This is outrageous and a disgrace. Although, I don't believe in some of what he is saying, as such that all Muslim's believe in killing and whatnot, I think that he hit the nail on the head.
I didn't make it!
I got about a minute in before I turned it off. That guy is Alex incarnate, only British. He said that the religion did this, um...... No, the assholes who hijacked the planes did it. As mush as I believe it is pretty fucking thick-headed to think that building a mosque near ground-zero is A-okay, I don't oppose it. But when it gets bombed and becomes a victim of arson, they better not start crying about it.
[COLOR="Black"]Stopped watching after about two minutes. Just another silly islamophobist.
The funniest thing is that these people actually think that Muslims shouldn't have the right to buy property and build buildings on them. So freedom is now a right reserved for white Christians? [/COLOR]
No-Life Overwatch Player
14th August 2008
Quit the video after a minute or two as well. This is probably the most ridiculous video I've ever seen. This guy's clearly anti-muslim, just at a greater level than Alex as aforementioned. Not to mention he's a prime example of pure generalization of a religion and/or its people.
Seriously, I hope he'll become less narrow-minded in the future, but that's pretty much doubtful seeing his age.
Formerly known as Graeme and Arld.
Buying land and building on it has never been a right. Everyone has to get planning permission.
Let's start the argument where it begins though: Ground Zero constitutes the place that thousands of people died; it should not have a mosque built yards from it, it should not have a church built yards from it.
You didn't know them, you can't pay tribute to what they stood for because you've no idea what it was. Invoking their deaths for symbolic exposure is and always has been an inherently dishonest move. Many people of many different faiths were murdered there, and hijacking their deaths to provide a bit of extra exposure for your religion is an extremely disrespectful move regardless of who does it.
They're dead, and you can't do anything for them. The deaths of those people should not be used for religious statements at all.
If people want to make others think well of their religion they should get out in the community and help people. But it's easier to mess around with symbols and lipservice isn't it? The more talk of love and brotherhood going on the deeper the pool of shit the person's standing in.
Graeme;5371772 Seriously, I hope he'll become less narrow-minded in the future, but that's pretty much doubtful seeing his age.[/QUOTE][COLOR=Black] He probably isn't very narrow-minded but just says what gets him the most clicks. A youtube demagogue and not even a good one; he sounds like he is reading a prepared speech from a piece of paper without too much enthusiasm.
[/COLOR][QUOTE=Nemmerle;5371774]Buying land and building on it has never been a right. Everyone has to get planning permission.
[COLOR=Black] If you are allowed to build a church in one location but not a mosque then someone is probably abusing a planning permission law to violate the freedom of religion.
The deaths of those people should not be used for religious statements at all.
[COLOR=Black] I don't think a lot of religious people would like this idea. Most of Christianity is based on turning a single death into a big religious statement and most other religions are not so different.[/COLOR]
This guy looks like he's an avid reader of the daily mail. I don't agree with building a Mosque at ground zero, and I actually agreed with the outrageousness of a 'sensitive to outside comments' religion suggesting this, but I disagree that an entire religion is hateful.
Spirituality is a beautiful thing. Religions on the other hand are power structures, without a clear purpose they inherently attract the easily corrupted. If you view putting power in the hands of those who want to control people for control's sake as hateful, then most religions are going to fall under that heading simply because of their structure.
[COLOR="Black"]Well after reading the wikipedia article I must say that the idea of naming the mosque "Cordoba house" is a bit tasteless. "Center for friendship and mutual understanding" or something similar I wouldn't mind, but using its name to allude to a big victory of Islamists over Christians is a bit of a bad move.[/COLOR]
MrFancypants;5371775If you are allowed to build a church in one location but not a mosque then someone is probably abusing a planning permission law to violate the freedom of religion.[/QUOTE]
Have they allowed a church to be built next to ground zero? I mean I realise there's a church that was there before the attacks but afterwards?
[QUOTE=MrFancypants;5371775]I don't think a lot of religious people would like this idea. Most of Christianity is based on turning a single death into a big religious statement and most other religions are not so different.
If they want to string the skeletons of others up on the church gates it's just too bad for them if they end up upset.