By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Church plans to burn the Quran on Sept. 11

Kasz216 on 08 September 2010
yanamaster said:
Kasz216 said:
sapphi_snake said:
Kasz216 said:

Because studies show that there are huge amounts of people with PTSD in that area due to the attacks?  I believe the Figure is like... a 15% baseline for that area, 4-5% over the nation as a whole, and that's a place where people go to work through their issues about that place getting knocked over... so yeah.  Plentry of reason.

And... why should people building a mosque care that by building it there they are going to cause lots of undue unrest, trouble and emotional pain to people?

I dunno, the same reason McDonalds wouldn't want to build in the place mentioend in the above example?

Or the same reason this chruch wouldn't want to burn a Qu'ran?  You know... the fact that it woul cause a lot of undue unrest, trouble and emotional pain to people. 

Common human compassion and decency.

The difference is that the mosque isn't meant to cause anyone any unrest, while the Qu'ran burning is meant to do just that. And I'm willing to bet most people who don't want the mosque built hate muslims anyways. Plus during the terrorists attacks all those people you claim to have PTSD could have seen was planes crashing in the towers, not a giant Mohammed blimp doing that. So at most that could be scared of planes, not of muslims.

And the peopel who want to build the mosque shouldn't have to apologise for what the terrorists did, nor should they have to feel guilty about it and allow themselves to be pushed around by wackos driven by irrational fears.

That really isn't relevent.  The end result is the same... and futhermore they know the pain it will cause. 

I mean hell... slavery wasn't emeant to do anybody any harm.  The slavers actually thought they were doing black people a favor.  According to your reasoning, slavery was better then that, because at least they meant well and thought they were doing good.  Rather then intentionally causing harm as a side effect.

As for your arguement about PTSD... All it shows is your complete lack of knowledge about PTSD and further insensitive remarks towards people with a mental health issue.

It's not about "feeling guilty".  It's about doing something decent for people rather then knowingly antagonize them.  It's an identical situation to the above McDonalds thing I mentioned, which you've likely only ignored because you would feel differently about that and know I'm right.

No, you're not right. Because your being right is the only one. You've decided to be the sensitive man that defends the poor souls with PTSD. Unfortunately your whole point is somehow flawed. Considering how many bombings there were around the world led by christian extremists, some that took place in the US, then we should assume that people should not like to live next to a church , right?

well, i assume you understand where i'm going with this. I'll write it anyway.

It is only pure phobia of Islam that i see with your reasoning.What some group does should and cannot be tied to any specific religion, mainly because of the absurdity that awaits us later. People in Belfast have been blown to smithereens by both catholics and protestants more than once, but do you see anyone making a fuss of living next to a newly built church in Ireland? And i assure you that there were many  people with PTSD .

Unfortunately if you had your way with "protecting" people with the syndrome you only actually make it worse by fueling their fears and enforce their feeling of being entitled to their "genuine" fear. You know that facing fear is the only way to go forward. And it's been almost 9 years since the attack. About time to take a few steps forward. 


I'm only addressing the bold here, because it's the only thing I have to address.

 

Yes.  I've used it as an example before actually.

 

If someone were to blow up an abortion clinic in the name of god, it would be VERY disrespectful to build a church within visible distance of the smoldering remains of the abortion clinic.  It would be disrespecful, damaging and hurtful to those who lost loved ones and others who may of been traumtized by such events.

Any such church should be protested vigoursly... and that's a MUCH smaller case with not even likely a thousanth of the victims.



Around the Network
miz1q2w3e on 08 September 2010
Kantor said:
miz1q2w3e said:
TheRealMafoo said:

So all you who are against this, what do you think of these guys?

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20100906/twl-uk-afghanistan-protest-bd5ae06.html

That's wrong too, you're point?

besides, look at this:  "United States government in no way condones such acts of disrespect against the religion of Islam, and is deeply concerned about deliberate attempts to offend members of religious or ethnic groups." (from your link)

more people that think it's bad

Yes, because the location of that Islamic Centre was randomly chosen, and the desire to cause controversy played no part in the decision whatsoever.

How large is New York, and how large is a two block radius?

EDIT: I should point out that burning the Qu'ran is much worse than building that Islamic Centre, because while the latter is just attention whoring, the former is offending the beliefs of the hundreds of millions of peaceful Muslims, and ignoring the fact that the Bible and the Qu'ran both contain (in my opinion) equal parts genuine insight and ridiculous drivel.

I think most would agree with this statement

The location chosen for the Islamic center is a bit controversial, the burning of the Qur'an is a lot worse. I hope they see that there's just no point to it and cancel the whole thing... or am i being too hopeful <:-I



chapset on 08 September 2010

USAians are no better then the rest of the world, they should be allowed to express their anger, everyone else is doing so, if not expressed that anger will bowled doing and they might end up doing worse in a near futur, but I think they could find a less inflamatory way to express their anger



Bet reminder: I bet with Tboned51 that Splatoon won't reach the 1 million shipped mark by the end of 2015. I win if he loses and I lose if I lost.

Smidlee on 08 September 2010
mirgro said:
SmoothCriminal said:
mirgro said:

If you are going to burn books like the Nazis, just burn all the Qurans and Bibles and be done with this fairytale bullshit retards are dying over.

If that's your logic, then we'd have to burn "On the Origin of Species" as well.


Not really no. If you are trying to pull the whole "evolution is also blind faith" schtick, I am sorry but you are mistaken. I would also love to hear which scientific leader has ended up murdering millions because he read about some idiot on mushrooms/acid in some fairytale book.

There are a guy who took people hostage at Discovery Channel because they were not preaching more Darwin than they were (Cash Cab).   Being scientific doesn't stop a person from murdering millions. WMD

 I believe the real reason they are doing this is to make the news. It's very hard to make news being normal and average. Unibomber is right in that if you want you voice to be heard over the masses you got to do something crazy like blowing people up.



steverhcp02 on 08 September 2010
Kasz216 said:
steverhcp02 said:

Sounds like these SPECIFIC people are doing something stupid in the name of their religion. Just like those SPECIFIC people on 9/11 did something (obviously more) stupid in the name of their religon.

Bottomline, lots of people are fucking dumb regardless of religion.

The thing that ive taken away from this, people like Mafoo who obviously have an agenda have compromised parts of their logic and humanity for politically watered down reasons which has resulted in an argument youd see on a preschool playground.

As someone else pointed out, is it illegal to be a jerk? No, but why not error on the side of being kind? Is climate change "real" Who the fuck knows, but why not error on the side of safety? Sure it may be legal, but why not be a bigger person and not argue in favor of giving people ammunition (even if its not justified) when they know its only going to cause problems? The fact that they are essentially going against a hallmark and pillar of Christ's turn the other cheek teaching makes it more laughable.....but whats really disturbing is the results in this thread going great distances to try to explain why this SHOULD happen.

We can get into link wars pointing out crazies from each others "sides" but honestly? Why cant some of you just be above it. Just because somethings within mans law doesnt mean it should be done, I'd hope everyone regardless of religious preference or political party can draw the correlation that doing things out of spite knowing they are meant to incite is just wrong. 

As others have said, if its within the law we only have ethos to argue over. But the chirch and these people get nothing productive out of doing this. It fosters hatred, is an unhealthy way of coping and accomplishes nothing. It really shouldnt even be debatable since there is really no underlying benefit to this as there is with the Mosque at all other than hatred.

Just be nice to people and dont do mean things even if youre allowed. How about that?

And... you totally missed Mafoo's point.  Which was just that.  Everyone has the right to be a jerk but shouldn't.  He was just pointing out another case of it for people who were defending someones right to be a jerk.


No i didnt. His point was that everyone who wants to either hold a debate or supports th emosque must then in turn support this as if to get us in a "aha" moment.

The fact is burning a holy scripture makes no sense other than to incite hatred. We can hold a debate on the reasoning for fear of  aMosque 2 blocks from 9/11...but the anger for it is built on a phobia and blanket statement made against all muslims for the actions of few. 

A community center has benefits, its being built 2 blocks away and may be an outlet for a young child in NYC. Burning holy scripture, on th eother hand, there is no such debate on why this should be appropriate so in a sense its quite comical that anyone would try to draw parrallels of religious freedom given the cirumstances.

And thus, why i said people political and religious beliefs have clouded their loigic/ judgement.

We can actually weigh pros and cons of a community center built by muslims 2 blocks away from ground zero. I wonder who would argue pros and cons of a religious group condoning the burning of another religions scripture....one is debatable and there should be a debate, the other is fucking stupid, thats the difference.




Get Your Portable ID!

Around the Network
Tigerlure on 08 September 2010

Now I can see why people are coming out as atheists. This gives Christianity as a whole a bad name. How would that church feel if Muslims burned their bibles? Probably wouldn't be too happy. The pastor is a fool, and I hope he gets what is coming to him, especially for putting our troops in danger.

And please don't use that stupid argument of "but but they're building a mosque in New York!" There's so many ways to defeat that argument it's not even funny.



ssj12 on 08 September 2010
Tigerlure said:

Now I can see why people are coming out as atheists. This gives Christianity as a whole a bad name. How would that church feel if Muslims burned their bibles? Probably wouldn't be too happy. The pastor is a fool, and I hope he gets what is coming to him, especially for putting our troops in danger.


Actually I'm a Catholic Agnostic and have been considering going to the church and burning the Bible there myself right in front the everyone if they burn the Qur'an. Whats fair is fair, and religious intolerance is just as much of a "sin" in America's eyes as it is to the Islamic and sudo-Christian faiths.

Now to be frank, the Church responsible for this crap is an extremist church. They believe that their members are on a crusade against the devil. They have in the past attempted to destroy the life of the mayor of Gainesville, Fl during the election because he was openly gay.



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
Tigerlure on 08 September 2010
ssj12 said:
Tigerlure said:

Now I can see why people are coming out as atheists. This gives Christianity as a whole a bad name. How would that church feel if Muslims burned their bibles? Probably wouldn't be too happy. The pastor is a fool, and I hope he gets what is coming to him, especially for putting our troops in danger.


Actually I'm a Catholic Agnostic and have been considering going to the church and burning the Bible there myself right in front the everyone if they burn the Qur'an. Whats fair is fair, and religious intolerance is just as much of a "sin" in America's eyes as it is to the Islamic and sudo-Christian faiths.

Now to be frank, the Church responsible for this crap is an extremist church. They believe that their members are on a crusade against the devil. They have in the past attempted to destroy the life of the mayor of Gainesville, Fl during the election because he was openly gay.

If you carry out with your plan, let me know. I'd love to hear about that lol. But I agree, they are extremists, and I'm glad that Jones' former church is denouncing it too. I just hate people like him who claim to do these things in the name of God. Would God really want this?



Kasz216 on 08 September 2010
ssj12 said:
Tigerlure said:

Now I can see why people are coming out as atheists. This gives Christianity as a whole a bad name. How would that church feel if Muslims burned their bibles? Probably wouldn't be too happy. The pastor is a fool, and I hope he gets what is coming to him, especially for putting our troops in danger.


Actually I'm a Catholic Agnostic and have been considering going to the church and burning the Bible there myself right in front the everyone if they burn the Qur'an. Whats fair is fair, and religious intolerance is just as much of a "sin" in America's eyes as it is to the Islamic and sudo-Christian faiths.

Now to be frank, the Church responsible for this crap is an extremist church. They believe that their members are on a crusade against the devil. They have in the past attempted to destroy the life of the mayor of Gainesville, Fl during the election because he was openly gay.


Heh, you should mention the name of the Pastor's book.  I believe it's something to the tune of "Islam is the Devil".

or... "Islam is evil"  i dunno something like that.

Either way if you were to go though, make sure to get a permit for burning it.

Regardless, it's a group doing something dumb that will hurt people that they have the legal right to do.  It really is the same premise... there is no "defeating" it.



Kasz216 on 08 September 2010
steverhcp02 said:
Kasz216 said:
steverhcp02 said:

Sounds like these SPECIFIC people are doing something stupid in the name of their religion. Just like those SPECIFIC people on 9/11 did something (obviously more) stupid in the name of their religon.

Bottomline, lots of people are fucking dumb regardless of religion.

The thing that ive taken away from this, people like Mafoo who obviously have an agenda have compromised parts of their logic and humanity for politically watered down reasons which has resulted in an argument youd see on a preschool playground.

As someone else pointed out, is it illegal to be a jerk? No, but why not error on the side of being kind? Is climate change "real" Who the fuck knows, but why not error on the side of safety? Sure it may be legal, but why not be a bigger person and not argue in favor of giving people ammunition (even if its not justified) when they know its only going to cause problems? The fact that they are essentially going against a hallmark and pillar of Christ's turn the other cheek teaching makes it more laughable.....but whats really disturbing is the results in this thread going great distances to try to explain why this SHOULD happen.

We can get into link wars pointing out crazies from each others "sides" but honestly? Why cant some of you just be above it. Just because somethings within mans law doesnt mean it should be done, I'd hope everyone regardless of religious preference or political party can draw the correlation that doing things out of spite knowing they are meant to incite is just wrong. 

As others have said, if its within the law we only have ethos to argue over. But the chirch and these people get nothing productive out of doing this. It fosters hatred, is an unhealthy way of coping and accomplishes nothing. It really shouldnt even be debatable since there is really no underlying benefit to this as there is with the Mosque at all other than hatred.

Just be nice to people and dont do mean things even if youre allowed. How about that?

And... you totally missed Mafoo's point.  Which was just that.  Everyone has the right to be a jerk but shouldn't.  He was just pointing out another case of it for people who were defending someones right to be a jerk.


No i didnt. His point was that everyone who wants to either hold a debate or supports th emosque must then in turn support this as if to get us in a "aha" moment.

The fact is burning a holy scripture makes no sense other than to incite hatred. We can hold a debate on the reasoning for fear of  aMosque 2 blocks from 9/11...but the anger for it is built on a phobia and blanket statement made against all muslims for the actions of few. 

A community center has benefits, its being built 2 blocks away and may be an outlet for a young child in NYC. Burning holy scripture, on th eother hand, there is no such debate on why this should be appropriate so in a sense its quite comical that anyone would try to draw parrallels of religious freedom given the cirumstances.

And thus, why i said people political and religious beliefs have clouded their loigic/ judgement.

We can actually weigh pros and cons of a community center built by muslims 2 blocks away from ground zero. I wonder who would argue pros and cons of a religious group condoning the burning of another religions scripture....one is debatable and there should be a debate, the other is fucking stupid, thats the difference.


Nah, there are plenty of ways you can debate why it's appropriate.  Some of which has already been stated as just a general example. 

Both moves are "fucking stupid".  Differnet levels... maybe.  But both are causing uneeded pain for no real benefit.  (Since the mosque could be moved moderatly away, for free with no loss present.)

Of course, the book burning is a one time thing, while the center will be there and causing people problems permanently.

Doing something really stupid for a short period of time... vs just doing something stupid but it's consqeuences will continue to reap problems for decades...

They're a lot closer in outcome then you're willing to admit.