Obama’s lack of leadership about the mosque at ground zero is appalling. And the muslim insistence that it go there is another attack on the fabric of America. Tell me they are not on jihad. The president could have easily and quietly worked a deal for the mosque to go elsewhere or for the government to come in and buy that property. It’s not rocket science. It’s what he does everyday on the items that promote his agenda.
Ms. Krempasky’s comment, “tell me they are not on Jihad,” makes little sense to me. Every religion makes efforts to establish itself as the dominant faith in regions where it is practiced. Few succeed, but those that do immediately begin making excuses for why less popular faiths should no longer be able to compete with their own. It is hardly a behavior exclusive to Islam, though they may be the only faith to have clearly given it a name. The construction of a new mosque near ground zero is hardly a militant act. New York is a very large city, and there are mosques everywhere, including some very close to ground zero. Should we make them all move? Should they shamefully hide their faces in order to express the guilt they’re supposed to feel for something they were in no way accountable for, likely never knew anything about, and certainly didn’t condone? I’m certain that 9/11 was as terrifying and heartbreaking to them as it was to anyone else living in New York on that day. Why is it justifiable to hold an entire group of people accountable for the actions of a few individuals who held extremist views? That’s like using the Westboro Baptist Church as an example for how all Christians behave, or claiming that the Tamil Tigers represent the whole of Buddhism. There are different Islamic groups, just as there are different sects of Christianity, and it is ignorant to treat them all as if they are one and the same. Islam is not synonymous with terrorism.
As an atheist, I am personally very pleased to see Obama supporting the rights of religious minorities. After all, I am a member of one of the most openly detested religious minorities in the country. Knowing that Obama will publicly take an unpopular stand in favor of religious freedom makes me feel that, if the tables are turned against atheists and agnostics, he will support my rights as well. I dislike religion, but I am not opposed to anyone practicing their beliefs so long as they do not interfere with my ability to practice my own. Many Americans are Muslims, and to believe that they should have fewer rights than members of other religious groups is one of the most un-American things I can think of. Atheists need true freedom of religion just as much as any other religious group does, and if we choose to fight against that freedom I can guarantee you that we will be hurt by it more than most.
Aug 15, 2010 @ 04:37:54
and what…
hes right…
Aug 15, 2010 @ 13:26:38
Obama’s lack of leadership about the mosque at ground zero is appalling. And the muslim insistence that it go there is another attack on the fabric of America. Tell me they are not on jihad. The president could have easily and quietly worked a deal for the mosque to go elsewhere or for the government to come in and buy that property. It’s not rocket science. It’s what he does everyday on the items that promote his agenda.
Aug 15, 2010 @ 14:31:26
Our commitment to religious freedom…
Unless you’re an atheist. Yes he addressed nonbelievers in his inaugural speech, but America didn’t like that.
Aug 19, 2010 @ 16:38:31
Ms. Krempasky’s comment, “tell me they are not on Jihad,” makes little sense to me. Every religion makes efforts to establish itself as the dominant faith in regions where it is practiced. Few succeed, but those that do immediately begin making excuses for why less popular faiths should no longer be able to compete with their own. It is hardly a behavior exclusive to Islam, though they may be the only faith to have clearly given it a name. The construction of a new mosque near ground zero is hardly a militant act. New York is a very large city, and there are mosques everywhere, including some very close to ground zero. Should we make them all move? Should they shamefully hide their faces in order to express the guilt they’re supposed to feel for something they were in no way accountable for, likely never knew anything about, and certainly didn’t condone? I’m certain that 9/11 was as terrifying and heartbreaking to them as it was to anyone else living in New York on that day. Why is it justifiable to hold an entire group of people accountable for the actions of a few individuals who held extremist views? That’s like using the Westboro Baptist Church as an example for how all Christians behave, or claiming that the Tamil Tigers represent the whole of Buddhism. There are different Islamic groups, just as there are different sects of Christianity, and it is ignorant to treat them all as if they are one and the same. Islam is not synonymous with terrorism.
As an atheist, I am personally very pleased to see Obama supporting the rights of religious minorities. After all, I am a member of one of the most openly detested religious minorities in the country. Knowing that Obama will publicly take an unpopular stand in favor of religious freedom makes me feel that, if the tables are turned against atheists and agnostics, he will support my rights as well. I dislike religion, but I am not opposed to anyone practicing their beliefs so long as they do not interfere with my ability to practice my own. Many Americans are Muslims, and to believe that they should have fewer rights than members of other religious groups is one of the most un-American things I can think of. Atheists need true freedom of religion just as much as any other religious group does, and if we choose to fight against that freedom I can guarantee you that we will be hurt by it more than most.
Aug 19, 2010 @ 16:42:16
My apologies. I meant to say Hinduism.