Quote:
Originally Posted by brianwspencer
I'm not pretending that the site is not more likely to be attacked because of where it is. It certainly is, but that doesn't mean that people shouldn't be able to freely exercise their religion wherever they see fit without fear of being attacked. Mosques are targets in other parts of the country -- and they're only attacked because people commit crimes against them.
It doesn't matter one ounce where it is. If people don't act like criminals, then it won't get attacked -- that's the end of the story. Potential victims of crimes are not the ones responsible for making sure that they don't become victims of crimes. Do you know why crimes happen? Because criminals commit them. Period. No amount of emotion based on location or past events absolves criminals of that responsibility, and the people building in this location are not, and should not, be responsible for those who may commit crimes against them.
|
On one hand you say that the site IS more likely to be attacked then you say it won't get attacked unless people don't act like criminals? Well what if you were the business next store? How would you feel then knowing that the site next to you IS more likely to be attacked meaning that you are in greater danger through no fault of your own.
Once again we aren't advocating taking away any freedoms from these people but are showing concern for the other citizens of the area who are now at more risk because of the choice of location. Does that mean we should force them to move or stop them from building or sympathize with those that would do them harm? No. But assuming that anyone who believes that the people building the mosque have made a poor choice of a location doesn't mean we are racist or insensitive. Just trying to use common sense.