polifrog
Unencumbered by moral relativism Renee Ellmers leads while Bob Etheridge hides.
There is nothing wrong with labeling a thing that is wrong as such.
It should be pointed out that freedom of religion does not extend to freely building structures where ever one chooses. For instance, if a religion wished to build on the DC Reflecting Pool, they would be denied and this denial would not constitute an infringement of their freedom of religion as they would still be able to practice ... just elsewhere.
Of course, if your a moral relativist like Bob "who are you?" Etheridge accosting college students is just fine if only you would take the time to understand his perspective.
out
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hello from Short Sharp Shock. Responding to your comments.
ReplyDelete"Like the inconvenient [fact] that undercuts her assertion that “there will never be a mosque at Ground Zero.” The fact that, according to Samuel G. Freedman, writing in a Sept. 10th report in The New York Times, a mosque was situated on the 17th floor of 2 World Trade Center, the southernmost tower, and had been since at least 1993."
You ask: "Are you suggesting there was ground zero before the very attack that defined it as such?"
In case you forgot the World Trade Center was a ground zero before 9/11/2001. That was in 1993, the first time the buildings were attacked. There was a mosque there at that time, too.
"Your point here is weak and is based on ignoring the redefining aspects of the 9/11 attacks."
No, actually my point is that, since mosques have long been a part of the social life at the World Trade Center, even before it became known as Ground Zero, it's rather silly to place the region off limits to some of the people who helped make that part of lower Manhattan the rich, vibrant place it was before 9/11 -- and will be again. And what are these hazy "redefining aspects" of which you speak? Did we stop being a democracy on 9/11?
"It is not scapegoating to be suspicious of those who attacked you. It is truly a low that people in our nation would so easily forget the sacrifice of those lost on 9/11 to make political points such as this."
Maybe you've forgotten: The people who attacked us that day are dead! You've definitely forgotten that "the sacrifice of those lost on 9/11" included Muslim Americans -- they died when the towers came down, too. That seems to be something you've overlooked on the way to making "political points" that have a lot to do with ensuring that Muslims remain at arm's length. outsiders. Strangers. "The Other."
You say: "For liberals to come to the defense of a group that disparages women, stones homosexuals, prefers religious rule in governance, disrespects human rights, etc. is no better than defending the clan. To come to the defense of such beliefs is the result of moral relativism run amok"
I say: For conservatives to condemn not a group but an entire religion with a sad connection of 1,300-year old history with life in the 21st century; for you to paint all Muslims with the same broad brush of intolerance is to equate them with the Klan, and to take part in the kind of immoral equivalency that's got you and Renee Ellmers making enemies of people who needn't be your enemies.
AMEN
ReplyDelete