Build mosque at ground zero? ..Obama would be delighted!

[powderman]

HEATHER. Are you willing to let the mexicans put a monument at the Alamo celebrating their victory there??? What about letting the japs build a monument in Pearl Harbor to celebrate their victory??? It's the same thing the muzzies are doing, celebrating their allahs victory over the Christian God and America.  POWDERMAN. 

[Hooker]

I for one believe these folks building this Mosque at Ground Zero is within their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AS AMERICAN CITIZENS!  The mindset that ONLY those who feel the same as you deserve FREEDOM is WHY WE ARE LOOSING MORE AND MORE EVERYDAY!  Using the logic that a Mosque can't be built where a Muslim supposedly committed a crime because it is in bad taste, then I could conclude that ANY church built where a Christian committed a crime should be in bad taste as well.  Well then take down almost all of the Churches then! 

Heather

Interesting take. But the Constitution was not written for everyone it is for the people of the United States what are commonly called Americans. What is an American?  An American is not just someone who holds documentation that proclaims his or her membership. An American is not someone who seeks to change this great nation to fit their liking. So many of these muslims claim to be Americans but their actions and lack of action say something entirely different. They like many others use the Constitution  to defend their destruction of it and this nation.
Myself I couldn't care less if they build a mosque or not but I have no delusions about this just being in bad taste. This is an intentional slap in the face to Americans and another rip in the Constitution.

Pat

[Heather]

HEATHER. Are you willing to let the mexicans put a monument at the Alamo celebrating their victory there??? What about letting the japs build a monument in Pearl Harbor to celebrate their victory??? It's the same thing the muzzies are doing, celebrating their allahs victory over the Christian God and America.  POWDERMAN. 

As long as they are here legally, I don't care what anyone builds anywhere.  There are Hispanic churches within a mile of the Alamo, what difference does it make?  Their whole race and religion didn't take down the towers, "a few men with box-cutters" did!

Heather

[Catus Magnus]

 There are Hispanic churches within a mile of the Alamo, what difference does it make?  Their whole race and religion didn't take down the towers, "a few men with box-cutters" did!
Heather

LOTS and LOTS of people within a thousand-yard radius of the Alamo, speak... Spanish.

[dukkillr]

 There are Hispanic churches within a mile of the Alamo, what difference does it make?  Their whole race and religion didn't take down the towers, "a few men with box-cutters" did!
Heather

LOTS and LOTS of people within a thousand-yard radius of the Alamo, speak... Spanish.

And anyone who's been to Pearl knows there are a TON of Japanese tourists there... 

Damn Constitution.  Damn Capitalism.  Where's my Christian theocracy when I need it?

[billy_56081]

I myself will never vote guilty if on a jury for someone who burns or bombs this tribute to the terrorists who attacked the twin towers.

[powderman]

HEATHER. I'm amazed that you can't see the big difference there between a spanish church and a monument to islams victory over America. Make no doubt about it, thats exactly why they want it there. There are not even any muslims in that entire precinct, so why a mosque?? POWDERMAN. 

[lakota]

I dont think anyone is claiming they have no right to build. I think most people are only asking that they show us the same tolerance and sensitivity that we are required to show them and build it else where it wouldnt raise such a problem.

I for one am sick of this seemingly implied notion that we must bend over bacwards to tolerate other cultures religions but when they do something that offends the majority of us we must take it on the chin and turn the other cheek.

[wreckhog]

HEATHER. I'm amazed that you can't see the big difference there between a spanish church and a monument to islams victory over America. Make no doubt about it, thats exactly why they want it there. There are not even any muslims in that entire precinct, so why a mosque?? POWDERMAN. 

I guarantee you that there are more muslims working, walking, driving and taking mass transportation around Ground Zero than there are Greek Orthodox. If we were talking about astoria, that would be different. And a pretty good place for a greek church. The truly obnoxious thing about places of worship is that they insist on building them where they don't have much of a reason to be there. Certainly not unique to Muslims. I would bet that most people in the Ground Zero area (most meaning 95%+) have never bothered to go to a place of worship in the Ground Zero area.

[powderman]

I for one am sick of this seemingly implied notion that we must bend over bacwards to tolerate other cultures religions but when they do something that offends the majority of us we must take it on the chin and turn the other cheek.



A big AMEN to that. POWDERMAN. 

[ironglow]

If the issue is pressed and this gang who won't admit Hamas to be a terrorist group, succeed in building a "bridge", which they may well have a legal right to do...then Muslims who are of the more bucolic type and not inclined toward hostility, will also "take it in the chin".
    This kind of blatant disregard for the for the already heightened sensitivities of almost all real Americans, can bring repercussions upon some Muslims who do not deserve it.
   As with many broaches of common decency, it may be technically legal, but the great majority who are deeply offended...don't have to like it. ....This is not in any way a Constitutional problem, but one of common sense and decency !

  Dukkillr;
  You interjected a pointless issue. Christianity has nothing to do with the mosque question and I saw nobody even hint at such a thing before drew the remarks from apparently thin air. An as far as any kind of "Christian theocracy"..you are the only one I have seen to mention the term in weeks. It seems that in the past, whenever such a silly thing as "Christian theocracy" has been mentioned here, is  almost invariably by some frustrated far leftist. I cannot recall a single instance on this forum where an obvious Christian in this forum has suggested such.
  Just yesterday a couple were ACCUSED of adultry were stoned to death, under Sharia law (which the Imam pushing for the ground zero mosque, calls for in trhe US). They were apprehended, tried and executed, all on the same day! When the time for execution was announced, 150 village "worthies" did the dirty deed.
  http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Taliban+stones+couple+death+alleged+adultery/3403786/story.html
    In a "Christian theocracy", which BTW, NOBODY HERE ENDORSES,...at least they could have appealed to how Jesus handled the stoning of a woman when He came upon the scene...."let he who is without sin, cast the first stone"..
  Perhaps you ought to rethink your statement concerning "Christian theocracy"..which none are calling for.

[powderman]

IRONGLOW. Good post Sir, all true. POWDERMAN. 

[dukkillr]

If the issue is pressed and this gang who won't admit Hamas to be a terrorist group, succeed in building a "bridge", which they may well have a legal right to do...then Muslims who are of the more bucolic type and not inclined toward hostility, will also "take it in the chin".
    This kind of blatant disregard for the for the already heightened sensitivities of almost all real Americans, can bring repercussions upon some Muslims who do not deserve it.
   As with many broaches of common decency, it may be technically legal, but the great majority who are deeply offended...don't have to like it. ....This is not in any way a Constitutional problem, but one of common sense and decency !

  Dukkillr;
  You interjected a pointless issue. Christianity has nothing to do with the mosque question and I saw nobody even hint at such a thing before drew the remarks from apparently thin air. An as far as any kind of "Christian theocracy"..you are the only one I have seen to mention the term in weeks. It seems that in the past, whenever such a silly thing as "Christian theocracy" has been mentioned here, is  almost invariably by some frustrated far leftist. I cannot recall a single instance on this forum where an obvious Christian in this forum has suggested such.
  Just yesterday a couple were ACCUSED of adultry were stoned to death, under Sharia law (which the Imam pushing for the ground zero mosque, calls for in trhe US). They were apprehended, tried and executed, all on the same day! When the time for execution was announced, 150 village "worthies" did the dirty deed.
  http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Taliban+stones+couple+death+alleged+adultery/3403786/story.html
    In a "Christian theocracy", which BTW, NOBODY HERE ENDORSES,...at least they could have appealed to how Jesus handled the stoning of a woman when He came upon the scene...."let he who is without sin, cast the first stone"..
  Perhaps you ought to rethink your statement concerning "Christian theocracy"..which none are calling for.

Wow.  Struck a nerve there huh?  Obviously when a person or group is seeking to invalidate the protections of our secular Constitution in favor of imposing their own religious ideals on others you have a...?

The idea behind a Christian theocracy is prominent in many posts by many posters around here, it just may not be claimed as such.  Not sure what your second paragraph has to do with this?  Your third is illuminating for many reasons.  Funny though, I've mentioned that part of the bible before and the hardliners immediately distort that story to support their ridiculous hate filled view of Christianity.

But I digress.  There is a reason the religion section was removed, and to that extent I am guilty here of bringing the subtle underlying issue into the open.  Bill does not want this to be a religious discussion.  Blame me for bringing it up, but let’s try and move on.  I'd be happy to continue this conversation by PM though if you'd like?

[ironglow]

 Dukkillr;
      You didn't strike a nerve here, you simply struck some rational thinking.  I'll be pleased to move on, but please go into GBO archives and show me one instance where somebody called for a "Christian Theocracy" to be set up in the US..... Just to prove your accusation, you know...
     
 On the other hand, we have heard influential Muslims call for an "Islamic Caliphate"


   Daily in the news, we find those of the left attacking Christianity, while defending Islam. They should be careful what they wish for....

[billy_56081]

This is not a question of whether this mosque is legal or constitutional. What it isn is a question of wrong and right. The Klan if it legally aquired the land next to where MLK was killed would legally and constitutionally be able to erect a statue of James Earl Ray. What is being done here is provocation and insult, and it is wrong. I myself have no gray area in between only right or wrong. The parasitic lawyer class of humanity has came up with this gray area to confuse the weak progressive mind.

[ironglow]

Billy;
  If they have been told once, they have been told a thousand times...nobody is debating the constitutionality of the project..they do have a right to build there.
    People are only questioning the good sense and sensibility of building there.

   Still, daily on TV we see the radical left trying to make it a constitutional question, even though it obviously is not such.
   I don't believe even they are that dense, but rather intentionally posing as dimwitted.

[wreckhog]

I looked up the address. It is not Ground Zero IMHO. Not that there is a fixed definition, but this is a couple blocks from the towers. Some would disagree, some define Ground Zero as anything below Canal street. That may have been true the month it happened, as there were certainly a lot of closures, but now this address is well outside the currently closed area.

[jimster]

Here is an interseting view on how a lot of us feel, worth the read..things are not always cut and dry, there have been many times where people were sensitive to certain things, and did not follow the law to the letter. 

By Charles Krauthammer

A place is made sacred by a widespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent (Lourdes, the Temple Mount), by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice (Gettysburg), or by the blood of martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent (Auschwitz).

When we speak of Ground Zero as hallowed ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there — and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated.

That’s why Disney’s early ’90s proposal to build an American history theme park near Manassas Battlefield was defeated by a broad coalition fearing vulgarization of the Civil War (and wiser than me; at the time I obtusely saw little harm in the venture). It’s why the commercial viewing tower built right on the border of Gettysburg was taken down by the Park Service. It’s why, while no one objects to Japanese cultural centers, the idea of putting one up at Pearl Harbor would be offensive.

And why Pope John Paul II ordered the Carmelite nuns to leave the convent they had established at Auschwitz. He was in no way devaluing their heartfelt mission to pray for the souls of the dead. He was teaching them a lesson in respect: This is not your place, it belongs to others. However pure your voice, better to let silence reign.

Even New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who denounced opponents of the proposed 15-story mosque and Islamic center near Ground Zero as tramplers on religious freedom, asked the mosque organizers “to show some special sensitivity to the situation.”

Yet, as columnist Rich Lowry pointedly noted, the government has no business telling churches how to conduct their business, shape their message, or show “special sensitivity” to anyone about anything. Bloomberg was thereby inadvertently conceding the claim of those he excoriates for opposing the mosque, namely, that Ground Zero is indeed unlike any other place and therefore unique criteria govern what can be done there.

Bloomberg’s implication is clear: If the proposed mosque were controlled by “insensitive” Islamist radicals either excusing or celebrating 9/11, he would not support its construction.

But then, why not? By the mayor’s own expansive view of religious freedom, by what right do we dictate the message of any mosque? Moreover, there’s no guarantee this couldn’t happen in the future. Who is to say that the mosque won’t one day hire an Anwar al-Aulaqi — spiritual mentor to the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas Day bomber, and one-time imam at the Virginia mosque attended by two of the 9/11 terrorists?

An Aulaqi preaching in Virginia is a security problem. An Aulaqi preaching at Ground Zero is a sacrilege.

Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history — perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed.

Of course that strain represents only a minority of Muslims. Islam is no more intrinsically Islamist than present-day Germany is Nazi — yet despite contemporary Germany’s innocence, no German of good will would even think of proposing a German cultural center at, say, Treblinka.

Which makes you wonder about the good will behind Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s proposal. This is a man who has called U.S. policy “an accessory to the crime” of 9/11 and, when recently asked whether Hamas is a terrorist organization, replied, “I’m not a politician. ... The issue of terrorism is a very complex question.”

America is a free country where you can build whatever you want — but not anywhere. That’s why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities.

These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz — and no mosque at Ground Zero.

Build it anywhere but there.

The governor of New York offered to help find land to build the mosque elsewhere. A mosque really seeking to build bridges, Rauf’s ostensible hope for the structure, would accept the offer.

[wreckhog]

My take is that most of the whiners have not been to Ground Zero and don't realize that the "mosque" is not in Ground Zero.

[jimster]

My take is that is debatable. The people that live there think it's too close...so it's too close far as they are concerned.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is not concerned in the least about how anyone feels either...your not alone in your thinking.  your in good company.  And the law is probably on your side as well. 



 


 

[Casull]

My take is that most of the whiners have not been to Ground Zero and don't realize that the "mosque" is not in Ground Zero.

My take is that even if it were, you'd have some excuse for the muslims.   

[powderman]

My take is that most of the whiners have not been to Ground Zero and don't realize that the "mosque" is not in Ground Zero.

I do realize that, doesn't matter to me, it's not wanted by the people and not needed. The Godless ones have over 100 in nyc alone and thats 100 too many. It's just an in your face thing and you know it. Theres no such critter as an American muslim anyway. POWDERMAN. 

[wreckhog]

My take is that is debatable. The people that live there think it's too close...so it's too close far as they are concerned.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is not concerned in the least about how anyone feels either...your not alone in your thinking.  your in good company.  And the law is probably on your side as well.  



 


  

The nature of real estate in NYC is that everyone lives very close to someone else, and that everyone has an agenda. They don't want construction, they don't want their view blocked, they don't want their investment to depreciate, etc. You could be putting a school for retarded kids there and half the neighborhood would have an issue with it and half would not care or would support it. I guarantee you that there are families living there who are drooling over the prospect of a community center featuring day care and a pool opening up within walking distance. You want something really controversial, try school zoning issues. Lots of folks buy $5 million apartments so they can be in a good public school district and go insane when the school zone changes and their apartment is worth 10% less, because it no longer gets a kid into a coveted school. Same furor when they proposed putting a garbage pier in the fancy neighborhood where a prior mayor lived. The neighborhood generates a lot of garbage, but the residents did not want to acknowledge that. There was one famous building that was built too high. The city made the building owners knock the top off before certifying it for occupancy. Never assume that anything in NYC is about religion, ultimately, it is always about money, and those with money spinning public to do their dirty work.


And regarding financing, getting $100 miilion of real estate loans is a nice transaction for a commercial real estate investment banker. If one banker did one of those deals a month, that would be real nice. If they did one a year, they would probably get another career. If they did one every 3 years, they would be bankrupt. I don't know where the money is coming from, but in that market, that is not a lot of money.

Will the structure generate jobs and taxes, what are the implications of replacing the ConEd substation that is currently there, what are they offering the neighborhood in exchange for building there, that is what the residents care about. The folks that don't live there who are protesting this, they are pawns.

[powderman]

Seems that there are communities all over America complaing and protesting these Godless mosques. Good deal, maybe people are finally seeing islam for the cancer it is. POWDERMAN. 

[Oldshooter]

I heard on the radio this morning that this Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is on a tour of the middle east sponsered by the state department to raise funds for this mosque.................someone please tell my information is faulty!

[jimster]

I heard on the radio this morning that this Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is on a tour of the middle east sponsered by the state department to raise funds for this mosque.................someone please tell my information is faulty!

I don't think he will need to look too far to get funding, the terrorists will help with that.  Far as I'm concerned he's on their side all the way and has said so.

Course no matter what happens...have to concentrate on freedom of religion ya know...gotta keep those "rights"....for each and every person in the entire world ya know.  No matter what or who they are.

This entire thread is frustrating.  I really don't care what "their" rights are...I been losing my rights for years little by little from those who try to change our entire country into something it is not...so maybe they can lose a few rights too far as I'm concerned.  After a while you just get to a point where nothing means anything anymore. 

This is about a small group of people who are using our own broken corrupt system and the panzies that run it against us, and laughing about it all the way to the bank. That's all it is and nothing more, and everyone knows it.

[Oldshooter]

This is about a small group of people who are using our own broken corrupt system and the panzies that run it against us, and laughing about it all the way to the bank. That's all it is and nothing more, and everyone knows it.

MORE TRUTHFULL AND PROFOUND THAN YOU COULD EVER IMAGINE!!!

KRUSCHEV, WAS RIGHT WE'LL BE DESTROYED FROM WITHIN

[powderman]

This is about a small group of people who are using our own broken corrupt system and the panzies that run it against us, and laughing about it all the way to the bank. That's all it is and nothing more, and everyone knows it.

MORE TRUTHFULL AND PROFOUND THAN YOU COULD EVER IMAGINE!!!

KRUSCHEV, WAS RIGHT WE'LL BE DESTROYED FROM WITHIN

YEP on both posts. POWDERMAN. 

[wreckhog]

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23759&page=56

http://www.flickr.com/photos/leeloo2003leeloo/4904058281/in/set-72157624628177939/

Ask the Author Live: Hendrik Hertzberg
Posted by The New Yorker

In this week’s Comment, Hendrik Hertzberg writes about the Islamic community center in Lower Manhattan. Today, Hertzberg answered readers’ questions in a live chat. A transcript of their discussion follows.

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Greetings, friends!

QUESTION FROM MICHIEL SIKMA: How much overlap is there with those protesting this mosque and those complaining about the constitution being “under attack”, like we saw during the health care debate?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Rather a lot, it seems. But I’m wary of guilt by association.

QUESTION FROM MEL: Can we admit that Islamic ideology was responsible for 9/11 ?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Islamist, not Islamic. There’s a real distinction, as there is between Christian and Christianist. Also, I doubt that Al Qaeda’s motivations are totally “religious.” They are equally if not more “political,” as are those of many Christianists.

QUESTION FROM RAFAEL: Why has President Obama been so silent on the Park51 issue? Shouldn’t he defend American Muslims?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Part of the motivation of some of the antis is undoubtedly to force Obama to do just that, thereby “proving” that he’s “really” a Muslim. “Hussein” and all that. When and if he does it, I imagine he’ll do it with the kind of deeply reasoned speech he gave on race during the campaign.

QUESTION FROM RYAN CAMPI: I am immediately turned off by the rabid tribalism of certain segments of our society which narrowly define what is and is not “American” (often preferring sterile, white, christian and non-urban—be it rural or suburban—to anything which might be rightly categorized as worldly and cosmopolitan). However, my own tribalism comes into play in this issue. I really don’t like people from other regions of the country demanding we in New York ban a mosque … but I have difficulty reconciling this. Do you feel tribalism after a sort colors the whole debate on Muslim-American relations, on both sides?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: It does, and I have to admit that I played a small New York chauvinism card in my Comment. One does get tired of New York being a punching bag—rhetorically by self-appointed “heartland” spokespersons like Ms. Palin, lethally by Al Qaeda.

QUESTION FROM SORINA HIGGINS: Thank you for this discussion. First, do you call this building project a “mosque” or a “cultural center” (or something else), what connotations do those words carry, and why does it matter?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: It’s both, with the emphasis on cultural center—the sponsors are modeling it on the 92nd Street Y. It doesn’t matter in terms of First Amendment rights, but it does matter in terms of the sponsors’ motivations, which are explicitly interfaith, moderate, anti-terror, etc.

QUESTION FROM BILL SUAREZ: What is the design of the mosque?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: The mosque will be a “prayer room” occupying about 10 per cent of a modern glass building. No minarets.

QUESTION FROM GUEST: How much do you think all this Nativism and anti-immigration sentiment has to do with the economy?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: A lot.

QUESTION FROM MIKEWIESENBERG: If the Park51 proponents aren’t building it as a symbol of triumph, why call it the Cordoba project? Any other name would not have that meaning and symbology.

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: The meaning of “Cordoba” is not what Newt and Fox News would have you believe. I just did a blog post on this very question. Have a look.

QUESTION FROM CHRISTINA H.: In trying to discuss the issue with friends, I’ve made an analogy to opening a gun store near Columbine to discuss the issues of…taste or tact of the matter for lack of better words. Is that analogy apt?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Only if the gun store is operated by people who favor gun control and sells only water pistols.

QUESTION FROM BILL STOTT: Many “liberal” Americans—in which number I include you and me—now fear that liberal (and, I think, rational) opinions of the sort you purvey are growing more endangered than in earlier generations. I am right in thinking that you think our country now is no more unenlightened than it often has been?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Often but certainly not always. My underlying worry is not that we’re less enlightened than we used to be (I think the opposite is true) but that our political institutions are too weak and paralyzed to handle the problems we have, especially the problems of an economy in relative and maybe absolute decline.

QUESTION FROM GUEST: Will there be a call to prayer?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: No.

QUESTION FROM WARWICKSHIRE: I am am in favour of the idea of the mosque/cultural centre, but i wonder who it is aimed at? Moderate Muslims have no need to be reminded of their peaceful approach to their faith, whilst extremists will not be touched by the symbolism.

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Moderate Muslims don’t have to be reminded, but they do have to be encouraged. To lump them with violent extremists is a huge gift to the latter.

QUESTION FROM RITA: I ask about the families of 9/11 victims who are in favor of building the center. Who are they?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: There is a group of some 250 such families. It’s not hard to find them if you know how to use Google.

QUESTION FROM DAVID: Are you offended by any of the public statements made by the imam who’s constructing this “center”?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Specifics, please. I know of several that have been bandied about, but I’d like to know which ones you mean.

QUESTION FROM FERGUS: Why no minarets? Shouldn’t we espouse architectural diversity?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Why no minarets? I suppose for the same reason YMCAs don’t have steeples.

QUESTION FROM SORINA HIGGINS: A friend of mine (who is extremely opposed to the building of this center) said that there will be something there to memorialize the “Muslims killed on 9-11.” She wanted to know if this includes the hijackers. Will their names be listed on such a memorial?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: My understanding is that it won’t be only for the Muslim victims (there were about 300, if I remember right.) And I’m quite sure the hijackers will not be honored. They were perpetrators, not victims.

QUESTION FROM DAVID: In your Comment you quoted Newt Gingrich saying that America should allow this as soon as Saudi Arabia allows a church or synagogue. Seems like an internationally idealistic sentiment of human rights and religious liberty that you would agree with if it hadn’t been uttered by Newt Gingrich.

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: You’re kidding, right?

QUESTION FROM BR: Why are the 9/11 families who have said irrational, hateful things getting a pass? Does a personal tragedy give a person an excuse to be a bigot?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: They have an excuse, maybe not in terms of ethics but in terms of human emotion, human weakness, etc. The politicians exploiting their pain have no excuse.

QUESTION FROM MEL: If Muslims had the numbers, would they pose a threat to western culture and freedoms?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: I guess that would depend on their politics more than their religious affiliation. The example of Turkey suggests that secular freedoms are possible in a majority Muslim country.

QUESTION FROM MIKE SMITH: Why shouldn’t the federal government pass legislation prohibiting the application of sharia law in the US as recently suggested by Newt Gingrich?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Why is such a law necessary? In this country, the laws that apply are those enacted through the democratic process. There is such a thing as Catholic canon law, but it cannot be enforced by state power.

QUESTION FROM OTHER CHRIS: If Christians had the numbers, would they pose a threat to my secular and atheist freedoms?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Christians do have the numbers. But Christianists don’t, thank God.

QUESTION FROM GUEST: why can’t they just build it somewhere else?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: There are a several questions along this line. But part of the reason for the location is precisely to make a statement in opposition to the kind of “thinking” that gave rise to 9/11,

QUESTION FROM PETER H: How do you feel about the ADL’s analogy of Park 51/Cordoba House to the Cathloic convent that was set up on the perimeter of Auschwitz, that Pope John Paul eventually ordered closed?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: It’s probably the best argument by analogy the antis have. But it’s pretty flawed, for the reason you cite and others. (For example, the building the nuns used was actually part of the Auschwitz complex, used for storage of poison gas). Perhaps I’ll take up this question in a blog post.

QUESTION FROM WARWICKSHIRE: Is it over?

HENDRIK HERTZBERG: Yes! Thanks, everybody. See you next time.





The New Yorker © 2010 Condé Nast Digital.

[wreckhog]

Interesting that it is based on the 92nd st Y community center concept. The 92nd st Y is a rather famous/infamous Jewish center that offers a lot to the surrounding community. A gym which is very popular with all, a theatre for very well known, but mostly Jewish public speakers and entertainers (like Seinfeld), and a half day day care center that is very hard to get your kid into. Sandy Weil (Citigroup CEO) donated $1,000,000 there so that a stock analyst, Jack Grubman, could get his twins into it. In return, Grubman raised C's stock rating. The joke has always been that the kids there are rich, so rich that most families have their own jets. The day care is is considered a great launching point for a successful business career in NYC.