|
|
Post by keita on Aug 14, 2010 13:07:36 GMT -5
I couldn't agree with you more, my sister.  Imho, our President said EXACTLY what he should have as President of the United States who took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States......and as GOD's perfect set man for this VERY time. But may I add what he did (dared?) not (yet?) say, but which for me is always exemplified by his very election to and continued presence in that office: If the definition of democracy is equal rights for all people, then surely the selective application of U.S. law against any nonwhite people in the United States, or anywhere in the world, is just plain racism. And straight up SIN. Nevertheless........ While his pronouncement concerning the mosque might find favor in the Muslim world, Obama's stance runs counter to the opinions of the majority of Americans, according to polls. A CNN/Opinion Research poll released this week found that nearly 70 percent of Americans opposed the mosque plan while just 29 percent approved. So I'm watching as well as praying.  |
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Aug 14, 2010 17:06:19 GMT -5
Hey Guys,
While I definitely agree that we should all have basic religious freedoms, and I also agree that we should not want anyone to decide where we have a church I disagree with where this mosque is placed.
I don't think it has to be about racism to desire that the mosque be moved. To me it is just common sense. The whole situation could possible invite violence on both sides... From Crazy Christians the same kind who would bomb abortion clinics to again the types of muslims who succeed in causing 9/11.
In the back of my mind I am wondering if it is possible for some parts of the Patriot Act thar would cover this type of situation. After all this bill denies us our basic rights in the name of preventing terrorism.
I, not sure what I think about the President speaking out on this matter. I know that what he stated does of course line up with the law and the history of the United States yet I still disagree with the idea of this mosque. I also feel that is was a bad move on his part in the sense that it allows many of the same groups who claimed that he was muslim before to make that claim again.
I think it would have been best for him to remain silent on this matter and let it play out in the courts... But I will say this one thing bothers me....
That in the United States we can't get Prop 8 which was voted into law by the citizens, to deny gay marriage by the people of California to stick. (It was surprising overturned...) Yet we can't move a mosque based on the same laws? Doesn't deem quite fair...
Kitty
|
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Aug 15, 2010 9:17:09 GMT -5
Hey Guys, While I definitely agree that we should all have basic religious freedoms, and I also agree that we should not want anyone to decide where we have a church I disagree with where this mosque is placed. I don't think it has to be about racism to desire that the mosque be moved. To me it is just common sense. The whole situation could possible invite violence on both sides... From Crazy Christians the same kind who would bomb abortion clinics to again the types of muslims who succeed in causing 9/11. In the back of my mind I am wondering if it is possible for some parts of the Patriot Act thar would cover this type of situation. After all this bill denies us our basic rights in the name of preventing terrorism. I, not sure what I think about the President speaking out on this matter. I know that what he stated does of course line up with the law and the history of the United States yet I still disagree with the idea of this mosque. I also feel that is was a bad move on his part in the sense that it allows many of the same groups who claimed that he was muslim before to make that claim again. I think it would have been best for him to remain silent on this matter and let it play out in the courts... But I will say this one thing bothers me.... That in the United States we can't get Prop 8 which was voted into law by the citizens, to deny gay marriage by the people of California to stick. (It was surprising overturned...) Yet we can't move a mosque based on the same laws? Doesn't deem quite fair... Kitty Kitty, if the Muslim decide to more their center, they will be taking responsibilty and ownership of 9/11.... They should not feel quilty or responsible for something they had no control over and many of them were killed along with others. We should be looking at what will happen down the line if we stop them from practicing there right and freedom of worship.... We will soon be affected too, they will tell us where we can and can not worship and how... Just like there are extreme islam, there are extreme Christian too, that are just as dangerous. |
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Aug 16, 2010 11:35:21 GMT -5
This is what the President said, while he was visiting Panama, FL this weekend.
My intention was to simply let people know what I thought. Which was that in this country, we treat everybody equally in accordance with the law. Regardless of race. Regardless of religion. I was not commenting on and will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right that people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country's about and I think it's very important that as difficult as some of these issues are, we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about.
As you notice, he didn't say they should or shouldn't, only their right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Aug 17, 2010 6:51:29 GMT -5
I think that the President should've kept silent on this one...
|
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Aug 17, 2010 10:36:35 GMT -5
I think that the President should've kept silent on this one... Why?.... He just reminded us of the Constitution... The leaders of the Muslim group are Republicans and very conservative... Conservative Muslim-Americans' Letter To GOP Leaders: Don't Bring Mosque Debate Into Elections A group of conservative Muslim and Arab American officials on Tuesday went further than most in the GOP to accuse their Republican colleagues of trying to exploit the so-called "Ground Zero mosque controversy" for electoral benefits. In a letter to Republican leaders, the group of authors criticized members of the party for abandoning the principle of tolerance that has defined the GOP from Lincoln to Bush. In the process, the authors -- who include former Bush administration official Randa Fahmy Hudome and former Reagan administration official and prominent D.C.-based lawyer George Salmon, as well as David Ramadan, who worked on both of George W. Bush's campaigns -- make similar philosophical and substantive arguments as other defenders of the proposed Cordoba House. In its sharpest criticism, the group chastises the GOP for putting short-term electoral interests ahead of geopolitical concerns. "While we share the desire of all in our party to be successful in the November elections, we cannot support victory at the expense of the U.S. Constitution or the Arab and Muslim community in America," the authors write. As President Lincoln so eloquently stated in his famous speech: 'a house divided against itself cannot stand.'" This is, it appears, a direct shot against several current members of Congress (among them, Sen. David Vitter and the National Republican Senatorial Committee) who have already begun using the "mosque" debate as a political bludgeon. And while, the conservative Muslim and Arab-American community is far from the type of lobbying force that can change broader party strategy or tactics, their concerns aren't being offered in a vacuum. Others in the party, notably other veterans of the Bush administration, have tried to get their colleagues to tone down the rhetoric surrounding the Islamic cultural center as well. Hudome, Ramadan and Salmon, meanwhile, have audiences in the top circles of the GOP (former RNC chair Ed Gillespie, for one, has talked with Ramadan about his concerns) owing primarily to the work they have done on behalf of the party in the past. BELOW IS THE FULL LETTER. August 17, 2010
Dear Republican Colleague:
We are writing to you today as loyal Americans who are active members of the Republican Party. We also happen to be proud of our Arab American and Muslim American contributions to the Republican Party.
We are deeply concerned by the rhetoric of some leading members of our party surrounding the construction of the Muslim Community Center in downtown Manhattan. These comments are not only constitutionally unsound, they are also alienating millions of Arab American and Muslim American voters who believe, as we do, in the principles of our party - individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law.
As you know, our party has had a long history of inclusion - beginning with our great President Abraham Lincoln, whose leadership on the slavery issue was monumental, and continuing through President George W. Bush whose public statements and actions on the differentiation between Islam and the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11 were critically important. We are particularly proud to note that President Bush appointed more Arab Americans and Muslim Americans to his administration than any other president in U.S. history.
That being said, it perplexes us as to why some vocal members of our party have chosen to oppose the construction of a cultural and religious center on private grounds. Not only does the First Amendment to our Constitution protect the right of these private citizens to worship freely, it also prevents Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion. Our party and the leaders in our party should not be engaged in judgment issues of the location of a cultural center and a house of worship in direct contravention of the First Amendment.
While some in our party have recently conceded the constitutional argument, they are now arguing that it is insensitive, intolerant and unacceptable to locate the center at the present location: "Just because they have the right to do so - does not make it the right thing to do" they say. Many of these individuals are objecting to the location as being too close to the Ground Zero site and voicing the understandable pain and anguish of the 9-11 families who lost loved ones in this horrible tragedy. In expressing compassion and understanding for these families, we are asking ourselves the following: if two blocks is too close, is four blocks acceptable? or six blocks? or eight blocks? Does our party believe that one can only practice his/her religion in certain places within defined boundaries and away from the disapproving glances of some citizens? Should our party not be standing up and taking a leadership role- just like President Bush did after 9-11 - by making a clear distinction between Islam, one of the great three monotheistic faiths along with Judaism and Christianity, versus the terrorists who committed the atrocities on 9-11 and who are not only the true enemies of America but of Islam as well? President Bush struck the right balance in expressing sympathy for the families of the 9-11 victims while making it absolutely clear that the acts committed on 9-11 were not in the name of Islam. We are hoping that our party leaders can do the same now - especially at a time when it is greatly needed.
While we share the desire of all in our party to be successful in the November elections, we cannot support victory at the expense of the U.S. Constitution or the Arab and Muslim community in America. As President Lincoln so eloquently stated in his famous speech: "a house divided against itself cannot stand."
As proud and patriotic Americans, we are grateful for all the rights our U.S. citizenship allows us, and we will always do our best to not only protect our rights but the rights of all others as well. May God Bless our nation, our freedoms, and our party.
David Ramadan
Vice Chair, Ethnic Coalitions, Republican Party of Virginia
Sherine El-Abd
President, New Jersey Federation of Republican Women
Randa Fahmy Hudome
Associate Deputy Secretary of Energy, Bush Administration
George Salem
Solicitor of Labor, Reagan Administration
Suhail Khan
Chairman, Conservative Inclusion Coalition |
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Aug 17, 2010 11:52:25 GMT -5
This is why we have different branches of government....the branch of government that this would fall under would be the judicial branch....this should be left to the courts.
Those who are in leadership don't have to remark on everything that occurs.... it can cause more harm than good.
|
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Aug 17, 2010 13:27:19 GMT -5
This is why we have different branches of government....the branch of government that this would fall under would be the judicial branch....this should be left to the courts. Those who are in leadership don't have to remark on everything that occurs.... it can cause more harm than good. He can't get around it.... They were waiting for his response... All he said what was already written in the Constitution, which he took an oat to defend.... People, especially the Gopers as usually are adding to the remark.... He never say they should or shouldn't, they just have the right through freedom of religions. |
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Aug 17, 2010 14:34:49 GMT -5
This is why we have different branches of government....the branch of government that this would fall under would be the judicial branch....this should be left to the courts. Those who are in leadership don't have to remark on everything that occurs.... it can cause more harm than good. He can't get around it.... They [/b]were waiting for his response... All he said what was already written in the Constitution, which he took an oat to defend.... People, especially the Gopers as usually are adding to the remark.... He never say they should or shouldn't, they just have the right through freedom of religions.[/quote] Who's "they"? His opinion doesn't really make a difference...esp since this was to be handled by the judicial branch. Separation of Powers was created for a reason. He could've gotten around it and said nothing....speaking caused more discussion than if he were to have said nothing at all.....it falls in the same line whe he said that the cops acted "stupidly"...when you're in the public eye, you have to be even more careful to what you say and pick your battles WISELY. |
|
|
|
Post by krazeeboi on Aug 19, 2010 11:01:40 GMT -5
For Obama, this would be a case of literally being d**ned if he does, or d**ned if he doesn't (like I said, I'm using "d**ned" in the most literal sense here, not as an expletive). If he didn't say anything, he would come across as uncaring and unconcerned about a subject that has unfortunately and unnecessarily become politicized. This issue, along with the immigration issue, is unfortunately America showing its xenophobic face to the world. Since Obama has spoken out in favor of this group's constitutional right to build this Islamic community center (that will have a mix of uses, including a mosque on the inside--it is NOT a 13-story mosque), it's being reported that more people increasingly believe the president to be a Muslim. The fact of the matter is that if this group has a constitutional right to build this Islamic community center TWO BLOCKS away from Ground Zero (people act like they want to build it right on top of the WTC site) and they satisfy all of the local and state requirements for doing so, then there is no legal recourse for prohibiting them to do so. The only thing politicians and ordinary citizens can do is appeal to the imam and members of this group directly in order to persuade them to build elsewhere. Since Obama was elected, conservatives/the GOP has really been bringing out the worst in (White) people by stoking their xenophobic and racist fears. With all of this talk about amending the 14th amendment, the 1st and 15th amendments might well be next on the chopping block. These bitter White folks (most from the South) want to do everything in their power to ensure that ethnic and religious minorities "stay in their place." It's quite easy to see that even though we have a Black president, we weren't ready for one AT ALL. |
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Aug 20, 2010 10:21:09 GMT -5
For Obama, this would be a case of literally being d**ned if he does, or d**ned if he doesn't (like I said, I'm using "d**ned" in the most literal sense here, not as an expletive). If he didn't say anything, he would come across as uncaring and unconcerned about a subject that has unfortunately and unnecessarily become politicized. This issue, along with the immigration issue, is unfortunately America showing its xenophobic face to the world. Since Obama has spoken out in favor of this group's constitutional right to build this Islamic community center (that will have a mix of uses, including a mosque on the inside--it is NOT a 13-story mosque), it's being reported that more people increasingly believe the president to be a Muslim. The fact of the matter is that if this group has a constitutional right to build this Islamic community center TWO BLOCKS away from Ground Zero (people act like they want to build it right on top of the WTC site) and they satisfy all of the local and state requirements for doing so, then there is no legal recourse for prohibiting them to do so. The only thing politicians and ordinary citizens can do is appeal to the imam and members of this group directly in order to persuade them to build elsewhere. Since Obama was elected, conservatives/the GOP has really been bringing out the worst in (White) people by stoking their xenophobic and racist fears. With all of this talk about amending the 14th amendment, the 1st and 15th amendments might well be next on the chopping block. These bitter White folks (most from the South) want to do everything in their power to ensure that ethnic and religious minorities "stay in their place." It's quite easy to see that even though we have a Black president, we weren't ready for one AT ALL. Thanks... |
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Aug 22, 2010 5:50:32 GMT -5
Hey Guys,
Nikkol... I agree with you Obama should have kept silent on this one... The honest truth is that legal or not most Americans really don't agree with the idea that a mosque would be built so close to ground zero... Secondly... legally there really could be some things done to have prevented the mosque from getting this far in being built.
There are laws concerning public domain that the city and the state could have used. I think the reason that the mosque got this far is that so many people democrats and republican alike were silent as things got along... But let's not underestimate the cry of the public....
For example... It was kept real quiet that Bush and the governemet was going to allow a Muslim shipping company to have control of a lot of ports coming into the U.S. something that without a doubt would have been a security issue....
When Rush Limbough made this news public on the radio the out cry from the American people was immediate! Bush made a public statement defending the deal. It made him look like a real idiot! Especially with all the war backing and weapons of mass destruction that he claimed was out there. It was another major drop in his popularity and the republican on all levels started distancing themselves from him. The deal did not go through... Just as right now the governor of New York is meeting with the builders of the mosque to try to place them in another area. Different groups are indeed filing law suits against te measures that have allowed the building of the mosque to get this far... Honestly... I don't think this mosque is going to happen. And if by some chance it is... without a doubt it will burned and torn down... It a dangerous situation...
Kitty
|
|
|
|
Post by anointedteacher on Aug 22, 2010 10:25:38 GMT -5
Hey Guys, Nikkol... I agree with you Obama should have kept silent on this one... The honest truth is that legal or not most Americans really don't agree with the idea that a mosque would be built so close to ground zero... Secondly... legally there really could be some things done to have prevented the mosque from getting this far in being built. There are laws concerning public domain that the city and the state could have used. I think the reason that the mosque got this far is that so many people democrats and republican alike were silent as things got along... But let's not underestimate the cry of the public.... For example... It was kept real quiet that Bush and the governemet was going to allow a Muslim shipping company to have control of a lot of ports coming into the U.S. something that without a doubt would have been a security issue.... When Rush Limbough made this news public on the radio the out cry from the American people was immediate! Bush made a public statement defending the deal. It made him look like a real idiot! Especially with all the war backing and weapons of mass destruction that he claimed was out there. It was another major drop in his popularity and the republican on all levels started distancing themselves from him. The deal did not go through... Just as right now the governor of New York is meeting with the builders of the mosque to try to place them in another area. Different groups are indeed filing law suits against te measures that have allowed the building of the mosque to get this far... Honestly... I don't think this mosque is going to happen. And if by some chance it is... without a doubt it will burned and torn down... It a dangerous situation... Kitty Also most American don't want more churches build... should we stop building churches.... You see there are some extreme Christian that are dangerous too... Like the OK bombing, a devoked Christian bombed the government building. Is it wrong to have churches near the OK building.... A Christian flew the plane into the IRS building, should there be churches near that building... |
|
|
|
Post by krazeeboi on Aug 22, 2010 15:54:03 GMT -5
Hey Guys, Nikkol... I agree with you Obama should have kept silent on this one... The honest truth is that legal or not most Americans really don't agree with the idea that a mosque would be built so close to ground zero... Secondly... legally there really could be some things done to have prevented the mosque from getting this far in being built. There are laws concerning public domain that the city and the state could have used. Yes, but on what grounds? If it got to court, a solid case could be made in favor of the group wanting to build this community center (it's a multipurpose facility that will have a mosque, among other things, inside of it) that the laws were suddenly being implemented against them were out of bias, not out of a sense of the rule of law being fairly applied across the board. All I know is that if public opinion were allowed to determine what laws were created or stood or fell, we as Black people wouldn't have the freedoms that we have right now. The reason we have laws in the first place is so that liberties aren't held hostage to the whims of one person or a group of people. This thing has been overly politicized, by far. People act like the structure is going to be built atop the Ground Zero site itself. Furthermore, who says how far "far enough" is? Three blocks away? Four blocks away? Five blocks away? Who determines that, and upon what basis? There's no way that Obama could have continued to keep silent on this issue, not the way that it was being blown up in the media. That's just the information age we now live in. This is why Obama was eventually forced to comment on the Shirley Sherrod fiasco. |
|
|
|
Post by Nikkol on Aug 23, 2010 6:57:29 GMT -5
There's no way that Obama could have continued to keep silent on this issue, not the way that it was being blown up in the media. That's just the information age we now live in. This is why Obama was eventually forced to comment on the Shirley Sherrod fiasco. He could've kept silent...just because things are being "blown up" doesn't mean he has to say anything. That's why he doesn't "work alone" (ie sec of state, vp, senate, house, etc). If he wanted to say anything, he could've just said "This is an issue that constitutionally should be handled by the judicial branch." I think the Shirley incident was a little "closer to home" so to speak. |
|
While his pronouncement concerning the mosque might find favor in the Muslim world, Obama's stance runs counter to the opinions of the majority of Americans, according to polls. A CNN/Opinion Research poll released this week found that nearly 70 percent of Americans opposed the mosque plan while just 29 percent approved.
