The Constitution is the Constitution, anti-Muslims please read

[Bass v 2.0]

That is not happening nor will it. That is a what if scenario. I do not care if the build the building but it is not a Constitutional right. Muslims are currently doing fine worshiping in NYC so this building is not going to make or break the religion. It has brought religious differences to the forefront and instead of bringing together all of New York it is putting a rift between the Muslims who want to build this and those opposed. I did not say Christians because there are Jews and other Muslims who are opposed to this as well.

Preventing a religious group from accomodating its members with necessary facilities is tantamount to placing restrictions on freedom of worship. The government does not have the power to interfere with anybody's property rights simply because what they're doing is deemed "insensitive" by some... sensitivity toward others' misguided emotions is not a requirement in New York City's building code.

Now go tell all your Muslim Buddies in their Countries the same.... ohh wait I forgot, since Islam is the only religion that matters outside the US you are fine with Islamic Countries preventing the free exercise of religion with in their domains.

Hypocrite.

We're talking about *OUR* Constitution and preventing freedom of religion and peaceable assembly is against the Constitution, how many mosques and synagouges are in Vatican City?

 

[Kalam]

That is not happening nor will it. That is a what if scenario. I do not care if the build the building but it is not a Constitutional right. Muslims are currently doing fine worshiping in NYC so this building is not going to make or break the religion. It has brought religious differences to the forefront and instead of bringing together all of New York it is putting a rift between the Muslims who want to build this and those opposed. I did not say Christians because there are Jews and other Muslims who are opposed to this as well.

Preventing a religious group from accomodating its members with necessary facilities is tantamount to placing restrictions on freedom of worship. The government does not have the power to interfere with anybody's property rights simply because what they're doing is deemed "insensitive" by some... sensitivity toward others' misguided emotions is not a requirement in New York City's building code.

Now go tell all your Muslim Buddies in their Countries the same.... ohh wait I forgot, since Islam is the only religion that matters outside the US you are fine with Islamic Countries preventing the free exercise of religion with in their domains.

Hypocrite.

I have a shampoo recommendation for you:

Hope it helps!

 

[Bass v 2.0]

I ask the question: How would the government be establishing a religion or failing to allow the practice of a religion by not allow a building to be built?

A ban on mosques would certainly abridge on people's right to practice their religion.

No one is asking for a ban on Mosques. Some people are asking for a SPECIFIC Mosque in a SPECIFIC spot not to be built.

They're fighting against the building of mosques everywhere across the country under the excuse that the mosques are going to be recruiting grounds for terrorists.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Preventing a religious group from accomodating its members with necessary facilities is tantamount to placing restrictions on freedom of worship. The government does not have the power to interfere with anybody's property rights simply because what they're doing is deemed "insensitive" by some... sensitivity toward others' misguided emotions is not a requirement in New York City's building code.

Now go tell all your Muslim Buddies in their Countries the same.... ohh wait I forgot, since Islam is the only religion that matters outside the US you are fine with Islamic Countries preventing the free exercise of religion with in their domains.

Hypocrite.

We're talking about *OUR* Constitution and preventing freedom of religion and peaceable assembly is against the Constitution, how many mosques and synagouges are in Vatican City?

No one has proposed banning Muslims from worship. No one has proposed banning the building of Mosques across the Country.

We are ( well not you) discussing one Mosque. And I am discussing the only legal means that can be used to stop said Mosque. That would be the zoning Board. Petitioning the board is within the confines of the Constitution. It is legal and allowed. Any claim otherwise is simply sour grapes.

Now to the reality. The Zoning Board will NOT be changing the zoning for that area. So legally the Mosque can and will go up. Guess what? No violation of the Constitution at all.

Last I checked the 1st Amendment also has the stipulation that the people can peaceably assemble and air their grievances. People that are opposed to the Mosque have the right to gather and air their opposition to said building.

In fact if you are trying to stop them, THAT would be the only Constitutional Violation happening. But hey thanks for playing MONKEY.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Now go tell all your Muslim Buddies in their Countries the same.... ohh wait I forgot, since Islam is the only religion that matters outside the US you are fine with Islamic Countries preventing the free exercise of religion with in their domains.

Hypocrite.

We're talking about *OUR* Constitution and preventing freedom of religion and peaceable assembly is against the Constitution, how many mosques and synagouges are in Vatican City?

No one has proposed banning Muslims from worship. No one has proposed banning the building of Mosques across the Country.

We are ( well not you) discussing one Mosque. And I am discussing the only legal means that can be used to stop said Mosque. That would be the zoning Board. Petitioning the board is within the confines of the Constitution. It is legal and allowed. Any claim otherwise is simply sour grapes.

Now to the reality. The Zoning Board will NOT be changing the zoning for that area. So legally the Mosque can and will go up. Guess what? No violation of the Constitution at all.

Last I checked the 1st Amendment also has the stipulation that the people can peaceably assemble and air their grievances. People that are opposed to the Mosque have the right to gather and air their opposition to said building.

In fact if you are trying to stop them, THAT would be the only Constitutional Violation happening. But hey thanks for playing MONKEY.

No, this is all across the country, people are coming out against the buildings of mosques, they can have their opinions all they like, but to continually keep filing lawsuits to block the building of mosques due to religion bigotry is not constitutional. What I am criticizing is the religious bigotry that forms the basis of these protests.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Again, its not just New York, so stop that dumb argument:

The New York Times > Log In

 

[Kalam]

Now go tell all your Muslim Buddies in their Countries the same.... ohh wait I forgot, since Islam is the only religion that matters outside the US you are fine with Islamic Countries preventing the free exercise of religion with in their domains.

Hypocrite.

We're talking about *OUR* Constitution and preventing freedom of religion and peaceable assembly is against the Constitution, how many mosques and synagouges are in Vatican City?

No one has proposed banning Muslims from worship. No one has proposed banning the building of Mosques across the Country.

Some people have:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2598996-post60.html

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Not going to fly. The state would never allow eminent domain to be invoked as such a transparent pretense for preventing the building's construction.

The statement was made that the government doesn't have the right. Even though I do not agree with Eminent domain the government does have the right to take anyones proprety that it deems necessry. That is unless you are wishing to use the tenth amendment to justify your stance.

That decision would never be made in a case like this. Even if it was, it would almost certainly be appealed and struck down. The government's true intentions would be far too obvious.

true since America has a muslim president, but anyway Eminent domain can be used and it would stick. So I say let'em build it and watch it burn down after it's built. It your money better that it's used on a building then used on weapons to kill more Americans.

 

[Kalam]

The statement was made that the government doesn't have the right. Even though I do not agree with Eminent domain the government does have the right to take anyones proprety that it deems necessry. That is unless you are wishing to use the tenth amendment to justify your stance.

That decision would never be made in a case like this. Even if it was, it would almost certainly be appealed and struck down. The government's true intentions would be far too obvious.

true since America has a muslim president,

That asshole isn't a Muslim.

but anyway Eminent domain can be used and it would stick. So I say let'em build it and watch it burn down after it's built. It your money better that it's used on a building then used on weapons to kill more Americans.

If you burn it down, we can just collect the insurance money and use that to buy weapons.

 

[Andy]

Quoting the Establishment clause to justify support for building a Mosque at ground zero is an interesting, but misguided application. There is plenty of bias against religion to be dealt with in more "normal" circumstances. The city of New York has to be concerned about its own budget and putting a mosque there is just trouble they don't need.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

BigRed, what the fuck is wrong with you? The last thing we need is for something like that to happen

For them to even want to build a mosque on that sight is a little insensitive. Allowing them to build it there would prevent what? The next terrorist attack? I doubt it. There is an upside to it the more money they spend building the less money they have for buying weapon to kill more Americans.

None of your monkey speak has anything to do with the Constitution and those people have a right to build a mosque, the insensitivity ploy is just a monkey screen to hide the fact that no one wants Muslims building a mosque. Besides, the very idiots walking around with those damn signs are some of the most insensitive baboons in the country, we have Columbus Day as a holiday, do you monkeys ever think or care that that maybe insensitive to Native Americans? The same with Thanksgiving Day, very insensitive to Native Americans with its fake Miles Standish story or Pilgrims and native Americans being living together happily ever after . What about pro sports teams like the Washington Redskins and the Cleveland Indians' logo of a Native American?


Many white Americans[who are the majority of those who are carrying the signs and complaining about the mosques] view people who complain about such things as whiners, but when something is insensitive to them they want people to bend over backwards to accommodate them. I'm convinced that a good amount of white people don't give a damn about what's insensitive and offensive to others because those others are not human enough to them to be respected, only people white like them are human.

You want to talk about whats insensitive? Insensitive is a group of people from the same religion got to gather and decided to hijack a several commercial jetliners and ram them into several building now 10 years later on the very date that same religion wants to build a mosque near the site were two planes killed over 3000 Americans citizens. Now that’s insensitive. So fuck you and them, if they want to build a mosque they can build anywhere but there.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

That decision would never be made in a case like this. Even if it was, it would almost certainly be appealed and struck down. The government's true intentions would be far too obvious.

true since America has a muslim president,

That asshole isn't a Muslim.

but anyway Eminent domain can be used and it would stick. So I say let'em build it and watch it burn down after it's built. It your money better that it's used on a building then used on weapons to kill more Americans.

If you burn it down, we can just collect the insurance money and use that to buy weapons.

He never had any Muslim teachings?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

That decision would never be made in a case like this. Even if it was, it would almost certainly be appealed and struck down. The government's true intentions would be far too obvious.

true since America has a muslim president,

That asshole isn't a Muslim.

but anyway Eminent domain can be used and it would stick. So I say let'em build it and watch it burn down after it's built. It your money better that it's used on a building then used on weapons to kill more Americans.

If you burn it down, we can just collect the insurance money and use that to buy weapons.

GOOD buy more weapons I love seeing dead extremist muslins in the morning.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Islime is NOT a 'religion', but rather a totalatarian movement which uses the cloak of 'faith' to infiltrate and paralyze other socities it plans to destroy.

.....And, you've got your English-teacher's endorsement, on all this, right???
​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

We could just kill everyone and be done with all this bullshit....

.....More-commonly-referred-to as The Suicide Option. ​

Webster

Exceptionalism: the condition of being different from the norm.

Exceptional: 3 : deviating from the norm: as a: having above or below average intelligence b: physically disabled​

The White-Wingers need to get-over the illusion you're entitled to much-of-anything!!

Hell.....compared to the rest-of-the-Universe.....none-of-us....INCLUDING (believe it, or not) Christians/Whites....even register as a spec-of-dust on a gnat's ass!!!!!

White-Wingers, get OVER yourselves!!! You've GOT no Divine Right to make everyone-else miserable.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJJBtmhRRl8]YouTube - ‪National Lampoon-"Deteriorata" from the LP "Greatest Hits of the National Lampoon" WITH LYRICS!‬‎[/ame]

 

[The T]

Shaman? You're an idiot.

That is all....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

We're talking about *OUR* Constitution and preventing freedom of religion and peaceable assembly is against the Constitution, how many mosques and synagouges are in Vatican City?

No one has proposed banning Muslims from worship. No one has proposed banning the building of Mosques across the Country.

Some people have:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2598996-post60.html

To be honest I would support a move to A) ban all Muslims from immigrating to the US. And B) ban all new Muslim structures.

I would do so by having the Government declare that Islam is a threat to non Islamic peoples and religions.

It won't happen any time soon though. It will take some real eye opening and honesty from our Government instead of the namby pamby bullshit that Islam is a religion of Peace.

Ohh and it would not be Unconstitutional since A) the US Constitution is not a death pact and B) any religion that is a threat to law and order, peace and human life is NO religion at all.

Or did I miss all the religions we protect that support cannibalism and human sacrifices?

As for right now? Simply is not happening.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

true since America has a muslim president,

That asshole isn't a Muslim.

but anyway Eminent domain can be used and it would stick. So I say let'em build it and watch it burn down after it's built. It your money better that it's used on a building then used on weapons to kill more Americans.

If you burn it down, we can just collect the insurance money and use that to buy weapons.

He never had any Muslim teachings?

Kalam is a good Muslim, he is not going to remind everyone that in the eyes of the Muslim world once a Muslim always a Muslim. But more importantly Obama has been sitting in a Christian Church for at least 20 years. That alone condemns him in the eyes of world wide Muslims.

 

[Kalam]

To be honest I would support a move to A) ban all Muslims from immigrating to the US. And B) ban all new Muslim structures.

I would do so by having the Government declare that Islam is a threat to non Islamic peoples and religions.

It won't happen any time soon though. It will take some real eye opening and honesty from our Government instead of the namby pamby bullshit that Islam is a religion of Peace.

Ohh and it would not be Unconstitutional since A) the US Constitution is not a death pact and B) any religion that is a threat to law and order, peace and human life is NO religion at all.

Or did I miss all the religions we protect that support cannibalism and human sacrifices?

As for right now? Simply is not happening.

You and Mr. Fitnah should organize some sort of big, anti-Islamic circle jerk. I could give a shit less about your Hitler-esque political beliefs, but I bet he'd really get off if you told him all about them.

 

[G.T.]

America is not "the Muslim world" and The President is not a Muslim.