Quote:
Originally Posted by brianwspencer
Of course they both have the right to do it, but it's foolish to try to place one group trying to freely practice their religion at some moral equivalence as a group actively doing nothing but causing a scene by trashing another religion and burning their holy book, whether they agree with it or not.
If Muslims wanted to open an anti-Christian center two blocks from Ground Zero and have piss on the Bible parties, or a center that celebrated the perpetrators of 9/11 as glorious examples of what Muslims are all about, then maybe you'd have a point, but as far as I can tell, they don't, so in turn, you don't.
They can all do whatever they want, because it's their right, but that's just ridiculous to pretend these two are the exact same thing. The only things they really have in common are 1.) They both have the right to do it 2.) Some people oppose each of them.
No more than that, because they're worlds apart, and it's not a matter of "inconsistency" to point that out.
|
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.
09-08-2010, 02:08 PM
Threaded Mode