B.O. Supports Mosque near ground zero.

[Ron Earp]

but I do not support the president making statements that change laws which we have all aided by just because we "perceive" public sentiment has changed.

Totally agree.

But I disagree that I see harm in elected officials stating their private opinion. Mr. Obama made the statement that "they" are within their right to build the mosque. He chose not to state his opinion if he thought it was a good idea or not. If he said he thought it in poor taste to build a mosque there, that doesn't mean he is arguing for laws to be changed. Just means he thinks it isn't a good idea.

If the group putting this plan together wants to build it there then have at it within the confines of the law. I personally think it is shit stirring gesture that is going to result in trouble, but that doesn't mean I'll be lobbying for laws to prevent the mosque from going up.

 

[Jack]

Exactly Ron!

 

[Bill Cooke]

Yes I believe all should have the right to worship in the place of their choice.How ever they must be sensitive of others of different beliefs. The good must not accept the bad in any way. We were granted the freedom of religion. I suggest that also means the freedom from religion and the beliefs of others.

 

[Jeff Young]

It always seems dangerous to me when private opinions on religion are offered in a public forum. Nothing good seems to come of it.

Is it a good idea to put the Mosque up here? The folks who are doing it think so (although I agree they are misguided) and are doing it (their stated purpose) to show Americans that not all Moslems are like the 9/11 terrorists. Again, misguided, but that is their stated intent.

If the President or any elected official offered an opinion on that, it immediately (whether they like it or not) becomes essentially an opinion on the religion as a whole. That is always the problem with public officials and religion. If they offer a private opinion that is positive it appears to be endorsement; if they offer a private opinon that is not it can be construed as potentially repressive.

Public opinion by people? Sure. TV ads. Demonstrations. Letter writing. All fine. But public officials speaking on it on this one way or the other is just trouble in my view.

 

[Ron Earp]

We were granted the freedom of religion. I suggest that also means the freedom from religion and the beliefs of others.

But that doesn't mean you can prevent this group from building a mosque in NY City, specifically at the site of the 9/11 attacks. Say I'm not a religious person. Churches in my neighborhood, or next door to my house, would not be a a problem since I can choose to attend them or not. In this way I would be free from religion and the beliefs of others.

Except in GA where I am affected by the beliefs of others. GA, at least the county where the town of Pooler is, has some silly rule that you can't sell beer within like 500 yards of a church. So, the only convenient store convenient to Roebling Road Raceway doesn't offer beer, presumably because churchgoers don't wanted to be tempted by drink near their place of worship. Go figure.

 

[Jeff Young]

But you can go up the road to (what is it called, Timmy's?) and get hammered with the same bunch of folks who voted that beer can't be sold within 500 feet of the church.

Odd!

 

[Kevin L]

But I disagree that I see harm in elected officials stating their private opinion. Mr. Obama made the statement that "they" are within their right to build the mosque. He chose not to state his opinion if he thought it was a good idea or not. If he said he thought it in poor taste to build a mosque there, that doesn't mean he is arguing for laws to be changed. Just means he thinks it isn't a good idea.

Upon re-reading my text, I see that I was not precise. I agree with what you wrote above in the quote.

 

I have no comfort level with the mosque unless the names of the people/groups funding it come forward.
The irony of this issue is that the folks defending religious freedom for Islam couldn't begin to have any in the eyes of even the most moderate Muslim in any Islamic country in the middle east. Try carrying a Bible in Saudi Arabia, let alone discuss building a church there.

 

[Ron Earp]

It always seems dangerous to me when private opinions on religion are offered in a public forum. Nothing good seems to come of it.

But US politicians routinely offer private opinion on controversial topics. Abortion, various gay topics, personal rights/freedoms, education, gun laws, etc - all are private opinions even when discussed in the course of law. Not sure why they should refrain from this particular issue, or even want to refrain from it. If they are comfortable discussing the aforementioned topics, and they seem to be, I wouldn't think the mosque at G-zero would be taboo. And this is probably what the right wing contingent has seized upon, that is, if Mr. Obama is comfortable discussing gays and abortion then he ought to be able to weigh in on the G-zero mosque.

 

[Dave Lindemann]

I have no comfort level with the mosque unless the names of the people/groups funding it come forward.
The irony of this issue is that the folks defending religious freedom for Islam couldn't begin to have any in the eyes of even the most moderate Muslim in any Islamic country in the middle east. Try carrying a Bible in Saudi Arabia, let alone discuss building a church there.

We don't live in the middle east. The bottom line is they have the "right" to build a mosque. Is it a good idea or wise....not in my opinion, actually I think its really a BAD idea.

Dave L

 

[Jim Craik]

I also think it a bad idea, but will argue their right to built it until YOU are green in the face.

 

[Jeff Young]

That is a good point, although the topics you mention are very different (in my view) than very core statements that can be interpreted to endorse or criticize a particular religious sect.

Saying that gay marriage is ok implicates religion I agree. But (again, to me) it is different from saying a particular church should or shouldn't be in a location due to the reaction it might provoke.

But US politicians routinely offer private opinion on controversial topics. Abortion, various gay topics, personal rights/freedoms, education, gun laws, etc - all are private opinions even when discussed in the course of law. Not sure why they should refrain from this particular issue, or even want to refrain from it. If they are comfortable discussing the aforementioned topics, and they seem to be, I wouldn't think the mosque at G-zero would be taboo. And this is probably what the right wing contingent has seized upon, that is, if Mr. Obama is comfortable discussing gays and abortion then he ought to be able to weigh in on the G-zero mosque.

 

[Ron Earp]

The topics are different, but they are no less controversial. Gay rights are certainly tied to religion in most discussions as is the topic of abortion. If I figure you're ok expressing your views in public about these two items then I don't see the G-Zero mosque as any more dangerous.

 

[Frank3]

I have been told , and have not followed up with research yet , that it is the way of Muslim or Islamic religion , or government , to erect a Mosque as a sign of conquest .

Separation of church and state , means that government can not choose a state religion .
And freedom of religion does not mean one can infringe on another , and do as it pleases against the will of the majority .

I don't mean to be rude , but some of what gets said in these discussions is PC .
And I am very against PC as I believe that it clouds common sense with good intentions . And the real meaning of the topic gets lost .

So my Question is , what is their intention with this controversial location , and doesn't their religion have compassion for the feelings of the community in which they are moving to .

And of course B O could support this . By most accounts available , He was brought up in this religion .

 

[Dave Lindemann]

I also think it a bad idea, but will argue their right to built it until YOU are green in the face.

I agree with you.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

I don't have a problem with a mosque in New York, I do have a problem with a mosque in that close a proximity to the 9/11 site. Pick another site, have at it!

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

The muslims are saying that the reason they want to build at this site is to honor the dead and improve relations with the US. Given the fervor of the people who lost relatives and loved ones, not to build, it seems that the muslims are talking out of the side of their mouths. If the had any real regard or feeling I would think that they should move it to another place in the city, problem over. I haven't seen polls regarding this, but I would say that if the question were asked, an overwhelming majority of Americans would be against building the mosque on that site, and I believe that the muslims know it. So, why?

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

I was much more interested in what your reaction would be.

Jim, Were the Japanese in Hiroshima against Christian churches being built? I don't see your point.

 

[Doug S.]

While I support their right to build it, I think it is a "slap in the face" to the citizens of the U.S., and if the culture were to "honor" the "martyrs" from 9/11 with special mention, or perhaps business closures during one of their religious holidays as happens in the Houston area, then I would suspect that there is a high probability that the building would be a target for vandalism if not annihilation at the hands of individuals. It seems like such a bad choice for placement of such a structure, with all the other places where they could build a mosque, why does it have to be in this location?

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

While I support their right to build it, I think it is a "slap in the face" to the citizens of the U.S., and if the culture were to "honor" the "martyrs" from 9/11 with special mention, or perhaps business closures during one of their religious holidays as happens in the Houston area, then I would suspect that there is a high probability that the building would be a target for vandalism if not annihilation at the hands of individuals. It seems like such a bad choice for placement of such a structure, with all the other places where they could build a mosque, why does it have to be in this location?

Exactly!