Pastor Terry Burning Korans VS Ground Zero Mosque: Hypocricy is rampant

[edthecynic]

Link, please.

You beat me to it!

PP is our of his/her mind. The way CON$ pervert anything anyone they hate says is why CON$ have no credibility.

There is no comparison between the cultural center and the Koran burning. The cultural center was set up to bring people together and the Koran burning was intended to divide.

I'm sorry that the original post makes you feel the need to be distracting and defensive. I was trying to avoid calling people out by name to give people a chance to self examine their own inconsistancy in values.

So that is the RATIONALIZATION you use to justify your perverting what the Imam said.

Maybe you should self examine your own dishonesty first!

 

[jillian]

And what is your personal position on the 2 issues also? You are one I would expect to be consistant from your other posts.

I think book burning is disgusting. There is nothing that justifies it, despite being legal.

I think the mosque is legal but ill-considered. However, I think the verbiage used to oppose it is far worse than the presence of the mosque at ground zero.

In both cases, I think the vilification of an entire group of people is no less frightening than when i see that type of verbiage used against other groups of people including my own.

I also think that the type of rhetoric used with respect to muslims can easily take people who might otherwise be moderate and convince them that the radicals are right.

 

[California Girl]

You beat me to it!

PP is our of his/her mind. The way CON$ pervert anything anyone they hate says is why CON$ have no credibility.

There is no comparison between the cultural center and the Koran burning. The cultural center was set up to bring people together and the Koran burning was intended to divide.

I'm sorry that the original post makes you feel the need to be distracting and defensive. I was trying to avoid calling people out by name to give people a chance to self examine their own inconsistancy in values.

So that is the RATIONALIZATION you use to justify your perverting what the Imam said.

Maybe you should self examine your own dishonesty first!

Where is the dishonesty in the OP? He has clearly stated his position on both... it is those who view the mosque as acceptable and yet object to the burning of the koran that are the hypocrites.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

And what is your personal position on the 2 issues also? You are one I would expect to be consistant from your other posts.

I think book burning is disgusting. There is nothing that justifies it, despite being legal.

I think the mosque is legal but ill-considered. However, I think the verbiage used to oppose it is far worse than the presence of the mosque at ground zero.

In both cases, I think the vilification of an entire group of people is no less frightening than when i see that type of verbiage used against other groups of people including my own.

As I suspected you are consistant . This is why I defended you in the "flame Jillian" thread a week or so ago.

You don't think either one is a good idea, even if they are both legal. You find one more disturbing than the other, as do I, but feel both are bad ideas overall.

 

[xotoxi]

My stance on Pastor Terry is nearly identical to my stance on the mosque.

He has the right to burn the koran under the first ammendment. However just because he has the right to do it doesn't mean he should. I think it is a very insensitive action and I dont think he, or anyone else, should be out burning Korans. By doing so he is being very insensitive and disrespectful to the feelings of the majority of americans.

Just like the mosque...the Imam, who just stated violence could ensue if the mosque isn't built, has every right to build the mosque there. However just becaues he has the right to do so doesn't mean he should. I think its a very insensitve action and I dont think he should be building the cordova center in that specific location. By doing so it is very insensitive and disrespectful to the feelings of the majority of americans.

Many of you posting here on the USMB sound very hypocritical in this arena. I think everyone should really examine their personal stances on these two issues and decide why they hold their opinions. It seems many on the left and right are just spouting off with talking points instead of coming to an opinion based on personal values.


Agree, Disagree, and discuss with me if you want.

My mouth tastes funny after you put your hands into it and pulled words out.

Please keep your hands to yourself in the future.

 

[California Girl]

And what is your personal position on the 2 issues also? You are one I would expect to be consistant from your other posts.

I think book burning is disgusting. There is nothing that justifies it, despite being legal.

I think the mosque is legal but ill-considered. However, I think the verbiage used to oppose it is far worse than the presence of the mosque at ground zero.

In both cases, I think the vilification of an entire group of people is no less frightening than when i see that type of verbiage used against other groups of people including my own.

I also think that the type of rhetoric used with respect to muslims can easily take people who might otherwise be moderate and convince them that the radicals are right.

The only group of people who have been vilified with regard to the mosque are those who disagree with it on moral grounds.... We have been labeled bigots. I've seen no one vilifying Muslims.... only Americans.

 

[edthecynic]

I'm sorry that the original post makes you feel the need to be distracting and defensive. I was trying to avoid calling people out by name to give people a chance to self examine their own inconsistancy in values.

So that is the RATIONALIZATION you use to justify your perverting what the Imam said.

Maybe you should self examine your own dishonesty first!

Where is the dishonesty in the OP? He has clearly stated his position on both... it is those who view the mosque as acceptable and yet object to the burning of the koran that are the hypocrites.

The patented CON$ervative dumb act again!

Read this dishonesty:

the Imam, who just threatened violence if the mosque isn't built,

 

[Ravi]

the Imam, who just threatened violence if the mosque isn't built,

Link, please.

imam says violence if no mosque - Google Search

pick a story from that google.

That's a little different than your statement that he threatened violence.

 

[Ravi]

Link, please.

imam says violence if no mosque - Google Search

pick a story from that google.

Predicting how extremists will use moving the cultural center is hardly "THREATENING" violence.

This is why CON$ have no credibility with honest people!!!!!

I know, it's like saying Petraues threatened violence if the bible thumper burns the korans.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Im not sure he has the right to burn the Quran as he was unable to get a permit, Im not certain they can build a mosque since they dont own the land.

Its like burning the flag Mr. Fitnah. Everyone has the general right under the first ammendment to burn the flag or the koran but people shouldn't do either, both are very insulting and wrong.

You do have a good technical point, I think in that guy's state book burning may actually be illegal and he most likely does need a permit which I hope he doesn't get.

Deputy Chief Tim Hayes, who serves as the department's fire marshal, said he and an investigator went to the church's 20-acre property on Northwest 37th Street earlier this month to determine what the burn would entail.

Under the fire ordinances the City Commission adopted last year, bonfires aren't allowed without a permit, Hayes said.

Under Section 10-63, "Open burning and outdoor burning are prohibited in the City of Gainesville unless otherwise specifically permitted as provided by this article."

Gainesville fire chief says open book burning not allowed in the city but Dove Church will still do it | Gainesville.com

 

[xotoxi]

And what is your personal position on the 2 issues also? You are one I would expect to be consistant from your other posts.

I think book burning is disgusting. There is nothing that justifies it, despite being legal.

I think the mosque is legal but ill-considered. However, I think the verbiage used to oppose it is far worse than the presence of the mosque at ground zero.

In both cases, I think the vilification of an entire group of people is no less frightening than when i see that type of verbiage used against other groups of people including my own.

As I suspected you are consistant . This is why I defended you in the "flame Jillian" thread a week or so ago.

You don't think either one is a good idea, even if they are both legal. You find one more disturbing than the other, as do I, but feel both are bad ideas overall.

I think I agree with Jillian.

The one thing about the mosque is that it is constructive...though some may argue motives. There is a chance that some individuals will have their lives bettered through its creation.

The book burning is completely destructive. I cannot thing of anything positive that can come of it.

 

[jillian]

And what is your personal position on the 2 issues also? You are one I would expect to be consistant from your other posts.

I think book burning is disgusting. There is nothing that justifies it, despite being legal.

I think the mosque is legal but ill-considered. However, I think the verbiage used to oppose it is far worse than the presence of the mosque at ground zero.

In both cases, I think the vilification of an entire group of people is no less frightening than when i see that type of verbiage used against other groups of people including my own.

I also think that the type of rhetoric used with respect to muslims can easily take people who might otherwise be moderate and convince them that the radicals are right.

The only group of people who have been vilified with regard to the mosque are those who disagree with it on moral grounds.... We have been labeled bigots. I've seen no one vilifying Muslims.... only Americans.

the muslims building the mosque ARE americans?

see what i mean, hon? sometimes people don't even think about what they say even when they don't mean for it to sound certain ways.

 

[California Girl]

So that is the RATIONALIZATION you use to justify your perverting what the Imam said.

Maybe you should self examine your own dishonesty first!

Where is the dishonesty in the OP? He has clearly stated his position on both... it is those who view the mosque as acceptable and yet object to the burning of the koran that are the hypocrites.

The patented CON$ervative dumb act again!

Read this dishonesty:

the Imam, who just threatened violence if the mosque isn't built,

The whiny assed leftie response. It's backed up - the Imam has suggested that violence may be the consequence of not building the mosque. So what? We are to be held hostage by a group of extremists? Maybe a cowardly whiny assed leftie, but not Americans.

 

[Ravi]

You beat me to it!

PP is our of his/her mind. The way CON$ pervert anything anyone they hate says is why CON$ have no credibility.

There is no comparison between the cultural center and the Koran burning. The cultural center was set up to bring people together and the Koran burning was intended to divide.

I'm sorry that the original post makes you feel the need to be distracting and defensive. I was trying to avoid calling people out by name to give people a chance to self examine their own inconsistancy in values.

So that is the RATIONALIZATION you use to justify your perverting what the Imam said.

Maybe you should self examine your own dishonesty first!

^^^This.

 

[edthecynic]

Where is the dishonesty in the OP? He has clearly stated his position on both... it is those who view the mosque as acceptable and yet object to the burning of the koran that are the hypocrites.

The patented CON$ervative dumb act again!

Read this dishonesty:

the Imam, who just threatened violence if the mosque isn't built,

The whiny assed leftie response. It's backed up - the Imam has suggested that violence may be the consequence of not building the mosque. So what? We are to be held hostage by a group of extremists? Maybe a cowardly whiny assed leftie, but not Americans.

it wasn't backed up!

the Imam pointed out how extremists will pervert it. He was not "THREATENING" anything. CON$ervative extremists then perverted what the Imam said.

CON$ervoFascists and IslamoFascists are twin sons of different mothers!

 

[Ravi]

Despite your dishonest OP, PP, the fact is that burning korans is an act of destruction meant to intimidate while building the mosque is an act of construction meant to serve moderate muslims. They are not comparable.

This is not the face of a woman that secretly yearns to wear a burka.

The Imam and his wife are MODERATE people they are not extremists.

Pastor Terry is an extremist.

 

[Sunni Man]

Timothy McVeigh was a Catholic.

But I doubt that there would be any national debate or uproar.

If a new Catholic Church was going to be built a couple of blocks from the site of the former Murrah building in OKC

 

[goldcatt]

The one thing about the mosque is that it is constructive...though some may argue motives. There is a chance that some individuals will have their lives bettered through its creation.

The book burning is completely destructive. I cannot thing of anything positive that can come of it.

^^^^ This.

 

[jillian]

The whiny assed leftie response. It's backed up - the Imam has suggested that violence may be the consequence of not building the mosque. So what? We are to be held hostage by a group of extremists? Maybe a cowardly whiny assed leftie, but not Americans.

the 'lefties' aren't doing anything but pointing out that saying the imam THREATENED anyone is not correct.

If being accurate is a leftie value...

and calling someone who rationally points out facts 'threatening' a rightwingnut value, as espoused by fauxnews, (since that was the article that used the word threat in reference to the imam), i'm ok with being a leftie.

and the only whining i'm seeing about this is yours. sometimes, darlin' it's just better to say, well... yeah, maybe the word threat was propaganda.

 

[konradv]

Where is the dishonesty in the OP? He has clearly stated his position on both... it is those who view the mosque as acceptable and yet object to the burning of the koran that are the hypocrites.

The patented CON$ervative dumb act again!

Read this dishonesty:

the Imam, who just threatened violence if the mosque isn't built,

The whiny assed leftie response. It's backed up - the Imam has suggested that violence may be the consequence of not building the mosque. So what? We are to be held hostage by a group of extremists? Maybe a cowardly whiny assed leftie, but not Americans.

It's those opposed to the mosque and want to burn Korans that are the cowards. They're so scared of Islam that they're willing to turn the entire religion against us to make themselves fell better. Cowardly and egocentric, IMHO.