They're building a mosque close to my house.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='oldschooler' timestamp='1284079165' post='916320']
Please show me where they said we made him.
Please show me where they said we got what we deserved.

And while you are at it, please don't try and justify the attacks
and act like any of that is true. It was an act that can not be
justified. It should be condemned. Nothing more, nothing less.
It sickens me that you would say otherwise.
[/quote]


You clearly dont understand what blowback is.

So let me explain it in terms you understand.

If I call you John Wayne and say your nothing but a America Cheerleader who has a superficial patriotism and you punch me in the throat, according to you you are responsible for that action and I bear no responsibility for you punching me in the throat, it after all was your decision.

Terrorism is not born in a vacuum.

[oldschooler]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1284079501' post='916325']
You clearly dont understand what blowback is.

So let me explain it in terms you understand.

If I call you John Wayne and say your nothing but a America Cheerleader who has a superficial patriotism and you punch me in the throat, according to you you are responsible for that action and I bear no responsibility for you punching me in the throat, it after all was your decision.
[/quote]


I know what blowback is.

And way to take shots at me. LOL Priceless.

Saying our policies in the region inflamed bin Laden and we created him
and deserved it are two totally different things.

And if I told the cops that you called me names and shit, and that is why I crushed
your puny, girlish, dick sucking wind-pipe, then I am sure they would blame me
for the decision I made to crush your puny, girlish, dick sucking wind-pipe and
arrest me. Therefore, I would be to blame.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='oldschooler' timestamp='1284079922' post='916329']
I know what blowback is.

And way to take shots at me. LOL Priceless.

[color="#FF0000"]Saying our policies in the region inflamed bin Laden and we created him
and deserved it are two totally different things. [/color]

And if I told the cops that you called me names and shit, and that is why I crushed
your puny, girlish, dick sucking wind-pipe, then I am sure they would blame me
for the decision I made to crush your puny, girlish, dick sucking wind-pipe and
arrest me. Therefore, I would be to blame.
[/quote]


So we bear NO responsibility at all? We can do whatever we want and expect and if someone retaliates its on them not us?

That is EXACTLY why I call you John Wayne.

[oldschooler]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1284080248' post='916334']
So we bear NO responsibility at all? We can do whatever we want and expect and if someone retaliates its on them not us?

That is EXACTLY why I call you John Wayne.
[/quote]



That's like saying a woman cheated on her husband, and he went off
and killed her and her entire family, makes her responsible.

And call me what you want. I'll wear it like a badge of honor.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='oldschooler' timestamp='1284082991' post='916351']
That's like saying a woman cheated on her husband, and he went off
and killed her and her entire family, makes her responsible.

And call me what you want. I'll wear it like a badge of honor.
[/quote]


And clearly she cheated on him because a religion that she hijacked told her to.

[Homer_Rice]

A compromise solution to this is pretty obvious. Everybody agrees that Americans who also happen to be Muslim have the right to build their center. In this sense, they are equal to any other citizen of any other faith (or non-faith.) However, in deference to those who, for whatever reasons, are offended by the proximity of the center, perhaps it should be built separately. That way everybody is happy. With some serious thought, we could even turn this approach into a serious doctrine, fleshed out in width and depth to permeate throughout society at large, just in case similar situations arise. I can even think of a pithy name for the doctrine, we can call it: separate but equal.

[CincyInDC]

Or maybe non-Muslims are more equal than Muslims?

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='oldschooler' timestamp='1284078499' post='916314']
Who said they should all feel guilty?

You don't think Ground Zero and the Muslim religion being together is a delicate situation?
You think it is appropriate for the same religion that was used as reasoning
for the attacks, to have a place of worship right on top of the hallowed ground?
I don't. And neither do a lot of others.


It's about respect for a site that has become a national monument marking the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

The proposed site is offending and ruffling feathers. I have already said that it would be no different
than if someone wanted to build a Japanese rec center in Pearl Harbor shortly after WW2.
Or a Mexican rec center right after the Alamo. Or a Vietnamese center right after the Vietnam war.
Did all Japanese, all Mexicans or all Veitnamese all have anything to do with those wars or attacks?
No. But it doesn't mean any Center wouldn't have offended or been in bad taste.

Sometimes some people are too PC for their own good, I guess. Or some aren't PC enough. I guess.
[/quote]

Like I said before.. Just because some assholes were Muslim and used their faith as support for what they did does not mean that Islam itself has done anything to America.

And besides.. They didn't attack us [i]because[/i] of their faith.. It was a geo-political action that was committed with political goals in mind.. They may have used scripture to justify their attacks.. But that is a HUGE difference than attacking BECAUSE of their religion.

The problem as I see it, is that Americans mistakenly feel as though they were attacked by a religion, and not some crazy misguided assholes that happened to be religious. Their faith shouldn't be any more important than the faith of someone in the KKK or Ted Bundy or McVeigh.

Your comparison to the Japanese would be appropriate if it were Al-Qaeda that wanted to build this center.. We were at war with Japan... We aren't (or shouldn't be) at war with Islam.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1284135585' post='916556']
Like I said before.. Just because some assholes were Muslim and used their faith as support for what they did does not mean that Islam itself has done anything to America.

And besides.. They didn't attack us [i]because[/i] of their faith.. It was a geo-political action that was committed with political goals in mind.. They may have used scripture to justify their attacks.. But that is a HUGE difference than attacking BECAUSE of their religion.

The problem as I see it, is that Americans mistakenly feel as though they were attacked by a religion, and not some crazy misguided assholes that happened to be religious. Their faith shouldn't be any more important than the faith of someone in the KKK or Ted Bundy or McVeigh.

Your comparison to the Japanese would be appropriate if it were Al-Qaeda that wanted to build this center.. We were at war with Japan... We aren't (or shouldn't be) at war with Islam.
[/quote]


Winner winner chicken dinner.

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' timestamp='1284126081' post='916469']
A compromise solution to this is pretty obvious. Everybody agrees that Americans who also happen to be Muslim have the right to build their center. In this sense, they are equal to any other citizen of any other faith (or non-faith.) However, in deference to those who, for whatever reasons, are offended by the proximity of the center, perhaps it should be built separately. That way everybody is happy. With some serious thought, we could even turn this approach into a serious doctrine, fleshed out in width and depth to permeate throughout society at large, just in case similar situations arise. I can even think of a pithy name for the doctrine, we can call it: [b]separate but equal.[/b]
[/quote]
I lol'd


I don't care what they build or where they build it, I'd just like to see religious institutions taxed. Philosophy aside, religion is a trillion dollar industry in this country. We need to start tapping into it.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1284140446' post='916587']
I lol'd


I don't care what they build or where they build it, I'd just like to see religious institutions taxed. Philosophy aside, religion is a trillion dollar industry in this country. We need to start tapping into it.
[/quote]


How would that not violate separation of church and state?

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1284142880' post='916608']
How would that not violate separation of church and state?
[/quote]


I don't see the conflict honestly... Could you explain the issue as you see it?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1284143074' post='916609']
I don't see the conflict honestly... Could you explain the issue as you see it?
[/quote]


The State getting involved in the affairs of the church and such.

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1284143609' post='916615']
The State getting involved in the affairs of the church and such.
[/quote]


Hmmm.. Not sure about that.. No more so than giving people tax breaks for giving to churches. It's not like the IRS would be telling them what to preach etc...

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1284142880' post='916608']
How would that not violate separation of church and state?
[/quote]

How would it? Its not prohibiting or promoting any religion. It just says you can worship anyway you want and we won't stop you nor will we favor or discriminate against individual faiths.

There are distinct differences between faith, worship, and marketable product all housed under the term "religion."

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1284143682' post='916617']
Hmmm.. Not sure about that.. No more so than giving people tax breaks for giving to churches. It's not like the IRS would be telling them what to preach etc...
[/quote]


Supreme Court Decision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walz_v._Tax_Commission

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1284144722' post='916626']
Supreme Court Decision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walz_v._Tax_Commission
[/quote]


First off.. The guys suit was sort of strange.... If I read it correctly, he contended that he was basically being forced to support religion because of the exemptions?? I can see why they threw it out..

Secondly, I am in support of taxing the churches, and I don't agree it would create more of a connection between the state than exemptions.

If you make a special "church tax" then I would agree that is meddling.. But to tax the income of a Church under the same laws as other institutions, you aren't singling them out.. It seems to me that making special provisions for churches is more meddling than not..

Also, the reason I support taxing churches is because they do in fact meddle in the political process. We can't stop them from doing so, so the solution IMO, is to revoke the tax exempt status.

[|Elflocko|]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1284144686' post='916625']
How would it? Its not prohibiting or promoting any religion. It just says you can worship anyway you want and we won't stop you nor will we favor or discriminate against individual faiths.

There are distinct differences between faith, worship, and marketable product all housed under the term "religion."
[/quote]

And if the government taxed them it would give them carte blanche to push their agenda into governmental and legislative decisions.

What a nightmare.

Don't forget that the SC court just ruled that Citibank, Exxon, et al are the same as voters too. Do you really want religious organizations having that kind of pull as well?

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='Elflocko' timestamp='1284145328' post='916628']
And if the government taxed them it would give them carte blanche to push their agenda into governmental and legislative decisions.

What a nightmare.

Don't forget that the SC court just ruled that Citibank, Exxon, et al are the same as voters too. Do you really want religious organizations having that kind of pull too?
[/quote]


They already meddle in politics.. They even pass out pamphlets to their parishioners telling them which candidates are supported by the church.

How do you police that?

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1284144722' post='916626']
Supreme Court Decision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walz_v._Tax_Commission
[/quote]

That appears to be regarding property taxes, and it lumps churches in with playgrounds, hospitals and libraries in regards to whom is exempt.

Mega-church profit is where we could stand to look a little closer. Institutions that move out of the realm of community worship and develop a "brand." A brand that merchandises, accumulates property, and profits rapidly.

[|Elflocko|]

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1284145420' post='916629']
They already meddle in politics.. They even pass out pamphlets to their parishioners telling them which candidates are supported by the church.

How do you police that?
[/quote]

Oh, I'm well aware they do that (Moral Majority, Focus on the Family anyone), but steps can be taken like threatening to tax them when they get too far out of line.

I'd love to tax the hell out of them as well, but the Pandora's box it would open wouldn't offset the cost...

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='Elflocko' timestamp='1284145561' post='916633']
Oh, I'm well aware they do that (Moral Majority, Focus on the Family anyone), but steps can be taken like threatening to tax them when they get too far out of line.

I'd love to tax the hell out of them as well, but the Pandora's box it would open wouldn't offset the cost...
[/quote]


You could be right... TBH, I flop from one side of the fence to the other on this issue.. My stance is far from refined, and born more out of frustration at the meddling (which has gotten out of control frankly).

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='Elflocko' timestamp='1284145328' post='916628']
And if the government taxed them it would give them carte blanche to push their agenda into governmental and legislative decisions.

What a nightmare.

Don't forget that the SC court just ruled that Citibank, Exxon, et al are the same as voters too. Do you really want religious organizations having that kind of pull as well?
[/quote]
I guess I don't see how it would be much different than it already is.

They couldn't lobby to get certain churches more or less breaks because that is in direct violation of the 1st amendment.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1284145420' post='916629']
They already meddle in politics.. [color="#FF0000"]They even pass out pamphlets to their parishioners telling them which candidates are supported by the church.
[/color]
How do you police that?
[/quote]




I'm pretty sure that is a direct violation of their tax exemption.

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1284145942' post='916639']
I'm pretty sure that is a direct violation of their tax exemption.
[/quote]

Yes it is.

Which is where the frustration comes in...