So far too many people have asked me to do a post about the “ground zero mosque” controversy, and using that phrase just makes me feel irritated because it’s not at ground zero and it’s not a mosque, but using the phrase at least means everybody knows what you’re talking about.
Here’s my problem: I don’t know what there is left to write about. The right people have already pretty much covered every inch of this issue and why it’s a non-troversy. People have talked about how the “mosque” is in fact a community centre with a prayer room, and how if you want to call it a mosque then by the same logic the Pentagon is a mosque. People have talked about how Feisal Abdul Rauf really isn’t anything but a moderate, peaceful scholar and how his “ties” to radical Islamic movements have been overdramatized or fictionalized. People have talked about how this wasn’t a big deal to anybody until the usual right-wing media suspects decided to gin it up into a big deal months after the fact. People have talked about how other people who should frankly know better (I’m looking at you, Howard Dean) are acting as apologists for bigots. And of course, people have talked about how this is a basic issue of civil rights, and how suggesting that all Muslims have to be “sensitive” post-9/11 is the worst kind of assigning of collective guilt, something that should generally be anathema to anybody living in a modern liberal democracy.
And none of it really matters, because “Muslim” is the new “nigger.” Except in a way it’s kind of worse, because the (almost entirely white) people screaming about Muslims nowadays are the ones who either still use the word or who are the ones who never really understood why it was bad in the first place. Everybody knows at least one white person who doesn’t understand why black people get to use the N-word and why white people can’t; to them, the word being bad is completely understandable. Taboo behaviour is nothing new, after all, and they can understand a new type of taboo behaviour, but what they don’t understand is that the reason for the taboo isn’t because the word itself is bad; after all, it’s just a word. “Nigger” is taboo because when someone who isn’t black uses it, it’s one-word shorthand for “you are less human than me based on the colour of your skin.” Which is why black people can use it, because when one black person says it to another, they’re both black and that shorthand doesn’t apply.
If you don’t understand that – or if you don’t care – then you’re not really going to be concerned about the fact that there are many different types of Muslims and the gigantic majority of them just want to live in peace like everybody else, because the idea of living post-racially (as best anybody can; we all have our inherent biases to overcome) is one that requires introspection and an inquisitive mind. Neither of these traits has been terribly evident in the mosque protesters.
Related Articles
70 users responded in this post
This is the best post.
When I was in Africa, this voice came to me and said, “Richard, what do you see?” I said, I see all types of people.” The voice said, “But do you see any niggers?” I said, “No.” It said, “Do you know why? ‘Cause there aren’t any.”
. . . I’ll never call another man “nigger” again. That’s a word that was used to describe our own wretchedness!
I think this post is racist, so I feel no need to address its points or give it any weight before dismissing it completely as the excuses of a bigot.
When I first heard of the furor kicking up over this issue, I was surprised and confused, wondering why anyone would get rattled over such a non-issue.
Then I remembered: people are stupid, and some of them get paid to argue.
suggesting that all Muslims have to be “sensitive” post-9/11 is the worst kind of assigning of collective guilt
This.
I don’t know if I’d compare “Muslim” to “nigger”.
Nigger was/is inherently derogatory (I’m no authority on the subject, but didn’t black people only start using it as an effort to “take it back” and rob it of its power?) “Muslim” is still a neutral term for now (how do people who practice Islam refer to themselves?), but eventually either the bigots will come up with some derogatory nickname a la “nigger”, or we’ll start to see some kind of “Jew”/”Jewish” distinction.
The most interesting thing I heard about this whole affair is that there was a health care bill to give 9/11 first responders medical help, as lots of them are getting cancer and respiratory problems. The republicans voted nay to it, caught some heat and now they’re blowing the whole mosque/community centre thing out of proportion to divert attention from them not wanting to pay more taxes to help heroes.
Then again, this may be wrong as I read it in the comments on a Guardian opinion piece: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/23/charlie-brooker-ground-zero-mosque
I’ve made my donation to http://www.cordobainitiative.org/ as a way of showing support for religious freedom.
“Here’s my problem: I don’t know what there is left to write about. The right people have already pretty much covered every inch of this issue and why it’s a non-troversy. People have talked about […]. People have talked about […]. People have talked about […]. People have talked about […]. And of course, people have talked about how […].”
Yes, but MGK, you have to remember: we want to hear it all from YOU.
Could you do a small followup in the comments?
This morning’s Harper’s Weekly claims that the “project continues to lack a lobbyist, engineer, architect, blueprint, and, according to their most recent disclosure, $99,981,745 of the $100 million they intend to raise”. Have you heard this anywhere else, and what significance could it have?
This is sort of orthogonal to the issues re: everyone in the US is a xenophobic ignorant asshole, though.
Hey Dmart, not everyone in the US is a xenophobic ignorant asshole. Just the Republicans we vote into office (stolen David Cross joke)
Re: the whole Cordoba House thing, I agree with you 100% and am on your side.
Re: this, on the other hand…
““Nigger” is taboo because when someone who isn’t black uses it, it’s one-word shorthand for “you are less human than me based on the colour of your skin.” Which is why black people can use it, because when one black person says it to another, they’re both black and that shorthand doesn’t apply.”
I don’t agree with that, though I’m open to being convinced. Are you telling me that black people never (and never have) used nigger as a derogatory towards each other? Because I don’t believe that nigger is value-neutral if used between people of the same skin color; it is context-sensitive, and I can understand that. But one black person cannot use it towards another and assume “it’s all good” just because they’re both black.
I disagree about the word “nigger.” New n-word same as the old n-word, however, I agree that the word Muslim is coming into use (distressingly) in much the same way. It’s used to attack and discredit people and turn them into that mysterious other that certain factions of the United States are afraid of.
And I don’t like the word nigger and I don’t use it, however if a Black person calls me a nigger I will always know exactly what they’re trying to get across, with a White person, I will never know for sure.
Sadly for white bigots everywhere, the closest things I’ve heard to epithets for Moslems are ‘rag head’, which is one of the only times I seen clothing used that way and which would anyway apply more accurately to Sihks (who are frequently misidentified as Arab or Moslem); and ‘sand nigger’, which is even less creative, simply transferring existing racism by adding a stereotyping qualifier.
None of this is to say I’d be fine with racial/religious epithets for Arabs or Moslems if they were clever enough, but it certainly says a lot about the sort of person who uses the existing ones.
If this were the sixties, I’d write a clever little sci-fi story where aliens come down and find us debating about who can and can’t use the word ‘nigger’. And then they’d proclaim something like, “Nobody has the *right* to call anybody anything. We have the *privileged* of calling people whatever they want to be called.” This is right before the Southern sheriff shots them because he thinks they’re going to eat a little girl. I could probably sell it for seven bucks.
But I don’t think “muslim” has become the new “nigger” in the same way “terrorist” has become the new “communist”. If in the racist narratives of America, Islam has long been recognized as something niggers did, especially racist niggers who wanted to kill innocent folk for being white. We have a long history of fearing Muslim extremists and it dovetails neatly with common objections to civil rights movements — these are selfish people with their loyalties elsewhere, who don’t appreciate being American but want all the benefits.
—-
“Nigger” is taboo because when someone who isn’t black uses it, it’s one-word shorthand for “you are less human than me based on the colour of your skin.” Which is why black people can use it, because when one black person says it to another, they’re both black and that shorthand doesn’t apply.
—-
Words don’t magically mean something different because somebody else says them. And your example doesn’t rule out white people calling each other nigger (which I think was a skit on the Dave Chappelle show). Please stop trying to pervert the english language as there are enough high school dropouts on Twitter handling that job already.
Remember children: Calling black people niggers doesn’t make you racist anymore than calling them chesterfields does. Hating black people because they’re black makes you racist.
Calling black people that means you either don’t know they’re likely to find it offensive or you don’t care. The latter is pretty much saying “I don’t care about these people’s feelings”, which… shows a certain disregard for people of African descent, to put it one way.
“Words don’t magically mean something different because somebody else says them.”
So if a 3 year-old girl said “I’m going to punch you in the face” you’d react in the same way you would if a 300-pound prizefighter said it? Because you’re arguing against the existence of context here, which is something that pretty obviously exists. Feel free to pick this post apart semantically anyway, though!
I would agree with you, however, that calling a black person a nigger doesn’t automatically make you a racist. An ignorant asshole, at the bare minimum, but not a racist by neccessity.
RAC:
What you said.
I agree, MGK, that the people who are freaking out over the Ground Zero “mosque” are likely the same people who still think it’s acceptable to use the word “nigger”, but I don’t agree that this necessarily means that “Muslim” now *equals* “nigger”. I think both Spartakos and Jane have it right: even when used among Black people, the n-word doesn’t suddenly become neutral. Consider, for a moment, a light-skinned Black person with a straight nose and “good hair” saying it to a dark-skinned Black person with a wide nose and nappy hair… even if said in jest or in friendship, the silent implication that the lighter-skinned person isn’t as much of a nigger as the darker-skinned person – and, therefore, is somehow “better” – is *always* there. “Muslim”, as a racial slur, doesn’t quite have the same sort of mainstream, worldwide understanding (which is not to say “acceptance”) that “nigger” does. And, as Jane pointed out, even though it does seem that more and more people are using “Muslim” in this way, I don’t think that it’s ever going to have the same kind of racist impact that “nigger” does. At least, I hope not.
Oh, and @ The Evil Whitey: thank you *so much* for your brilliant and thought-provoking analysis of MGK’s argument. It heartens me to see everyday people willing to engage in critical discussions about race and racism, as messy and uncomfortable as they may be, instead of trying to shut down the conversation by attacking the original poster, and positioning themselves as morally superior for doing so.
Oh, wait…
Not context RAC, definition. Nigger either implies the person is … whatever the hell it’s supposed to mean now … or it doesn’t. A 5 year old threatening to punch me doesn’t imply she’s intending to turn into a unicorn and grant me a wish. The statement means exactly the same thing regardless of who says it.
—-
Calling black people that means … you don’t care.
—-
Can’t speak for everybody else, but for me it’s that one. Nigger is not some super-powerful word which trancends the bounds of thought to inflict harm on people. You don’t need a particular word to repress a people. You can lynch a black man using charcoal pictures and crude pantomime if need be.
Jane pointed out not knowing whether or not a white person really “means” nigger when they say it. Guess what; It doesn’t matter. Even while they’re asleep the KKK hates black people. They hate black people while they take their kids to school. They hate black people while they say their prayers before bed. They hate black people all day long, and they even hate the black people they’ve never had a chance to shout “Nigger!” at.
Even if you could force them to never use a hateful word again, that doesn’t make them like you. It just makes them quieter about it. Stopping people from using words you don’t like won’t make the world a better place, nor will letting them use ‘nasty’ words make the world worse.
you rock man
Everybody’s someone else’s….:
Words don’t magically have any meaning whatsoever.
They’re just a combination of characters. The only meaning they have is the one we assign them, and this meaning can be different depending on what your cultural background is. For instance, depending on who you ask, “fag” is either a derogatory term for a gay person or a cigarette. (Hey, look at that! The meaning magically changed, and it was all dependent on the person who uttered it. Shocking.)
But hey, I’m just an 18 year old girl, what do I know?
The cigarette/gay duality still doesn’t depend on the speaker. In that case it’s meaning will generally be assumed first by the language the listener is familiar with.
For somebody steeped in UK slang/dialect/whatever, even Pat Buchanan and Richard Simmons talking about fags would probably be fairly confusing for a few minutes as they tried to figure out why cigarettes sucking eachother’s cocks was a bad thing.. or even possible.
While a word can have multiple meanings, nigger doesn’t automatically mean something different just because somebody who isn’t black says it (no matter how much Al Sharpton wishes it was so). Nor does it have some special property to do things other words can’t do. It’s still a racial slur, and not something appropriate for dinner with the Queen, but it’s not any more offensive than Carlin’s list of things you can’t say on TV.
FYI – for those who like to be on topic: I didn’t realize it wasn’t a mosque, because I didn’t give a shit enough to look into it. I couldn’t care less. So fuck all the people who buy into the “Better dead than Red!” mentality towards whichever country/political system/guy in a cave we’re fighting this generation. As much as the media is quick to spout off about the lack of human rights in the lands of the Prophet, all I need to do is read about Ireland’s “troubles” again, and I go back to hating all of you.
Well I’m American and Black and Muslim all while being raised not more than 20 blocks away from the World Trade Center. So I guess this should be an issue of great importance to me. But it’s really not. There is one Mosque that has a pretty large congregation that has been in that area since before the WTC was built. The lease ran out on the space and the Muslim community in the area still needs to be served. So there’s that.
But the whole Ni99er thing. I don’t know how I feel that relates to this. Sure it’s America and pretty much everyone that isn’t a WASP get’s a turn on the Roller Coaster of Intolerance and Ignorance, but I think it’s apples and oranges when it comes to that comparison. Muslim is the word used in the religious text to designate the followers of that religion or way of life. It’s not a word that some other group used to dehumanize and marginalize a group of people like Nigger is/was. Maybe when people through in extremist, fundamentalist or terrorist to describe all Muslims does it become an issue of negative connotation or a conditioned negative association, but alone, the word Muslim just accurately descriptive of a group based on religious beliefs.
But I’ll let it slide because you’re Canadian, and therefore I assume the “N” word doesn’t hold the same weight it would if you were American, seems like a more academic than practical usage of the word. So this is your one time pass from an Ambassador of the Black Delegation of Fanboys.
Everybody’s…I’m not sure what point it is you’re trying to make here. But let’s assume a hypothetical conversation where you use that particular word. I’m not going to argue with what you felt or thought. I DON’T CARE WHAT YOU MEANT, I CARE WHAT YOU DID. And I’m not going to have a conversation with you about your intent and motivation, or a debate on semantics, I’m just going to form my opinion based on your actions. Thus, if you drop an N-bomb I’m going to come to the conclusion that you are at least an asshole (someone who doesn’t care about their effects on others), and almost certainly a racist (because when a white person says that to a non-white person that’s what that word means).
And to the larger point. Yes, “Muslim” has become code for “Nigger.” That’s because Tea Party People know they can openly call the President “Muslim.”
Re: Ground Zero Mosque. It is pointless whargarbling by attention whores. None of the arguments hold water. People who oppose it are ill-informed.
Re: Niggers. I don’t use the word and I don’t think that anyone should. Just because it is such a polarizing word. There are plenty of words out there that are just as demeaning to particular groups that are still in common use (perhaps not as historically long lived) but this one has had more controversy surrounding it and there is no value in using it unless you’re trying to get a negative reaction. Saying that one group can or can’t use it is even worse to me because it is a) saying that our behaviors are judged differently by race which is contrary to the whole point, and b) if you don’t want a word to be used, don’t use it.
Re: Muslim. It is only derrogatory in the mouths of some people. To me it is the same as saying Christian or Greek or Californian. If you attach a negative connotation to it, that’s your problem and reflective of your personal feelings. Sure someone might say Muslim with the same inflection I use for Browns fans, but that should just give you insight into my own feelings, not tell you how to feel about them. Seeing things trending in the negative direction for that word should just incite people to be more accurate in its use and more aware of its meaning.
I guess I’m one of those dumb white guys that doesn’t agree that black people should freely use “the n-word”. I’m happy to discuss it and see things from your point of view, and I love learning about how certain social norms are treated and seen from different views.
As a life-long Texan, I will say that MGK is exactly right about the N-word. When southern white men of my generation use it, this is precisely what they mean. They may not be able to articulate it in so many words, but the one-word shorthand works perfectly.
But you see it’s not about the prayer room.
It’s about the POOL HALL!
That’s right, we got trouble right here in Manhattan. Trouble with a Capital T, and that rhymes with P, and that stands for POOL!
…what, no one watched “Music Man” last night on Turner Movie Classics…?
I wanted to thank you for introducing me to the term “non-troversy” I think you have contributed positively to the discussion.
Yeah, “non-troversy.” That’s cute. Some people just wanna make mountains out of mole hills, I guess. Maybe they feel it makes the landscape seem more dramatic.
@Starlin Castrated
Yeah, I’m from the US myself and I’d like to think I’m one of the “good guys”. I’m not quite ready to cut out for Canada, but stories like this remind me of how very many idiots we still have, if only because I think this whole deal should never have gotten traction for all the people asking the shit-stirrers “what the fuck is wrong with you?”
“Words don’t magically mean something different because somebody else says them.”
If I say “me”, it means me. If you say “me”, it means you.
Magic!
Which is why black people can use it, because when one black person says it to another, they’re both black and that shorthand doesn’t apply.
I think you’re off, there. For the not-totally-self-aware user, the shorthand is still absolutely present, and what’s worse is that they’re taking SOMEONE ELSE’s perspective for the term, and using it EXACTLY like that sort of insult, without consideration of the implications. The implications being “I put you lower than me by using THEIR term, and putting myself, as user of the term, on THEIR level above YOU.” It’s less unacceptable for use by members of the same conceptual category, but that doesn’t make it not offensive, or rooted in offensiveness.
((Is it possible to strip it of that meaning, that elevation differential? Sure; anyone who’s trying to ‘take back’, ‘subvert’, or ‘reclaim’ a term (“bitch” being foremost in my mind here, because I’m better- (though still ‘casually-‘) versed in modern feminism than race issues) can, in full self-consciousness, attempt to reclaim a term in that fashion. “You don’t get to use that word; that’s OUR word!”, along that line of thinking. The thing is, subverting or reclaiming a term usually means making it contrarily a point of pride, not continuing its use as a derogative. Which I’m pretty sure it still gets used as, even between people of perceived ‘equal’ standing racially.))
Say, for example, I were to call my brother “a son of a bitch”? I’d be using an insult against someone of equivalent standing and applicability as regards the term, sure. However, the intended offense would remain intact because I was using the term to put myself above him, not be erased because of those similarities in status. Would some of the inherent insult be dulled or blunted? Certainly, if you stop to think about it, calling a blood-related sibling “a son of a bitch” is intrinsically silly, BECAUSE of the similarity of status. It doesn’t make it NOT offensive to use between status-comparable individuals, especially if (as is operational in this case) the insult draws power from the historical context of the use, and the referenced separation between the “elevated” and the insulted.
I think you’re on the right track with your thinking about “yelling ‘Muslim’ while white”, though. It’s the current acceptable (well, ‘acceptable to some’) manner of “othering”, at least through the full span of the continent. I suspect the ostensible reasoning behind the ‘acceptability’ of the othering comes from the idea that being Muslim is a choice rather than a racial affiliation, even if the “Muslim!” accusation in most cases is just the new guise of racism from the same old racist mouths.
Here are two things that make me mad(ish):
1) It isn’t at all that the word itself is right or wrong; it’s that you cannot (at this time) separate the word from how it’s been used in the past, and what it has historically meant when a white person says it to a black person. The argument, “why can a person of one race say it and I can’t?” is immature because it pretends that the word’s history is immaterial–as though you could substitute “cup” for that word and the argument would still apply. It’s unacceptable BECAUSE any thinking person is CHOOSING to ignore the contextual, historical meaning, which is insulting to the race the word was once used to injure.
2) I read that they are building a MALL at Ground Zero. The fact that nobody seems to be complaining about THAT, instead of this, makes me want to cry.
“We are the Time Haters and we’ve travelled all the way back through time, to call you a cracker.”
Technically, a prayer room IS a mosque.
just sayin…
I guess I should elaborate:
A mosque is just a muslim place of worship, also called a prayer place, a.k.a a prayer room. That said, it doesn’t mean the WHOLE CENTER is a mosque, just that one room off on the side.
Chris, you’ve tried in the past to suggest that worry about Islam is just like racism but I don’t think your case is a strong one. Being black is not a system of belief. A religion is a system of belief, and anyone is entitled to have an opinion about those beliefs. The Koran, like the Bible, has a number of passages that non-Muslims would likely find troubling. It’s a big mistake of course for people to assume that the average Muslim takes every word of the Koran seriously, but given the thorough reverence Muslims are encouraged to publicly show that book — it’s more holy to them, in a couple of ways, than the Bible is to Christians — it’s an easy mistake to make.
It’s my impression that, for the most part, the people who have the most difficulty understanding owned words are the people least likely to ever have had those words used against them. Similar to the idea that some people are less likely to be able to grasp the idea of white/straight/male privilege because they’ve never had to experience life without it.
If I call my girlfriend “bitch” it absolutely means something different than if a man calls my girlfriend bitch because there is an inherent oppression in a man using the term that I simply cannot convey, being female myself.
Period. End of story. No matter what some commenters here may say.
Same holds true with any other derogatory term based on race, gender or sexuality.
And words are magical things. Any number of outside influences can change a meaning of a word. As an example, please see the brilliant and infamous “Fuck” scene from Wired.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQbsnSVM1zM
One word. Two speakers. Dozens of meanings all in a single 3 minute scene.
—- Dan
Re: Niggers. I don’t use the word and I don’t think that anyone should. Just because it is such a polarizing word.
…
Re: Muslim. It is only derrogatory in the mouths of some people. To me it is the same as saying Christian or Greek or Californian. If you attach a negative connotation to it, that’s your problem and reflective of your personal feelings
—-
You can’t have it both ways.
You’re right on Muslim. Some people hate Muslims, so Muslim becomes an epithet. I can make the case for nigger that it just means “black person”, and is only insulting if you think being black is bad. What the speaker intends forms the meaning of the word, not who the speaker is. Even Tim’s Texan friends usage of nigger stems from their racism, not from simply being white.
I disagree with basically ladypeyton’s entire post… but she’s on to something with the idea of people who don’t see racism in their daily life not having an issue with the usage of nigger. If the idea of hating somebody for the color of their skin seems silly or stupid, how is this word going to carry with it the weight of hundreds of years of opression?
Will this prayer room be home to an imam? Will the muezzin be sounded? No to both of those? Then it’s not a mosque.
I’d like to echo Garfield’s assertment that people easily confuse Islamophobia with Racism. For so long, America’s been under the scrutiny of having to deal with their slavery past that they’ve simply developed a knee-jerk reaction whenever something similar comes up. It’s why they feel extreme guilt over Israel not devoting more land to the “repressed” Palestinians.
But they’re simply NOT the same thing. For one thing, Muslims have PLENTY of countries where they can practice their religion freely. However, their religion is extremely harsh towards any OTHER religion, especially Judaism. Go ahead and check how many Churches and Temples there are in Middle Eastern countries as opposed to Mosques.
In a daring essay, a journalist suggested that if the New York Iman wanted to be truly open to all religions, then the Mosque should’ve shared floors with Churches & Temples, so they wouldn’t feel left out. See how quickly he’d rationalize shooting down that idea, simply because it wouldn’t be feasible for OTHER religions to share closet space with them.
For more information about Islam, I highly recommend reading Ayaan Hirsi’s Infidel and Nomad. As she’s said, it’s amazing that Feminism which is about empowering women, simply overlooks the Islamic repression of girls as soon as they’re born. They claim that they don’t want to infringe on another nation’s culture, but when those cultures still indulge in un-Democratic rituals such as female genital mutilation, (even in a Western country) then it’s time to stand up, take notice and do something about it.
This video I was e-mailed recently should be an eye-opener:
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/07/three-things-about-islam-video.html
It’s too bad that the video didn’t zoom out at the end – I would’ve liked to see if the text formed a picture at the end. Maybe somebody could take snapshots & form them together if they had the time.
The moment America becomes a theocracy, that will suddenly matter.
Also, St. Paul’s Cathedral should totally set up a loudspeaker and allow Muslims to take their services there. I mean, it’s only fair, right?
“Daring.” Yeesh.
It’s amazing that anybody can say something so staggeringly stupid.
DeBT, the fact that “islamophobics” are bigots rather than racists makes it better?
I think I liked Jon Stewart’s “Fox News is funding the terror mosque” take on it best.
John 2.0 said: DeBT, the fact that “islamophobics” are bigots rather than racists makes it better?
No, that wasn’t what I said. To clarify my wording, people easily confuse being afraid of Islam with being afraid of Black people. Since many Muslims come from Middle-East countries, this is a common misconception. You don’t hear much about people being scared of Hindus or Kwanzaa, despite them being made fun of in the Media. Of course, those don’t result in crowds of angry protestors claiming they’ve been wrongfully portrayed, even if it was slightly truthful.
MGK said: It’s amazing that anybody can say something so staggeringly stupid.
So, you’re saying that Ayaan Hirsi is stupid, that I’m stupid, or the Feminists are stupid? Some clarification would be nice.
Also, the proposal to occupy one of the thirteen floors of the Mosque didn’t seem that out of left field for me. Hospitals regularly have a ward where desperate people come to pray. Of course, given that the Mosque is having trouble getting their project started, this might become a moot point. A better analogy would be if there were a competing Church or Temple not far from the Mosque building site. That could work on another level entirely.
The media and many right wing talking heads have blown things far out of proportion, but what it all boils down to is pretty simple.
Do they have the right to put the mosque there? Sure. It’s a free country, and freedom of religion is Important. This isn’t an Islamic regime where other churches aren’t allowed, and we don’t get to say tit for tat about it. Very bad idea, very slippery slope.
Should they put the mosque there? It’s kind of insensitive, and it offends a lot of Americans. It doesn’t send the message, “Let’s get along.”, it feels like planting a flag and saying “Ours now.” Is that the intent? A lot of people say yes, I don’t know for myself. I kind of doubt it, but it looks bad.
If they wanted to win hearts and minds, and make great strides in making Americans realize that not every Muslim is a danger waiting to go strike, like the media has fear-mongered them into thinking, they would at the least incorporate a memorial into the mosque/community center design, if not move the planned center and devote the property to a memorial. Something that firmly decries the attacks as antithetical to the Muslim faith and enshrines the dead.
Can you imagine the shame on NYC if a Muslim congregation placed a memorial before the city finished doing anything with ground zero itself? That would be sending a powerful message of peace and goodwill.
DeBT, you’re pushing a distinction without a difference.
Bigot, noun: One who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
People easily confuse being scared of Islam with being afraid of Black people because it’s the same behavior: The hatred and intolderance of a specific members of a group. An “islamophobe” is a bigot.
I don’t know what this is supposed to mean: “Of course, those don’t result in crowds of angry protestors claiming they’ve been wrongfully portrayed, even if it was slightly truthful.”
John 2.0 said: I don’t know what this is supposed to mean: “Of course, those don’t result in crowds of angry protestors claiming they’ve been wrongfully portrayed, even if it was slightly truthful.”
I meant that Hindu people don’t go rioting in the streets when they’ve been stereotyped by Apu Nahasapeemapetilon on the Simpsons. However, the Islamists got totally rilled up by the mere POSSIBILITY of Muhammad showing up on South Park that the broadcasters declined to ever show that episode ever again. Even though the man under the Bear suit turned out to be Santa Claus instead.
It’s strange that Islamists talk of being singled out for being persecuted when they’re more likely to be intolerant towards Jews themselves. A sure case for the Kettle calling the Pot black.
First of all, if you Google define:mosque you’ll see that the definition of the word, across the board, is “a place of prayer or worship for followers of Islam”. So, even though its being built on top of a recreation center, there is a mosque being built right next to the WTC.
However, its still private property and Muslims have the right to practice freedom of religion. But its also being done in very bad taste.
Its as if the Ohio National Guard held recruitment drives at private property next to Kent State. Is it their right? Absolutely. Is it in bad taste? Oh hell yeah. Do I have to support their efforts? Hell No.
Also, you can not claim people are bigoted towards followers of a religion that specifically promotes extreme bigotry of others. Hating Middle-Easterners because of Islam is as stupid as hating whites because of the KKK, but blind sympathy for followers of a religion that promotes death for committing the crime of apostasy is even more ridiculous.
Before I get called out for my implication that I’m being a bigot myself for implying that Ismlamists might be anti-semetic, I’d like to propose a little challenge. Everyone seems capable of finding someone who’ll be willing to speak up for Islam itself whenever it’s under attack. However, can you find any glowing praise for Judaism from any practicing Islamists? How about the Islamist preachers? The followers? Their wives and children? Be sure to follow your claim with resources – no hearsay involved. An essay about the virtues of Jews from a believer of the Islamic faith would be greatly appreciated.
I’d be very interested in seeing your results!
Let’s remove as much racial or religious weight from the discussion of why a particular word or words are “ok” when spoken by one person, and “bad” when spoken by someone else.
I grew up with my family. We’ve gone through good times and bad. If I call my mother a bitch, I’ve earned the right to do that (though other family members may disagree, either regarding the term, or the appropriateness of me calling her a name at all). However, myself and every member of my family would be up in arms if someone outside my family called my mother a bitch. The reason? We’re a community. A small community, but a community nonetheless, with shared history.
THAT is the difference between one black person referring to another as “nigger” as opposed to a person of ANY other background referring to a black person that way. It goes for any social, racial, religious, or economic words that are used as epithets, as well. If you’re part of a community that has a history like that, there ARE words that you get to use in regard to yourself and others in your community that would be offensive if used by someone who isn’t part of that community.
Is it “fair”? Define fair when it comes to that kind of shared history. Then we can talk about whether it’s “fair.”
Bwahahahahaha!
@ Skemono Was that supposed to be a refutation? In the very article you linked, it refers to the concept of Dhimmi. Sure, you can practice your religion, but you can’t build a church, or convert Muslims to it, and you have to pay a special tax in order to practice your religion, and you’re literally a second class citizen, but otherwise, it’s all good! Be Jewish (or Christian) all day long!
You cannot tar all Muslims with the same brush. Or any group for that matter. And you can’t hold one person responsible for another man’s actions. “But they’re, the same race/religion/height/zodiac sign, they all have the same nefarious intentions/thoughts.”
Sounds pretty ridiculous right? As an African-American I can say that White Christians instituted chattel slavery and the suppression of human rights and only be half right. Another group of White Christians were champions of abolitionism. They essentially read the same book, yet had different interpretations of it.
It would be small minded and vulgar to resent all White American Christians for the beliefs and actions of the few. You shouldn’t hold the Quakers accountable for the crimes of Other Protestant Christians. You can’t say all Christians are crazy because David Koresh thought he was Jesus.
Terrorism is not something all Muslims are involved in, a very small percentage engage in this politically motivated behavior. Certain groups in Islam pervert the Qu’ran to meet their agendas to tragic results. But the greater majority of Muslims cannot be held responsible for the behavior of the few, and shouldn’t be punished for the actions of the few.
The people that committed these atrocities were easily manipulated by the hype and slick words of a few twisted, self serving sociopaths. They became puppets and instruments of destruction and fear because they couldn’t see past their despair and outrage. If you really think you are better than them, then do what they didn’t and use your ability to reason with logic and honesty. Do not deny another human being their God given right to a life of happiness and fulfillment. Do not be an instrument of destruction and fear.
@LashLightning
YES.
Republican (and some Democrat) reps recently voted down care for 9/11 first responders, and maybe three days afterwards, all hell broke loose on this issue. BOY, ISN’T IT FUNNY HOW LIFE WORKS. These people are gutless.
Yes, the Middle Ages were a time when Christians were utterly corrupted by the Church, and effectively suppressed any discoveries that went against their faith. Eventually, through a long slog through history and reason, they were able to reconcile their diferences to the point where Scientists and Christianity can co-exist their beliefs together.
Trouble is, Islam is still mentally stuck in the Middle Ages. They’re on a crusade to convert anybody who thinks otherwise, and won’t rest until the whole world thinks that way. If anybody (and I mean ANYBODY) attempts to strike up a reasonable arguement (such as letting covered-up women have more freedom), they’ll lash out with vitrol for even SUGGESTING such a thing. Usually, the arguement is a variation of, “It’s always been done this way before.” While completely ignoring the instances where following such a ritual in another country with different values would be counterproductive.
Of course there are ultra-orthodox faiths where they obey the rule of the written text to the letter, but by far, they’re mostly a minority. But Islam is a faith where the majority HAVE to be orthodox to be taken seriously. Otherwise they’re betraying their honor by failing to do so. Honor is a BIG thing in Islam, usually dominated by the Father, where even the slightest transgression of their children can be seen as a challenge to their control over their family.
Islam is an authoritariative religion where obedience is more important than independant thought. If anybody strays outside the path, they must be dealt with, usually with force. Just look at how they treated someone who converted from Islam to Christianity:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/08/somalia-muslims-murder-convert-from-islam-to-christianity.html
All of this of course is done in the name of love and peace. If that isn’t the definition of a cult, I’m not sure what is.
One tenet of Islam is to seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave. I always interpreted that as finding out things on your own. We’re supposed to read the Qu’ran everyday. And read the complete Qu’ran in the month of Ramadan. But I was raised in America, I’m not sure how it goes down other places in the world. But I have personally asked Imams and Scholars about topics that were unclear to me and was never brow beaten or outcast.
Some traditions people hold on to are regional and tied to older cultures in the Arab world that because Islam originated in that area are tied to the religion.
In understanding the Qu’ran, there are a few historic supplements that offer perspective. Some of the scripture is parable, some is literal and some is tied to specific situations. A scholar studies the Tafsir, literature that details when verses and chapters were revealed. It’s not an easy religion I will admit that. If you want to get a deeper understanding you can’t just scratch the surface.
As far as what people do and what the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad did there is a pretty great divide jut like how a lot of followers of Jesus don’t follow his example. People allow their insecurity to overshadow their compassion. Harsh dogma and judgment over shadow the tolerance both of these men exhibited in their lives. Quick to revel in the faults of others and avoid working on their own issues. You know how it goes even without a religious context. If you can project your short comings on someone else, a passionate demonstration of their faults can veil your weaknesses.
Islam is not a cult. It’s a very strict religion or way of life. And a mob mentality exists in all societies. Any example of irrational mob violence in the heat of the moment you find with Islam you will find in other faiths and ideologies. We as humans are very emotional and emotions are very much transferable. Sadly there are people in the world that seek to manipulate our emotions and attitudes to bring about their desired behaviors. If we can work on dealing with people as people first without condemning them with negative labels and biases the world would be a much better place. If it’s always “us” and “them” there will always be conflict. Because we always want what’s best for “us.”
Be an example of truth justice and humility and that’s what people will see.
“Trouble is, Islam is still mentally stuck in the Middle Ages. ”
I wish. Islam in the Middle Ages was loads more progressive and invented math.
“. They’re on a crusade to convert anybody who thinks otherwise…”
Stop right there before you hurt yourself. Islam is not some monolithic organization. You say “they” refuse to let covered-up women have freedom? Have you seen Daisy Kahn, wife of Imam Rauf? Not even a scarf on her. Therefore she is – what, not a Muslim?
You’re an idiot who is looking at extremist theocrat loons and assuming they’re the baseline.
Oh, and the woman who runs that website you linked to is the same one who said “Sarah Palin didn’t quit. The lower 48 needed her and she heeded the call.” So quite apart from her being a hate-mongering opportunist, she’s clearly an idiot.
““Nigger” is taboo because when someone who isn’t black uses it, it’s one-word shorthand for “you are less human than me based on the colour of your skin.” Which is why black people can use it, because when one black person says it to another, they’re both black and that shorthand doesn’t apply.”
Exactly.
Speaking as a Black man, this has always been my opinion as to why eyebrows are raised when non-blacks use the word. Now it’s true, the word can be used by Blacks in a negative context (the character of Uncle Ruckus from the Boondocks for example, shit Alan Moore imo even squeezed in a little commentary about the word in “Watchmen”) and by Non-Blacks in a non-offensive context.
But most times, it’s usage by non-Blacks is viewed as racism spewing out in verbal form. And frankly, given history, privilege, and the perception of Blacks as a whole, it’s a pretty safe assumption.
Which makes it about infinitely better than Judaism and Christianity.
—- KD
Now it’s true, the word can be used by Blacks in a negative context (the character of Uncle Ruckus from the Boondocks for example, shit Alan Moore imo even squeezed in a little commentary about the word in “Watchmen”) and by Non-Blacks in a non-offensive context.
—-
Thank you, it’s part of the point I’ve been trying to get across. White + “Nigger” =/= racist.
It bothers me when people talk about “respecting the sensitivities of the victims’ families”.
Innocent Muslims were in the Towers when the planes struck, and they were murdered along with all the others. Perhaps their families would like to be able to pray and grieve within two blocks of Ground Zero, as is their right.
So when people bring up the “respect the victims’ families” argument, it sounds to me like they mean “respect the Christian victims’ families, and pretend that the Muslim victims never existed, or simply don’t count”, and I simply can’t get on board with that.
I would think that once the point is raised that “there were innocent Muslim victims too”, this whole debate should just stop and the community centre should be built with no further outcry.
Salmo said in response to:
“Trouble is, Islam is still mentally stuck in the Middle Ages.” I wish. Islam in the Middle Ages was loads more progressive and invented math.
Yes, they developed a system that’s still in use today, but what have they discovered or invented recently? A look at the number of Muslim Nobel Peace Prize winners is below ten people, and Yasser Arafat doesn’t count.
http://www.islamichistorymonth.com/education/nobel.php
In comparision, Jewish people have a much higher success rate in multiple fields. Of the 750 Nobel Prizes that were rewarded, at least 163 were Jews:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/nobels.html
To put things in comparision, Muslims make up 1.57 Billion people, while Jewish people make up 0.02% of the human population. In fact, the most critically acclaimed Muslim literatures have been in response AGAINST their religion than FOR it. A culture raised in fear doesn’t leave room to grow.
To get an idea of how backwards they are, in Ayaan Hirsi’s Nomad, she told the amazing fact that Arabics have no words to describe sexual diseases. So when somebody comes down with an STD, they have no idea how to explain it, since they’ve never been taught it before, and the language hasn’t adapted itself to keep pace. Not to mention they feel that “It can’t happen to me”, since only Jews and Gays get God’s disease.
DeBT, I’d like to thank you for repeatedly proving my earlier point with your multiple postings.
Two short points:
1) It’s irrelevant what word is used to refer to a thing. If the thing is viewed to be bad, that word becomes an insult. If the thing is viewed to be good, the word becomes praise. Replacing the word does nothing.
2) Muslims are not a race.
@Skemono… you’ve just pointed out a great example of why separation of church and state is good, something I already said. You’re also comparing the actions and laws of an ancient culture with the current laws of Islamic countries. Apples and chainsaws, mate.
You know, I haven’t heard anybody complain about those huge Roman Catholic churches built DIRECTLY ON the sites of numerous cases of child sexual abuse. Talk about insensitive.
I guess it’s not really the same thing, though, since in this example the institution actually did participate in the crime, unlike with Park51.
DeBT, please describe the differences between Wahabism and Sufism. You are aware that they are not the same thing, yes?
Prodigal said: …please describe the differences between Wahabism and Sufism.
I’m sorry, I’m not that interested in religion to devote heavy minutae research into subsets of Islam. I had to look these terms up to understand what you were talking about. You’ll have to ask someone else.
The trick will be to find someone judgemental and unbiased enough who won’t just heap endless praise about one while spouting scorn for the other. I’ve noticed that whenever someone defends Islam, they almost never denounce those who use Islam for violent means.
As much as Muslims claim that Islam brings them together, they have a sorry history of neglect across borders because of tribal conflicts. Just look at how little support Pakistan got from neighboring nations when it was flooded. Muslim nations are usually the LAST ones to help each other in times of a crisis. They won’t even take in Palestienian refugees except as cheap labour, much like Mexican immigrants.
Your question sounds more like a diversion to distract from the issue at hand. Could you clarify your intent?
I’m also a little disappointed that the amount of debating here has slowed to a trickle. I had plenty of other rebuttals that I still hadn’t used yet.