Mosque On Ground Zero. An Act Of Aggression: Yea Or Nay?

Legalities aside,they really should reconsider building their large Mosque in this location. It's insensitive and hostile. Many Americans would be incredibly grateful if they decided to do the right thing. That would be a real expression of peace,love,and understanding in my opinion.
 
Of course building a Mosque "ANYWHERE" is an act of aggression! Those "War mongering" muslims just want to put up landing strips for the mother ship so it can send InJeels over to behead us!


Say no to the Mosque! Also, Did you know that Obama is not our legitimate President? Retake your Republic! Vote Sarah Palin for president in 2012!
 
I oppose Eminent Domain Laws and i always have. I opposed these Laws whether it was convenient or not. That's much more than i can say for phony Liberals who are now on here pretending they opposed Eminent Domain Laws all along. They now oppose Eminent Domain on this particular issue. Gee i wonder why? What a joke.

Except in this case, you don't seem to. This is a Constitutional issue at this point and to deny this Mosque being built on the basis that it's a Mosque is breaking the first amendment. Once you break the first amendment in this case, not only do you leave it open to be broken in all other cases but all the other amendments as well.
 
What a crock. You certainly cannot build whatever suits you on your property. There are zoning and building regulations to satisfy. Typically they center on compatible use and a properly zoned area.

For instance, a mosque without adequate parking, might not be a good use. I would recommend a nice Jewish Community Center across the street and an adult book store next door.

you're right...things are subject to reasonable zoning regulations.

however, those zoning regulations cannot be discriminatory. there are at least two churches next to the site... how would you justify not allowing a mosque? because you like churches but not mosques.

prejudice is not a reasonable use of zoning power.
 
Btw,i am a big Ron Paul fan but i'm not a robot like so many Socialist/Progressive nutters are. I don't agree with every word the man has ever uttered. I agree with him on most issues but i do disagree with him on others. People who walk in lock-step and agree with everything a politician says or does,really do scare me. You have to learn to think for yourself at some point in life.
 
You guys are jokes. Oh now you Liberals suddenly hate that Eminent Domain stuff. Sorry,not buying it. You've just changed your tune because you see that most Conservatives oppose the building of this Mosque. You can't be trusted. Nuff said.

are you claiming to be a conservative?

:rofl:
 
I oppose Eminent Domain Laws and i always have. I opposed these Laws whether it was convenient or not. That's much more than i can say for phony Liberals who are now on here pretending they opposed Eminent Domain Laws all along. They now oppose Eminent Domain on this particular issue. Gee i wonder why? What a joke.

other than your needing to spew, what makes a liberal 'phony'?

eminent domain is used occasionally, but it can't be used to violate the constitution.

what's with you pretend constitutionalists who hate the constitution when it actually protects those its supposed to protect... eg, the people the torch and pitchfork crowd would go after.
 
You guys are jokes. Oh now you Liberals suddenly hate that Eminent Domain stuff. Sorry,not buying it. You've just changed your tune because you see that most Conservatives oppose the building of this Mosque. You can't be trusted. Nuff said.

are you claiming to be a conservative?

:rofl:

Yes.

last i checked, conservatives supported property rights.

you may want to rethink your position, libtard.
 
One, Cordoba House is not a mosque. Two, it's not being built at Ground Zero.
 
One, Cordoba House is not a mosque. Two, it's not being built at Ground Zero.

1. It most certainly will contain a msoque. now PERHAPS if they would also include a Church and a Synagogue you would have a point, but they will not, so you do not.

2. That misconception was cleared up long ago, and people with sense are no longer saying it is AT ground zero, but it IS within 1800 '.
 
One, Cordoba House is not a mosque. Two, it's not being built at Ground Zero.

Please let our readers understand the symbolism of Cordoba House. Something to do with conquering and occupying for 800 years I believe?
 
15th post
One, Cordoba House is not a mosque. Two, it's not being built at Ground Zero.

Please let our readers understand the symbolism of Cordoba House. Something to do with conquering and occupying for 800 years I believe?

No it doesn't. It has to do with 800 years of peaceful coexistence of Muslims, Christians and Jews. Cordoba House takes its name from the medieval Spanish city where Muslims, Jews and Christians lived in peace for 800 years. The developers promise to act in that spirit by bringing people together in peace, healing and collaboration at a center that would include a 500-seat auditorium, art exhibition space, a swimming pool and retail space. It would also include a place for prayer.
 
Last edited:
are you claiming to be a conservative?

:rofl:

Yes.

last i checked, conservatives supported property rights.

you may want to rethink your position, libtard.

Different argument. I never argued the legalities of this issue. Others started that argument. I just gave my opinion. I oppose this Mosque being built in that location. I think it's incredibly insensitive and a bit hostile. The legalities obviously favor the builders since it's their property. I never argued otherwise. Someone else brought up the issue of Eminent Domain and i gave my opinion on that too. I oppose Eminent Domain Laws. The legalities are obviously in the builder's favor but it doesn't mean that i have to agree with them building their Mosque in this location. They really should reconsider.
 
You're apparently either unable or unwilling to address anything I said in the previous post.

How much does it disappoint you that this moron has a Ron Paul avatar?

Well it just means that he doesn't understand Ron Paul's philosophy or disagrees with it in this instance. It's a shame he claims to support Ron Paul and the Constitution, since he's arguing against both, but you can't have everything in life.
 
Back
Top Bottom