Poll

Which is more insensitive?

Putting up an Islamic center/mosque 2 blocks from Ground Zero
2 (6.7%)
Publically burning the Qur'an
9 (30%)
Is this like which is worse: hanging or poisoning?
5 (16.7%)
This does not lend itself to a quantitative comparison
9 (30%)
Another idea (please elaborate)
2 (6.7%)
Don't care
3 (10%)

Total Members Voted: 15

Author Topic: Which is more insensitive?  (Read 970 times)

Mike Gehlhausen

  • Guest
Which is more insensitive?
« on: September 08, 2010, 01:50:29 PM »
OK, which is more "insensitive" ... putting up a building near, not at, Ground Zero, or burning the Koran?

Lutheranistic

  • Guest
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2010, 02:27:54 PM »
IMO it's not comparable. Insensitive or not, the proposed community center (including a space for Islamic worship) has a positive purpose. It is building something for the good of a community. It's purpose is not to incite anger, offend an entire faith community, or demonstrate the perceived worthlessness of another religions sacred text. All those things could have been accomplished much more cheaply by other means. So, burn a Bible/burn a Qu'ran, or build an Islamic Center near Ground Zero/build a Christian Church near a site of specific memory for Muslims. You might be able to construct a comparable that way. Besides...I have heard very few people object to the building of the Islamic Center on strictly religious grounds...they tend to be much more culturally/democracy vs. Islam based. It wasn't just Christians killed 9/11/01...Muslims died in the towers, too.

JEdwards

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 629
    • View Profile
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2010, 03:50:39 PM »

But insensitivity to those who died by placing a stark reminder of the religious hatred that caused the destruction of the Twin Towers near it is galling as well even if it is purported not to be.

Mike


So, any place where Muslims worship is "a stark reminder of the religious hatred that caused the destruction of the Twin Towers"?  Admittedly, I don't know much about Imam Rauf, but he appears to be a spokesman for tolerant, moderate Islam. 

We often hear laments about how moderate Muslims fail to "speak out" against radical Islam.  Now, an apparently moderate Muslim leader is asked to lower his profile in the name of sensitivity.  You can't have it both ways.

Jon

Matt Staneck

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Shabbat Shalom! Matthew 11:28-30, 12:8
    • View Profile
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2010, 04:09:51 PM »
With all due respect to Pr. McCain, (I feel bc of the internet I do have to verify that I mean that), I feel as though his question misses the point.  I've seen a couple times now that he has specifically pointed out that the mosque is not being built "at" or "on" Ground Zero.  As a native New Yorker, in the months following 9/11/2001 I was unable to visit the surrounding city blocks that encompassed Ground Zero because it was roped off and still being very much investigated.  What they did allow was to herd curious minds to an enclosed area to view the pit of death that was still smoldering even months after the attack.  The former Burlington Coat Factory, now known as the Park51 project, had landing gear from one of the planes that was used as a giant, full of jet fuel and human beings, missile go through its roof.  It was very much a part of the crime scene.

In fact, that area of Lower Manhattan was such a horror scene that my parents barred me from even being allowed to go to the viewing area to stare directly at the height and depth of the human fall into sin.  I remember as relatives went to go view the Trade Center site I walked around with my brother, my cousin who wanted no part of seeing it, and an uncle as we went to Battery Park, also blocks away, which oh yeah, a fuel tanker from one of these Jet missiles was also found. 

I feel as though the insensitivity runs rampant both ways.  Those insisting this project cannot be built because they are equating these particular Muslims with the Muslims who acted on 9/11/2001 and those insisting that those who are offended are ignorant and need to get over it.  Both sides have no place in the public sphere for this conversation but are unfortunately the ones driving all the media headlines.  I would have much preferred a series of town hall events addressing the project forthright and honestly inviting all types to voice opinions/concerns as opposed to a quick vote by the council and the backing of an arrogant mayor whose trying to claim everyone else is playing politics but him.

The Park51 Project makes a statement either way.  I am not saying an Islamic Cultural Center with a Mosque should not ever be built there, but I am saying I wish much more understanding and conversation went into this.  But then it wouldn't be American would it?   

M. Staneck
Matt Staneck, Pastor
St. John's Evangelical Lutheran Church
Queens, NY

Mike Bennett

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2010, 04:22:30 PM »

Perhaps the US should place a cultural center near Hiroshima?

Mike


Good grief.

The U.S. nuked Hiroshima.

Islam did not destroy the World Trade Center.

Mike Bennett
“What peace can there be, so long as the many whoredoms and sorceries of your mother Jezebel continue?”  2 Kings 9:22

Mike Bennett

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2010, 04:29:25 PM »
OK, which is more "insensitive" ... putting up a building near, not at, Ground Zero, or burning the Koran?

And regarding the question in the poll:

Burning the Koran obviously has no purpose but to be offensive, and those who are supposed to be offended are obviously Muslims.

Building a Mosque/Muslim community center two blocks from the World Trade Center site is intended to be . . . . . who knows? . . . . . the builders claim it's intended to provide a place for worship, education and gathering for Muslims.

A counter question for you:

Which is most offensive to the memory of those lost in the World Trade Center destruction: 

+ Building a house of worship/community center within two blocks?
+ Operating peep show parlors and off track gambling houses within two blocks? (about which I hear no bellyaching)

Mike Bennett
“What peace can there be, so long as the many whoredoms and sorceries of your mother Jezebel continue?”  2 Kings 9:22

Matt Staneck

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
  • Shabbat Shalom! Matthew 11:28-30, 12:8
    • View Profile
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #6 on: September 08, 2010, 04:52:24 PM »

And regarding the question in the poll:

Burning the Koran obviously has no purpose but to be offensive, and those who are supposed to be offended are obviously Muslims.

Building a Mosque/Muslim community center two blocks from the World Trade Center site is intended to be . . . . . who knows? . . . . . the builders claim it's intended to provide a place for worship, education and gathering for Muslims.

A counter question for you:

Which is most offensive to the memory of those lost in the World Trade Center destruction: 

+ Building a house of worship/community center within two blocks?
+ Operating peep show parlors and off track gambling houses within two blocks? (about which I hear no bellyaching)

Mike Bennett

Mike, certainly two wrongs don't make a right, but once again we are missing how this move is both intentional (whether positively or negatively) and insensitive.  Just because we Americans have "the right!!!" to do things does not mean we ought or should do things.  Certainly as Christians we understand that looking out for the betterment of my neighbor is more important than clamoring for my rights.  What I express dismay over is a group of people (either Park51 participants or supporters) who are supposedly community conscience, have no regard for the community in this case because of "my right!!!"

It is completely apples and oranges with OTB and "Peep Show Parlors."  Nobody in the name of either took out the World Trade Center.  The fact that those things are also less than Christian, or negative, really has no bearing in this discussion.  Should they be there either? I'd say no, but they already are, and are in no way related to the current thing being proposed.

M. Staneck
Matt Staneck, Pastor
St. John's Evangelical Lutheran Church
Queens, NY

mqll

  • Guest
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #7 on: September 08, 2010, 04:59:47 PM »
I'm just a little unsure how "moderate" the iman is...I mean, that is sorta the issue that keeps coming around.

But at the core of it, burning the Koran is intentionally sticking a finger in the eye. It is meant to be "provocative" (at the least).

I doubt that the Islamic Center was intentionally designed to be insulting. I do think it is a bad idea.

I would also put my money where my mouth is on this, and would have no problem with a mosque in my little corner of the woods.

Steven Tibbetts

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10214
  • Big tents are for circuses.
    • View Profile
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2010, 07:37:19 PM »
This burning of the Qur'an isn't insensitive at all.

It's idiotic.

spt+
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

LutherMan

  • Guest
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2010, 08:52:13 PM »
This burning of the Qur'an isn't insensitive at all.

It's idiotic.

spt+
Spot on, Pr. T.

G.Edward

  • Guest
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #10 on: September 12, 2010, 12:57:01 AM »
I'm just a little unsure how "moderate" the iman is...I mean, that is sorta the issue that keeps coming around.

But at the core of it, burning the Koran is intentionally sticking a finger in the eye. It is meant to be "provocative" (at the least).

I doubt that the Islamic Center was intentionally designed to be insulting. I do think it is a bad idea.

I would also put my money where my mouth is on this, and would have no problem with a mosque in my little corner of the woods.

An Islamic center with the name "The Cordoba Institute" is insulting and inflamatory to anyone who knows a little bit about the last 1500 years of history.  But most Americans don't know history.  During Islam's prior advance across the known world Cordoba was the eastern-most outpost and a center of learning.  Jews and Christians were allowed to remain as long as they paid tribute and didn't cause any trouble.

Erma S. Wolf

  • Guest
Re: Which is more insensitive?
« Reply #11 on: September 12, 2010, 02:13:08 AM »
   People do all kinds of horrible things in the name of their religion.

   The hi-jackers of the planes on 9/11 were Muslims.
    Those who planned the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City were Christians. 

   Militant Islam is a real threat to the United States.
    Militant Christianity is also a real threat.  (And as one who grew up in the South and knows what a burning cross means, don't try to tell me that militant Christianity doesn't exist.  It does, I've seen it and I've seen the sites where those operating in its name murdered the innocent.)

   I think the mosque and Islamic cultural center should be built in lower Manhattan.  I also think the Greek Orthodox Church that was destroyed in the collapse of the Towers should also be rebuilt, there at Ground Zero.  Together, that might be the strongest statement that we as Americans could make in the face of fear and anger.  Remember, among the innocents killed that day were Jews, Christians, and Muslims.