NY Mosque

[Sniperchoke]

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM

I have read some of these posts out of boredom and became outraged! I can not honeslty believe some of the ignorant posts on this topic! How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque at ground zero after watching the footage on Sept. 11! I remember exactly where I was and all of you do as well, and that is because it was the most horrific and horrible act of terrorism that people my age will probably ever see! I pray to MY GOD that nothing like that ever happens again! For those of you who want all of this equality bull****, try another country! When you come back to America you may kiss the ground and thank GOD for the love, kindness, friendliness, affection, helpfulness, and the open arms that WE Americans(Christians, Jews, etc...) show and give on a daily basis! Bottom line I don't even consider this a relegion issue, but the pride of a nation to stand up and say we will not put up with the straight up slap in the face of building a worship center for the brothers of those who tore down that very ground!

Preach on brother!

 

[Sniperchoke]

Think about this Mosque from this perspective. Khalid Shaek Muhammed is still in prison waiting on a civilian trial in New York he will get to see a Mosque looking over the spot where he helped to knockdown those towers.. Obama is an idiot politically he will not recover from this..

 

[Bfish]

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM
... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

 

[Eyeman2]

Constitution & morality are tee totaly different.
Amendment 1..the right to...
morality...the pricipals of rules or right conduct.
It ain't Moral, so we as citizens have a right to say no, not here, but somewhere else your religion has not destroyed and claim Jehad.

 

[TritonAL186]

Putting the Mosque at or near "Ground Zero" is like having your ex-wife and her new husband move in next to you, it's just not right for many reasons. I would hate to see the Mosque near Ground Zero and anywhere near it for that fact , but that's where it will probably be built unless someone does something about it.

 

[Liveliner]

To me that would be no different than flying a Japanese flag over the USS Arizona Memorial in Pearl Harbor. Anyone other than Muslims in favor of the mosque on ground zero is an ignorant fool. That excludes your president from being a fool due to his Muslim roots. He is just an idiot for being in favor of the idea.

 

[outcaster]

Bfish - 8/16/2010 11:49 PM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM
... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

Unfortunately the Constitution takes a back seat in a "Holy War" This is just another example of the difference between liberals and conservatives.......Liberals will defend the Constitutional Rights of people we may disagree with. Conservatives seek to deny Constitutional rights to people they disagree with.

 

[Buoy-Master]

Oh Hell...Build it..allow them...Whatever!

Wonder how long it will stay there. Any bets on this?!

 

[SpurHunter]

outcaster - 8/17/2010 8:19 AM

Bfish - 8/16/2010 11:49 PM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM ... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

Unfortunately the Constitution takes a back seat in a "Holy War" This is just another example of the difference between liberals and conservatives.......Liberals will defend the Constitutional Rights of people we may disagree with. Conservatives seek to deny Constitutional rights to people they disagree with.

</p>

emoScratch emoScratch emoScratch Are we talking about the same Liberals in DCthat are rewriting the Constitution as we speak? Making back-room deals, making new laws in direct opposition to the Constitution? The same ones that wont enforce the Constitution whereit applies, because they dont like a part of it?</p>

</p>

</p>

</p>

</p>

 

[brushhog]

why not house and feed the homeless? across the nation,billions of dollars are being taking away by the government in every single state for the future of our children,untill this countries leaders repent for their actions, i'm afraid what of lies ahead,they cannot buy {or build} our way into heaven as a nation,works without faith means nothing,in GOD WE TRUST, remember??

 

[Guest]

outcaster - 8/17/2010 9:19 AM

Bfish - 8/16/2010 11:49 PM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM
... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

Unfortunately the Constitution takes a back seat in a "Holy War" This is just another example of the difference between liberals and conservatives.......Liberals will defend the Constitutional Rights of people we may disagree with. Conservatives seek to deny Constitutional rights to people they disagree with.

Is this why liberals are constantly attacking the second ammendment? Or maybe why liberals have been pushing hard for the fairness doctrine? Or maybe why liberals have been trying their best to disallow preachers from preaching against homosexuality? I can go on and on refuting your statement here Danny. You are WAY off base here.

 

[tie1on]

Harry Reid publicly announced that he thinks the mosque should be built somewhere else. I think this is the first thing that Harry has ever said that I agree with! emoEek

 

[outcaster]

SpurHunter - 8/17/2010 10:30 AM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 8:19 AM

Bfish - 8/16/2010 11:49 PM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM ... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

Unfortunately the Constitution takes a back seat in a "Holy War" This is just another example of the difference between liberals and conservatives.......Liberals will defend the Constitutional Rights of people we may disagree with. Conservatives seek to deny Constitutional rights to people they disagree with.

</p>

emoScratch emoScratch emoScratch  Are we talking about the same Liberals in DC that are rewriting the Constitution as we speak? Making back-room deals, making new laws in direct opposition to the Constitution? The same ones that wont enforce the Constitution where it applies, because they dont like a part of it?</p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

Rewriting it? Really? Who? Which laws? Be more specific than "Liberals in Washington" Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Obama Justice Dept. has been ruled against only once. (on offshore Gulf drilling) Make no mistake.... A un-constitutional Law that is rammed thru will be challenged and shot down before the ink is dry. (Arizona Immigration Law, Partial Birth Abortion Law --twice, Line Item Veto) all come to mind. The only ones seeking to re-write old amendments and propose new Constitutional Amendments, are Republicans. And who is jumping up and down over a non-christian religious group opening a community center? Even though they have the Right to do so.... that's right... Republicans. I'll stand by my statement... Conservatives want the Constitution changed/amended to DENY a citizen or group certain Rights. When Liberals want the Constitution changed/amended, it's to EXTEND the rights of citizens or groups.

 

[Liveliner]

Bfish - 8/17/2010 1:49 AM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM ... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

</p>

I would love to read what you would be saying right now if the KKK was moving forward in constructing a temple in Harlem. Don't they have the exact same rights? </p>

There is another big factor that used to practiced in this country, and that WAS "respect for your fellow man". Now it is "No holes barred for the special groups and screw the fellow man".</p>

 

[Sniperchoke]

outcaster - 8/17/2010 1:04 PM

SpurHunter - 8/17/2010 10:30 AM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 8:19 AM

Bfish - 8/16/2010 11:49 PM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM ... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

Unfortunately the Constitution takes a back seat in a "Holy War" This is just another example of the difference between liberals and conservatives.......Liberals will defend the Constitutional Rights of people we may disagree with. Conservatives seek to deny Constitutional rights to people they disagree with.

</p>

emoScratch emoScratch emoScratch  Are we talking about the same Liberals in DC that are rewriting the Constitution as we speak? Making back-room deals, making new laws in direct opposition to the Constitution? The same ones that wont enforce the Constitution where it applies, because they dont like a part of it?</p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

Rewriting it? Really? Who? Which laws? Be more specific than "Liberals in Washington" Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Obama Justice Dept. has been ruled against only once. (on offshore Gulf drilling) Make no mistake.... A un-constitutional Law that is rammed thru will be challenged and shot down before the ink is dry. (Arizona Immigration Law, Partial Birth Abortion Law --twice, Line Item Veto) all come to mind. The only ones seeking to re-write old amendments and propose new Constitutional Amendments, are Republicans. And who is jumping up and down over a non-Christian religious group opening a community center? Even though they have the Right to do so.... that's right... Republicans. I'll stand by my statement... Conservatives want the Constitution changed/amended to DENY a citizen or group certain Rights. When Liberals want the Constitution changed/amended, it's to EXTEND the rights of citizens or groups.

Liberals passed the healthcare law which forces citizens to buy a product from a private company. Unconstitutional. Liberal gov't won't enforce Federal immigration law. Unconstitutional. Liberal gov't won't punish sanctuary cities for not cooperating with I.C.E. but will bring lawsuit to Arizona over their enforcement. Unconstitutional. Pete Stark (Dem) California quoted as saying "the Federal gov't can do anything it wants" Unconstitutional. Just a few from recent memory I can find many more.

 

[outcaster]

Sniperchoke - 8/17/2010 2:56 PM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 1:04 PM

SpurHunter - 8/17/2010 10:30 AM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 8:19 AM

Bfish - 8/16/2010 11:49 PM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM ... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

Unfortunately the Constitution takes a back seat in a "Holy War" This is just another example of the difference between liberals and conservatives.......Liberals will defend the Constitutional Rights of people we may disagree with. Conservatives seek to deny Constitutional rights to people they disagree with.

</p>

emoScratch emoScratch emoScratch  Are we talking about the same Liberals in DC that are rewriting the Constitution as we speak? Making back-room deals, making new laws in direct opposition to the Constitution? The same ones that wont enforce the Constitution where it applies, because they dont like a part of it?</p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

Rewriting it? Really? Who? Which laws? Be more specific than "Liberals in Washington" Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Obama Justice Dept. has been ruled against only once. (on offshore Gulf drilling) Make no mistake.... A un-constitutional Law that is rammed thru will be challenged and shot down before the ink is dry. (Arizona Immigration Law, Partial Birth Abortion Law --twice, Line Item Veto) all come to mind. The only ones seeking to re-write old amendments and propose new Constitutional Amendments, are Republicans. And who is jumping up and down over a non-Christian religious group opening a community center? Even though they have the Right to do so.... that's right... Republicans. I'll stand by my statement... Conservatives want the Constitution changed/amended to DENY a citizen or group certain Rights. When Liberals want the Constitution changed/amended, it's to EXTEND the rights of citizens or groups.

Liberals passed the healthcare law which forces citizens to buy a product from a private company. Unconstitutional. Liberal gov't won't enforce Federal immigration law. Unconstitutional. Liberal gov't won't punish sanctuary cities for not cooperating with I.C.E. but will bring lawsuit to Arizona over their enforcement. Unconstitutional. Pete Stark (Dem) California quoted as saying "the Federal gov't can do anything it wants" Unconstitutional. Just a few from recent memory I can find many more.

You need to re-take 9th grade Civics before you tackle Constitutional Law. Fortunately, most don't interpret the Constitution with your narrow libertarian view, where anything the Federal Gov't does beyond provide for a Nat'l defense is considered un-constitutional. The healthcare law is most certainly Constitutional with legal precedent. States requiring citizens to purchase auto insurance is one example. The Arizona Law was found un-constitutional before it even went into effect.

 

[elwestb]

BBass - 8/17/2010 9:08 AM

Oh Hell...Build it..allow them...Whatever!

Wonder how long it will stay there. Any bets on this?!

... and then celebrate with a beer and BBQ picnic, pulled pork and baby back ribs for all of them! Bring in some dancing girls, pull those burkas off! Everybody just have a good time! Praise be to Allah!

 

[Sniperchoke]

outcaster - 8/17/2010 5:53 PM

Sniperchoke - 8/17/2010 2:56 PM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 1:04 PM

SpurHunter - 8/17/2010 10:30 AM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 8:19 AM

Bfish - 8/16/2010 11:49 PM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM ... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

Unfortunately the Constitution takes a back seat in a "Holy War" This is just another example of the difference between liberals and conservatives.......Liberals will defend the Constitutional Rights of people we may disagree with. Conservatives seek to deny Constitutional rights to people they disagree with.

</p>

emoScratch emoScratch emoScratch  Are we talking about the same Liberals in DC that are rewriting the Constitution as we speak? Making back-room deals, making new laws in direct opposition to the Constitution? The same ones that wont enforce the Constitution where it applies, because they dont like a part of it?</p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

Rewriting it? Really? Who? Which laws? Be more specific than "Liberals in Washington" Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Obama Justice Dept. has been ruled against only once. (on offshore Gulf drilling) Make no mistake.... A un-constitutional Law that is rammed thru will be challenged and shot down before the ink is dry. (Arizona Immigration Law, Partial Birth Abortion Law --twice, Line Item Veto) all come to mind. The only ones seeking to re-write old amendments and propose new Constitutional Amendments, are Republicans. And who is jumping up and down over a non-Christian religious group opening a community center? Even though they have the Right to do so.... that's right... Republicans. I'll stand by my statement... Conservatives want the Constitution changed/amended to DENY a citizen or group certain Rights. When Liberals want the Constitution changed/amended, it's to EXTEND the rights of citizens or groups.

Liberals passed the healthcare law which forces citizens to buy a product from a private company. Unconstitutional. Liberal gov't won't enforce Federal immigration law. Unconstitutional. Liberal gov't won't punish sanctuary cities for not cooperating with I.C.E. but will bring lawsuit to Arizona over their enforcement. Unconstitutional. Pete Stark (Dem) California quoted as saying "the Federal gov't can do anything it wants" Unconstitutional. Just a few from recent memory I can find many more.

You need to re-take 9th grade Civics before you tackle Constitutional Law. Fortunately, most don't interpret the Constitution with your narrow libertarian view, where anything the Federal Gov't does beyond provide for a Nat'l defense is considered un-constitutional. The healthcare law us most certainly Constitutional with legal precedent. States requiring citizens to purchase auto insurance is one example. The Arizona Law was found un-constitutional before it even went into effect.

State law is different from Federal Law. I probably had a liberal 9th grade teacher like you that skewed what our founding fathers really wanted. The whole purpose of the Constitution is and was to limit government envolvement in our everyday lives. Government was never ment to be a public safety net. The states were set up for a reason remeber the definition of experimentation. States are supposed to experiment with programs and if they work other states can follow. etc... etc...

 

[cast4bass]

elwestb - 8/17/2010 6:09 PM

BBass - 8/17/2010 9:08 AM

Oh Hell...Build it..allow them...Whatever!

Wonder how long it will stay there. Any bets on this?!

... and then celebrate with a beer and BBQ picnic, pulled pork and baby back ribs for all of them! Bring in some dancing girls, pull those burkas off! Everybody just have a good time! Praise be to Allah!

emoUpsmile emoUpsmile

 

[outcaster]

Sniperchoke - 8/17/2010 7:28 PM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 5:53 PM

Sniperchoke - 8/17/2010 2:56 PM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 1:04 PM

SpurHunter - 8/17/2010 10:30 AM

outcaster - 8/17/2010 8:19 AM

Bfish - 8/16/2010 11:49 PM

grayson_garrett - 8/16/2010 8:39 PM ... How can you honeslty think that there is anything right(legal or not) about building a mosque ....

As soon as you disallow, then you can throw the First Amendment to the Constitution out the window.

Unfortunately the Constitution takes a back seat in a "Holy War" This is just another example of the difference between liberals and conservatives.......Liberals will defend the Constitutional Rights of people we may disagree with. Conservatives seek to deny Constitutional rights to people they disagree with.

</p>

emoScratch emoScratch emoScratch  Are we talking about the same Liberals in DC that are rewriting the Constitution as we speak? Making back-room deals, making new laws in direct opposition to the Constitution? The same ones that wont enforce the Constitution where it applies, because they dont like a part of it?</p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

 </p>

Rewriting it? Really? Who? Which laws? Be more specific than "Liberals in Washington" Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Obama Justice Dept. has been ruled against only once. (on offshore Gulf drilling) Make no mistake.... A un-constitutional Law that is rammed thru will be challenged and shot down before the ink is dry. (Arizona Immigration Law, Partial Birth Abortion Law --twice, Line Item Veto) all come to mind. The only ones seeking to re-write old amendments and propose new Constitutional Amendments, are Republicans. And who is jumping up and down over a non-Christian religious group opening a community center? Even though they have the Right to do so.... that's right... Republicans. I'll stand by my statement... Conservatives want the Constitution changed/amended to DENY a citizen or group certain Rights. When Liberals want the Constitution changed/amended, it's to EXTEND the rights of citizens or groups.

Liberals passed the healthcare law which forces citizens to buy a product from a private company. Unconstitutional. Liberal gov't won't enforce Federal immigration law. Unconstitutional. Liberal gov't won't punish sanctuary cities for not cooperating with I.C.E. but will bring lawsuit to Arizona over their enforcement. Unconstitutional. Pete Stark (Dem) California quoted as saying "the Federal gov't can do anything it wants" Unconstitutional. Just a few from recent memory I can find many more.

You need to re-take 9th grade Civics before you tackle Constitutional Law. Fortunately, most don't interpret the Constitution with your narrow libertarian view, where anything the Federal Gov't does beyond provide for a Nat'l defense is considered un-constitutional. The healthcare law us most certainly Constitutional with legal precedent. States requiring citizens to purchase auto insurance is one example. The Arizona Law was found un-constitutional before it even went into effect.

State law is different from Federal Law. I probably had a liberal 9th grade teacher like you that skewed what our founding fathers really wanted. The whole purpose of the Constitution is and was to limit government envolvement in our everyday lives. Government was never ment to be a public safety net. The states were set up for a reason remeber the definition of experimentation. States are supposed to experiment with programs and if they work other states can follow. etc... etc...

Following your Libertarian view of the Constitution we should privatize or abolish the FBI, FDA, SS, Medicare, National Parks, OSHA, USDA, BATF, FEMA, Corps of Engineers, Census Bureau, Copyright Office, DEA, FDIC, NASA, EPA, all Welfare and Foreign Aid & Forest Service. I know.... We can turn all of them into Capitalistic organizations. BTW Please point me to the page in the US Constitution where it discusses "Capitalism" as our National economic platform. Don't bother, it does not. What the Constitution does mention in its very first paragraph is promoting the general "WELFARE" and forming a more perfect "UNION". Imagine that! The two words that Conservatives hate the most "Welfare and Unions" right there in the first paragraph of the Constitution. Too Funny!