But the left frequently opposes the building of Walmarts that are LEGALLY within all local, state, and federal laws allowed to built based on essentially 'moral' arguments against Walmart. That to me is hypocritical and dishonest. You can't on one hand say 'We must follow the Constitution and local laws and allow the Mosque to be built. Then turn around and say 'We can ignore the Constitution and local laws when determining if a Walmart can be built'. Its either legal, or its not for a Walmart to be built. Often the left opposes LEGAL builds on moral grounds such as alleged treatment of employees, "fair" business practices, etc. They then turn to methods such as public pressure, boycotts, and other actions to 'encourage' Walmart not the build there. I see no difference in what the opponents to the Mosque are doing.
But the left frequently opposes the building of Walmarts that are LEGALLY within all local, state, and federal laws allowed to built based on essentially 'moral' arguments against Walmart. That to me is hypocritical and dishonest. You can't on one hand say 'We must follow the Constitution and local laws and allow the Mosque to be built. Then turn around and say 'We can ignore the Constitution and local laws when determining if a Walmart can be built'. Its either legal, or its not for a Walmart to be built. Often the left opposes LEGAL builds on moral grounds such as alleged treatment of employees, "fair" business practices, etc. They then turn to methods such as public pressure, boycotts, and other actions to 'encourage' Walmart not the build there. I see no difference in what the opponents to the Mosque are doing.
Fear No Evil
Again! You seem to know nothing about the Constitution. "The left" cannot deny freedom of speech. If you keep insisting on that, you are an idiot. Freedom of speech is a GOVERNMENT issue. Period.
Again you fail on determination of any physical hardships the center might have. I already pointed out that the "community" has neither the information or the expertise on such issues. You must agree anyway with your BS about city employees probably just as ignorant with their liberal arts degrees. I seriously doubt they have unrelated liberal arts degrees, since most such jobs have educational requirements for such positions. If you are not prepared to prove that the city employees are not qualified, you are an ass for suggesting it. You seem ruinously dependent on making shit up to form an argument.
Again! You seem to know nothing about the Constitution. "The left" cannot deny freedom of speech. If you keep insisting on that, you are an idiot. Freedom of speech is a GOVERNMENT issue. Period.
Again you fail on determination of any physical hardships the center might have. I already pointed out that the "community" has neither the information or the expertise on such issues. You must agree anyway with your BS about city employees probably just as ignorant with their liberal arts degrees. I seriously doubt they have unrelated liberal arts degrees, since most such jobs have educational requirements for such positions. If you are not prepared to prove that the city employees are not qualified, you are an ass for suggesting it. You seem ruinously dependent on making shit up to form an argument.
Nobody (Certainly not myself) has said that its somehow a violation of the U.S. constitution for a city to not allow a Walmart to be built. I am saying its hypocritical of the left to PROTEST, BOYCOTT, PRESSURE, and BULLY a LEGALLY APPROVED Walmart into not being built. I'm saying one that meets all local, state, federal laws. Why does the left not consider it UnAmerican to prevent that business which meets or exceeds all the requirements to built on essentially moral grounds because a vocal minority has made the determination that it doesn't want the LEGAL Walmart to be built?
I'm dense? Read what you are saying. Its un-American to exercise your freedom of speech? Its certainly not un-American to condemn anyone for ANY reason. That condemnation may be WRONG, it may be IGNORANT, and may be STUPID, RACIST, or whatever else.. but to say its un-American tells me you are NOT defending America you are defending speech you APPROVE of.
Nancy Pelosi is certainly TRYING through threats and intimidation. I never said the left IS denying freedom of speech though. Of course they can't (legally) do that. But why are people in this forum saying that people who are expressing their freedom of speech AGAINST the Mosque are somehow denying the Muslims of their rights? You can't on one hand say freedom of speech should be protected by all means necessary and then speech is limiting the rights of others and should be limited. You can't have it both ways.
What kind of education do you think city planners and such have? I doubt anything higher than a BA or BS degree is required. Do you think these people are Doctors or something? PHDs? Hell, if they are elected positions there are probably no educational requirements at all. Have you SEEN government employees in action before? If you have full faith in government I have a bridge in NYC to sell you..
What type of degree do you think is required for these people? I don't honestly give a shit enough to check to see what the requirements are but I am curious as to what you THINK is required. You think the people deciding on what to allow to be built are PHDs or something in international affairs and Islamo-American relations? LOL
Fear No Evil
The needle is stuck (maybe you're too young to know what that means) on your "freedom of speech" rant. I never said that you did not have the right to sound dense, ill-informed, incapable of rational or logical thought. You have addressed none of the points I have presented you with, and I doubt you ever will. My personal assessment is that you need significantly more training in the art of logic and argument. You avoid everything of substance and resort to a mis-applied "freedom of speech" tirade to evade.
The needle is stuck (maybe you're too young to know what that means) on your "freedom of speech" rant. I never said that you did not have the right to sound dense, ill-informed, incapable of rational or logical thought. You have addressed none of the points I have presented you with, and I doubt you ever will. My personal assessment is that you need significantly more training in the art of logic and argument. You avoid everything of substance and resort to a mis-applied "freedom of speech" tirade to evade.
What am I evading? You said its unamerican to condemn anyone for the acts of others. I showed you why thats patently false.
I didn't answer the part of being penalized for the actions of my family because it in no way, shape, or form applies to the argument we are having here. You interested in my opinion on tort reform as well? WTF does that question have to do with people expressing themselves against the 'Near Ground Zero' Mosque?
Fear No Evil
Ever hear of "impact statements"? Who do you think produces those?
Is the City Engineer elected (not sure in NYC)? Do you think a degree in Oriental Floral Arrangement would get him the job? Do you think the directors of traffic control and design don't have real engineers working for them? Do you think the city director of public safety doesn't have an army of trained analysts available to him/her?
Ever hear of "impact statements"? Who do you think produces those?
Is the City Engineer elected (not sure in NYC)? Do you think a degree in Oriental Floral Arrangement would get him the job? Do you think the directors of traffic control and design don't have real engineers working for them? Do you think the city director of public safety doesn't have an army of trained analysts available to him/her?
Now the left is suddenly against illegals? Racist!
The opposition to wal-mart has always involved them hiring illegals. Keep misrepresenting things, it just makes your arguments look even weaker. Guess what? All that stuff that you try and brush off as not being wal-marts problems are caused by wal-mart. So a business that causes actual physical problems for people and business you brush aside but a community center that no one can come up with 1 thing is the end of the world?
Sounds like your father's problem was not with Walmart, but rather with the city for not planning and zoning properly. Your dad probably shops there as well when they have 30 packs of Bud Light on sale for a rollback price!
Nope, it's with Wal-Mart. The litigation is still on going afaik but I don't really keep track. I'm sure it's a common practice with them. And no, he's doesn't shop there.
You're right they do have that right. And I and "the left" have the fucking right to call you the "R WORD" for being an ignorant douchebag. That no way infringes on your rights. Is that simple enough for you?
Most liberals believe that religion is a farce anyway, so I am not sure why they are so concerned with protecting the rights of what is just essentially a 'business' anyway on a moral level. If you believe religion is nothing more than a spaghetti monster in the sky than the church is basically a company in the business of ripping off its customers and community (Sound familiar?) of its hard earned money. If Walmart suddenly claimed it was a non-profit church worshiping the god of consumerism would it suddenly be OK to build them anywhere?
Many companies make money from ripping off their customers. Religions just operate in a niche. Why am I interested in freedom of religion? Because it's part of the constitution and it protects me from their craziness.
Fear No Evil
"You said its unamerican to condemn anyone for the acts of others. I showed you why thats patently false." (copied and pasted with errors)
I have seen no such proof. Was it disguised somehow? Do I need a decoder ring or something?
"You said its unamerican to condemn anyone for the acts of others. I showed you why thats patently false." (copied and pasted with errors)
I have seen no such proof. Was it disguised somehow? Do I need a decoder ring or something?
You honestly believe Walmart should be afforded the protections we afford to religion?
CPA
Elite Member
- Nov 19, 2001
- 30,322
- 4
- 0
How about religion not getting special permissions? I would like that. Walmarts depress me but it nowhere as irrational and absurd as religion.
I guess perhaps you need to define 'UnAmerican' then. Because its certainly not UNCONSTITUTIONAL to condemn someone for the acts of others. But again maybe I need to have you define CONDEMN.. I interpret that as speech, maybe you do not.
If you are suggesting condemnation is something more than speech, than I don't know how it applies in this discussion because I am not supporting anything other than people's right to express their opposition to Walmart, Target, McDonalds, or the Mosque through freedom of speech.
Honestly I have never heard that Walmart has an issue with hiring illegals. Every employee I see is usually white and ugly. I guess they could be illegal still I don't want to racially profile. But then what I don't understand is why hasn't the government cracked down on Walmart? I guess maybe we need to blame Obama here for not enforcing federal law and suing states who try to do it.
I'm certainly not brushing aside Walmart's issues. Sue the living fuck out of them if they are breaking the law. Don't allow the stores to be built on the basis of that legal action. No problem with me! I'm not aware of any pending legal actions against Walmart though in this regard. Most of the time I hear about cities approving Walmarts and the vocal minority in a community throwing a hissy fit and trying to prevent it based on pressuring the company through threats of boycotts, pickets, and pressure from the local media.
We have courts to decide who is at fault. Just because you say its Walmart's fault doesn't make it so. I suspect there is a shit-ton of paperwork that go into approving these type of things and its not as clear cut as you think. Communities often make promises to businesses and fail to keep them as well. I suspect the truth is a bit in between what both sides are saying.
By the R-word I assume you mean racist? I don't believe Muslim's are considered a race, but I guess thats just a technicality. Seriously, if a victim family of 9/11 opposes this they are racists? Its interesting that the left seems so hellbent on labeling anyone who opposes the mosque a racist, but conveniently looks the other way on Islam's own bigoted beliefs. As least be consistent in your criticism. I guess this scenario in regards to the mosque we have a bunch of bigots opposing a bunch of bigots?
Many on the left have made it quite clear that religious people are all essentially bigoted backwards uneducated people who believe in a magic spaghetti monster in the sky. But for some reason in the case of this mosque they suddenly believe a certain religious group is educated, tolerant, and deserved of our utmost respect. I don't get it.
Orignal Earl
Diamond Member
- Oct 27, 2005
- 8,059
- 55
- 86
I think you're trying to employ false equivalency, FNE.
Walmart construction is an issue for the people of a particular community or neighborhood to decide. There's no national hue and cry wrt the location of any particularly Walmart. The people who live nearby have the final say, which is entirely reasonable.
And that's really the way it should be wrt the construction of the mosque in lower Manhattan. If the people who live in the neighborhood and the borough have a big problem with it, then they get to decide whether it's built or not. The people who're elevating it to a national level don't give a fig about the neighborhood or the local effects of the mosque, at all. They just want an emotional wedge issue they can employ for electoral gain. the whole imbroglio really is maudlin pandering of the worst sort and an effort to distract the electorate from our all too real problems and the reasons we have them...
Walmart construction is an issue for the people of a particular community or neighborhood to decide. There's no national hue and cry wrt the location of any particularly Walmart. The people who live nearby have the final say, which is entirely reasonable.
And that's really the way it should be wrt the construction of the mosque in lower Manhattan. If the people who live in the neighborhood and the borough have a big problem with it, then they get to decide whether it's built or not. The people who're elevating it to a national level don't give a fig about the neighborhood or the local effects of the mosque, at all. They just want an emotional wedge issue they can employ for electoral gain. the whole imbroglio really is maudlin pandering of the worst sort and an effort to distract the electorate from our all too real problems and the reasons we have them...
IronWing
No Lifer
- Jul 20, 2001
- 72,904
- 34,014
- 136
That's because you are "essentially bigoted backwards uneducated" or pretend to be so when your arguments are shredded. The Constitution protects the rights of all religious exercise, no matter how stupid a particular religion seems to those of the left, the right, or the unaligned. The content of a religious belief is not the issue. Your attempt to equate corporate profit goals to religion and pretending both are subject to the same Constitutional protection and then using this foolish assertion as a basis for attacking your strawman "left" is the issue. Following up to having your argument dismissed by whining and playing the victim card yet again just plain irritates people.
Yep your positions on the mosque opposition and Walmart oppositions are completely consistent.
Nope, I wasn't calling anyone a racist you R-Word.
That's because your making that stuff up in your head. Just because I won't blame these people building this mosque for 9/11 and call them terrorists doesn't mean I like them or support them. So far they haven't done anything wrong, and until it's proven they're connected they shouldn't be held responsible for 9/11 or terrorism.
Fear No Evil
definition: to pronounce to be guilty; sentence to punishment: to condemn a murderer to life imprisonment.
Since the the whole argument has been about holding people accountable for the actions of others, how could you not have understood this definition?
definition: to pronounce to be guilty; sentence to punishment: to condemn a murderer to life imprisonment.
Since the the whole argument has been about holding people accountable for the actions of others, how could you not have understood this definition?
I don't think I've seen anyone try to take away freedom of speech, certainly many have spoken their opinion on this matter.
That said, there are well known limits on free speech already, it doesn't mean you get to say anything you want. You can find numerous Supreme Court rulings limiting it. Freedom of Speech does not give you the right to impinge the rights of others. Freedom of Speech also does not prevent others from criticizing you. Others can label you in anyway they want to, to a certain degree.
In this case, the "freedom of speech" is being used to prevent free exercise of religion, which is also protected by the first amendment. You don't get to pick and choose which parts of the Constitution (or in this case, the same amendment) you follow.
That said, there are well known limits on free speech already, it doesn't mean you get to say anything you want. You can find numerous Supreme Court rulings limiting it. Freedom of Speech does not give you the right to impinge the rights of others. Freedom of Speech also does not prevent others from criticizing you. Others can label you in anyway they want to, to a certain degree.
In this case, the "freedom of speech" is being used to prevent free exercise of religion, which is also protected by the first amendment. You don't get to pick and choose which parts of the Constitution (or in this case, the same amendment) you follow.
Last edited:
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
Yeah, to blame them for the actions of a few would be like blaming all Christians for the actions of Jim Jones.
I mean how does this happen in the first place? They said to themselves "hey, lets go build a building in the most offense place to Americans that we can as possible. Where would that be? Oh, the World Trade Centers."
Well, no, that's not how it happened...but I sense you have no interest in fact or truth.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter