• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

How many Walmart stores has the left prevented from being built?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,353
1,862
126
Since the left seems to be champions of private property rights in the building of the 'Near Ground Zero' Mosque and are claiming that opposing building it on the grounds that its inappropriate is somehow against the Constitution

I stopped reading after this line. Are you really that fucking stupid? Is building a church or a synagogue appropriate? If so, then building a mosque is appropriate.

I don't like any religion, but, the constitution protects all religions equally. This a very much a black/white issue with no middle ground, no grey. It is absolute in it's simplicity.

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

In other words, people can pick whatever religion they want, no matter how fucked up it is. They can practice where they want too. Making rules about "religion A can have buildings here, but religion B is evil so they can not" is a direct violation of the constitution. No "crazy lefty twisting" required, it's plain English, most 2nd graders could figure this shit out.

Now, if you hate Muslims and don't want them to build their mosque, just say it. But don't spew retarded bullshit about how it's "inappropriate" and that somehow the constitution does not protect them. If they can afford to buy the property, and if it doesn't violate zoning laws, then they can build their silly religious building there as long as they abide by all the building codes.
 
Last edited:

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
Ah, my bad. I'm getting you guys confused, sorry. You aren't claiming that opposing the mosque is unconstitutional, and I'm not claiming building the mosque is unconstitutional. It was Carmen that (this thread) specifically said opposing the mosque was unconstitutional, and various other lefties (including Ironwing) who have said in various threads that opposing the mosque is unconstitutional.

I apologize for my confusion.

I think you are misinterpreting what I said. Opposing the mosque, and expressing that view, is not unconstitutional. That is freedom of speech. I think they are going against the principles the country was founded on, but constitutionally, that is their right. I do think it is possible to abuse Freedom of Speech to suppress the rights of others, it's certainly been done in the past...whether or not that is happening now is difficult to say, but some people with the largest megaphones are certainly doing their damnedest to do so.

Opposing the mosque, and actively attempting to prevent it from being built, either through legal or other means, is unconstitutional. It violates Muslim rights to freedom to exercise their religion.

As for your statements about polling, grassroots movements, ect....I could honestly give a damn. The rule of law (Constitution) is not subject to what is popular, we don't have mob rule in this country. I highly doubt 70 percent of Americans can even reach a truly informed opinion about this issue, let alone are part of any type of grass roots movement about it. What we have is a very small and very vocal group expressing it's xenophobic hatred. Just by the very fact that many still refer to this as a "Ground Zero Mosque" when it isn't demonstrates that.

Politicians are speaking about it because they sense an opportunity to grab votes, I sincerely doubt the majority of them give a damn. Any time they can play on a voter's emotions, they go for it.

Respectfully Werepossum, you are being incredibly ignorant about Islam and biased in your statements about this project. This isn't a victory anything, there is no moral issue other than the right for a minority group to practice its religion. This building is the equivalent of a Muslim YMCA. I really wish you would step out of your comfort zone and visit a mosque in your area, so much the better if you can get someone to act as a guide. In other words, read the first quote in my sig.
 
Last edited:

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76

4 of these 5 articles deal with public financing of religion, religious symbols on public grounds, prayer in public schools, or public schools teaching an elective course on the bible. All of which arguably violate separation of church and state.

The other seems to be a gay man on a rampage.

And here is an example from today where Christian groups have successfully used Congress and Courts to impose their moral values on the rest of us.
 
Last edited:

Kanalua

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2001
4,860
2
81
I am more outraged that there are NO supercenter walmarts here in Hawaii. Of all the places that would most benefit from lower prices and higher competition, Hawaii doesn't have a WalMart supercenter.

I guess our local politicians do not like their citizens saving money and living better.

As for the Mosque, what is the hub-bub all about? Religious tolerance? Come on...next time go to a city council or zoning committee meeting when a Mormon church or Mormon temple is being proposed in someone's neighborhood. You will hear vitriol, bigotry, all the fun stuff. The "ground zero mosque" uproar is nothing new in American nimby politics. The NYC Mosque is just a tool for fundraising for both sides (anyone look at how much money the Mosque planners had raised prior to all of this "uproar"), and something for pundits to talk about and news producers to fill up time with.
 
Last edited:

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,810
8,402
136
I went to a neighborhood association meeting when the topic of discussion was building a Walmart immediately adjacent to expensive hillside homes and right at the busiest intersection in our town center.

The points being brought up was decreased residential property values, traffic congestion, increased crime and noise from having a business too close to residences.

There was no mention of being anti-business. There was no mention of being for or against the proposed building site as a left-against-right political issue. There was no mention of how that store would run small local businesses out of existence (as it surely would). There was no mention of how the store was anti-union, or any other extraneous duplicitous ideologically driven reason.

The people at that meeting were all from the neighborhood being affected by having a Walmart at the site Wally picked. Being conservative or liberal didn't matter one iota. Being for or against big business didn't matter either.

Property values and quality of life were the two issues constantly being brought up at that meeting and there wasn't a single time in that meeting that the residents of our neighborhood aligned themselves politically, religiously or economically that night.

To make the allowance/disallowance of where Wally world can put up shop is not a black/white matter of left against right. There are many other reasons for objecting to where Wally wants to set up shop.

Target, Kmart, Costco and other big box outlets built their stores down the road in the commercial area of our city, WHERE THEY BELONGED. Wallyworld wanted to trump all of them by setting up shop too close to our neighborhood with no buffer in-between such as it now exists, and they just might get their way. Such is life.