Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
dianahsieh

NYC Mosque: Respect Property Rights

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

If the organizers behind the mosque are linked to terrorists, surely the whole debate about the location of the mosque is a red herring. If they are guilty of a crime, they should be arrested or thrown out of the country.

This has always been my position personally. I haven't really said anything regarding all of this property proximity stuff.

Edited by CapitalistSwine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I reasoned my way to a position founded within property law. An unreasoned emotional demonstration of outrage is useless and impotent, which those demonstrators are going to find out.

was more a joke, I should have been more clear.

Should it be illegal to build a memorial to Hitler near Auschwitz?

Not necessarily, but good luck getting that to happen in the first place. Too much outrage would come about.

As for the second sign, Saudi Arabia does not allow non-muslim symbols in their country; does that imply the U.S. should ban certain religious symbols as well?

No, we are not Saudi Arabia.

Edited by CapitalistSwine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that property rights should be respected here. However, the real problem I have is this. Say I had a non-profit that went around educating people on the evils of Islam. If I bought the lot across the street from the mosque and wanted to build an "educational center teaching the evils of Islam," the zoning board would turn me down instantly. I think the morally superior way to try and stop this mosque would be to put significant pressure on the zoning board to allow exactly that type of response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I bought the lot across the street from the mosque and wanted to build an "educational center teaching the evils of Islam," the zoning board would turn me down instantly.
What is your evidence that this is true? In some backwater village in Alabama, it's possible that a zoning board might think that would be allowed, but in a real city like New York, they have lawyers that they can and will consult, and would know that such an action would be unconstitutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is your evidence that this is true? In some backwater village in Alabama, it's possible that a zoning board might think that would be allowed, but in a real city like New York, they have lawyers that they can and will consult, and would know that such an action would be unconstitutional.

As corrupt as most MAJOR cities are, and as easily swayed by PC attitudes, its very likely they would be turned down.

Edited by SimonJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As corrupt as most MAJOR cities are, and as easily swayed by PC attitudes, its very likely they would be turned down.
I will repeat: What is your evidence that this is true? In some backwater village in Alabama, it's possible that a zoning board might think that would be allowed, but in a real city like New York, they have lawyers that they can and will consult, and would know that such an action would be unconstitutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will repeat: What is your evidence that this is true? In some backwater village in Alabama, it's possible that a zoning board might think that would be allowed, but in a real city like New York, they have lawyers that they can and will consult, and would know that such an action would be unconstitutional.

Do you not keep up with current events and news from large cities?

The politics in most is a joke. How many dead or imprisoned voted in the last election?

What makes you think that a lwyer would be honest? Arent most politicians lawyers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you not keep up with current events and news from large cities?

The politics in most is a joke. How many dead or imprisoned voted in the last election?

What makes you think that a lwyer would be honest? Arent most politicians lawyers?

You're utterly missing the point. It's not a matter of honesty, it's a matter of knowing what the law is, and know what will be enforced. You give not a shred of evidence that officials in NYC are so dumb that they'd do somthing that any judge would strike down in a New York minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're utterly missing the point. It's not a matter of honesty, it's a matter of knowing what the law is, and know what will be enforced. You give not a shred of evidence that officials in NYC are so dumb that they'd do somthing that any judge would strike down in a New York minute.

Not missing any point. It happens that Ive seen laws flouted by judges and lawyers as well

many places, many times. An honest lawyer or judge is scarce as a hen with teeth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In some backwater village in Alabama, it's possible that a zoning board might think that would be allowed, but in a real city like New York...

Tak, tsk. Do I detect a regional bias here? Toothless rednecks and all that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
" To begin with, the proposed Islamic center – not a mosque, but the Muslim equivalent of the YMCA – a nonprofit foundation wants to build in New York City isn’t at "ground zero," it is four blocks from the site of the World Trade Center.

Is this correct? I read it here: Haters Go After the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’.

If this is true I think this whole thing has been blown out of proportion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"The mosque is part of a proposed 13-storey Muslim community centre, which will include a swimming pool, gym, theatre and sports facilities.

The building, which was damaged by the fuselage of one of the hijacked planes, is at 45 Park Place -- just two blocks from Ground Zero.

The location was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims who bought the building in July. A presence so close to the World Trade Center, "where a piece of the wreckage fell," said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the cleric leading the project, "sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11."

We want to push back against the extremists," added Imam Feisal, 61.

The Imam states:

My colleagues and I are the anti-terrorists. We are the people who want to embolden the vast majority of Muslims who hate terrorism to stand up to the radical rhetoric. ...

People who are stakeholders in society, who believe they are welcomed as equal partners, do not want to destroy it. ... And there's no better demonstration of our desire to build than the construction of this center. ...

The project has been mischaracterized... It is not a mosque, although it will include a space for Muslim prayer services. It will have a swimming pool [etc.] ...

And, yes, the center will have a public memorial to the victims of 9/11 as well as a meditation room where all will be welcome...

The center will be open to all regardless of religion. ...

What grieves me most is the false reporting that leads some families of 9/11 victims to think this project somehow is designed by Muslims to gloat over the attack.

That could not be further from the truth.

My heart goes out to all of the victims of 9/11. ...

Freedom of religion is something we hold dear. It is the core of what America is all about, and it is what people worldwide respect about our country. The Koran itself says compulsion in religion is wrong.

American Muslims want to be both good Americans and good Muslims. They can be the best assets the United States has in combatting radicalism.

They know that many American values -- freedom of religion, human dignity and opportunity for prosperity -- are also Muslim values. ...

I have been the imam at a mosque in Tribeca for 27 years. ... My work is to make sure mosques are not recruiting grounds for radicals.

To do that, Muslims must feel they are welcome in New York. Alienated people are open to cynicism and radicalism. Any group that believes it is under attack will breed rebellion. The proposed center is an attempt to prevent the next 9/11."

Source: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/05/26/2010-05-26_the_truth_about_the_mosque_the_leader_of_proposed_muslim_center_near_ground_zero.html

In response to your comment, yes I certainly do believe this has been blown way out of proportion.

Edited by CapitalistSwine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this correct? I read it here: Haters Go After the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’.

If this is true I think this whole thing has been blown out of proportion.

It is not correct, because there is not any valid distinction between a so-called Islamic center and a mosque. In fact it is evidence of carrying out the strategy in this document: An Explanatory Memorandum

4- Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America:

The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The

Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and

destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their

hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious

over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and

have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work

wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that

destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be

equal.

17- Understanding the role and the nature of work of "The Islamic Center" in every city

with what achieves the goal of the process of settlement:

The center we seek is the one which constitutes the "axis" of our Movement, the "perimeter" of

the circle of our work, our "balance center", the "base" for our rise and our "Dar al-Arqam" to

educate us, prepare us and supply our battalions in addition to being the "niche" of our prayers.

This is in order for the Islamic center to turn - in action not in words - into a seed "for a small

Islamic society" which is a reflection and a mirror to our central organizations. The center ought

to turn into a "beehive" which produces sweet honey. Thus, the Islamic center would turn into a

place for study, family, battalion, course, seminar, visit, sport, school, social club, women

gathering, kindergarten for male and female youngsters, the office of the domestic political

resolution, and the center for distributing our newspapers, magazines, books and our audio and

visual tapes.

In brief we say: we would like for the Islamic center to become "The House of Dawa"' and "the

general center" in deeds first before name. As much as we own and direct these centers at the

continent level, we can say we are marching successfully towards the settlement of Dawa' in this

country.

Meaning that the "center's" role should be the same as the "mosque's" role during the time of

God's prophet, God's prayers and peace be upon him, when he marched to "settle" the Dawa' in

its first generation in Madina. from the mosque, he drew the Islamic life and provided to the

world the most magnificent and fabulous civilization humanity knew.

This mandates that, eventually, the region, the branch and the Usra turn into "operations rooms"

for planning, direction, monitoring and leadership for the Islamic center in order to be a role

model to be followed.

edit: And could you try to be a little less naive and credulous when an article is a) posted at a place called antiwar.com B) calls names in the headline of the article. These are dead giveaways that you should be on the lookout for non-objective thinking.

Edited by Grames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edit: And could you try to be a little less naive and credulous when an article is a) posted at a place called antiwar.com B) calls names in the headline of the article. These are dead giveaways that you should be on the lookout for non-objective thinking.

No, I figured they were full of it. That's why I asked for clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
could you try to be a little less naive and credulous when an article is a) posted at a place called antiwar.com

Half the people on this website get their "unbiased news" from Jihadwatch.org or Breitbart, neither of which I consider proper sources of information on the subject, that aside....the content of the article should be what is judged not what website it is on.

"I agree with your position on the matter."

http://blog.ariarmstrong.com/2010/07/three-arguments-for-blocking-cordoba.html

@Grames

I have not seen evidence thus far in my fairly thorough research on this subject that the Imam or anyone else directly affiliated with the property are directly affiliated with the Muslim brotherhood. Could you source me this info? (I do not consider sites that start off with jihad, religionofpeace, infidels, breitbart, atlasshrugs2000 (Pamela's site), capitalism magazine or pajamasmedia as sources when making this request, just so we don't waste each others time). I have only seen evidence of such regarding the Imam's father.

Edited by CapitalistSwine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Grames

I have not seen evidence thus far in my fairly thorough research on this subject that the Imam or anyone else directly affiliated with the property are affiliated with the Muslim brotherhood. Could you source me this info? (I do not consider sites that start off with jihad, religionofpeace, infidels, breitbart, atlasshrugs2000 (Pamela's site), capitalism magazine or pajamasmedia as sources when making this request, just so we don't waste each others time). I have only seen evidence of such regarding the Imam's father.

It is impossible to determine if Faisal's heart is true or not. It does not matter. The building is the problem not the man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is impossible to determine if Faisal's heart is true or not. It does not matter. The building is the problem not the man.

I am glad you and I agree on that point (about the man). It was more of a question of personal interest than anything. I never tried to suggest it was something substantial or consequential when it comes to this discussion. Though I would say the building is not the problem either, but rather our government and our foreign policy. I allude to Ari Armstrong's comments here.

Edited by CapitalistSwine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as many wish to stand on Principle, if the Muslims wins in this we lose.

I hope you don't consider yourself an Objectivist if you have such a position.

Sorry for such a short comment Ryan. But I dont deal in long winded verbage.

You have nothing to apologize for.

Edited by CapitalistSwine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure who said it up there, but the Mosque may end up being built with tax dollars, in part. Now, does using public money to build on private property ring well? What about a building that many of the direct constituents do not want built?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure who said it up there, but the Mosque may end up being built with tax dollars, in part. Now, does using public money to build on private property ring well? What about a building that many of the direct constituents do not want built?

That's a matter for the other thread you started (about the morality of taxes). Objectivism is opposed to any kind of taxation, or spending on private projects.

From a legal perspective, the US Constitution and laws allow for both taxation and spending on private property. In fact, US laws specifically prohibit discriminating against a project just because Muslims are involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...