hypocritical to claim we want church and state separate, while also claiming that we should oppose the construction of religious buildings. We thrive under the first amendment, but many tend to forget that that blade has 2 edges.
And yes, Phreedm quotemines with great skill. (By which I mean skill as in “blatantly obvious”) While Joe’s comment was not an opinion which is shared by the atheist community, it’s one that I feel many people start at and follow a bit further than they should. Hell, on the AA facebook page there was someone who was asking how to *LEGALLY* deal with people who were fairly gathering, just because it was a bible study class. It’s that type of action that Joe’s opinion snow balls into. And it’s not fair, for either side.
I still don’t understand how that means you’d agree with Phreedm when your reasons to speak out against Joe are everything Phreedm failed to express. Phreedm’s whole “point” is made moot by the very amendment he quoted. I sure as hell DO NOT support any kind of actual repression on religious expression and sincerely doubt Joe does, either, including their building of endless churches. But, that doesn’t mean I don’t also strongly support building anything else but. Even a garbage dump would be a better use of land spent on a church that would only create another secluded bubble in our society that inevitably maligns human progress and ingenuity.
Churches are wasteful. Certainly, we shouldn’t support the non-building of churches, but we could certainly support the actual building of real centers of community and humanity.
“Opponents of the mosque project have staged vocal protests at government meetings, charging that the project insults the memory of the thousands of people who died in the 9/11 attacks.” — The ease with which these bigots slip into hypocrisy is absolutely galling. These protesters act as if only Christians died in the attacks. I’m sure there were a good amount of Muslims who were killed, as well.
As was pointed out on the daily show just the other evening, just 4 blocks from “ground zero” is a full blown mosque, so why sweat this YMMA?
9-11 was an act of war, people died it was tragic but not much different from Pearl harbor or Dresden or Nagasaki and Hiroshima. I understand there is a McDonalds in Hiroshima and a sushi restaurant within blocks of Pearl Harbor. Life goes on.
If the 9/11 attack was an act of war comparable to Pearl Harbor or Hiroshima, which country launched it? Facts: A few dozen members of an extremist organization launched it. Most were from Saudi Arabia, a US ally which disapproved of the attacks. Less successful attacks by the same organization (USS Cole, Kenya embassy, shoe bomber, etc.) were treated as criminal acts, which suggests that the # of casualties is the factor making some people view 9/11 as different. Al Quaeda is believed to have kept knowledge of the attack down to a few dozen people in Afghanistan/Pakistan, so even the Taliban were unaware. No link between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attack has ever been discovered.
.
Conclusion: 9/11 was a crime committed by a few dozen extremists, not an act of war committed by a government or representing the support of an entire civilization. Christian and Muslim fundamentalists now have incentive to call it a war of civilizations because they want justification to discriminate against religious minorities in their own countries. Muslims feel that discrimination in the U.S. Christians feel it in the middle east. More importantly, if they can run those minority religions out of a region, they can remove from public sight the doubt that the “problem of many faiths” presents and achieve a forced intellectual monopoly.
The “Daily Show”? Sheesh. Hmmm…that Mosque is a 4 story building the same height as the buildings next door.
Would you support a Shrine to the Emperor of Japan near Pearl Harbor?
This is a tough decision. Allowing the government to dictate where a house of worship can be built would simply allow radicals such as JZ to force their narrow beliefs upon the majority.
To anyone that actually studies early American history, it’s clear that the FF’s believed religion was necessary for good government in a “free” society.
Say Mr. Ed…what’s the difference between spending Federal Tax dollars on a Mosque or spending Federal Tax dollars on sending that Imam, as a representative of the State Department, to the Middle East?
Is ground zero mosque imam best choice for diplomatic mission to Mideast?
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2010/0811/Is-ground-zero-mosque-imam-best-choice-for-diplomatic-mission-to-Mideast
Separation of Church and State. Separation of Gum and Hair.
The state has gum stuck in its hair again on this one. In one fell swoop they are proposing to use public money to help Muslims AND Christian bigots. The path could be so easy…First Amendment, the state stays out of this affair, PERIOD. That’s all they have to stay. Instead, they get bullied into this not-thought-out-at-all response, and compound their problems.
Why is the city dragging its feet on the reconstuction of the greek orthodox church that was damaged in 9/11 and had to be demolished.I’m talking permits for the congregation to rebuild.
Most of the 9/11 attackers were saudi,how many churchs,synagogues in saudi arabia-none, but i think most of the funding for this project is coming from saudi arabia.
We love the constitution but shouldn’t let it be used against us by muslims who openly say they intend to bring USA under islam.
Book,The Myth of Twentieth Century-sound or unsound.
1
There is a case that muslims in 9/11 were just useful idiots in a false flag operation.
2
The Talmud Unmasked,explains the teachings of the Talmud the most hate filled teachings a religion has ever produced.
The question is, is the case beyond a reasonable doubt? Not even close.
Written in 1892 by Father I. B. Pranaitis]- Roman Catholic Priest; Master of Theology and Professor of the Hebrew Language at the Imperial Ecclesiastical Academy of the Roman Catholic Church in Old St. Petersburg.
Written over a hundred years ago by some other faitheist.
Really, you need to get better reading material.
KA…what’s your limitation on how old writings can be and still be accurate and a valuable source for research?
phreddy – go look up the ‘Talmud Unmasked’, read some of it, & tell me how a book that predates christianity is anti-christian.(should be good for a laugh) A book written by some obscure anti-semitic priest to boot.
& the talmud & bible are loaded w/garbage anyways.
KA
It is my understanding the talmud doesn’t predate christianity.
Why do you buy gov’t line on 9/11 when 9/11 comission complains about gov’t response in inquiry?
Hello? Gemara? Babylonian talmud?
Are you just quoting this guy because you like how it gibes w/some of your wilder guesses?
Because all the alternative theories have been debunked.
KA
I believe Germara,Babylonian talmuds were written well after the temple in jerusalem was destroyed by Rome this would place the talmud after time of jesus.
I disagree that all theories on 9/11 are debunked how could they when there is a full court press by gov’t and gov’t regulated media to ignore or demonize dissenting views.
Our illegitimate president has endorsed ground zero mosque.This joseph mobutu wannabe is destroying the country.Nat Hentoff a fine writer has written many excellent columns on the growing police state in USA under first bush now obama.
Doesn’t matter what you believe. Evidence says otherwise. You may want to do real research this time.
This sounds remarkably like xtians trying to use cries of ‘persecution’ to claim they’ve got the inside info.
Listen, he’s a full US citizen. Moron.
Definitely apples to oranges – bad analogy all the way around. Standard rethuglican hyperbole tactics.
KA
Gemara talmud 350-400 ce,Babylonian talmud 500 ce that is well after the claimed death of jesus.
If obama produces his long form birth certificate there will be alot of crow eaten.If we on the right get control of congress we will make that fraud wish he was never born.The impeachment trial of clinton is going to look like a church social, bank on it.
reason, if you want to discuss “illegitimate presidents”, one sent us into two wars.
This is fast becoming a stupid conversation. The talmud was transmitted orally for centuries prior. Even the bibble states that jebus was some sort of rabbi. Anyways, this is standard anti-semitic garbage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud#Contemporary_accusations
Yes,because of course nobody checked this prior to his running for office. Is Rush Bimbo’s hand up your ass or something? It’s ridiculous. The ‘birther’ controversy is more idiocy conceived by the same 1/2 wits of the ‘swift boat’ variety.
Wow, you just parrot everything you hear in the echo chambers, don’t you? But wait…you voted for the commander-in-thief the 2nd time around, who was by far the only illegitimate president ever, as CPT points out.
W/any luck @ all, you reichwing asshats will be out of power for good.
CPT BRUMBL3Z
I think that Bush was a disaster as president.And did not vote for his re-election.
KA
You seem sensitive about anything negative said against judaism, is a loved one jewish because let me be clear i don’t think jewish people are bad.
When i say obama is illegitimate i am talking about the sense of the public that he is culturally one of us.His birth record could show bithplace kenya and he would still be a natural born US citizen because of his mother.The fact that he won’t release his longform record is short sighted on his part for it has fixed in the minds of public he is not culturally one of us.Trust me he will disappoint the left as well as the right.
I address you with respect yet you call me moron,anti-semite
No, I’m sensitive about unsupportable stupid claims. You’ve cited 1 obscure writer from the 19th CE. You’ve also evinced a near-complete lack of knowledge on the subject matter. When someone says ‘talmud’ the auto-reference is for the babylonian, I waited (& waited) for you to stipulate the jerusalem talmud, because that DOES post-date xtianity. It wouldn’t have validated that priest’s work anyways, but would’ve demonstrated @ least a marginal grasp of subject matter.
The talmud is garbage, but it’s landfill not compost.
Wow. Lousy save.
Here, do some fact-checking:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
You will of course call the source names, or whip up some lame ass nonsense.
He won’t get a chance to – he’s too busy trying to repair the horrendous damage W did.
Correction: I called your source anti-semitic – I called you a moron because…well…you make increasingly outlandish claims w/zip to back them up. It’s as if you believe anything you read on the internet.
The internet is like the talmud, it’s about 99% full of shit.
KA,
How do you do those block quotes? HTML?
Exactimundo.
<blockquote>Text to be blockquoted.</blockquote>
I have a Firefox Add-on called BBCODEXTRA, that provides a right-click menu for HTML – comes in handy for blogging.
reason,
.
“When i say obama is illegitimate i am talking about the sense of the public that he is culturally one of us.”
.
One thing I’ve noticed about conservatives is that they’re very tribal. You’re considered either “one of us” or one of them. Society is divided by race, ethnic origin, class, ever-narrowing religious sect distinctions, and whatever new difference becomes salient. Outgroup members are distrusted and considered the source of all problems. The mentality is that all of our problems would be solved if only we were all alike, culturally, racially, and religiously. The Judeo-Christian concept of heaven is a place where everyone is from the “chosen” religious / ethnic group and everyone behaves the same – a conservative paradise with no outsiders and therefore no problems. In the real world, of course, running modern, democratic nation-states requires buy-in from diverse groups, which explains why conservatives tend to fail in the long run at leading anything besides small monolithic groups.
I must agree with Christopher Hitchens on this one:
“One would want assurances, also, about the transparency of its funding and the content of its educational programs. But the way to respond to such overtures is by critical scrutiny and engagement, not cheap appeals to parochialism, victimology, and unreason.” Slate.com
We must be aware that fundamental Islam poses a threat to the health and well being of its women and children. We cannot close our eyes to abuse in the name of religion as many did when it involved the Catholic Church, but neither can we allow Christian fundamentalists to use this issue as a free pass to violate the Constitution.
14 million at risk in pakistan floods and more rain on the way.My thoughts go out the suffering.Fires in russia getting under control that is good news.
unemployment continues to rise in USA as does forecloseures that is bad news.
What is the holy book of Sol INVICTUS cult?
this is a gross example of the non-existing line between church and state…..
another gross example is that its seems religion has broken the tax break rules by stomping around in the political arena; by trying to encourage its sheeple to support a particular canadate …..they bust the intent of the law and state they dont support a particular candidate, they only support deeply held beliefs….I guess its just a coincidence that there might be a candidate out there having similar fantasies….I mean beliefs….
stupid religion knows no integrity…
the government cannot legally oppose the establishment of a mosque at ground zero without implicating the entirety of islam in 911. so they will likely do nothing.
Are’t we, as atheists, supposed to oppose the spread of expression of religion in any form including building of religious community centers?
Would doing so be a productive use of our time? Would doing so be likely to be successful? Would repression advance the interests of humanity? In a cultural war, we would lose. Intellectuals always lose when it comes to the use of force.
.
I’d say if there’s something we’re “supposed” to do, it’s developing the social systems to replace religion in the long run. It’s naive to expect individuals to quit religion cold turkey and give up all the social, financial, and psychological benefits they enjoy. Replacing religion with something less pathological would be a human advancement equal to animal domestication or harnessing the use of fire.
I, as an athiest, am against this mosque. I’m quite certain the 9-11 idiots envisioned their shrine as they crashed into the twin towers (inbetween thoughts of virgins).
What? They can’t walk two more blocks? Perhaps this is left over from hacking up their own genitals?
Fuck islam, fuck xianity, fuck the bastard gawd of the hebrews. There I said it.
Don’t hide behind the label of atheist to oppose something like this. It gives a bad name to atheists. What is 2 more blocks going to do? Trying to answer “how far is far enough” is just jumping into shades of gray which can’t actually have a correct answer. As an atheist, you should look at this as a community center and just another place for people who aren’t atheists, to practice what they believe. Preventing them from practicing their religion would be similar to them forcing their religion on you.
So much to say! First “hiding behind the label of athiest”? I’m not hiding behind anything. I’m also a SLP, a writer, a heterosexual, a blonde (well, mostly), etc. Guess what? I still oppose! Nope, not hiding.
“How far is far enough” is perhaps a question you should ask yourself. What do you think the 9-11 idiots were envisioning when they successfully highjacked those planes, a community center at ground zero?
If you don’t think islam has a plan for you then think again. They are committed to world domination, and those who politefully step aside will eventually enable. Islam is not constrained by secular law as xianity has been forced to. If you’re not aware, they have their own laws, and if you continue to step aside, you’ll be fitting your granddaughters for their burkas before you know it.
If I could prevent these barbarians from practicing their horrendous flavor of mysoginy, believe me I would, but alas, I can’t. I can only say, “Get of your ignorant asses and walk two blocks!”
I refuse to enable.
Oh, and if it were xians who perpretrated 9-11, I would oppose a church, If they were jews, I would oppose a synagogue, and so on…
That’s “misogyny”.
This may not be the appropriate spot but my hometown is in a Ten Commandments on the town square debate and the local paper has a poll. I thought maybe some of the horde might help me swing the vote. Thanks all in advance.
http://www.dailyrepublicannews.com/
Also, if anyone knows a good place to repost this, PLEASE do so.