Peter, come on. Do you seriously meant to say that 1950’s Roman Catholicism was equivalent to Islam? Another egalitarian statement IMO. Under Islam there is not distinction between the state and the people of God. Under Islam deadly force can and will be applied to those who resist Allah. Even at its most aggressive, the RCC never went to the extremes of Islam PLUS such behavior is explicitly in violation of the teachings of Christ while it is largely in concord with the teachings of Muhammed.
The only reason to have a mosque at ground zero is to proclaim the victory of Islam over the degraded and immoral infidel of the west.
An ‘American Islam’ would be no Islam at all, just another version of religious hypocrisy.
]]>I wasn’t talking about egalitarianism, merely U.S. law, implying that an exclusion on the basis of religion would not stand under a traditional, non-activist U.S. Supreme Court, without a Constitutional Amendment amending the 1st Amendment. Unless they were sacrificing animals unhygienically there!
As for aggressive, theocratic religions, as late as the 1950s Americans said that about Latinism — with some justification! — but justifying discrimination against my Irish parents, uncles, aunts, and ancestors. For that matter, traditional Byzantine or Russian Orthodoxy are often described as theocratic, exclusive, backward, anti-capitalist, etc. — again, not without some justification! (To be clear, I write as an Orthodox.)
But seriously, how do we define “near Ground Zero”? How are developers, builders, landowners, speculators, stockholders, etc., to know? I was joking about the Zoning Board, but actually that’s what zoning is for, to facilitate these economic interests. Lest the Muslims sue us for a “taking” without compensation!!! Fox News Channel can’t be retained as a permanent advisor to the ZBA. Maybe define a “9/11 National Historical Monument” area, within which these economic interests are somewhat restricted, or channelled in certain directions. Ah, but that would be gummint int’ference….
And seriously, what about American Muslims — there are more every week — who sincerely want to join in deploring 9/11 and opposing their foreign terrorist coreligionists (just like not all U.S. Orthodox are anti-Palestinian, or anti-Russian, or anti-Serbian; not all Jews are pro-Israeli; not all Hindus are pro-BJP; etc.)? If we don’t struggle with our passions and admit them, at least, to the commonwealth of U.S. society, we’ll just make more homegrown jihadists, as well as overseas. “Whiteness” didn’t always include non-WASPs, but the WASPs decided it was in their interest to expand it to light-skinned Catholics, then darker-skinned European extra-Iberian Catholics, then Greeks and Slavs, some Semites, then freckled Catholics(!), then Spaniards. Similarly, it may be in our interest to in a sense breed an American Islam, rather than continually be faced with un-American Islam. (But I believe laws already on the books would exclude non-citizen imams who advocate war against us; after all, you can even lose your driver’s license for advocating the violent overthrow of the government!)
]]>Ah, yes, the old eqalitarian nonesense that begs the question and refuses to recognize the reality of Islam as an aggressive theocratic philosophy that seeks to impose its rule on all of us.
Since, as a people, we have no conviction about anything any more except to protect our pocket-books, there is likely to be a mosque.
]]>Sabrina,
A Greek Orthodox Church was located at ground zero. It was most certainly holy ground. Wherever the Holy Eucharist is celebrated the ground is made holy. And as one priest taught a few us a while back, we must continue to claim more places upon this earth for Christ.
Islam is an evil religion. Don’t fall for the propaganda of the west. Many Orthodox Christians who came to the United States 100 years ago, came here because of persecution at the hands of Muslims. My grandparents left the middle east because life was unbearable under the Muslim rulers. Family and friends were killed or taken.
Try to stay calm when you go to various Orthodox sites but if you are new to the faith I would recommend you stay away from forums if they cause you to become angry.
At our age, fluctuating hormones can really run havoc with our moods.
Amen, Cordelia! Free men and women should be allowed to comport themselves in any way they see fit. We answer only to God, not addle-brained bigots who spew hatred in their sermons.
]]>Sabrina,
You might try this link.
]]>Sabrina,
Unfortunately you’ve taken up the tactics of the left to avoid reasoned argument. Anyone who disagrees with your assertions is necessarily hateful. It’s called attacking with your shield. It’s quite childish.
Since you tend to use the favorite buzz words and phrases of the left (“preach hate and intolerance”, etc.), I doubt that you would be very happy here. Nonetheless, of course, I’m sure you’re welcome to stay. Just avoid trying to lay a guilt trip on people who are too savvy to fall for it. You might be less frustrated that way.
]]>Hi Sabrina,
I’m not really sure how my response was hateful or intolerant or any of the other charges you threw my way. In any case, my points still stand:
1. Your comment about the “futility of conflict and violence” does not apply to the jihadist; war, unfortunately, can change the direction of civilizations; terrorism is a tactic of war and used because it is effective;
2. Non-sectarian is another term for secular;
3. Secularism is not sufficient to bond and self-identify a culture;
4. Non-sectarianism (like secularism) merely marks the absence or denial of a positive body of belief.
These points, which you label “intolerant” are self-evidently true, although you have to have eyes to see in order to see them. This last point is what I think has you upset, but you should know that charges of “hate speech” and the like don’t serve as a sufficient rebuttal. I call it “moral posturing” and it carries no authority here.
Here’s my suggestion. Leave off the personal invective. The questions are too serious to get bogged down in that mud. Instead, if you disagree, state the reasons for your disagreement. Then progress is possible.
]]>Sabrina, I realize that this probably may be too late, but I found nothing “hateful” or “rude” in Fr Hans’ reposte to you. He was just stating facts about Islam. It is no “love” to spew heresy or give in to the jihadist doctrine all in the name of peace and love, toleration, etc. It not only leads to subjugation but quite possibly perdition as well. Our priests and bishops NEED to be clear about our doctrines, not timid. Jesus wasn’t, neither was John the Baptist, Chrysostom, Augustine, etc. As such the EP does a grave disservice to the Gospel when he accedes to the dominant secular worldview of “tolerance” and timorousness before Islam. Going to the Soros-funded Center for American Progress is one such capitulation to the world. Being “generally pro-life” is a giant step in the direction of being conformed to the world.
In the defense of other posters here, I do admit that things can get rather boisterous at times. But to me that’s ok because vigorous debate requires vigorous locution. Since you state that you’re a former Marine, I can’t imagine that anything on this blog is more vociferous than what you encountered in your daily life. We are called to “contend earnestly for the faith.” There’s nothing wrong with that.
Please forgive me if my words offend.
P.S. I put my money where my mouth is. Go to my facebook page if you want and you will see a certain Kool-Aid drinking couple who spew vile things at me simply because they cannot answer my arguments. That’s ok. They’re xenophobic bigots. Their triumphalist words condemn them and their entire worldview. I can take it.
]]>So are a number of Catholic priests…but I don’t see anyone talking about THAT!
]]>