View Single Post
  #11  
Old 09-08-2010, 02:46 PM
brianwspencer's Avatar
brianwspencer brianwspencer is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,894
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 View Post
stop being inconsistent. Both actions are covered under that precious 1st amendment. They are the same thing when you look at it through the eyes of the Constitution.

Both actions are insensitive. Muslim terrorists killed 3k at ground zero and now there will be a muslim mosque right there. Insensitive to a lot of New Yorkers. If the Iman cared, or had any class, he'd understand that.

The Koran burning party is insensitive to a religion. Also happens to be a relgion that the radicals get riled up to kill others when they see Korans burning on tv. If the pastor had any brains, or class, he'd understand that.

The Koran burning party also happens to be idiotic and useless. The Muslim mosque can move down the street and nobody would have a problem.

They are both insensitive to different groups of people.
I certainly don't want to "pull a Riot," but I am forced to when I say: can you read?

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianwspencer View Post
Of course they both have the right to do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianwspencer View Post
They can all do whatever they want, because it's their right
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianwspencer View Post
1.) They both have the right to do it
I was hoping that three times in one single post would be more than enough for you to realize that there's no issue of consistency, as you'll be hard-pressed to find a place where I said they shouldn't burn the Koran....don't waste your time looking, because I didn't say it.

But to compare using a right to freely practice a religion with using a right to exercise free speech for no other reason than to antagonize a religion is insane. Of course (here, I'll say it again for clarity), they're the same in that they both have the right to do it, but they're hardly the same thing in any other way.

One is nasty and done out of sheer, admitted animus. The other is done out of the desire to freely practice religion. You're way too bright to not see any distinction at all and think that it's just ho-hum, people are offended, those are exactly the same thing. That's among the more pathetic attempts at moral equivalence I've ever seen.

Oh, and:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32 View Post
and now there will be a muslim mosque right there.
What do you mean "now there will be?"

There already is one. Hysteria overload.
Reply With Quote