Not racist. I came here from China and learned to speak the language before I left because I knew I was coming to an english speaking country. If I had wanted to immigrate to to France I would have learned french.

It is not racist to expect immigrants to integrate with their new nation, in fact I think it is a little backwards and ungrateful of an immigrant to America to not want to learn english

You did the same thing, the website must be anti semitic because they dare to speak against Israel. Not that I agree or disagree but you did the exact same thing right before saying it of her





Cutting aid to countries like Pakistan too

You missed this guy

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6740735.ece


This radical christian terrorist blew up a building in very recent memory


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik


So yes, you may be wrong. You are in fact wrong on that account








Both of the guys above did so, in fact the second one has a rather lengthy manifesto explaining why a crusade was in order









This is exactly what they are taught to think of us in the west. We are literally fighting two wars, occupying muslim countries because of the actions of criminal organisations we claim are harbored in those countries.

They see us block and defile mosques in New York Michigan and South Carolina, in the name of retaliation. They see us burning the Koran and can not help but think that we would surely erase them from the world as you think that of them










Only if you create it for them. The terrorists who attack us hope that we lash back at muslims and push more innocent muslims who would otherwise disagree and condemn their actions further and further from peace and closer to their own values


Burning the Koran or protesters stopping a mosque from being built are not standing up against the tide... they are causing it. When you say things like this instead of looking to reach out to organisations of peaceful muslims you are becoming the pawn of Ossma Bin Laden, as he would have loved nothing more than to cause a greater and greater rift between islam and the west


If that happened you will indeed face an army of one hundred million, but it will be an enemy of your creation

Aesops fable 'The Fox and the Grapes' applies here I think


You are adorable and will have little trouble finding someone who wants you, he knows this and calls you pathetic out of frustration

Mightymoe, I almost missed your post in the mix, easy to get distracted by clowns on forums. I really should give attention to intelligent posts but the comical rants are so hard to let go without a response





Oh there have been a few.

This guy, really rotten example of a westerner and probably responsible for more than a handful of young arab men turning to terrorism in their rage


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6740735.ece




Let us not forget about this radical christian terrorist


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik



Or these guys, staunch christians ready to defend their faith from 'godless northerners' and 'heathen negroes'. These people are still active today in many plances in America


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan



It was not too long ago that people were blowing each other up with car bombs in Ireland over religion and national pride. No different than Jews and Palestinians today








Agreed! So as long as you are not trying to get in to a spitting match, there is no need for you to say you do not remember any christian terrorists when they are as easy to remember as the muslim ones.

Lets just stick to the facts, that just about all faiths have dangerous fringe idiots












A nonbinding statment and one that each individual is allowed to consider binding or not based on his opinion of the speaker are both the same thing, non binding.








Right. This means that no one muslim cleric is any more right than anyone else. This problem exists here in America too

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps

This guy is the exact same as those nutty clerics calling us the great satan. There is no special problem with Islam over any other faith

I am going to be hesitant to use the word large, as compared to the number of muslims in the world they are a tiny fraction.






I would agree if it were only christians who were attacked that day, or if there were not two mosques inside the towers when they were destroyed.

You simply can not separate christian victims from the muslims who were attacked alongside them.







A great example. We should never fall to the level of theocratic governments or monarchies like Saudi Arabia. Nor should we use them as examples of how to behave.

The mosque and the greek orthodox church should be restored and the people should go about their business praying at any of them that they want.

We say 'If you do that the terrorists win' a lot, maybe too much but in this case it really is true. If we respond to the attacks with fear or ostracism for muslims and their holy sites as so many posts in this thread have done then it becomes clear that the terrorists really have totally defeated you in the exact way they meant to. Every post rejecting New Yorks muslim population and suggesting that we become more like Saudi Arabia in our willingness to bar the mosque puts us a little further down the road the terrorists would love to see us take


Always nice when you can find someone or at least a point you can agree with on the opposite side of a serious debate. Glad you posted.





Edit- In response to the post above, you and everyone should take a look here. More people especially muslims should speak out or at least support those who do

http://www.freemuslims.org/

Have to agree with the right wingers and the Israelis here. First Israel has a better track record with security than many other countries and they are surrounded by enemies. If they can handle their own security there then their model will no doubt be of use to us

No one said if you can not look the TSA agent in the face then you are automatically a terrorist, but maybe you do deserve a deeper look. If you are shifty because you are nervous about flying or something it will come out in a short conversation or a pat down and X ray

If you are really someone up to no good, that will likely come out too. This system is a lot better than random searches where a little old lady from Minnesota gets a full body cavity search because her number was up


It really is flawed thinking to assume the obvious muslim in long robes with a big bushy beard is a terrorist too, if they are serious about killing people they will shave and adopt more western dress and clothes but they can not so easily dismiss signs of stress or worry as their plans and luggage are questioned


I would never think to give up my fourth amendment rights, but if I was being shifty or jittery in line at the airport that is what you call reasonable suspicion

The Tao was not taught to Buddha, he likely never encountered it in his lifetime.

Buddha did not need to go to India 'to study', he was born and raised there. Buddhism does not 'Compare' with Hinduism, it sprang from it in much the same manner as Christianity sprang from Judaism


Here is some help for you. Not the best of sources but it will get you on the path to knowing, at least

The Tao-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao


Lao Tzu- The guy who is credited with giving the world the Tao, but may or may have not existed at all


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laozi


The Buddha, an Indian philosopher and prophet.... not Chinese


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha

Some intelligent questions, thanks for that. At the risk of sounding less liberal and more libetarian than I may be on the whole, I will take a stab at answering them






Protect them from what? Men and women already run out on their spouses and children with the government having little ability to control it. Both sides need to be more patient and cautious when chosing a mate






Americans marry and divorce at will anyway. The only real influence over who gets what during a divorce is the amount of money each side can pour in to getting a good lawyer

I will even dare to say that both women and men should be a little more picky in their choices of mates and only have children when they themselves are prepared for it. Personal responsibility is a bit much to ask here in the western world I know, but I am guilty of being a bit of an idealist







In other countries there exists much less of this divorce culture than we have here. With things like traditional Indian arranged marriage and even the more western seeming Chinese marriage you have more of a focus on the two families coming together than simply two people with stars in their eyes for one another

Now that China is becoming more like America in its views on romance and marriage you have a rising divorce rate there but in situations where the couples parents still have a say you have the lower rates of divorce

If a woman can not find a man who is family oriented and eager to raise and provide for his own children then maybe she should curb her need to help overpopulate the world with another mouth waiting to gobble up resources and do something useful like go to school

My own marriage is one chosen for love rather than arranged, but our aim is not to have children nor would I have financial hardship should I change my mind and decide to have one

Or not.

Buddha taught that life is suffering caused by desire. Curb your desires for more more more and you begin to improve yourself and the world. The teachings of the Buddha are given to humanity to free us of living in ignorance and self created suffering.

The Buddha was born in to a culture that believed in reincarnation and that man was doomed to spend life after life trying to become worthy of heaven. Buddha gave his lessons as a 'shortcut' past those thousands of lives so that we may give up our wicked and worldly ways of serving our petty desires and move on to Nirvana faster.

That is about the best nutshell of Buddhism you are going to get and it has nothing to do with living a balance of good and evil. Where did you learn that?

You may have confused Tao for Buddhism, that is not all to uncommon for westerners to do but they are not the same... but even if you have gotten the Tao mixed up you have still failed to grasp it as well





You meant 'prophet' but I think it is funny ten times over you would get your Christ mixed up with Mammon.





First is a lack of trust or understanding. A mob full of muslims wanting to burn a christian church is no more in the right than you were when you called for violence against the people building a mosque near ground zero. I am not calling either of those groups right or correct, Both sides are wrong and you are one of those wrong sides

Yes, I actually have a masters in religious studies.

Well said. In here lies the answer to all the problems with gay marriage


The government should not have anything to do with marriage at all. Not one bit. They should not have legal ceremonies nor should ones marital status have an concern over taxes or tax rates


Marriage is a religious ceremony and should be seperated from our government totally. If your church wants to marry a man and woman or two men or a cat and a dog that should be your right to have faith however you want it but the government should have no say in the matter at all


No gay marriage, no straight marriage... no civil unions or anything else. Just cut it totally out of the governments control then all the religious fanatics can go back to calling each other false or backwards and claiming to know the one true way while the government governs without favoring any one of them

No, they are pretty much carbon copies of one another.

If we are going to hold all muslims responsible for the acts of their extreme fanatics we will simply have to hold all of your faith responsible for the generations of vile evil deeds done in the name of your imaginary friend in the sky as well. A warning though, that list is long and ponderous.




Allah and god... same imaginary friend, just a different language.

As for the topic and building a mosque on or near ground zero... there were TWO mosques inside the towers that were destroyed that day. Plenty of the victims themselves were muslims so there is no special 'protect the victims' speech to be made as there is no common faith or creed for these victims. You do not get to pick and chose who you want to be protected and who you do not

Neither group is a moral authority for Islam. The Quran is the moral authority for Islam, literally the word of god to muslims. The Quran does not command women to cover their faces, it calls for modesty but not a command to cover their faces

Of corse the kids are not trying to be a moral authority for their faith, they are just trying to shed an old and outdated cultural norm and maybe poke the eye of their closed minded government

Nothing to be impressed with here, the post above was made to highlight the ignorance of the title of this topic

Irans morality police are no more able to decide what is against islamic values than Anders Behring Breivik is qualified to speak for what christian morality is

Those kids are muslims, not one of them declared they were fighting islamic morality. Iran has a pretty messed up government, but trying to equate them with muslim authority is the same ignorance as equating the spanish inquisition with christianity as a whole