So yesterday, Sarah Palin stirred up a pretty heated debate by using the wrong word over Twitter. And when she got called out on it, she took to Facebook to strike back. Unfortunately for her, the internet returned fire, flagging her message as hate speech.
Submitted by: Unknown
-
-
-
Copy & paste this:
Religion gets more people killed than cars and guns and sickness.
Well, that’s obviously not true. What did your grandparents die from? Stroke/cancer/heart disease/etc? Or religion?
My grandmother died of cancer because my grandfather would not let her go to the doctor. He said the family should pray for her. It didn’t work. Plus, religion starts wars and fighting.
Awkward…
Troll. Liar. Back under the bridge with him.
Jack is correct that the situation is awkward to bring up. People look at me different when they hear the story. They are worried I am a zealot like my grandfather, but I reassure them I am not. I love all.
Religion is typically not the root cause of war, power and resources is. Religion itself is not the cause of war but it is a method of control which can be exploited in favour of those with power. But this does not make it evil, it makes those who change its meaning to their own ends evil.
However, I do see what you’re saying with your grandmother but I again would not call that religion in itself – it is interpretation of it by an individual (or group).
My grandmother was a catholic who once found £20 on the street. She immediately wondered who was most deserving of it, and gave it to charity immediately. Religion, when interpreted rightly, is often the embodiment of humanity’s greatest moral senses, to good ends.
I agree. Religion is not evil. The ideals of most religions are to teach people to see the differences of right and wrong. But the line is so muddled now, every culture sees good and evil differently based on how they were taught it. These teachings have always caused conflict among different people. Anyone who has not lived under a rock for the past thousand years or so knows that the conflict in the middle east is due to religious disagreement. Centuries of conflict all because of people disagreeing over their faith.
The Crusades, a war between England and the Middle Eastern cultures lasted decades. The purpose? control of “The Holy Land” of Jerusalem.
Today, we fight for a figurative “Holy Land” in pursuit of wealth through oil. During the Crusades, the British saw the opportunity to gain personal wealth by taking from the people. We, the Americans, are doing the same thing.
The people who claim they are doing good in the name of their god, only are doing what THEY think is good. The various scriptures are their to teach you to be good to your fellow man.
All religions try to make sense, but they contradict eachother. If religion wasn’t involved in society at all, the world would be a more peaceful one.
I agree with you… except a religion cannot survive out of a society. But I just wanted to point out that the Crusades were not fought only by the British: every single European land was involved, Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, etc. I just didn’t want the British to look like the the only ones involved. Aaaaand yes, it was not about religion, just about money. You’re right.
love how every time the crusades are mentioned, its to blast the european countries who fought. the muslims during that time were attacking the european pilgrims to jerusalem, and that prompted the pope of the eastern roman empire to plead for help from the western, or holy roman empire, which led to the crusades. just clearing that up.
The Crusades were sactioned by the Catholic Church: Any crusader as well as recieving land in ‘the holy land’ as Palastine was known at the time, was absolved of all sins commited in the crusade. The historical political power of the church must be included in any discussion of the crusades. People saw the chance for enrichment and power when Crusading but the driving force behind idea was the Church and the wish to control the birthplace of their faith. The way religion has changed in western culture makes it hard to understand the sway that the Church held in the past, and the blinding effects of the faith that people had in their religion.
The church was the richest body in europe at the time, it held sway in the courts of kings (to opposing the church caused many wars). All of this was tied to their religious standing people now think about Wealth/Religion/Power as singular motivations “The truth is rarely pure and never simple.” Oscar Wilde
And have you ever compared the amount of territory taken by crusaders with the amount of territory taken by Jihad?
Islam spread peacefully through trade to the East and South. But through “fire and sword” to the North and West. The entire north coast of Africa and some of the west coast, the Middle East above Saudi Arabia, parts of southeastern Europe, and for hundreds of years Spain were all taken by Jihad.
Why do we keep beating ourselves up over the Crusades (and allow others to beat us up as well) when the Crusades only involved a small part of the eastern Mediterranean, but the territory captured through Jihad was many times larger?
If the Crusades were bad (and they were) because they were wars for territory cloaked in the guise of religion then Jihad was many times worse.
Actually, the Crusades were launched as a counter attack to Islamic invasions in Spain and the Balkans. Islam was not an innocent party to this. The only reason that we are not Islamic today is because of Charles Martel and the battle of Tours in France.
I am sorry, but I have to disagree with you on that point.
“The Holy Land” was just an excuse. Gavrilo Princip hasn’t start the WWI, and religious disputies are also an excuse. It is just that religious differences can easily be used for hatred motivation, where a lots of different religions exist on a small area. I sould know. I lived through such a war.
Ian, you should really check your facts. The Crusades were not fought by the English against the Middle Eastern culture. The war was between the Roman Catholic Church and Muslims who controlled tyhe Holy Land. The Crusades were primarily fought by The Holy Roman Empire and the Franks. England had a minimal part in this war. In fact, Richard The Lionheart, King of England from 1189-1199, was one of the few English generals/kings to be invloved in the Crusades. Check your facts before you base a rebuttal on them.
Then Love Sarah Palin.
WIN!
he can love anyone he wants and how he wants but i love palin in the night times….
Sarah Palin’s a retard, but I agree that it’s innapropriate to build a mosque there. Build it somewhere else.
Yeah, land is so plentiful in New York they could pick just any other spot!
Totally. They should just trade for some more land on Manhattan with beads and muskets. That still works, right? And they should ask for refunds on their city permits. And on their property taxes they’ve been paying on the land. Because THAT’S gonna work.
If Palin doesn’t want them to build there so much, why doesn’t she just raise some money and buy them out. Done. I’m sure for enough millions, they’d be happy to set up a mosque in midtown instead.
Sure…inappropriate (spelled CORRECTLY here I might point out) to build a mosque on that site, SO, lets build a synagogue or a cathedral or…oh I don’t know….maybe a Library for former AK governors perhaps?
(that ought to be a cheap build..there’d only be one book in it)
People who think Sarah Palin is a “retard” tend to be people who consider Saturday Night Live a primary news source.
“People who think Sarah Palin is a ‘retard’ tend to be people who consider Saturday Night Live a primary news source.”
…or people that have read what she says.
…or people that have met her.
…or people with an IQ over, say… 80.
People who dont think Sarah Palin is a “retard” tend to be people who consider Fox News a primary, and accurate news source.
People who think Sarah Palin isn’t a “retard” tend to be the people who consider Fox News a primary news source.
Ouch!
You got me there…
No wait, what is Saturday Night Live?
*bing*
Oh, i see, it’s a bunch of creative commies that prepares the plan of THEM to take over the world.
*bing*
Can’t find THEM in the intertubez…
But i found another person that seems to be quite similar to Sarah Palin in the history of my country.
His name was Jay Goebbels or so.
That is factually inaccurate. I haven’t watched SNL in 15 years. I came to the conclusion that Palin is a “retard” all on my own. (I hate that term, but I’m just quoting you. I’d rather say that she’s an extremly underqualified, uneucated, publicity whore who fails to use her own judgment but instead has become nothing but a mouthpiece for hard-line conservatives).
Agreed. I’d place a mosque in that, no doubt. We’d do it roguie style.
AHHH….That’s IT! A NeoChristjuedaislambudapagahindisatanostic church!!
If you like wolves to be culled, please like Sarah Palin, if you like wolves, please annihilate Sarah Palin.
You don’t have to dislike or hate someone to annihilate them.
But I certainly choose to. >:/
You say it is hate speach because she disagrees with a mosque being built near ground zero. That is being funded by and supported by a radical imam.
But it isn’t hate speech whaen you say to “annihilate” her because the wolves she was in favor of culling were so overpopulated they were killing off the large game animals, in affect destroying the eco system in that area.
This is called irrational hate.
Not destroying the ecosystem, killing the (keyword) GAME animals. This is what they do. They eat animals. Now if you want to allow for the limited hunting of them, like any other animal, there is nothing wrong with that. But it doesn’t seem morally reprehensible to you to massacre packs of animals so people have an easier time hunting?
You dont know what you’re talking about.
You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about. When they started the wolf hunts, there were approximately 230 wolves and 46,500 caribou. There is NO WAY that 230 wolves could be wiping out 46,500 caribou!
Willis… ever heard of something called a positive feedback loop? overpopulation of the wolves leads to the heightened killing of food sources for said wolves. Once the food source diminishes beyond a viable point for the wolves to maintain their population, the wolves die off naturally, allowing the game animals to reproduce and regain lost numbers. Eco-system was not facing destruction. The culling of wolves wasn’t necessary. Anything that involves people chasing animals down in helicopters, waiting for said animals to become exhausted, and then spring on them to kill them while they’re collapsed is pretty much never necessary.
If you hate your own children and don’t care if wolves kill them, annihilate Sarah.
If you hate wolves, don’t touch them. They’ll overpopulate and die.
…Isn’t that how it’s supposed to work? Was my Environmental Science class a waste of money?
If you send your kids off to play with the wolves so you can take pictures, don’t play with the wolves. If the wolves go after people because of overhunting of their prey…still not the wolves’ fault.
The only wolf I can think of off hand that doesn’t down large “game animals” for their primary food source (well, secondary, but as a REGULAR food source) is the Ethiopian Wolf. Arctic Wolves hunt in packs so they CAN get that large prey, and anyone living in an area with large predators should take the time to learn about those predators and how to make yourself worth more energy to capture than you make when you’re eaten.
FAIL!
…speaking of hate speech. But there’s always a double standard with you commie types.
Lin -> retarded
Lin -> 100% correct
What I’m amazed at is the wording of this poll. It makes it sound as if Palin is somehow propagating hate speech. Sure, let’s call Palin a hating homophobe racist Islamophobic republitard wacko while closing our eyes to the real threat of radical Islam. Liberals love finding hate speech where there is none and completely ignoring it where it really exists. We all know what I’m talking about (unless you only watch MSNBC). Liberals only attack those who don’t fight back. (Case in point: liberals’ treatment of Christianity versus their treatment of Islam.) A writer I would recommend highly to anyone, liberal or conservative, or anything else, really, is Mark Steyn. He is a very a prolific author and an insightful journalist who not only successfully predicted the societal collapse of Greece, but is also warning us of the death of Europe (which is something even the liberal lapdog media companies are beginning to realize).
And conservatives love trying to prove that liberals are tree hugging commie wackjobs whenever they can. We all know what I’m talking about (unless you only watch FOX News).
I agree that Palin was not using hate speech in this case. Oddly enough she’s absolutely right if she’s correct about the Imam condoning the attacks on the US on 09/11. It’s not a mosque thing, it’s just not right to have people who agreed with the attacks to actually be allowed a permanent place on the site of the attacks. It’s an insult to the dead and their families.
But, gneekie boy, you’re a freaky weird nutcase.
I agree with you, religion has been starting wars since it was first created. And your family isn’t the only one who pray for answers….of course it doesn’t work.
Kinda like Governor Bobby Jindal who asked all of Louisiana to pray for the oil spill to get fixed. I laughed my ass off when I read that article. Unf**kingbelievable.
Maybe god doesn’t answer most prayers cuz humanity is so f**king horrible maybe there is no god either way use facts dumbass not your f**king opinion only get facts and get an opinion off of them
Awkward because you don’t know anything?
Yes jack… VERY awkward @_@
…
that’s a scary husband
Maybe. Maybe there’s more to it than meets the eye. I’m not presuming to know this particular situation, but it’s ignorant to think that A. the cancer was treatable – maybe it wasn’t. B. his grandmother wanted to go through treatment – not everyone does – just our culture tries to tell us that we should want and seek treatment – that it’s the ‘right’ thing to do. C. that treatment was affordable. D. that the couple in question were fully informed of all of their treatment options.
I’m pretty sure it was still the cancer that killed your grandmother, and I’m sorry you don’t agree with your grandfather’s decision-he may have had his reasons – she may have, too- and it’s sad she had to go, but we’re mortal. Stop blaming religion for a NATURAL death… because illness is natural, and I’m tired of people treating all death as if it’s a tragedy. It’s not. It’s normal. Sad, but normal.
Your comment makes me sad. How many people do you know who have been diagnosed with cancer and said “oh well I guess I’ll just go die now.”
My Grandpa got Hepatitis from a blood transfusion and was told he would die without a kidney transplant. Because of his religious beliefs, he refused a kidney transplant. It happens more than you think.
A close friend of mine who didn’t want to go through the hell of chemo. Personally, I’m the same way.
I don’t think anybody is saying that the cancer didn’t kill her. What they’re saying is that if it wasn’t for religion, she might have lived.
she may have also went through an extreme amount of pain and spent every dime of inheritance so she could live another year
Or she could have gotten a lot better and survived long enough to see even more of her granddaughter’s important memories. If Just praying for health (and not taking any action) is SO absurd, I can’t even fathom.
correction, relying on prayer alone when you believe it is the best way for health is absurd.
Accepting your death and praying with those you love until then is beautiful.
faith healing is mostly stealing and sometimes, in my opinion 3rd degree murder
It’s true. I mean, Satan took Jesus to a cliff and was like “If you jump, God will save you.” And Jesus said: “Uhm… no.” It’s Gods job to save people who NEED to be healed, not people who are too stubborn to do so by conventional means.
Or people who are too poor to do so by conventional means.
If it’s God’s job to save people who need healed, he’s doing a lousy job of it. These comments are just hopping with people who have anecdotal stories about people dying from cancer!
Gosh. Maybe we can get together and pray on the steps of a courthouse. That’s the only way to cure cancer, right? I mean, why the hell else would a group of people say to themselves, “Where can we pray? The church? No, let’s do it on federal property so we can get kicked off and play the victim because the public education system failed to teach us crucial things about our country. Like the separation between church and state!”
Now, usually, I find myself at ends with religion…but this time, I honestly don’t see this as being right.
I have very few things I don’t want done to my body if I’m confronted with a terminal illness, but if I did believe in a hell, and that you’re a bad person for going against “god’s will” in the form of cancer…well, if you can accept death along with your family, that’s your choice.
On a purely logical stand point, though, Religion removed the hope that medical diagnosis and analysis may have given her.
Joseph Stalin was the worst mass murderer in the history of mankind. Estimates put the number killed at about 20 million. And he did it all in the name of religion.
…Oh wait, that’s right, he was an atheist that persecuted millions of priests, nuns, monks, and generally anyone that publicly associated themselves with a religion! That’s right!
Check, and mate.
hey, I a smart failblogger!
+1000 internets
Don’t be an idiot. Stalin had people killed because he was a tyrant, not because he was an atheist.
Check mate because you named one atheist who killed?
What about the billions that religion is directly responsible for? And Stalin didn’t murder because he was atheist whereas religious people do so in the name of God.
Play may continue.
Why is everyone painting this with-not even a brush- but a bucket? Not all religion is the same. Yes, there are extreme groups of different religions. But many terrorists hide behind religion. Let’s not loose site that this group that wants to build a mosque in NY, is a group that touts that they are seeking religious tolerance and freedom. But will not list where the finances are coming from, nor do they acknowledge a sworn enemy of our ally and the US as a terrorist group. Remember just because they are doing so “in the name of God, Allah, or whoever”, they are doing so as terrorists. They should be viewed as such. Religion is used as scapegoat. You may think me as narrow minded but many of these ‘zealots’ have been blinded from the truth. I am very conservative in my thinking, and I think that there is one true God, has been since the beginning of time. It’s not Allah. I know that there are tomatoes getting ready to be catapulted at me, that I am narrow minded. I have that right. I believe that I know the truth, it was handed down through the Bible. Many have tried to point errors, contradictions ect. But can any one give a legitimate one? I believe that we should be tolerant of people. I also have a moral obligation to spread what is the truth. Many say the truth is relative, what is true to me is not to everyone. Truth is truth. I am not trying to be an elitist. There are many things wrong with every religion, and its leaders. I am not perfect! But I know who is, and religious zealots killed Him too. We live in an imperfect world, for now we have to get used to it.
I don’t mean to start arguing with you, but:
1. Have you ever considered the possibility that your God and Allah are one and the same? That people just interpreted things differently? Take the Jews for example. They may not have believed Jesus was the Messiah, but they believe in the same God as the Christians, only they call him Yahweh.
2. You say you “have a moral obligation to spread what is the truth”, but how do you know what is the truth? Where you there two thousand years ago when Jesus was crucified? What about for all the stuff that happened before that? You can’t know for sure what is the truth just based on what is written in a book. Many religions have “holy books” which they believe to be the truth. Why is yours necessarily the ONE? Yes there are things from the Bible that can be proven, but did you know that there’s also strong evidence that the Jews plagiarized the book of Genesis from the Babylonian book of creation as a response of sorts to their enslavement in Babylon at the time?
Yet again, I don’t wish to argue with you. I do believe there is good in religion, as well as bad. I just refuse to believe I know what is the truth when in reality none of us do. I’m just pointing out the facts (or lack thereof) as I know them.
I strongly agree with you.
Minor correction there. After the desecration of the temple in Jerusalem many generations ago, Jews only refer to God by his titles. I forget all the intricacies of how it’s spelled in scripture, but he’s always referred to as Adonai, which is his title, not his name.
I’m not sure, but I think Allah is the same way.
Oh, by the way, about Allah and Adonai: the Jews and the Muslims used to have a much friendlier relationship, and there are even legends in Jewish lore about where the Muslims came up in arms to defend the Jews. I forget ALL the details.
A religion teacher told me that Christianity, Judaism and Islam all worship the same thing just in different ways.
And religions started as a way to explain things, nowadays we don’t need it for that reason. I’m not saying anyone should abandon their faith, just don’t use it to justify hate and fighting or try to force it on other people.
Religion is fine as long as it doesn’t control someone’s every single action and doesn’t negatively affect someone else.
Also suicide bombers like the ones responsible for 9/11 aren’t muslim. They’re part of a little cult like some of those Christian ‘religious movements’ who want members to give away everything and brainwash them. Just wanted to say that.
and of COURSE you are aware that there were a lot more gospels than the few that made the final “edit” of the bible, right? the problem was that the stories and teachings were a little inconsistent, sometimes jesus was all about smiting, like the old testament god and sometimes he was all peace and love, so the guys that put the bible together made a decision about which way the religion was going to go. if it had been edited differently so many other opinions would be “the lord’s will”!!
You are an idiot!
Religion is never the reason for a war though, Tyrants just use it as a ‘legitimate’ reason for acheiving their goals.
noone said he did it because he was an atheist.
….stop your whining.
He was an atheist, though, and hated religion. So you and Stalin have a common thread, much like me and tormequada have a common thread. I can argue, however, that tormequada never truly believed in my faith while you cannot make that arguement of Stalin’s lack of faith.
Stalin wasn’t an atheist. He was actually why the USSR went from an atheist state to a secular state, because he was raised orthodox and still was religious. However, you’re right, he didn’t kill all those people in the name in religion.
YES!
Not enough people underline that. Stalin didn’t show his faith publicly because it would go against the image he needed for his political carreer, but he was christian!
oh-pulease
people don’t underline it because they are informed. Not only was Stalin an Atheist, but he was known to publically humilliated his Christian mother. Sorry, but your claim is 100% false
you know, this was a rational, nice discussion until we started insulting each other. can we just play nice, for once, and state our opinions without calling each other retard or zealot or idiot? i think that as long as the mosque isn’t being funded by radical islamists, then there’s no reason not to build it. i also don’t really like sarah palin, but that’s just because im a democrat… i don’t want to kill her, i just don’t agree with her opinions.
Stalin didn’t necessarily “hate” religion. It’s just a simple matter of the marxist/communist/socialist forms of government having no room for religion.
Those forms of government always begin by stamping out religion. Truth is not relative to religious people as tyrants would prefer. Religious people believe that the Word of God is the only absolute truth and, as such, an ever-changing and “progressive” truth doesn’t go over well with them.
The same thing is under way in America.It makes no difference to me whether you are a thiest or an athiest, but it does matter to those who would be your master. No prayer in schools, No ten commandments in court, and no nativity scenes at Christmas. Religion must be marginalized before ths progressives can accomplish their goals.
When you take away people’s fredoms, you take away all that is good in man.
Your idea of “progression” is exactly what causes genocide and anguish.
Jesus’ idea of progression was to serve others above yourself. I’ll follow Jesus instead of your “progression” thanks.
If you are living in America, you are already experiencing the type of progression that strips away individual rights.
The progressive model does not accomodate the individual. You are a part of this group or that group and therefore subject to these rules or those rules.
Under the progressive model, only government can save you and it can only save you if it can also save everyone.
My religion tells me that I alone am responsible for my salvation.
BULLS**T!
That’s not what the progressive model you’re so afraid of is about. It’s about extending civil rights to the maximum number of people, not just white males or Christians.
Your religion (assuming it’s Christianity) doesn’t say any such thing. It says that Jesus is responsible for your salvation, and the only thing you have to do is let him do it.
Don’t argue with him. He probably doesn’t even believes the absurdities he spews, he’s only into insulting actual progressives, and you know what we evil commies say: “Don’t feed the troll.”
But the purest point of the communist dream is a society where everyone works for the good of others, sharing their labours and rewards.
So, Jesus was a communist
And a zombie. Jus’ sayin.
Communism demands, necessarily, that everyone give their all to the State, otherwise it can’t work. Therefore, nobody can give any allegiance to God or any religion.
Therefore, Jesus was definitely not a communist.
Think about it.
Jesus said that everyone is the same. That’s what communism says. Maybe not just that, but that’s the most important part of it.
Then couldn’t I just as easily say the leaders of the Crusades were just tyrants, and the fact that the were Christians was just a coincidence?
“Stalin had people killed because he was a tyrant, not because he was an atheist.”
Um nope, sorry, the above statement is incorrect. You are only seeing it the way you want to see it, because the point I made is a good one.
The fact is, one of the pillars of Communism is the ABSOLUTE REMOVAL OF RELIGION. The fact is, in the name of this ideology, Stalin killed MILLIONS. Throw in Hitler’s numbers, and one could very reasonably argue that atheism has killed many, many more times the number of people that religion has killed.
Here’s the problem with what you just said:
Neither Hitler nor Stalin was an atheist.
This is a common misconception, but they WERE NOT ATHEIST!
It’s a common misconception that Stalin *wasn’t* an atheist. He was raised religious, but under his Communist dictatorship, religion was something to be stamped-out.
Hitler was, at-best, non-religious, if not atheist himself. But I think we can all agree he was a persecutor of religion.
But again, you are missing the point that these dudes killed upwards of 40 million between the two of them, and it was most certainly NOT IN THE NAME OF RELIGION.
Stalin was an atheist. It was raised as christian as everyone at his time.
Mind you, there are more atheist who were raised as religious people, at least till puberty, than atheists raised by atheists since childhood. More importantly, being religious when young, especially in childhood, doesn’t prevent you to be atheist in the future.
Same for Hitler. He was raised as christian, but he became an occultist/spiritualist before founding its nazi movement (see the theory on racial purity, the Thule movement, the swastika being a satanic symbol, i.e. the opposite of the “raising sun” used by buddhists, christians and other religions (my romanic church is full of those reverse-swastika symbols), and the SS pagan rituals).
Hitler was very religious. The ideals of naziism are based off of Christian ones. (Not bashing Christians here)
Oh, come on. Hitler would have killed all the Jews in the world, if he had had enough time. He would have, I’m telling you, and they’re more than 20 millions. He just didn’t have enough time, because the Russians (together with the British and the Americans, yes) beated him eventually. And he was so disappointed he committed suicide.
One piece of information is check and mate? You have a low threshold for such a statement.
well, he COULD also bring up polpot, stalin, lennin, Khemer Rouge, Che Guevara, and other atheistic leaders, but why bother, just the one is check and mate.
He did bring up Stalin, and by proxy Lenin. Pol Pot was the father of the Khmer Rouge, so you’re repeating yourself, again. Let’s just step away from the fact that the Khmer Rouge did not kill people for religious reasons, shall we? Che Guevara didn’t kill people for religion, either – they were pushing a political agenda and as rebels, ended up using terrorist tactics that worked. Sixty percent of Cuba is Catholic, so I don’t think you’re winning anyone over with the ‘all commies are atheist bastards’ crap. If you’re going to pull up names, at least research what they did and what they stood for before inserting your foot in your mouth.
easy killer. Noone is saying Atheists are evil, they are only saying people who claim that religions creates war are wrong, that’s all. No foot-in-mouth, no agression, just using facts.
On a completely different story, the bible does tell us to love our neighbors and do everything we can to edify each other.
Without God we are left with human nature and inclinations, which is simply to devour and aquire, which many Atheists in power have shown us.
Religions have created numerous wars, as stated by an eloquent young man below. To say that they haven’t is just plain ignorant.
The Bible says a lot of things, including and demanding the death of homosexuals and those who curse their parents. Are you backing those up as well, or are we being selective with the Word of God?
Without God we are left with reality – who we are as people. It doesn’t take an imaginary bearded man sitting up on a cloud to get us to do the right thing. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It doesn’t matter if there’s a holy book involved or not.
go ahead and read the story of Jesus (the New Testiment), but make sure to bring your apetite, cause you’ll eat every word you just said. It’s about freedom from the law and treating each other without…
..
.
wait for it….
.
.
judging ANYONE
Man is corrupt and will use anything they can to gain power, which Jesus also fortells us. But we are to tolerate them nonetheless and even.
.
.
.
wait for it..
.
.
love our enemies!!
It’s a cool book, the bestseller of all time, actually. Give it a try.
Freedom from the law and treating each other without judging anyone?
Did we read the same bible? Mine wasn’t nearly a quarter as tolerant as what you say.
There were parts about how homosexual people should die and will go to hell and such, in mine. Hardlt tolerant of each other, seems to me.
You’re a moron.
Agreed
And you just can’t think of a good retort
since when is stating facts moronic?
jesus was a pretty progressive guy, whose ideas got fckd up by the church, politicians and others who abuse their powers to gain even more
i dont get why anyone whould build a mosque in the middle of downtown new york. Why not build it somewhere ppl live instead of work?
Then again im not well versed in Islam so maybe they go to it on their lunch break? Idk
Too deep comment structure, so I can’t replay to jo directly:
Tell me if he only should read the new testament, why all the big christian churches also state the old testament as part of their holy book?
oh, no, i never said don’t read the old testiment. Just read the whole book before giving ignorant comments. Jesus changed many, many things, including liberating man from the laws and allowing God to forgiving each individual indefinately
So you are openly admitting that your religious book contradicts itself horribly? Good job, dude!
The bible is full of horrible, horrible laws and stories. One contradictory statement by jesus does not cancel those out, dude. If anything, it just shows that the authors of the bible were very different people who were following very different gods (and therefore makes the christian god a bit unbelievable).
But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.
**you, sir, have also been brainwashed**
To Pun-isher,
Do good to those who hate you: So you’re pro-Mosque then, as it was islamic extremists who hated you enough to kill themselves to hurt you and building the Mosque is a very good thing to show that you have forgiven them for their selfish act.
I couldn’t care less where people build thier temples or idols, as long as I’m not forced upon them. As a Christian I am to serve others, not judge. I can yell at other Christians for being hypocrits, and that is all (and yes, that does fill up most of my time.)
Yes. The Bible contradicts itself horribly. I had to draw the conclusion that some of the texts included were never “holy scripture” in the first place. Leviticus in particular. I realized this when I saw that it contained detailed instructions on the proper way to sell one’s daughter into slavery. I believe in God, and I don’t believe He ever condoned that. Leviticus is some old (and horrible) law book that got stuck in by mistake just because the person(s) who wrote it mentioned God a lot.
As opposed to Thor?
I spent this past weekend with friends and strangers, all of whom are either wiccan or atheists. I was the only Christian in the bunch. I can honestly say that, having heard a self-proclaimed “peace-loving hippie witch” state the fact that she hates anything Christian and hope it all burns, I’m sick of this hypocritical crap.
Mrs. Palin may not be all that bright, but she wasn’t being hateful. Not nearly as hateful as a lot of you have been when implying she has no right to her opinion. Please, by all means, have your opinions, but everyone else gets their own as well. Yours isn’t the only one that matters.
Religious issues, wow. . . Intelligent discussions being one thing; spewing religious (or anti-religious, as the case may be) intolerance being another, remember that those of us who are unwilling to bend are most likely to break.
Jesus is in the Ikea Catalog???
OMG I almost spat coffee all over my keyboard from laughing at your hilarious comment!
WIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Omg that made my day. After reading all the depressing, petty comments made by both sides, this comment was totally WICKED!!!!! I love it.
Thank you so much!!!
Fail.
I said best seller of all time, not of the year
Yo Pun-isher, you know what the second best selling book is? “Quotations from Chairman Mao”
Just because something sells well doesn’t mean it’s a good book
Yo fribble. The mass percentage of bibles were owned by people by thier own free will. You were horribly persecuted if you didn’t have Mao’s “little red book” on you at ALL TIMES.
Also, I’d recommend reading Chinaman mao’s book.
It ain’t funny, you ass.
I have read the bible, and it contradicts itself throughout the entire text
No, not really. Please provide examples. I think you’re a troll and a liar.
What parts contradict eachother?
Agreed. There are numerous examples, but here are just a few:
In Genesis, who was created first, beasts or man? According to GEN 1:25-26, it was beasts then man. But according to GEN 2:18-19, it was man then beasts.
How many animals of each kind did Noah take on the ark? GEN 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.
OR
GEN 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, GEN 7:9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.
For the New Testament, the first thing that jumps to mind are the genealogies of Jesus, which differ depending on which gospel you’re reading.
How did Judas die? According to MAT 27:5, he hanged himself. But according to ACT 1:18, he “burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out.”
Did the men with Paul/Saul hear God when He spoke to Paul? Well, In ACT 9:7 they did, in ACT 22:9, they didn’t.
I’m not an atheist, but yes, it does. It’s a mess, actually. The Old Testament contradicts itself, the New Testament contradicts the Old, and Revelations is on crack.
But I still believe in God. Being misquoted can happen to anyone.
*likes* I would say religion causes the problems, not god. When people forget what religion is all about and only like it for it’s tradition. All they care about is making their religion look good by having more people. They don’t care about the means used or the reason for the religion.
I so <3 you
First off, it is actually fairly rare to find a war that does not involve religion as a catalyst, cause (direct or indirect), or reason for perpetuation. That is not to say that every war began because some religious fanatic began a genocide but different religions meeting often leads to extremist violence. Many times religion is not what a conflict is about but because of the aggressive nature people display when they perceive a threat to their faith it is often dragged into the fray as a major issue.
Secondly while the bible may say that one should love thy neighbor that does not mean that everyone obeys that rule. Just because a person’s religious text says one should do something does not mean it will be done or the world would be a much pleasanter place, but additionally not every religion claims the bible as its religious text, or even has such a text. Additionally one may mention that many religious sects have extremely different interpretations of what these texts request of their followers.
Finally I must say as an agnostic who has considered atheism, I find your last statement extremely insulting. Obviously you have disregarded the majority of history, up until modern times virtually every person in power has been of some religion, including dictators, the pre-Revolutionary monarchy of France being a prime example of human greed. Personally, while religion-less, I do like to believe I am more than a being ruled by unconquerable urges to devour and acquire, but then again that’s just me.
It’s not that comforting to think that the only thing keeping you from “devouring and acquiring” is a metaphysical concept. Whether God created it or not, we are both seeing the same world here. Do you truly believe that the only morality comes from such a complex and controversial concept as having a deity? That knowledge of a god is the only motivation for ethics and rules? Do you really put so little faith in your creator that he could instill a drive for goodness into humans, even without them knowing of his existence?
I in no way speak for every atheist, some of which, like some of all people, can undoubtably be corrupt. However, I have morals. They spring from the emotion called empathy.
It’s not that comforting to think that the only thing keeping you from “devouring and acquiring” is a metaphysical concept. Whether God created it or not, we are both seeing the same world here. Do you truly believe that the only morality comes from such a complex and controversial concept as having a deity? That knowledge of a god is the only motivation for ethics and rules? Do you really put so little faith in your creator that he could instill a drive for goodness into humans, even without them knowing of his existence?
I in no way speak for every atheist, some of which, like some of all people, can undoubtably be corrupt. However, I have morals. They spring from the emotion called empathy, the ability to imagine life from another’s perspective. Truly, if there is a god or gods, this is their greatest invention, for it brings morality down to a level humans can understand and use. The ability to find one’s own morals is what makes us humans, gives us purpose and thought. We are not puppets, following rules we do not understand.
This reminds me actually of the story of Adam and Eve. When they partook of that pesky forbidden fruit, they saw what God saw: the difference between good and bad things. With that knowledge comes the responsibility to have and the necessity for morals. With it, sadly, also comes the potential to abuse them.
Ideas and choices, empathy and compassion, do not require a god or religion. They require humanity to understand.
We should love our neighbors, but we should also have the courage to question why. Otherwise, we are just puppets in a divine comedy, committing every human mistake and virtue without reason. I’m sure you know in your heart there’s more than your religion keeping you from losing yourself to selfish hedonism. You can say it’s from God, you can say it’s from within, but I know there’s more than just obligation to your morality.
I wouldn’t mind sitting with you and discussing a few points over a beer. My first question would be this:
What other animal holds the capacity to have this fixated empathy?
In other words: What animal in nature isn’t first controlled by the need to devour and aquire, but rather the need to love and hold empathy?
If you agree that such an animal does not exist, then how did humans aquire it? Moreso, the human condition to corrupt has not changed in written history,
and neither has the human condition to blindly follow courage.
I’m sorry, but I believe your lack in faith is a luxury built within you from being in a society where compassion and empathy is freely given. The world does not work this way, my Godless friend, and it is those who surround you with faith that has built your environment to be so loving.
If i am wrong, then please show me the free society and loving, compassionate Atheists
the wars in iraq etc. are all to do with atheism then are they? No religious influences at all there then, huh?
How about the American hatred of Muslims? Standing together screaming we are Christians; we hate muslims and f*gs?
Religion is not the root cause of all wars, no. However people who are so inclined to stir up war and ill feeling use religion as justification…
About you’re last paragraph, wouldn’t that also mean that countless religious people, once they have power, convert to atheism? I ask this because people, regardless of which faith they believe in, will turn against their teachings in order to either sustain their current power, or -more than likely- will try to increase their influence and power.
look, Pun-isher. i am an atheist. i am a perfectly nice person who would never think of doing anything horrible. i prefer to believe that it is the way a person is raised, not what specific religion they belong to, that causes them to do horrible things… although sometimes mental illness is a cause as well.
. . . Don’t forget Mao Zedong, the Gang of Four, and motha-uckin’ Lin Biao.
Khmer Rouge killed people long after Polpot died, which is why I mentioned it twice. And I said Che didnt kill for religion, fact is, you a commie, you are an atheist. You cannot be both, the political philosophy of communism doesnt allow for it. Its like saying you are an American, but you support socialism, cant do it, doesnt work.
You are such an idiot. Communism is in no way diametrically opposed to religion; even if it were opposed to Christianity, which I don’t feel like addressing, I’m sure you’re making the mistake of equating theism with Christianity, because you are a zealot. Also, I am, legally and by self-identification, an American; although I don’t happen to support socialism generally, if I were to say that I did, there is nothing about that that “doesn’t work”. To claim otherwise reveals a fundamental failure to grasp reality. I think you live in some sort of solipsistic fanatical fantasy; please don’t try to apply the logic that applies in that universe to the one that the rest of us inhabit. Asswipe.
i’ve lived in communist countries. your view is not true. perhaps idealistically this is true, but i do not know of a single communist country that does not have rampant religious persecution, with the exception of those that are indigenous (buddhism, animism, ancestor worship). even then, if they are practiced outside of a state-controlled environment, you will be punished. North Korea is an example of this. Again, perhaps this is not “book” communism, but the way it is practiced in all 4 current communist states is oppressive towards religion.
sometimes, the best way to really know something is to experience it. unless you have, you should not be so quick to reply. often, you are just as much a victim of propoganda as any other person.
North Korea is not Communist. At all.
It’s a fascist dictatorship.
Communism is a country governed to make all people equal. Last time I checked Kim Jong-Il was not equal to the peasants of N. Korea
right, this is why i said it is not “book” communism. none of the communist states are actually communist, and all of them have/have had dictators. the fact is, vietnam, china, and n. korea – all which claim communism as their form of government – are religiously oppressive societies.
sorry, i am an american and a socialist and america has a socio-capitalist system. without socialism you’d have no fire dept, police force, or public schools, a socialist society makes sure that its weakest members are taken care of, because we are only as strong as our weakest link. america needs more socialism.
And Hitler killed plenty of people as well, but they were because of his religious views. The Vatican’s policy on condoms has killed how many Africans? It’s completely irrelevant though. Just because some crazies are doing evil in the name of something it doesn’t make what they’re doing it for evil too.
Hitler history fail.
Vatican condom impact fail.
final statement imediately after calling hitler killing b/c of religious = hypocracy fail
-300 internets.
Funny that being a jew isn’t about religion.
In regards to Hitler, no, it’s wasn’t about religion, it was about ethnicity.
No, it as both.
It wasn’t about any of those. It was about power. That’s all war is ever about. The rest is just excuses.
Certainly not all muslims are terrorists. That said, when someone associated with your already controversial group kills a lot of people, be it in a religious context or not, your don’t build nor plant a little flag right beside the site.
It’s not about freedom or morals, it’s about tact.
Catholics don’t need tact.
http://isurvived.org/Frameset4References/-ItalianChurch.html
Catholics don’t need tact.
http://isurvived.org/Frameset4References/-ItalianChurch.html
Yeah, the Catholics weren’t responsible for the Holocaust. But like the Germans, the Catholic church was largely silent on the genocide of their spiritual brethren.
“In the past, Jewish groups have protested Christian religious symbols, churches and other buildings, such as the Carmelite convent, in direct proximity to the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp.”
So the Catholics went ahead and built one anyway. Yet Christians are getting butthurt about a mosque near 9/11. Because the memory of 9/11 is apparently more profound than concentration camps.
and how many victems did religion allready have on it’s name
yeah idd, many more people were killed in the name of religion… so they were killed for nothing, cause relegion is nothing true 
:D:D:D:D:D lets stop playing checkers ^^
i get the strange feeling you’re the type of person who keeps a collection of dead kittens in your closet.
DDDDD
check and checkmate are chess, not checkers
strategy game knowledge fail
chess/=/checkers
Actually, your statement really says nothing. His rampages had nothing to do with his religion (or lack thereof), whereas horrible atrocities like the Crusades, the Inquisition, the multitudinous witch trials all over the world were all committed specifically because of religion. Stalin did not kill so many because they believed in a different God, he killed them to generate sufficient fear that it would breed complete compliance and loyalty. If he was killing people to prove that there is no God, you’d have a leg to stand on.
Checkmate FAIL.
Strange how all the atrocities you mention were committed by the Christian faith.
I’m just trying to think of when Islam became the big, bad monster and when Christianity became the ne’er-do-wrong founder of tolerance and peace.
Quite an interesting point, in my opinion
King me?
only christians think christianity is the “ne’er-do-wrong founder of tolerance and peace” because they don’t realise that the (catholic) church is one of the most hypocritical (e.g. pretend to help the poor and needy wherever they can, but insted build monstrous churches) and fascistoid (obey or burn in hell now, in history there was plenty of real violence) organisation around, but is still uphold as societies moral backbone.
also, christianity is the only religion with a vengeful god, who would let his children suffer for eternity, so it’s just a biased opinion by christian-influenced mainstream media that mad the islam the bad guy
The Spanish Inquisition.
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
I didn’t expect that
Christianity has the only vengeful god? Um… you might want to check up on that. I mean, you can actually look it up, or you can just watch bad period dramas from other (non-Christian)countries. Vengeful gods always be douching with those people. (for eternity or longer)
And I’m still pretty sure it’s Islamic extremists that gave all of Islam a bad name by douching up already strained relations between their proverbial corner of the world and the rest of us – the ‘mainstream media’ only facilitated the spread.
Besides, most religions that aren’t cults are about personal decisions – how you chose to live your life – and usually stress good decision-making. Just because some religious people, nonetheless, douche up their decision making, isn’t the ‘fault’ of the religion. That’s just denying someone the personal responsibility they have for their own choices. Oh, but stupid people would love to hide their poor decision making behind a name — a generality.
Douche count: 3
Fair point, this is why I’m not really religious (despite being raised a Catholic). As Rufus (the 13th disciple of Jesus from the film Dogma) said: “Don’t have a belief, a belief cannot be changed. Have a good idea”
The only religion I’m really drawn to is Buddhism because it’s focus is on finding paradise yourself and being a good person just because it’s the right thing to do, not out of fear of burning in lakes of sulphur for all eternity. Though I couldn’t be a true Buddhist as I like eating meat too much
Haha – yeah, because there were never any other religions anywhere else in the world that mattered before… wait no. I think people only mention atrocities in Christian history because it’s what they know. And now Islam is in the spotlight because it’s recent. There’s been plenty of violence in the name of other religions – even – get this – Buddhism.
I think the point is it’s not the religion so much as it is a gathering of people who strongly believe in the same idea and are willing to do whatever it takes to prove themselves. People. Not religion. Because EveryReligiousPerson=/=CRAZY and Crazy=/=EveryReligiousPerson.
Sorry but what violence has ever been committed in the name of Buddhism?
I know of plenty of occasions of violence against Buddhism, though.
Dude, there are literally hundreds and hundreds of faiths, many of which completely oppose each other, that all claim to be “Christian.” don’t even try to lump them all together saying their responsible for the poor little Muslims in the crusades.
Christianity is only in your eyes the n-d-w-f-o-t-a-p because you raised in a country with mostly christian people.
Islam became THE big bad monster with that fake islamistic terrorist attack (I say fake, because a government induced bombing isn’t a terrorist attack) and Bush stating it…which mostly borders this view to americans.
Isreals people have another view of Islam as THE big bad monster, because every state around them is muslim and the creation of Isreal in its modern form was … badly done.
Not at all, the arguement is, if you were paying attention, what has caused more deaths, religion or atheism, and atheism has killed more. Secondly The inquisition killed very few people when considered on a global scale (most inquisitorial killings occurred in Spain and Italy) and in the witch trials (I can only assume you are referencing the ones in salem) only seven people were actually put to death for practicing witch craft. So yes, his checkmate wins, and you fail.
Yeah… There were no crusades that killed thousands of Americans on American soil and then tried to build churches on those sites in the name of the religion that killed those Americans. Islam is doing just that.
So you’re not counting all of the Native Americans that were killed by European immigrants? And we’ll just ignore all of the churches that missionaries built on their holy grounds.
Congratulations, you have just Won!
The Game
Sorry, i call foul. You won nothing.
You’ve assumed that he agreeable to a Christian church being planted on a ground that might be sacred and offensive to others. Not good practice in any form.
Thanks for telling the truth
If atheists kill an individual…or millions because of religion,then the murders are religiously caused.So this Atheism vs. Religion thing you guys have going on has no validity.No checkmate for him…and for that matter Religion doesn’t kill either.People brainwash themselves and others with it, murder in the name of it…or against it yadda yadda yadda…Religious people not religion itself.
Extreme history FAIL. Only seven people were put to death for practising witchcraft IN SALEM. If you care to acknowledge that history also occurs in countries other than the USA, you might know that many thousands of people, mostly women, were put to death for practising witchcraft across Europe.
Here’s a book that you might care to read before making any more wildly inaccurate historical statements: The Witch-Hunt in Early Modern Europe by Brian Levack.
ok, sigh, you just got styx’d
umm actually the comment that started this debate was “Religion gets more people killed than cars and guns and sickness.” by bertbad.
It said nothing of religion causing more deaths than Atheism.
my thoughts exactly
Here is some evidence sigh.
How many Catholic Churches are near the site of the Alfred P. Murray Building in Oklahoma City? Timothy McVey was an Irish Catholic.
How’s that checkmate? The Crusades? 9/11? Six Days War? Spanish Inquisition? Salem Witch Trials? The entire campaign of the IRA? Anytime a Muslim has blown up/beheaded/killed a non-muslim? I’m pretty sure people died as a result of all of those, all based in religion. That being said, you’re retarded.
How about the noble crusade and the middle ages? I’m sure there were way more death there.
So. Just a check.
Nope. There’s no reliable sources for an exact estimate for the number of deaths over the course of the 2 centuries during which the Crusades took place. But from a quick search, it looks like the generally accepted ceiling number is about 1 million across the ~200 years, which even that is stretching it. Only 5% of the impact Stalin had, and he was just one dude. I’m not even counting the great number of other Communist leaders listed above.
Boom!
Wait, so he killed people…who publicly associated…with religion? Doesn’t that mean they died because of religion? Yes, I think it does.
^ This.
congratulations, you found one…and he really persecuted religion because he thought it interfered with his government ideals…it’s not like he woke up one morning and said to himself “I want everyone to be an atheist, so I’m going to become a dictator and make them…” Of course I cannot prove this 100% – but it is pretty clear to see by doing a little research on stalin that the reason he wanted to get rid of religion was that it did not jive well with his policies (Communism) and could have gotten in his way.
So sorry, I would not call that a check mate…
um yea that would be your crazy controlling delusional Grandpa’s fault, not the religion’s. And whose to say modern medicine would have saved her anyhow (greater chance yes but not a 100%), maybe it was just her time.
Plus, money, power, envy, control, and greed, start wars and fighting as well. In fact, most wars and fighting happen for SEVERAL reasons.
Not to say religion is infallible, but I hate it when people blame the religion in its entirety, instead of the people ‘figure heads’ behind the religions.
well, if that is your belief then you obviously feel that the mosque should be built, right? Cuz it was only islamic extremists, not ALL muslims that attacked on 9/11…really, interested in knowing.
… How about this — it’s just a bad idea. Hey – why don’t we build a synagogue, a church, and a Buddhist temple within stone’s throw of the Masjid al-Haram in Mecca? No? Oh yeah – because it’s just a bad idea. Why not build a huge Shinto shrine in the heart Nanjing? Nope, that’s a bad idea, too. Even if it’s not Islam’s fault, the attackers are of a certain culture (not going to say religion here, since we agree it’s not the religion’s fault.) that, were we to build a structure strongly associated with that culture which honors that culture and not so much that of the majority of the victims is really disrespectful. Can you imagine attending that mosque? What kind of person would attend for worship there? Would it even be safe? If they build it, it’s like building a huge hate-crime target.
Just a really bad idea all around.
+200
There is no difference in an Islamic and an Islamic extremist other than the preferred method method of clensing the world of infidels.
What you refer to as extremists tend to blow infidels up, while the “normal” muslims would prefer to breed them out.
Do a little checking into islam and you will see that, once they accomplish their ultimate goal, the only non-muslim people left are those who are kept around as dhimis or slaves.
you are quite the stereotyper. You dont see Muslims, you see the media. You should do a little checking into Islam as you said and get your facts straight. Pure Islam teaches peace. That we should get along with other people. The Islamic Extremist took one verse that said that others wont live, as in going to Heaven, and took it into a whole new concept. Look through Prophet Muhammed’s time and there is a lot of peace. My family is Muslim and i was put in a Christian school. You have probably grown through a public school and therefore do not have any knowledge about other religions. I have studied Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, and Islam. Get your facts straight and get your mind out of the media.
Jennisays, don’t assume you know how I feel about the mosque topic, i said nothing at all about it or ground zero, but good job on looking like a idiot, ass.
A core tenant of the US Constitution is religious freedom. The mosque should be allowed according to the Constitution. And all the Christians saying is shouldn’t, wouldn’t allowing the building of the mosque be the ultimate in “turning the other cheek”?
It would be, but the thing is, not everyone is religious. To build the mosque there would just be plain disrespectful to memories of the victims of a crime commited in the name of a religion. It’s not a question of who was in the right or wrong, it comes down to the fact that people died and the dominant need here is to respect them, not solve the religious debate with gestures of good or ill will.
yeah, that’s part of a real religion. There have been many court hearings over whether these people should be allowed to try to “pray away” measles, strep throat, eye infections, etc, in the stead of modern medicine.
It’s sad but true. They believe that their prayers, and positive thoughts will fix anything. If you don’t get better; you didn’t believe enough.
Idiots. Have the operation and pray for it to be successful. If they survive it’s because of your prayers, if they don’t then you didn’t pray enough. Everyone wins
Then your grandfather killed her, not religion. If he’d pulled a gun on her and fired, it’d be him, not the gun.
Your grandfather killed her, not religion. If he had pulled a gun and shot her, it would be him, not the gun.
And now I sound like a broken record.
My great-grandma died from cancer as well and wasn’t allowed to see a doctor until it was too late. There was a stigma against cancer back then. That whole side of the family doesn’t believe in doctors, they think faith and prayer will save you.
I prefer Hunter S. Thompson’s saying, “Pray to God, but row away from the rocks.”
I’m not sure you can blame all religion for the fact that your Grandfather was an extremist freak.
but we can blame all muslims for the extremist freaks?
It is not necessarily religion that causes fighting but ppl who fight over it I can see why u have this view due to the death of your grandma and I apologize to you on that but don’t blame religion on stupid people who skip the parts in their bibles and imams and what not about beeing peaceful and loving all mankind as well as treating them equally
Also, how many people could be saved with stem cells? but religious politicians say no. Cloning? No. Science is protection. Logic is a sword.
actually, people who try to erase religion have killed over 100 million in the last 100 years.
Religion is always DESIGNED to stay away from politics. It’s often the whining people who don’t get thier way who point to religious values and say they are the blame, however most religious people are down to earth and go with the flow.
Simply put, you’ve been misinformed.
p.s. Science and Logic have been, in large, developed by Churches and Church funded education. Check out the Harvard Motto when you get some time.
Velcro, Jell-o, Tang, Invisible Braces, Memory foam, Water filters all came from NASA that started with a simple trip to the moon. Not for religion, but science.
which was funded by a congress who was 100% christian.
Check-mate.
wait, false. 86% Christian.
Check-mate anyways.
Who cares how much percent of them was christian? Every “christian” in his right mind is only a “christian” because he was born to a christian family. It’s pretty safe to say that 90% of today’s “christians” don’t care about religion at all, let alone practice it.
Also, your statement about religion enforcing science? What the hell? Religion has been the sole and only tool of the elite to keep the working class dumb and uneducated for centuries. If it wasn’t for the church, we’d all have our own jetpacks by now.
http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~gsascf/shield.html
Stop being brainwashed. Christ asks up to open our minds and explore, edifying each other without fear of this world. Without Christianity you’d be riding an ox.
Actually, alot of modern scientific method and theory is based on principles developed my Islamic scientists.
not “actually, Integer, but rather “additionally” as it supports my claim that the notion that religion hinders innovation is rediculas
Except for the fact that the Catholic church was what sent Europe into the Dark Ages…Some religions do hinder progress because it helps keep the stupid masses under control and helps the church grow stronger.
Religion can’t hinder innovation as religion is just an idea to help people not kill each other. Sadly the people in charge of religions can hinder innovation and help people kill each other.
Don’t get rid of religion people, get rid of organised religion.
Your spelling is terrible. lol Try making your point without adding fuel to your opponents’ fire.
Pun-isher, without Judaism, your Christianity would still be a Greek cannibal cult.
I’ll stick with the basics, thanks.
I’m confused, does that mean you’ve chosen to be part of a cannibal cult?
With christianity, we’d still be riding the ox to go stone a non-virgin bride.
:/
another person who hasn’t read anything Jesus said
“he who is without sin should cast the first stone”
only he who is without sin should cast the first stone
-Jesus
let only he who is without sin cast the first stone
-Jesus Christ
so, go get babtised and wash away your sins, then walk really carefully back and lob a rock.
He was quite lucky nobody thought of that, I guess.
But the message is good and that’s what matters.
that’s…a…good idea!
but seriously, your sins are forgiven, you still aren’t “without sin”
..and do you SERIOUSLY think that someone hasn’t brought that up in the Vatican yet for an excuse for power???
Um what about alchemy that’s a mix between religion and science and was aaon cause for modern science without it Christians would still be calling it witchery and hanging ppl get your facts straight u stupid f**k
Seriously? Did you read the text in the link?
“with the intention of establishing a school to train Christian ministers” … not everyone.
“that he shall be ready to give such an account of his proficiency therein, both in Theoreticall observations of Language and Logick, and in practical and spiritual truths” … spiritual truths?
I admit, that some things the religions founded DID turn out to be a good thing for science, but they were mostly founded in a non-scientific (meaning finding and spreading knowledge in the world) way and turned scientific mostly AGAINST religious leadership.
Well Hitler commanded to built the german high ways and I think they are even now a good thing…that doesn’t make Hitler a good man either.
science, but they were mostly founded in a non-scientific (meaning finding and spreading knowledge in the world) way and turned scientific mostly AGAINST religious leadership.
^^^^^^^
complete bologna. Old, wrotten, wishful-thinking bologna
The USA, Italy, and Germany are the piek of Western Innovation and exports. Guess what they all have in common, buddyboy???
JJ, just shoot yourself, your genes shouldnt pollute humanity’s gene pool any longer.
…where did you get THAT statistic?!
Also, religion ans science are not meant to be mutually exclusive. One explains the way the world, etc. work while the other explains how that came to be.
Sorry but one explains how the world works AND how it came to be. One is just saying be nice to people.
But the people in charge of the be-nice-to-people one don’t want you to know that
^^haha
+200 internets.
it also says you are saved from your evil nature if you accept God’s gift
Science only answers the question HOW. It never answers WHY.
yes, I think we’re still working on that….
I love this comment
You’re not the brightest crayon in the box huh Integer? You can try to sum up all of religion in “be nice to people” if you want, but it only shows how uneducated you are on the subject matter.
I think it shows my completely illogical hope that one day humankind will stop using explosives to propel bits of lead into other people.
Most religions are built around a core rule of treating others as you want to be treated yourself.
So unless we want little bits of lead hurtling towards us we should grow and give the other guy a hug instead
^ up*
It’s pretty safe to say that you don’t care about statistics because you make up all of yours. What, to you, constitutes “practicing?” 90% of Christians everywhere? Or just in America? Oh, nevermind – your argument was dumb anyways.
Again – religion – this includes Hinduism and Buddhism and Shinto and Sheik-ism and Animism and Daoism and … well… I don’t need to go on. Point is, lots of religions are actually responsible for new thinking and human achievement throughout the ages. Visit the great Cathedrals, Angkor Wat, or even Moorish Spain and try arguing that religion has held mankind back…
Sir Issac Newton got his start calculating the date of Christ’s return. So if it wasn’t for Christianity, there would be no gravity and we’d all float away.
William are you really that stupid? Sir Isaac Newton didn’t “invent” gravity, one of the most famous things that he did was create the laws of motion. If he died when he was a baby or was never birthed there would still be gravity.
Wow. Really? I hope you’re a troll, because if you’re not, I think you need to see a doctor, because I’m pretty sure you have Asperger’s.
Actually, due to publishing issues his theories didn’t reach France before a couple of year, within which similar theories were also published. Have a look at the history of inventions some day, it’s interesting. From the renaissance on, inventions occurred in several countries a few years or even days apart.
If a wizard turned Newton into a newt, someone else would have come up with his ideas in a short time.
Sorry Pun-isher, that’s only check.
How about we look at all the times where Christianity has held back science. There was a time when the Church was the supreme authority, and the work of science and reason was equated to magic and witchcraft. We call that the Dark Ages. That ended when a group of free thinkers went against the Church and decided that all the beliefs of holy mother Rome were wrong. The Earth was NOT the center of the universe. They put that early scientist under house arrest. Yes, the CHURCH did. Imagine that.
The religion of the people in power means nothing when their record of sex scandals, mistresses, spousal abuse, lying, theft, and all the other crimes committed by people in congress clearly shows that they are not PRACTICING Christians, even if they claim to be. Anyone can claim to be one, but actually living like one takes a special kind of rare person.
In addition, while there may be 86% Christians in congress, that doesn’t mean they all agree on WHICH branch of Christianity they all believe in, so no one branch can claim the credit, even if there was any way for them to take it.
So, with a history of the Church actually holding back scientific progress, and no actual correlation between the religion itself backing NASA, I believe that soundly denounces your theory.
Oh and…
Check mate.
those special kind of rare people are feeding the homeless, taking care of widows, and giving help to the lost right next door to you right now.
Who cares about branches of Christianity, the arguement was that fait hinder’s scientific advancement, which is completely false.
and you aren’t playing chess, so “go fish”
Galileo reference! <3
He was the Man
Whow, just because Congress was mostly Christian, that didn’t effect in any way if they wanted to send people into space. Plus, don’t say Check-Mate, it’s f**king annoying and ignorant
…..recents studies have shown that people who use vulgarity in common language are among the bottom 25% intelligence….
..in other news, those who play chess on leasure are known to be more intelligent and less ignorant than others…
check-mate.
p.s. Nasa was approve and funded by congress. I’d show you how, but i don’t have a chalkboard available.
*leisure
damn canadians
Alright, i’ll punish myself
*stamps “intelligence fail” on his forehead*
Why are you swearing now? Is everything you say just to get a reaction?
Maybe you should stamp 25% on your forehead instead and take back your “check-mate” since you just placed yourself in that percentile using “damn”.
“Vulgarity” is just a group of words. One can use them to express a stronger passion to the meaning you’re trying to convey. How can you assort intelligence to something so inherently meaningless, even if backed by a rhetorically sound sociological argument? I use “vulgarity” a lot, in my daily speech. I do not when i’m trying to prove a point, though. Also, such studies are not failproof, and represent, simply, a likelihood.
You must write disclaimers for a living. It was a joke, guy, so quit with the mundacity.
do not take life too seriously, only death
No, “vulgarity” is just one word.
Those who use vulgarity to express a stronger passion do so because the lack the vocabulary to express passion other wise.
Those who decide that some words are not as worthy descriptors as others are short-sighted morons. Think about it. If the words can create such strong feelings in people that some think the words should be outlawed, then obviously they’re among the most powerful words available.
Also, it’s “they” and “otherwise”, Brainiac.
It’s cool. If you ever need to take him out, just ‘checkmate’ him to death. It’s his fault for revealing his weakness.
The trip to the moon was based on political motivation (our space race with Russia), politics=religious views. They are inseparable.
The Cold War was not based on religious views. It was based on fear of Nuclear Weapons
“actually, people who try to erase religion have killed over 100 million in the last 100 years.” –Citation please.
“Religion is always DESIGNED to stay away from politics.”
– LOL wut? You can’t be serious. If you actually believe this statement I’m done with any conversation with you. Do you even know your history?! Do you have an eye open at all to the battle going on in the United States right now over the separation of Church and State? Seriously, if you believe that this is truth, you need to put down the Kool-Aid.
” It’s often the whining people who don’t get thier way who point to religious values and say they are the blame, however most religious people are down to earth and go with the flow.”
– Yes, this is why two people of the same sex have no problem getting married, right? Because all those down to earth religious folks aren’t making ANY stink about that at all. They’re just going with the flow and not using religion to influence policy in any way.
p.s. Science and Logic have been, in large, developed by Churches and Church funded education. Check out the Harvard Motto when you get some time.”
– When the Church is up in everyone’s business, governing what they can read, sing and observe, then of course it’s because of the Church that we have anything at all. Considering all of the tax breaks and special financial situations afforded churches (especially in the States), it’s no wonder they have so much to give in support of education. It’s also no mistake that they put funding into it – you control what people know and you control the people. They’ve been doing that for centuries….
There is far too much for me to respond to in there, but I will tell you it is largely false. I will leave you with one passage from the new testiment.
“Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. ”
This is a common theme throug The New Testiment was Jesus seperating Man from the Law, so we are free from it. So yes, I am serious, I am drinking the Kool-aid. Jesus DESIGNED the church to stay away from politics. I take it you are done conversating with me now. I hope you’ll start looking within yourself for answers instead of other people for your basis of opinions.
Okay, first and foremost, your kooky interpretation of one book is not all religion – when you make a statement like ‘Religion is always DESIGNED to stay away from politics’, you’re saying that you speak for all religions. You don’t.
For a book you are fond of quoting, you can’t even spell it properly? Really? Testament.
Jesus never designed any church. THAT is the truth. He never established any ruling government either, and the quote you give is not separating the two. It is saying that you must submit yourself to the authority of God, as the only authority that exists is the one established by him. That’s saying that Christians are above the law of the land; that they answer to the authority of their God. NOT THE SAME.
A line in a book does not prove that religion is designed to stay out of politics, in any way. In Vatican City, the religion IS the government. History has shown time and again how religion has run countries, and in many places still does today. When was the last time you saw a name in the list of American presidents that wasn’t a proclaimed Christian?
Religion is not always designed to stay out of politics, and it hasn’t, not in the entire time humans have been forming ruling authorities. Religions have been integral to societies all over the world, including the United States.
I don’t have to look to others for the basis of my opinions, nor do I have to look in a 2000 year old, almost completely irrelevant book to tell me how to live an ethical and moral lifestyle. I think for myself, as an educated individual.
If you want a citation for the number of people killed, open a history book. And what battle of separation of church and state are you referring to that is on the same scale as say…Mao’s rise to power? its a poor comparison. Gay marriage is a sham and everyone knows it, it is nothing more than the gay community trying to further do everything they can to spit on what Christians hold important to them, and hiding behind the law to do it. As far as the church being up in everyones business, that is impossible. There are no victims only volunteers. And f.y.i. churches dont get special tax breaks, they are exempt from paying tax because the pastor, imam, rabbi etc… is supported by the collections of the flock. Some flocks are bigger, some are smaller. And finally, religion has no bearing on American education, at least not like you claim. The educational system is mostly atheistic and liberal (but they take that donation from the church anyhow, nicely hypocritical) and dont allow religion on school premises (thats why its illegal to pray in school in America).
~You do realize that ‘marriage’ would give gays 1049 benefits that man/woman couples get? http://www.religioustolerance.org/mar_bene.htm
they’re certainly not “spitting on everything you hold dear.”
~ACTUALLYYYYYYY churches pay no taxes, and ‘collections’ are used to pay workers , etc.
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html
~I agree, the church isn’t ‘up in anyone’s business’.
~no source, but i don’t think education is “atheistic”. it’s pretty much don’t ask don’t tell for religion. liberal? ehhhhh…. maybe. but you should use “liberal”, “atheistic” and others sparingly. they reek of a close mind. and uh… they do allow religion, just not prayer. honestly, i agree with them.
Just as having a bar mitzvah for a daughter wouldn’t make sense, so would not having a marriage between two people of the same sex. Call it something else and many fewer people would take issue, even if the same legal benefits applied.
Religion backing science? Um, when? Who backed Copernicus? Who backed Leonardo da Vinci?
Thats some very ignorant views you got there. First off, conservative politicians dont all want to ban stem cell research. Second off, its a moot debate because they can obtain viable stem cells from adults, so no need for embryonic. Science is a tool, a very very fallible one, and logic is often flawed by a lack of understanding, which comes back to Science being flawed.
But why do risky procedures to extract Stem Cells from adults when you can get them from a little ball of Cells which is months away from having any resemblance of humanity, cannot feel pain and has no brain function?
Clearly you have never housed a little “ball of cells”.
I know, I’m not a petri dish
I have lots of little balls of cells inside me, thank you very much. Would you like some?
Well if your planning to abort that little ball of cells i see no reason why we can take some cells from it,,, maybe thats why “god” put it here?
maybe god was like I want you to use this little ball of cells and save my people. I want you to learn for your selves to help preserve man kind and grow….i mean…isnt that what a christian does? they belive god has a reason for everything?
Whos to say he isnt all for you taking those soon to be killed ball of cells and use them for something good
..mind you im all about harvesting organs from death row inmates and pedophiles.
You can get stem cells from cord blood as well.
there is no way science is protection. there is not significant sources of science that say man is the major source in global warming but everyone seems to think we are to blame.
also you dont seem to know much about stem cell research. what is under controversy is embryonic stem cell research, do you know why? the whole f**king baby dies when take the stem cell. for what? just so you can do whatever with it? no good enough. why not just take a stem cell from an adult that already has a job and put it to work? sounds easier to me.
also i’d like to see you stab someone with logic, logic is an idea, a sword is normally very sharp.
There’s a difference between someone dying and someone being killed. Cancer/stroke/heart disease doesn’t take lives because you don’t believe the same way they do, or act in a way that the disease deems to be immoral.
That, my friend, is what you call a “strawman”
Straw man = liberals
Jillian, this is obviously REALLY true. Think from back in the days. During the Middle Ages many people people were killed killed because of religion. If you were not christian, catholic in fact, you were killed for being pagan and told you were going to hell. Then the church called a war against the Islamic people because they wanted their “Holy Land” or “Outremer”. This was the Crusades and it lastest for 3 centuries, think of how many people can die in that period of time. The French Wars, a war between Roman-Catholics and Protestants. The Thirty Years War. Most notably, there is the Taiping Rebellion, which is the cruelest and bloodiest civil war, with over 20 million deaths. There are other little wars and disputes, too many to count, in fact. Many religious people have been killed because of differing religious views. After 9/11, many people declared every Muslim a terrorist, and some still do. Religion has also promoted racism and homophobia.
— All this is coming from a 14-year-old.
teehee, i like your comment, it is very accurate and truthful. But Jillian is still correct. Think, even with the millions and millions of deaths dating back to the beginning of our existance, all caused over religious beliefs…. Think how many more people have died over all that time just from natural causes, accidents, infections, wars, murders, and other violent crimes, that had nothing to do with religion…. Yes mass killings and massive wars are more noticeable, and there are alot of wars in the name of God, but people still die everyday, 100′s and 100′s of them……to say the majority of all deaths are from religion, is just false.
Yet, religion is also an excuse to cause deaths, Like the holocaust. Think of all the people who have prayed because they think that will save them instead of actually take action and do something to help the community. So religion has also been involved in those deaths, everything has effect on deaths. The person itself, environment, beliefs, and people. There’s just no scape when it comes to religion. Religion involved everywhere.
Well, Hitler hated Jews because he was bitter that they had rejected him earlier in his life, so it was more one mad man’s revenge on a certain group then religion driven. Think of all the people who take action instead of praying, and end up making the community worse off then it was? I’m not saying praying is more effective, just that taking action isn’t always a good thing. Yes, you are correct, there are many factors that cause one’s death and are usually a combination of things, you can’t simply blame one’s death on one of those percentages. Yes religion is involved everywhere, but diet is involved to everyone, exercise is involved with everyone, a govt. of some sorts involves everyone, etc…. Teehee I don’t think you’re wrong when you say religion has caused millions and millions of deaths…..but so has every other contributing factor. That’s why religion cannot be the cause of the majority of the deaths in the world; it is just an ingredient in the mix
I find it intresting we bring up all the big stuff and none of the little stuff that also contributes, think of all those parents who killed their kids because they saw a deamon or devil in them or god told them to. Or those people who killed families or places because god told them to (not christian god only but any god really) . There was no religion figure head brainwashing them. these people seemed good and did it becasue they heard the voice of god and killed for it. How about people killed for being epeltic (yes i know my spelling was horrid on that) exercoised to get the devil out of them. So if you take all the big things, and then add the small ones the ones that happen even now, it does raise the number of religion killings.
well, as long as you believe it was really God’s voice they heard and not just insane thoughts or a plea to get insanity once faced with the consequences, then yes you can tie those into religion as well. But remember, humans can error, and could even try to point blame elsewhere (like religion) to attempt at getting out of the trouble they caused themselves.
and it shows. Kid, you really need to learn your history, the crusades started when muslim’s started denying access to temples in Jerusalem, and would no longer protect Christian monks from bandits, so, these monks then brought their own knights with them, but the muslims still refused to let them in, so fighting broke out. Pagans, were known for doing such lovely practices as, infanticide to predict the weather, rape to appease angry gods, and cannibalism. But, most were wiped out by the Romans, not the Christians, Romans were pagans themselves, and wanted to assert their dominance over conquered lands and people. The best way to do that was to decimate the local religions, with their spiritual backs broken, people are much much less likely to rebel. Junior, you need to stop listening to your ignorant hippie friends and teachers, and find out the truth.
Wow, have you got your facts wrong. Typical for the internet.
A) The Crusades started in 1095 after a PAPAL DECREE by Pope Urban II. A five second Google search can tell you that. Taking Jerusalem back was secondary, too.
B) Pagans, oh where do I start? Pagans didn’t practice infanticide to predict the weather. That is just stupid. Pagans raped for the same reasons Christians, Muslims and Jews do. It had nothing to do with making any Gods happy.
C) Romans WERE the first established Christians, son. The Bible was amassed by Emperor Constantine and his advisors in ROME, in 325 CE at the Council of Nicea. Before Constantine, Christians were a rag-tag bunch of kids being persecuted at will by the populace. Without a Roman Emperor to stop them, the Christians would have faded into oblivion.
D) The way you say the Romans pacified a newly conquered land? You need to read about what the Spanish did to Central and South America. The only thing you’re missing is how they used syncretism to ensure that even if the ‘natives’ were praying to their old Gods, it certainly had the face of the Virgin Mother on it.
Son, you ought to pick up a history book that hasn’t been written for grade schoolers. Teachers by their very nature aren’t ignorant, and shame on you for denigrating one of our most valued professions. Perhaps you should shed some naivety and read up on what really happened.
Boom, headshot. Wins on grammar, capitalization, AND facts. I’m going to give you a 4 out of 5 on your AP Roman History essay Alicynx. Congrats, you will now have 2 courses worth of useless credits which probably won’t benefit you at all.
Actually, the statement that religion kills more people than disease is patently absurd. In 2004, for example, over 6 billion people died from disease. That is roughly 8.5% of the world’s population. If you assume that this mortality percentage has been constant over history (it has probably been much higher in times with less medical options) you can see that not even the most horrible war, religiously motivated or not, has ever killed more people in a single year than disease. In contrast, for example, there were 184,000 deaths in 2004 from war and civil conflict. This data is collected by the WHO and available on their web site for anyone who wants to get facts prior to spouting off.
“In 2004, for example, over 6 billion died from disease. That is roughly 8.5% of the worlds population.”
I think your numbers are a bit off. There are about 6 billion people on earth TODAY. If 6 billion people died in a year that would be nearer to 100% than 8.5% of the worlds population.
Joe, you are a moron. the current world population according to the U.S. world population clock on the U.S. census bureau is at 6.8 bil. So, unless there are only slightly over .8 bil people left in the world and we all just didnt notice all the new elbow room, YOU need to check your facts before spouting off.
In addition to the 6 billion people that die from disease each year, over 20 billion die each year from velociraptor-related injuries.
You sir, are full of win.
Pretty good for 14 – really. It’s great for 14. But you have a lot to learn about the world. Even at 14, wouldn’t you agree that individuals should be accountable for their own choices, despite whatever religion they profess themselves to be? And as others have pointed out, many of the conflicts you have brought up actually came about due to many factors – civil unrest, politics, land, rights, spoils – it’s too easy and ignorant to accept that it’s all about religion. Sometimes it doesn’t actually have anything to do with religion at all – the banner is just borrowed.
Religion has also promoted love, mercy, acceptance, and compassion.
You shouldn’t over-simplify the nature of religion and its role in history.
I think what teehee meant was that many wars and conflicts were started under the banner of religion, which is very true. There have been many, MANY, conflicts throughout human history that were caused by politics, want for land, ect. but were still waged under the banner of religion. I cite the Crusades as an example since they are a well known example of this.
Eh, if they didn’t start over religion we’d start having them over women again like in ancient Greece. There’s no winning.
Kamizilla, excuse me, but, RELIGION IS A PIECE OF CRAP. Yes, it has brought love and acceptance. MERCY AND COMPASSION?!?!?! BULLCRAP. Think of the old days, when the church had more power than royalty. The church would attack villages and charge fees. Priests were the richest man alive and also the greediest. Religion has brought nothing good at all but security. It makes people feel better because they think they are being watched and protected by a superior being. But when it comes to death what does their god do for them? Nothing at all, just “let them rest in the paradise” No religious person can tell you how their god came to be, they didn’t just appear from the nothing, they have to come from some source. So if you ask me, I will tell you that religion is the wort idea ever. I’d rather sit with a priest talking about religion and overwhelming them to the point they “don’t want to speak about it anymore”.
pick & choose, pick & choose. That’s all some Atheists do is pick & choose.
I take it you are a good person. How would you like it if people were talking about you and the only thing they mentioned was that you masterbated all the time and lied to your mother???
My point is that people in religion are people, and they’ve amassed some horrible things, however for the MOST PART religion under Christ has done far, far, far, far, far,
far,
far,
far,
far,
far,
far more to build our values in Western Society than anyting else. The Message is perfect, but people are flawed.
More people have been killed in the name of god than any other cause.
False! It’s all about land, Dr. Misinformed. Whether or not the evil tyrant is truthful about it is the question.
Check out my favorite truthful atheistic genocidal maniacs:
Pol-pot, Nero, Stalin, Vladimar Draculas
and some other awesome ones:
Atilla the Hun, Adolph Hitler
There is so much more, too! Join the municipality! Religion is poison! Kill tibet!
hitler was a christian, not an atheist
While he was raised Christian, historians agree that he was antagonistic to the religion in his rise to power and his reign. He tried to subvert it and use it for his own aims. He was more interested in Germanic supremacy.
I’m pretty sure that one’s kind of between him and God. But hey, believe what Hitler said. It’s not like he killed Christians, too… oh wait.
+300 internets
Vladimar Draculas.. excuse my stupidity, but did you just make that up?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlad_III_the_Impaler
False! it’s all land, Dr. Misinformed. Whether or not the leader is honest is the real question.
Here is a list of some of my favorite Athiestical maniacs who’ve cmmitted genocide.
Stalin, Pol-pot, Nero, Vladimir Draculas, Adolph Hitler (for true historians to understand only), and atilla the hun.
There are many, many more, though. But disregard that, Join the Municipality! Religion is poison! Destroy Tibet!
It’s also been around longer than any other cause.
Disease has existed a much longer time than religion.
Epic fail there Jillian.
Knuckle-head…ever hear about the 8 -12 million Jews killed during WWII? The religious minority in Nigeria that gets killed daily, The ethnic killing in Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia to name a few.
Shut up, and do some research prior to making comments. Jack-ass
well I can’t say that it’s a fact that religion has killed more. But it has definitely been around for centuries longer than cars and guns…and has been causing wars and death since the beginning. So I think bertbads statement may be pretty accurate.
wow that reply came waaaaaaay down the thread.
jjillian – One person’s grandparents are not a legitimate sample size for supporting OR refuting bertbad’s assertion. One individual experience is not representative of a population.
It is actually true. more people have died in wars fueled by religion than anything.. Look at the Pentacost, the Holocaust, and various other conflicts.
…….
Pentacost?
Really?
Bahahahahahhahahahahah!!!
I don’t like religion either. That’s why I follow Jesus Christ.
Amen!
I have a Question. You don’t like religions, but you follow Jesus Christ?
If you say you would follow god, okey, but when you say you follow Jesus Christ you’re religios. Then, Jesus Christ is just for the catholics or their sects a person which is god like. If you just believe, then you would follow god.
To ALL Christians (not just “the catholics or their sects”) Jesus and God are one in the same- not “a person which is god like.” NotReligious implies that he/she believes that Jesus died for his/her sins. That’s a far cry from being “religios”, which can imply a lot of positive or negative attributes.
If you read Jesus’ books, you’ll quickly notice he has some serious problems with religion. Especially ones making a profit.
Jesus never actually wrote any books. It’s odd that god would take human form and then not think to write a single word on a single scrap of paper that would survive for a couple of thousand years…
And for the record, Hitler was a christian, and most of the anti-semitism he fueled was started by Martin Luther, as well as the gospel of John.
who needs to write when you have 12 men following you indefinately and writing everything down? Plus the most significant part of Jesus life was his death. It’s tough to write with both hands nailed to a cross.
Also, hitler was not a Christian, not at the least. His claims were to rise in power. Ask a historian how Hitler treated the church once in power and also ask a historian how many Christian friends he had in power.
uhhm yeah. the so-called ‘gospels’ were written at varying long numbers of YEARS *after* he died. Can you remember the word-for-word details of a conversation you had last week, let alone forty years ago? Can you?? then how could they? Would you not be prone to embellishment when you can’t remember the exact wording then? And Paul, the head of the first church, never even met jesus. Therefore, I cry foul on the entire religion.
it pains me knowing that your close-minded deductive reasoning may cause you an infinate amount of affliction
be pained all you want. I decided I couldn’t ‘believe’ in something blindly, and so I did my own research. Maybe you should actually look into this instead of defending a faith full of lies.
You sir, are a retard. Paul, met Jesus (at the time his name was Saul) and followed him right up until his crucifixion. The gospels were written during and right after his death. In fact, the Vatican has the actual roman records of his trial, execution, and report from Caiaphas (read the “Archko volumes”). As well, think on this, while you are following a man who is shaking up your own peoples culture, performing miracles, and then is brutally killed, and yourself hunted down, yeah, you tend to remember those things fairly vividly. Dont belive me? ask a D-day veteran what he remembers, bet he can even tell you what the grease on the amphib smelled like.
WTF, dude. If that’s true, why did Saul/Paul have a conversion experience? You know, the one where Christ appears to him and asks “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”
Methinks you need to look in a mirror before you start calling people “retards.” Jesus wouldn’t like that anyway.
*cough*
Paul never met Christ. He was a roman who killed Christians until the road to demascus where he discovered his faith, which made him fall off his horse.
As an aside, you should call people retarted, especially if you are going to hold up the “good christian” card
*shouldn’t
It was peter who started the first church you moron. Oh and by the way He was the one Jesus called his Rock.
Its not odd at all. He created the whole world and yet left it to us to trust him by faith. Why by faith? Because love through faith, without proof of love returned, is the most valuable emotion we as humans are capable of expressing. It is greater than all the hatred that leads to any war, far greater than the clear and hateful statement sent forth by the coalition looking to build a mosque as their personal trophy of what they, as a political activist group fronting themselves with religious claims, consider the greatest victory they have achieved in the new millennium. And no, Jesus didn’t write the books. Why? Because he didn’t need to. What we have are the witness and testimony of his followers. That is how faith is spread. It is not religion. There is no true law saying we can’t do anything. There are simply actions and consequences, such as life holds for all of us. Those who live by the sword, die by the sword. It is the purpose of an ever-loving God to spread his love, and not his hatred, his mercy, and not his anger, his grace, and certainly not his condemnation, to a world that easily can say “What is God? How can he have made us? How can we be less than him? Isn’t it just our imagination??” despite the fact that he can only hope we might discover his truth, discover his promise, through the testimony of those who know, through the history of this world as has been written since the days of Moses. He has claimed that his displays of power in the past shall not be repeated, that his anger is slow, and his mercy is new every morning. He will not stop one of us from hurting the other. We are each free to make our own choices, no matter how much our choices hurt each other, no matter how much they hurt him. He loves us too much to strip us of that free will. Yet these same people who would build this mosque revel in the belief that the freedoms we have earned, have gained through our faith, through our convictions, if not in God, then in ourselves, in the creation he has made, are evil, and should simply be taken from us. Its not religious war. Its covetous greed.
By free will, they can build their mosque. By free will, I can be angered about what it stands for. I will not say it is against any law in the country. It simply makes me mad. I don’t see anything wrong with being mad about it.
Seriously? A god who loves us unconditionally? Look, I cant scientifically debate creation; its far fetched imo… but even assuming god did create earth and life, he certainly doesn’t give a s**t about us. Doesn’t hear our prayers, doesn’t care if we praise him on Sunday or sacrifice a goat at the altar. All of the s**t that comes with heaven and hell are made up to deter human kind from doing wrong to one another. I mean, don’t get me wrong, it’s all great moral teachings, but take a second and actually think about what it is you are preaching! All the things you take from your religious book, all the stories; they are moral teachings from some peaceful & eloquent writers back in the day. A creator, in its true sense, even if he/she/it exists in higher dimensions that I can’t comprehend, does not have a plan for me. It isn’t logical, it’s just man made to give me hope <– another man made trait.
You will see when “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord.” That includes your knees and tongue. I pray these words echo in your heart until you come to the realization of the truth. John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have eternal life.” That’s not moral teaching about being nice to each other. That’s shunning hell and receiving heaven.
I will bow to Christ, for He is my Lord. I shall never bow to your dark, evil god or its despicable churches. They are not the path of Christ.
God gave us the gift of free will….how is that a plan for you??
He cares about me, I pray all the time, and anytime I am faced with hard times or consequences, he gives me the strength to overcome them, I don’t take action, things work out in the best possible way. Maybe if you had faith, even an inkling of it, God would hear your prayers.
Until then, you will be forgiven
If you looked into Jesus’ teachings, you’d understand this. He was completely against any form of “religion.” He rebuked the Jewish religious leaders of the day, the pharisees, and taught that the only things of real importance are love and relationships. Not constant ceremonies of “cleansing” and “appearing holy,” which is essentially religion.
so basically, you’re saying that one billion catholics are all stalkers, if jesus doesn’t like religion, then they are following against his will, a fair fe are following in a rather scary level of detail, adhering to his every word…
i’m not quite clear which side of the argument you were on, but i love you.
Jesus has a serious problem with religious judgement and profiteering. Whereever you see that, imaging a ticked off Jesus.
…and yet his ‘followers’ had no problems torturing and murdering people of other faiths because they don’t believe in him….
how about you do a little science. Take all the “proclaimed” christians in history and see how many murders they’ve committed. They take all the other people and do the same math.
ok, now eat some humble pie with a glass of be-quiet tea. Man is corrupt and greedy by nature. Christ’s message helps bring us away from our nature.
I used to be a christian, but after actually studying the bible with actual historical and religious context I found that the whole thing is not only impossible and unprovable, but just plain contradictory. So I got myself the hell out; I couldn’t deal with all of that blood on my hands. Enjoy your murderous religion, apply named failbook commenter.
Question: Where is there any violence in the new testiment that isn’t directed at Christ or His followers?
answer: Once instance, where Peter cut off Pharasee’s ear for accusing Christ, in which Christ scolded Peter and healed the Pharasee immediately.
You have certainly NOT read the bible nor were you a follower of Jesus.
(p.s. This excludes revelations, which is a book that orders Christians not to take anything from it or add anything to it, therefore it does not pertain to us today at all
you’re right. I guess I never really was a christian. My ancestors were Jews who were forcibly converted to catholicism during the crusades. My revenge on that brutality was to convert back to my true faith.
and fail on you for not reading what I said – the violence isn’t in your bible, it’s what was done in its name.
Yes, in its name, yet not out of true respect for what the bible said. The crusades were carried out for political power through religion. Religion was too long used as a political force, and a power over the people. The higher ups took it, and perverted it, using it to accomplish their own means. No one who was actually in charge of the crusades would have easily seen heaven without a great deal of repentance.
…How do you know something is impossible? Are things only true if you can prove it? Because there’s a lot of unanswered questions in this world. No offense, but you sound kind of plebeian in your thought processes, and I’m not surprised you’ve made yourself a skeptic. It’s easier to play skeptic than to imagine and believe in probabilities. Good luck.
Which precisely proves the point of the OP, and of the comment from Notreligious. Thank you.
*aptly
Um, what?
WIN
What about all the people atheism’s gotten killed? Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong…I could go on naming atheist leaders who did much more horrible evils than you could imagine. So you can’t blame it all on religion.
yes i can, dont tell me what i cant do you unamerican bastard
Rage much? That’s pretty pathetic of you.
I believe he was being facetious. Hardly reason to deem someone “pathetic”.
anyone who makes an assumption for the sake of thier own bravado is worthy of a “pathetic” label, sir.
The utter irony of this comment is making my teeth ache.
Hahahahahahahaha!
So? I can name a bunch of religious leaders that killed tons more people. Using God as their reason. Plus you can’t really prove that any of those people you named were atheists. Also, they didn’t kill people because they were atheist, they killed people because they were corrupt/insane/power hungry, what have you. I’ve never heard of anyone killing somebody else in the name of atheism.
Ahem, atheism was one of the *main* reasons Stalin killed millions.
You are quite uninformed about the role of atheism in Communism.
I’m glad someone knows it… you know… other than me…
The Cultural Revolution in China was basically all about destroying people’s beliefs in anything other than Mao and HIS form of Chinese Communism. Hell, even if it’s not killing millions, there’s still a war against religion in China, to the point even some simple Chinese cultural traditions are labeled as unintellectual, superstitious belief that only the very poor would bother practicing. It’s very sad, actually.
Why is an exception just made for atheist leaders? None of the stupid people who killed in the name of religion were killing for corrupt/insane/power hungry reasons? Frick, all of them were. They just used religion as a justification. It wasn’t religion that killed all those people, it was stupid political crap.
BTW, you can name more wars in previous centuries, but the 20th century was the bloodiest of all time. And by that, I mean that more people were killed violently in the 20th century than all the other centuries of recorded history combined.
This is what I don’t understand, why is everyone focused on only direct murder? what about all those the catholic religion has killed by telling Africans condoms etc are bad, would kind of help the aids problem there quite a bit. passive murder is murder all the same, just because you didn’t bloody you’re hands doesn’t mean your innocent.
None of those lunatics killed in the name of atheism, they killed because religion interfered with their ability to control the population. Hitler didn’t give two s**ts about whether God existed or not, he’d use whatever gave him the most control over people – as evidenced by the fact that he regularly invoked religious principles in his speeches.
Stalin probably was an atheist, but it’s completely irrelevant because his atheism was not what spurred him to kill all those people. Political reasons were behind what he did. Since an integral part of communism is having complete control over your citizens, religion was his enemy. This has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with atheism as it is today.
After reading through all of these comments, you are probably my favorite person today.
Wow, you are now my favourite person here.
I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant by any means, but I do agree with your main point – that people that kill/go to war/whatever in the name of ____ (atheism, Islam, Christianity, FSM, etc.), are just using ____ as an excuse.
Stalin killed about as many people in the name of atheism as Bush killed people in the name of God. But the fact is, these two people had political agendas, and their usage of their faiths (or lack thereof) is just a means to accomplish their agendas.
People, not religion, kill.
at first i was outraged, then i realized you were implying that the answer was 0 for bush and stalin. I got it. I liked it.
+200
Umm, no, you really cant, but I would love to see you try
Because killing all those millions of people is a direct consequence of them being atheists.
I think not.
Talking about stupid… What? Stalin went: “IN THE NAME OF THE FMS YOU WILL ALL PERISH!!!”?
Gtfo…
FSM* My bad.
Cars and guns don’t kill people. The idiots using them do.
All the idiots are controlled by religion. Like my grandfather. A dumb man stuck in the fairytale past.
OMG OBAYMA IS A MOOSLIM STOCKPILE YER AMMO
what?
Im sorry that your grandfather was the way he was, and that your grandmother passed away. That does not mean all religious people suck. You are basically religiously intolerant when you hate religion for what happened to you.
In my opinion, religion does indeed suck, and “religious” people should cut loose of the social and spiritual propaganda that is religion. It has even scientifically been proven that even at birth, every human being has a basic understanding of good and bad. We simply don’t need rules and guidelines to tell us how to live our lives and what the truths of life are. As a matter of fact, they can only lead us further from the truth.
Um, excuse me, but not all religions are like that. I am a proud Wiccan and I can tell you that Wicca doesn’t give you guidelines on how to live your life except for “do as ye will ere it harm none.” Not to mention that there are so many ways to interperet the basis of Wicca, that it actually asks for you to find the truth yourself.
you should love the book of Corinthians in the Bible, then. It’s about Christians accepting those from whatever Wiccan god you believe in.
Many in Corinth kept to thier old ways, worshiping the old God (dionysus??) while adpoting the Christian value systems while keeping the drugs (not bias, just facts) and had other feel-good Wiccan parties while keeping the Christian values they felt were acceptable. This is how culture develops and I like it
You don’t need your religion to tell you to find the truth for yourself. Asking un-answerable questions and then actually searching for answers is a very bad way to spend your time. Act based religion is a crowd control tool, faith based “religions” are generally not considered religions. Whether or not you believe in God, what happens, after happening, is unchangeable.
Cars do too kill people, just ask Toyota… XD But one this note I have to say this, how many Jews were killed by the Nazi’s during the Holocaust b/c of what they believed? And before that, during the witch trials in Spain and Salem, how many people died because of what they believed, or even in many cases, DIDN’T believe, religion was used as an EXCUSE then as now for killing. Before that, how many died on both sides during the crusades? Just sayin, religion has killed more people (or been the reason for killing) than almost anything else in this world for CENTURIES.
No doubt.
The total number of people estimated to have been killed throughout history is 284,638,000. An estimated 151,491,000 were killed during the past 100 years. The largest single killer has been atheistic communism with a total of 110,000,000 which is over on-third of all people ever killed. If we add to that number just two other regimes where religion of any sort was strongly discouraged, Nazi Germany and Nationalist China, the number rises to 141,160,000. Almost 50% of all the killings in human history were committed int he past 100 years by regimes that either actively promoted atheism or strongly discouraged religion.
People just use religion (for or against) as an excuse to be incredibly crappy to each other.
“You don’t believe in my god!” [stab]
“You believe in something that isn’t me!” [shoot]
“You are completely wrong about everything!” [bomb]
Just stop it!
^^ could be the best way i’ve ever seen it put
+300 internets
ElfDa, you sir/maam win the internets for the day imho.
Please cite some sources for your numbers.
Also, Stalin ordered the deaths of these people not because of their religion (or because he was supposedly an atheist) but because they were his political enemies. That doesn’t justify his atrocities whatsoever, but it’s wrongheaded to blame them on atheism. Meanwhile, there are numerous examples throughout history of people from a wide variety of religions killing others specifically because of their religion or lack of one.
They weren’t really his political enemies. Some of them probably were (Trotsky, for example) but the majority were just normal people. Stalin did not kill these people because he was an atheist either. Stalin killed these people because he was FU**ING INSANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Okay, lets think this through, if these people were religious, and Stalin comes along and says religion is false, and that makes you my political enemy, so Im going to kill you, then that would mean, that Stalin killed these people because they were religious, and he did it because he did not believe in God, thus in the name of atheism.
isn’t that the point? It is still a killing because of Religion. Maybe that is the point you are trying to make, but it is coming across as if you are saying “gee, if only these crazy leaders had believed in agod of one sort or another, they wouldn’t have killed all the innocents who DID believe in a god of one sort or another. the killings still happened and we can still blame religion, just from an opposite point of view.
OLYMPIC GOLD!
no, he’d defending the ignorant attack that “gee, if these religious people only put away God, then there wouldn’t be so many killings ”
as if faith somehow supports one’s will to dominate over another.
Well it does, kinda. One God who is all powerful, smiting people and demanding sacrifices and sending plagues and floods. Doesn’t set the best example, then people hear about that and think “I’d like a piece of that Pie”
that’s the whole issues Jews are having, because if you believe Jesus’ message, and Christians and Muslims both do, then the whole “God smiting nations” is done with. However the jews are still waiting for thier massiah, so people see that as a green light to blow them to kingdom come because they still live by that cruel law.
Legal disclosure: I love jewish people and would never harm them.
It’s not a “cruel” law, it’s a “just” law. The God in the Old Testament clearly did not want to harm his creations. As attested to by sources saying that when the Reed Sea split and swallowed the Egyptians, the Israelites cheered for the vanquishing of their enemies, but when the angels began to cheer, God told them to be silent, and said that they should never rejoice for the destruction of his creations. “Smiting” is clearly not something God WANTS to do, but by allowing us free will it’s something he MUST do.
well kinda doesn’t too. 54% of the world and over 75% of religion believe that Jesus’ message was true and Jesus said that the vengeful God thing is through, so technically that piece of the only rests with the Jews, who are less than .05% of the population. And fortunately, I might add, cause the illiterate, power mongering portion of the 75% keeps inventing new ways to try and destroy them.
legal notice: I love the Jewish people and would never harm them.
… and therefore absolve ourselves of the responsibility of our thoughts and actions. Because religion. Wait, what? Sorry, not a statement to your personal attributes, which I’m sure are lovely, but this is a dumb argument, because it assumes that without religion, people would not have killed/been killed, though we well know that people kill for a myriad of ‘reasons,’ which we may as well call excuses or scapegoats. People find ‘reasons’ to kill, not the other way around.
For example: Hitler killed not only Jews but Polish people, homosexual people, and many others because they weren’t his definition of perfection.
However, in the last 150 years or so, the population has increased almost 6 times. So yes, more people will have been killed now then in the past.
However, percentage wise, we are living in the most peaceful time in human history, and also in the most atheist.
See, I can pull random facts too.
Actually, I want to say I’m sorry. Saying bad things about religion is intolerant. I have become what I hate the most with my intolerant statements. I must remember to keep an open mind and remember that different people get different things out of religion.
bertbad don’t apologize. your original statement was spot on.
bertbad I want to say I am very pleasantly surprised by this apology. Not very many people have the ability to tell when their actions are against their beliefs, let alone few are able to admit it. I hope that you can continue to be open minded and help others to be the same
Laura… Bush?
Don’t apologize, man. It’s just common sense. People may seem happy being part of a religious community, and that’s all fine and all. But just think how much happier they would be if they could cut loose from all that and find their own truth in life.
I mean. How many priests have you met in your life that have absolutely everything they want and were perfectly happy with what they do, every second of every day? Because that is how life can and should be. And I’ll be damned if I take spiritual advice from someone who hasn’t achieved that state of mind him/herself.
It’s scary how religious people are in denial… it’s scary how misinformed they are… it’s scary how they portray horrible events, and make it look as if they were done in the name of atheism.
I’ve never, in my life, heard of mass murdering of people in the name of atheism… in the name of religion however…
wow –poor Bertbad. look at all the people trying to recruit Bert back into religious intollerance. The book is a great one. Love others and treat them as you would like to be treated, and look to God as he too forgives for your errors. That’s the message and don’t let anyone distort it.
It’s called a history book. Try reading it sometime.
Hm – how many PEOPLE do you know that have absolutely everything they want and were perfectly happy with what they do, every second of every day? Because I’m pretty sure life can’t and shouldn’t really be like that – there can and should always be good AND bad AND freewill, and advice from others who may have different experiences, perfect or im, can help you find your way.
How do you know ‘cutting loose’ would really make people happier? You don’t! That’s the beauty of it.
Besides, when you ‘cut loose’, you don’t make vital connections and cultivate important relationships, which can ultimately open you up to more life than bumming it all on your own.
Don’t take my word for it – continue shutting yourself off and thinking you’re ‘righter’ than everyone until the day you realize you’re missing out – that you’re just stunting yourself by refusing to listen to what others have to say. Listening isn’t necessarily following, and it facilitates growth. Good luck, man.
Theres one thing in this world that would be good to cut lose from, it’s called farmville.
^_^ Best of luck, man.
Things happen for a reason, your grandmother is in a better place now, and without religion there would be a lot more wars and random violence.
Not true. Greed and desire to have more than the next person to the point of taking what doesn’t belong to you causes the most wars and conflicts. Religion is simply blamed or used as an excuse. Religious leaders are still human and by default have the same desires as the next guy.
You can argue that followers of religion are manipulated and many may believe they’re doing something bad through faith but again, this isn’t religion, it’s simply a tool used by bad people.
Oh, and World War 1, World War 2, Vietnam, Korea…f*ck all to do with Religion…
actually lack of oxygenated blood to the brain kills everyone. we should ban de-oxygenated blood.
It always has.
I think we should have been given an option to tick “Palin is an idiot.”
Not because of the comments, but because she really is an idiot.
I do think this project is ill-advised though. The prospects of violence and vandalism are pretty much guaranteed.
:L
Hah, you didn’t have a comment and I like your face, so here =)
Everyone that voted for “free speech” is literally retarded. There is no such thing as a right to free speech on private property, which is what websites are.
No, there is no Constitutional right to free speech on public property. But some of us think that Facebook should be a free-speech zone nonetheless.
true dat.
Draztikus, you seem to have completely missed the point. Facebook has rules against abusing their system for the purpose of censorship. The question isn’t the consitution’s definition of free speech but facebook’s, and that definition and related sets of rules are clearly being violated/abused in order to censor an opposing viewpoint.
so it only applies in public? and is facebook not a public forum? im not thinking the voters are retarded…..
Facebook is a private company, and therefore can set the own rules for their website. It’s not a constitutional free speech issue, but a moral one. I feel that it’s free speech and therefore SHOULD be allowed, even if I disagree with the sentiment, but ultimately it’s facebook’s decision whether to allow it or not.
They are a private company that is OPEN to the PUBLIC. anyone that wants to be part of facebook can be. sounds like a public place to me… even if it is owne by a private company.
Yeah, there’s, like, zero chance that any of the public ever had to agree to the site’s terms and conditions, either.
Why bother sticking to rules and regulations when we can rely on pure emotion instead?
Metal God: Facebook is only open to the public, because they say, “Hey, let’s make this open to the public.” They are not required to let anyone use their services, they do it because it’s profitable. A public place is a government owned area. That’s it, there are other places open to the public, but are still private property. Facebook is private property, therefore, not subject to the laws defining free speech. It’s up to them if they view this as offensive enough to remove from their property.
To think of it in a different way, say you hosted a party, and put up signs saying anyone could come. You now have a house open to the public, and it works for you. Until someone says something that offends you, or one of your guests. It’s then up to you if you want to remove that person, because despite being open to the public, the house is still owned by you.
You are right, facebook is a privately owned website, however, they cannot initiate rules that subvert someones constitutional rights. Lets say you own a business, you open it to the public, they come in and use it, but all of a sudden, you realize that all your customers are speaking spanish and and saying anti-(insert whatever country you are from). This offends you so you decide to ban all people with that particular political view point. You would be sued, and summarily judged against because even though it is your business, you violated someone’s constitutional right to free speech. Just like you cant not hire someone simply because of race, creed, culture, sexual orientation etc…
Sorry. You’re wrong. Constitutional rights are against the government, not private corporations or individuals. (And the reason you can’t discriminate in employment is because of the Civil Rights Act, not the constitution.)
Actually, this is pretty sad. The internet is evolving towards a structure where platforms like facebook will become a major source of public information. But still, it can be moderated by the facebook administrators. Way to systematically ban free speech from the internet.
Actaully, not all countries have free speech, just like there’s a lot of non-american companies.
Really? You know all their IQs? ‘Cause there’s this thing called a heart, which you don’t seem to have, and calling people “retards” hurts the feelings of those who actually are mentally challenged, along with their families. I know, free speech – feel free to show people how ignorant and cruel you are. See how far the free speech argument gets you.
seriously.
I may not be the smartest guy around, but I think you just used your right to free speech to call free speech activists retards (on a website). What does that make you?
*Nobody* on here is actually asserting their right to free speech! Your right to free speech is only a right to be protected from the government making laws that abridge it.
UGH. Thanks, Failbook, for putting such a stupid, misleading statement of the law in your poll and causing the mouth-breathers to come out in droves.
It’s funny how it somehow always comes back to being Failbook’s fault for everything. Stupid title? Failbook fail. Boring/fake post? Try harder, Failbook. Global warming? It’s all your fault, Failbook!
Poor Failbook…they only want your love.
Actually, this IS Failbook’s fault. They wrote a poll with an inaccurate statement of the law that is misleading a large number of commentors. Palin’s right to free speech has NOTHING to do with what she wrote on Facebook.
Failbook gets a HUGE fail for this.
I know the “free speech” option isn’t entirely accurate, but I think it captures the general idea of “Even if I don’t like what Gov. Palin has to say, we stand to lose far more by creating a precedent of moderating content and public outcry.” Palin’s words are based in opinion and citation-free quotes, and I consider it ignorant to assume the mosque is up to something, but her words aren’t obscene, they’re not overt hate speech, and they’re not promoting anything illegal. Yes, Facebook is a private organization, and has every right to block or remove content. As a user, however, I’d be hesitant to support an organization who blocks content simply for being unpopular.
Where is the “That was not hate speech, and this is not even semi-related to a freedom-of-speech issue” option?
Not including it is a violation of freedom of speech!!
Wow dude, I guess you overlooked the none of the above option that INVITED you to share your opinion here in the comments if it didn’t match any of the options.
Idiot.
I agree totally, this isn’t even VAGUELY hate speech, whoever interprets it as such is just hating on Sarah Palin (not necessarily a bad thing) and ignoring every f**king word she says that is true or reasonable.
^
I felt the need to respond to this comment yet again. You (Hmm), are a ####ing idiot. Violation of free speech my ass, do you think they could put every possible response in that poll? Like I said in my original response to your extremely stupid comment, there is an option for none of the above and then posting your other opinion here.
I can’t say it enough, YOU’RE A ####ING IDIOT!!!
Can you understand that you’re not helping anything?? All he is saying is that the options provided all talked about the issue of free speech violation when their isn’t much of an issue. Calm down and think a little more. It will help the internet as a whole if people wouldn’t angrily reply to everything they see.
I concure… I fail to see any “hate speech” in here. It must be one of those liberal things, where anyone that dares to say anything that differs to thier oppinion is racist, and is using “hate speech”. They need to be reminded that the muslim extremists are on a holy mission to kill all of us. How dare anyone let them plant a flag of thier victory at ground zero.
I equally oppose building a church or a synagogue on those grounds.
Hate speech laws are well and good in theory, but they are far too easy to warp into tools for censorship. As my father used to say, everyone has a right to their own wrong opinion.
I agree with you on that one. Let’s not turn Ground Zero into another Jerusalem, by arguing who gets to build what religious building where.
Furthermore, in my own opinion, people should not take offense to any religion, because of what it has caused. Don’t blame Islam for fundamentalists; blame the fundamentalists. This also goes for the anti-Catholic/anti-Christian sentiments too.
It’s not being built at Ground Zero. It would be housed in a former Burlington Coat Factory and it’s a couple of blocks away. And considering that fact that a church already exists cross the street from the WTC site, and there are more than a couple in the neighborhood, the argument is absurd.
What’s even more absurd is that a “Republican” (you know, the party of small-government, get-out-of-my-business) is asking for government intervention into a private real estate transaction. Oh, that’s right, I keep forgetting that all of that goes out the window when it comes to “religion” and “morals”.
There are no religious buildings or offices across the street from Ground Zero. However, there IS a highway, some commercial businesses, and a hotel.
St. Paul’s Chapel is right across Church Street from the WTC site. It’s that graveyard and church you see when you come out of the PATH station on Church Street side.
Not the real St Pauls though
Go England!
Go London!
Looks like I stand corrected, then. However, as others have previously stated, St. Paul’s existed well before 2001 and is thus grandfathered in. I can understand opposition to building a mosque (or any other non-grandfathered religious structure) across the street from Ground Zero; however, a couple of blocks away in a historical area that is generally very difficult to get a permit for new construction in.
*doesn’t seem like nearly as much of a problem. Hooray for losing the end of my run-on sentence.
Because all Democrats are equal in their moral standing and consideration for larger government and more control? She’s a republican. Why? Because there are only two viable options in the United states. You can argue there are other parties, but lets face it, the electoral college makes it impossible to ever truly vote in anyone outside of the two major parties. So unless the green party or the libertarians suddenly become a larger and more prominent group than the republicans or the democrats, its not going to happen. In that case, a person chooses the one that is CLOSEST to their overall beliefs, understandings of, and goals for our country. Morals are not set in stone, cannot be set in stone. They are subject to change. So the fact that a republican does anything in this case is a completely pointless argument that only makes your consideration of politics in America seem small and ill informed.
Yes.
May I add- the fact that it IS so controversial makes it a bad idea. Building it is only going to generate more problems and intolerance at this point. Lost cause, much? Maybe try again in 50 years.
Yup. Let’s face it, it’s probably not going to happen. And if it does get built, it will all be for naught, because it’s probably gonna get firebombed in less than a week.
some of the people killed that day were in fact Islamic. very few of the members of the Islamic world are extremists and to brand them all by a single act is sheer stupidity. If she doesn’t understand that, than she has no business being the public eye as she is not a role model we should be showing our children. This I think is a racist comment, the Muslims that wish to have a place of worship here have as much right as anyone else.
Sorry to break it to you but Muslims aren’t a race, the word you are looking for is bigoted.
ye, but it’s still called racist
No it’s not. It’s called prejudice.
Actually a Muslim, by definition, is a follower of Islam. So he is correct. Just saying.
still not a race. its a religion. you arent racists to chistians, or jews, or buddhists. your not racist towards muslims either. its just not how it works when THEY AREN’T THEIR OWN SEPERATE RACE.
Judaism is not a race but is considered, in the political sense, to be one due to the history of Jews being discriminated against, blamed for the collapse of the economy, exterminated by the Nazis, etc. It’s not uncommon for a religion to be lumped in with race for political expediency. But yes, it is not a seperate genetic subset.
I had always considered Jew to be an ethnicity and Judaism to be the religion, with Jewish being ambiguous.
“White Muslim woman”
I say: she’s got one race. She’s caucasian
You say: she’s got two. She’s half-caucasian, half-Muslim
Some others say: she’s got three. She’s caucasian, she’s Muslim, and she’s a woman
…Childhood was never long enough
Bigoted, also an incorrect word, but it fits the description of YOU nicely.
Not to mention if it’s being built on PRIVATE property, then they should be able to build whatever they want. No one, the public or the government, should have the power to stop people from building what they choose on their own property.
eh…. that’s what planning laws are set up for (or whatever said laws are called on that side of the pond)… so that people can’t build whatever they want, even if it is their own land. Avoids inappropriate development, substandard design and what-not.
Thank you, yes. I was going to bring that up when I saw that you had, in fact, already stated it.
Zoning permits and legal restrictions, on one’s own property, is essentially the government telling up what we can or cannot build on our “PRIVATE” property.
Are there special laws in place for sites where something like 9/11 occurred?
I’m willing to bet there are no laws against houses of worship in any zoning area in Manhattan. I’m willing to bet such things are uncommon in general, to be honest. Since you’d have to do it for ALL houses of worship and they don’t cause significant zoning issues, I’d imagine such laws are uncommon across the country even.
Sure, they have a right – but let’s be real. At this point, do you think it’s a good idea? So let’s say they build it – were you Islamic, would you go worship there? Would you feel safe worshiping there? W
Sure, they have a right – but let’s be real. At this point, do you think it’s a good idea? So let’s say they build it – were you Islamic, would you go worship there? Would you feel safe worshiping there? Would you feel like you were respecting the sanctity of the vicinity? Hell, my Alma Mater removed a gold cross on display from its historic Chapel because it “offended non-Christian students because of what it represented to them.” Tolerance needs to go both ways, right? It should, but the precedent seems to be “Well, let’s not if it offends people.” Sure, they should have the right to, but it’s in very bad taste, and probably not very smart. What point would they be making by building it now? They could argue freedom of religion, but I promise you that’s not how most people will see it, or they will be so angry they don’t care. Prove that point some other way, plz, this way is a bad ideer.
Hell, the mosque could actually use this as an opportunity to win the good press they need… or they can be very strong headed about the situation and garner hatred. Which fabulous prize will they choose?!
I don’t like the idea of this mosque being there simply because it almost feels like a taunt. If they do end up building it, though, it won’t be there for long. I can’t imagine anyone would feel safe going there, and I know that I would stay far away if I were Islamic. It’s too bad that so many people can’t be tolerant of another’s religion, but this is like a huge “kiss my ass” sign. Nothing good can come of this.
The “internet” didn’t strike back, people who disagree with her did.
For the love of all that is funny, STOP TRYING TO SHOVE YOUR LEFT-WING OR ANY WING VIEWS DOWN OUR THROATS. I don’t come here for conservative or leftwing rants. Seriously, can’t you keep your propaganga to yourself, or put it on pundit kitchen (which I believe was designed for that purpose.) Is it that hard?
Agreed. This would fit better in Pundit Kitchen.
I didn’t know that we had to limit our discussion to the proper forum. Something political is posted, people discuss its political ramifications. Problem? Or would you like some earplugs and horse-blinders?
Hm, point. I do fail to see how mere discussion constitutes shoving ideology down peoples’ throats.
Would still fit better in Pundit Kitchen, but it’s here so let’s have at it, shall we?
I believe stop was referring to the annotation above the picture:
“Unfortunately for her, the internet returned fire, flagging her message as hate speech.”
That could be taken either way, either as a statement of fact or as a ‘weasel word’ phrase designed to ally the reader with ‘the internet’ by overstating the unanimity of the response.
You also aren’t limited to urinating with your pants down, that doesn’t mean you should do it. This “I’m going to violate my own set of organizational standards because I can’t control my urge to shove my political view down other people’s throats” is a weak defense.
Also, if you don’t like comments that disagree with your point of view, then perhaps you could use some of your own “horse blinders,” since you seem to have them handy. Oh, and earplugs prevent hearing, not the ability to read posts on the internet. Metaphor fail.
So basically, STOP, your argument is “if you don’t like it, don’t read it”. Pray tell exactly what purpose that serves?
None too bright, are you lemur? All STOP did was turn Agent Orange’s argument around to show its fallaciousness.
“Propa Ganga”… awesome!
What do you expect? You all realize that FB is owned (and monitored by) a Russian company. Why do you think that so many security and military people are banned from them at work?
Yeah, so I’m not American and would certainly NOT vote republican if i was, but how exactly is this hate-speech? Even if it is, freedom of speech is more important than keeping people from having their feelings hurt (you don’t die from that). Plus, SERIOUSLY: a mosque?? So wrong…
It’s not hate speech. Calling it hate speech is merely a form of censorship in this case.
Agreed. I’ve had to constantly reword a comment on a friend’s post over and over until Facebook let me post it once. It finally went through almost exactly the same as how I first worded it. Never could figure out what was wrong with it, not a thing was even close to hate speech or spammy or anything.
I like your way of getting back to the point.
I don’t tend to agree with her, but Sarah has a very good point there.
A mosque the is funded by extremists who support terrorists should not be build on the site of a terrorist attack.
Religious intolerance? NO. Avoiding a massive slap in the face? Yes.
And you probably believe that if the terrorists were Christian, that a church should not be allowed to be built on the site, either?
Religion means many things to many people. Declaring that a mosque cannot be built because of what it means to some people, is sending a message that some people’s interpretations of what a mosque is, are more important than others (namely those that would worship there).
You need to stop your hate speech (see what I did there?)
Personally, I don’t think that any religious building should be built there, since that is not the purpose of the site.
No, because it’s clever and intelligent only unto yourself, STOP.
No religious buildings are being built at the WTC. The mosque in question is a couple of blocks away, in a former Burlington Coat Factory.
The Religious Right need to stop conflating this. As incredibly painfull as September 11th was and continues to be for those of us who lived through it first-hand and who have family who survived, crap like this only makes it worse. I certainly feel for those who lost their loved ones there and are still embittered by this.
But to see this punchline of a woman use it as a means to her political and financial end is disgusting. It’s even more sickening than the inability to get a proper building and memorial built on the WTC site in the last nine years.
What IS the purpose of an abandoned Burlington Coat Factory two blocks from Ground Zero? Is it a shrine to all the coats that will no longer be sold?
This is a misleading argument. As you are well aware, the WTC consisted of several buildings which collapsed and spread debris and carnage in a radius of several blocks – including the affected closed factory. Many people want to repurpose this site, ground zero, the area of effect, for memorial purposes. There have also been plans to repurpose the church other’s mentioned into a memorial site and I agree with them
And, as other’s have pointed out, these issues stand on private property. Ultimately, the decisions will be up to the owners.
No, it’s not a misleading argument. What’s misleading is someone as obviously lacking in knowledge of both the area, the neighborhood, and the culture of NYC is interjecting your ill-informed opinion into the argument at all, much like your champion Palin. For one thing, there is no repurposing the site. It’s contractually obligated to be an office building (and a really freakin’ ugly one at that). The people who want to “repurpose” it are those that don’t live here, don’t understand the politics or the players, and think anyone wants to hear from them in the first place. Second, the BCF site was never part of the WTC complex. Did it get it’s share of dust? Sure. But it’s not like it was the Customs House or World Fi. Perhaps you should try educating yourself on the geography of the area before you try to lump it in with the WTC site, because while it’s physically close, it was never part of the complex, not matter how much you wish it to be for your own purposes. And for “memorial purposes”, the area in question is between Church, the West Side Highway, Liberty and Vesey. Ain’t nobody building any memorials, painting any murals, or putting any plaques up at the old BCF. As for the plans for St. Paul’s, that too is private property and the owners can do with it as they wish so long as they comply with code.
I…think you replied to the wrong post here.
I can’t tell if you like or hate the idea of having the mosque there instead of a fugly office/retail building.
By all counts, you may have actually argued yourself into a neutral stance of “whatever the prospective new owners and the zoning folks want to do.”
Can you tell me just how much of my city you’re planning to claim for a “memorial?” If it’s everything touched by debris and carnage…well, that’s most of downtown. We’re not turning it ALL into a memorial park just because it happened to be in the general neighborhood — people have still got to live here. And there have been no plans to turn this building — or the bar next to it, for that matter — into a memorial to anything.
The WTC consisted of several buildings — you’re right there. But none of them were at, or near, this place. (And a Burlington Coat Factory isn’t actually a factory, by the way. It’s a low-end retail store.)
And St. Paul’s is still a church, and there’s absolutely no reason for it not to remain a church — there’s nothing wrong with having a church in the neighborhood, either.
Something some people fail to understand in this situation is that Muslims have a history of building religious buildings (usually mosques) on the sites of military victories over their enemies.
This just seems to be really close to that for many people. I tend to agree with many in that no religious building should be built on the site. Though maybe a building that had space for ALL religions to come and pay respects to those who fell that day would be a good idea???
Most of Palin’s argument is not even aimed at the building or religion, even. It is aimed mostly at the particular Imam and specific things that he has said, done or not done. Is no one noticing this? She puts up a very good argument of why a mosque should not be built near the site based on those arguments, even if you toss all the other general things out.
I wasn’t aware that what a person has said disqualifies them from completing a real estate transaction in this country.
And why is Sarah Palin entitled to her opinion and not this guy?
Ahhh, the irony. One could just as easily say that Palin is trying to censor this Imam with her actions.
(And for the record, the financing for the building has been thoroughly vetted and the Imam in question says he doesn’t hold those beliefs anymore.)
Fine, its free speech…but that doesn’t mean that what she said isn’t stupid. Good job Sarah, but there were innocent victims in 9-11 that were Islamic. And there are people living in Afghanistan and Iraq who also don’t like the terrorists. Everything this woman says preaches intolerance.
disagree. i think you ma’m are preeching intolerance against MRS. Palin. i say GO PALIN lets go shoot something in the face!
Shoot something in the face…….
………………..
…………how about Sarah Palin?
NOBODY can pronounce nuclear… there are actually two different pronunciations for it. Look it up, I did when I was unsure what the ‘proper’ way was.
And look, oh, she’s an idiot because she used a word that doesn’t exist and/or can’t pronounce something ‘properly’. Because, of course, NO ONE else has EVER done that… right? No, of course not. (don’t take this as a ‘defending Palin’ thing, take this more as a ‘thumbing my nose at everyone for being ‘mad’ at her for an incredibly stupid reason’ thing.)
As far as the mosque… no, I don’t think ANY religious organization should have a place there, except for possibly a ‘reflection garden’ or something of the like. Let people grieve and remember in their own way, and don’t make walls between them, making it an ‘us and them’ thing.
^ this. i agree with you 1000%
Just to put it in perspective…
It’s not “there,” it’s over two blocks away. In an abandoned Burlington Coat Factory. I understand there’s a strip club that’s just about as close to the trade center. There’s a betting parlor that’s the same distance. There’s a Payless, a Burger King, a Pronto Pizza. A Hookah Lounge. A McDonalds. A Men’s Wearhouse. All those things are as close or closer than the proposed mosque.
St. Paul’s is way closer — across the street rather than several blocks away. If a church is ok to have in the neighborhood, right across from Ground Zero, why not a mosque? (I guess you could argue that the church is grandfathered in — Washington prayed there — but if someone wanted to build a new church in the Equinox two blocks from the trade center…I kind of doubt anyone would protest.)
Look, if these things were AT the trade center…ok, I could see the argument — let’s not build any religious buildings on that land. But they’re not — they’re just in the general area. And I don’t understand trying to make all of downtown NY a muslim-free zone — I can’t get behind that.
I can. I think the entire US should be a Muslim-free zone.
thats f**ked up..just saying.
Michelle, I think you are a fool.
Love, peace and chicken grease make the world go round.
Understanding makes for a happier populace, though the populace is rarely ever happy because everyone’s understanding is different.
Tolerance is, at least, a start.
You sure showed them.
Dumbass
Oh? And what about the religious freedom that this country was founded on? I’m afraid that your comment only shows how much of a bigoted, closed-minded fool you are.
the church and all of those other places were there *before* 9/11, weren’t they? Your point is invalid.
Nope. The church was — but, as noted, no one would complain if another church was built equally as close. The others — like all similar places — change over pretty frequently.
But even if they didn’t…is the Burger King now a historic landmark because it was in the general area of the Trade Center? Because I’ve got to tell you, it’s a pretty crappy Burger King — if we’re going to declare a fast food place sacred, can’t we at least pick one that doesn’t suck?
You’re saying the shops haven’t changed in the last decade? Seriously?
^ oh, so well said!
pants! my prev comment was for Kat’s comment
She does know that the US did create Osama bin Laden right? The CIA gave him arms and training to fight the Soviets that he then used to kill thousands on 9/11. But this is like saying that we shouldn’t build a church in Oklahoma City because Timothy McVeigh was a Christian extremist. But I realize that this is just freedom speech at work, just like building a mosque there is like freedom of religion at work. She can say what she wants just like I can say what I want.
Yeah, the USA has a habit of creating it’s own enemies. Bin Laden, Hussein etc.
Hell, they are even partly responsible for the radicalisation of Che Guevara after he witnessed the US backed millitary coup in Guatemala to oust the democratically elected President Arbenz because he was bringing in reforms which would improve conditions for the peasants, which the US chiefs viewed as “Communist”
Oh, she’s stupid, all right, but it is for much larger reasons than mere inability to pronounce a specific word.
Also. *Devours with Tyranid swarms*
I wonder if Palin … or most of the posters on this forum … even know where the bloody mosque would supposedly go in relation to the WTC site.
Here’s a hint … it’s NOT on the site. It’s a couple of blocks away.
Regardless, do you think it’s a good idea or a bad idea? Make a realistic list of benefits and drawbacks, because, at this point, the benefits of building it in that location are not so great, and there are a LOT of potential drawbacks, including serious possible vandalism and garnering yet more scorn and intolerance from non-Muslim co-residents.
Benefits of deciding NOT to build a mosque there at this point are actually more promising.
It doesn’t really matter the technical distance because it’s become a point of debate already.
You mean surrender to ignorance, because it might become violent? Sure, that’s one option…
The benefits of this particular site are substantial. There’s a substantial need for a mosque in the area, but it’s hard to find a location in downtown NYC — land is both expensive and highly-restricted by historical preservation requirements. This building is abandoned and the historical boards are willing to grant approval because of its condition. If there’s ever going to be a mosque downtown, this is the place for it to go.
I’ve never understood what the zone of muslim exclusion is supposed to be. Two blocks away, with no line of sight to the Trade Center, is apparently still too close. So how about five? Ten? I guess muslims that work in the area could walk ten blocks for prayer, as a “compromise” with those who want them driven out entirely. But can you point to a building that fits the bill AND is far enough away not to offend the sensibilities of bullies? I can’t.
Religious intolerance is everywhere, and when I heard about the plans for the mosque, I thought it was a FANTASTIC idea.
Muslims aren’t all that violent. Sure, there are terrorist and purist organizations that like to link themselves with Islam. Did you ever stop to wonder where the inspiration for the KKK’s duds came from?
In addition, though, this is probably one of the pest publicity stunts you could DO to that area around the trade center. If the USA really wants to put out doubts that its most visible parts right now are tolerant, even accepting, this is the place and the way to do it. In fact, I’d go one step further and encourage its future congregation to get involved in neighborhood improvement programs like church and temple youth groups are wont to do.
Vandalism will happen. I think anyone that didn’t think so from the outset would be delirious, at best, and in an altered state at worst.
Actually, anyone who doubts that Muslims can be civil should go and attend a prayer session at a mosque or at least talk to a Muslim clergy, I have no idea what they are called. One thing that I’m pretty sure won’t happen is that you will be harassed or injured. After all, sharing is caring.
Just a minor fact, the KKK’s outfits have roots in European religion, specifically classical. Just think druids.
i really don’t like when people hide behind their computers just to be extremely rude to people. no one that voted in this poll is retarded. everyone is entitled to their opinion. if you don’t agree, say so politely. i mean, what’s the point in yelling at people you don’t know? do you think you’ll change their mind? they won’t
IMO, this doesn’t belong on Failbook. :p
OK forget the political BS for a second and just think. Building a mosque on or near the site wear Islamic terrorists caused so much death and destruction is probably the biggest slap in the face to all who died on that day and their friends and families. Personally all I would think if i saw it is a place were the extremists can come visit and “admire” the work of their twisted brethren. I’m not saying all Islamic people are twisted like that and not everyone that would visit this site would be there for that purpose but still..
Now personally I don’t think Palin is being religiously intolerant here she is just saying why it’ insensitive to build it there.
Btw I have no say in religion I just believe there maybe a higher power but I’m unsure cause I haven’t seen guaranteed proof that there is something after death, but I do hope there is.
I suppose you would also oppose the construction of churches anywhere the crusades took place? How near is too near for you? Shall we ask all the Muslims in New York to head out of town to worship?
The people who executed the 9/11 terrorist attacks did so because they are crazy and brainwashed, not because they are Muslim. The same is true of anyone who wants to take a philosophy, religion or any idea and stretch it to the point of trying to justify hurting and killing people.
Hooray for Hmm!
Oh and Brian, there is a higher power.
He’s called Stephen Hawking ;D
Why build a mosque there? To prove that God’s love for man is greater than man’s lunacy? To show that beauty and art can conquer hatred?
Frankly, the perfect thing to put on the site isn’t some memorial. Build it up with houses of worship from all of the world’s faiths. Put an art museum there too.
If, as you claim, this place is sacred, let us treat it as truly such, and establish it as a place for worship.
Sarah who?
Religion is the divine as imagined by humans. I believe we pretty much all have it wrong. That doesn’t mean that I think all is rubbish in religion; some good values of peace, love, and tolerance are taught in all religions. It’s just that some idiots (from all backgrounds) think that they are absolutely right and that everybody should klive by their standards. They live on every continent, in every country and probably in every city. Some are elected US and Canadian politicians, others hide in a cave in Pakistan or somewhere in that vicinity. Sarah Palin is one of them. The fact that we are talking about a palce of worship is not the problem here. The fact that we are talking about a mosque is. We seem to think that only good Christian Americans died in the 9/11 attacks. Weren’t there any Muslims? Jews? Atheists? What about them? No it’s too easy to suggest that Islam is the enemy and that it was Muslims that attacked the US, therefore Islam is evil. We cannot have a mosque by Ground Zero! Let’s protest and ask the NYC to not allow its construction! Then we can give that space away for a synagogue or church…
I do admit that I had a uneasy reaction after learning of the mosque’s planned construction, however. It seems a bit “in your face”… but are these Muslims the people who blew up the towers? Therefore, why am I shocked at all? Because in a way, we are all a bit intolerant towards what we don’t know, founding principles or not. There are hypocrits on both sides of the fence. The fanatics in the Middle East and anyone supporting them in the West are loonies who can’t accept they live on the same planet as other people. So what if someone draws Mohammed? Many people have taken pokes at Jesus before and even Christians manage to laugh at it. Grow up and open up your mind! But on the other hand, the US are far from perfect… a great example of capitalism gone too far. Richer than rich individuals with poorer than poor fellow citizens, ghettoization based largely on race, overconsumption of food, gas, and other goods, disregard for many environmental issues, constant meddling in other nation’s business so that US interests come first, right-wing christian fanatics in the Capitole and waaaaay too close to the White House…
Face it. Nobody’s perfect, not even ourselves. Let’s just accept that, everybody, and the world will be in a much, much better state.
Internet speech is free speech, but it is also relegated to the free exercise of rebuttal.
Personally, I’m pleased Ms. Palin turns to the internet to further her career in both politics and entertainment. Both she and her ideas are much more available to direct criticism by opponents on all fronts.
I could see your argument, except that Palin’s exercise of free speech takes place on a server that is paid for by someone else who has set rules to govern the use of their property — and what is in question is if what she’s using this forum for is against said rules.
Would it still be appropriate if I exercised MY free speech from your door step, or even your living room?
Well, that does make it entertaining.
I wonder if Sarah Palin has issues with the building of a Church or a Starbucks or a McDonalds “just a stones throw away” from the sacred grounds of the Hiroshima or Nagasaki bomb sites where 100,000s innocent people lost their lives?
That’s a different issue. If Hiroshima or Nagasaki had been crimes committed by religious idealists, then I would be able to understand not wanting a representation of that faith placed in the center of the ‘scene of the crime’, as it were.
Repeated for the slow of thinking: It’s not at the scene of the crime. It’s a couple of blocks away.
@Emily
Killing innocent people for WHATEVER reason is the same thing.
Representations of faith after the fact at a particular LOCATION don’t really add or detract from that.
It depends – it’s up to the people who live there and their laws, and if they find any of those things very widely offensive, then no, they probably wouldn’t build them. Haha – in fact – didn’t you hear about the Starbucks/Forbidden City controversy? I believe they ultimately disallowed it, simply because it was controversial.
Having been to Hiroshima (which, BTW, 55 years on August 6 have passed since the actual occurrence, not 9 years) and the peace monument there, an equivalent would be building a Japanese pro-military country club a few blocks away that everybody knew about. Trust me – it’s just not very smart, would disrespect the victims, and be against what the peace monument represented. Both areas – and cities, are visited by tons of tourists, too, so it’s folly to disregard how the public at large would view it and try to dismiss it as merely a local issue.
er… 65… no one saw that. -_-
She has a right to say what she wants. I have the right to think she’s an insensitive idiot.
True that, but I also have the right to point out that she’s contradicting her own party’s ideals, that her opinions on this matter are not only unsolicitated, but purposefully incendiary, and cynical.
Someone’s political partisanship is showing.
First the fail about Obama not having the ability to shut of the US’s internet, and now this.
Partisan political zealots always mess up a good lol.
What is the basis of almost every war in history? Religion. You may not be willing to acknowledge it, but religion causes so many squabbles and disputes that it makes me wish to disown the human race, however, I’m human myself so it’s a little difficult to have much of a say in it. And then there’s another thing. Americans make such a big deal over everything. Yes, some buildings were destroyed. People were killed. The mass hysteria that ensued soon afterward is far beyond necessary, in fact, it’s downright stupid! I couldn’t give less of a damn about if they want to build a mosque there. I don’t see what the problem is, she talks of religious freedom, and then turns around and pretty much shoves that statement right up her rear end! It’s madness! Besides. If this is seriously something you’ve taken concern about, don’t just blindly blather on about your views on facebook and the internet. You’ll just make a fool of yourself.
all in all, I couldn’t care less.
Almost every war in history has been caused by religion? What a load of crap!
Wars not caused by religion:
Both world wars, Vietnam, Korea, two Gulf Wars, US War of Independence, 7 Year War, Hundred Year War, War of the Roses, Russian Civil War, War of 1812, US Civil War, Napoleonic War, civil wars in Rwanda, Angola, Mozambique, Zulu War, Boer War, American Indian War, Chinese civil war, Greek civil war….
Need I continue? Even most of the Crusades were more about money and power than genuine religious reasons.
Also keep in mind that religion and politics are not really separate. We would like them to be but that’s clearly not the case. Once the two are mixed in together there’s no possible way to support an argument of religion as a cause rather than politics.
This is not a hate speech. This is a valid opinion, but just because it is held by a conservative, and especially Sarah Palin, it is classified as ‘hate’. The building of the mosque at ground zero was a story that no one in the mainstream media today seemed willing to cover. Sarah Palin simply ‘twittered’ about her opinion of this decision. Now, all of a sudden, it’s big news. My question is, why wasn’t it big news before if it’s an ‘example of American religious tolerance’? You’d think something like that would be proudly put forth by the liberals of this country.
It is being covered, quite extensively, by the mainstream media. Furthermore, it is not at Ground Zero. Not even close.
its two blocks away, while not at Ground Zero, it is certainly very close by
Two NYC blocks doesn’t really count as close, considering population density.
Did anyone else find themselves reading it in Palins voice?
I find myself reading it in Tina Fey’s voice doing Sarah Palin’s voice.
Connecting all Muslims to terrorist attacks is like saying all Catholics sexually abuse children because their leadership do so and protect those who do so. That’s lunacy. Muslims have a right to build a place of worship where ever they choose. This is insanity.
Actually, that’s not entirely true. In order to actually “be” a practicing member of a religion, one must follow all of it. Islam demands the death of all who do not follow it. Any “Muslim” not following that is not following the tenets of Islam and is therefore, not a true Muslim.
You have that confused with the extremist. Allah does not call for the death of EVERY Infidel, but just as the Bible has been modified time and again over the years to adjust to what the religion wants to push onto you, so has the Extremists’ version of the Quran (I think I botched the spelling).
I thought that the Islamic Bible says that Christianity is like a brother religion to their own. In fact it is perfectly normal for sane Islamic men to take Christian wifes.. But not the other way around because it would place an Islam woman in an awkward position if her husband asked her for wine, beer, or pork as both giving it to him and disobeying the request would be sins in her religion.
So what if the Christian husband also abided by the dietary restrictions? Would it be ok for the sane Muslim woman to marry the Christian man? I think you would see some of these situations, but they are probably rare and for different reasons than diet.
Actually you miss one very fundamental difference between Christianity and it’s fellow monotheistic religions.
Christianity is all about having one interpretation of the bible for it’s followers. Usually there is one central authority who dictates how the bible should be interpreted and all other interpretations are either ignored, encompassed by over-simplification or condemned e.g. the Vatican is the central authority for the Catholics, the Archbishop of Canterbury for Anglicans and so on.
Islam and Judaism both differ on the account that there is no one central authority, every single community interprets the Torah or the Koran differently even 2 Jewish or Muslim communities living in the same city can have completely divergent interpretations of their respective religions. While numerous laws will be common across the whole religion, every community will have a different interpretation of the more contentious stuff e.g. consumption of alcohol, a woman’s obedience to her husband, bigamy, interpretation of the laws of kashrut and halal, definitions of infidels and so on. (see chalev yisrael laws as a prime example)
Christianity just doesn’t have that diversity from church to church nor does it want that kind of diversity because it would annihilate their political power and in their ignorance ordinary Christians either deliberately ignore the diversity that exists within Judaism and Islam or just don’t comprehend it.
Sorry for the long essay.
Science flies you to the moon; Religion flies you into buildings.
Ha!
That, my Interweb friend, was brilliant
I feel that there shouldn’t be any form of religious structure built on the site regardless of the denomination. Religion is, in and of itself, the cause of almost every major problem the planet faces (with perhaps the exception of the various oil spills around the world which have been caused by greed).
Please see the hundreds of messages above: IT’S NOT ON THE SITE!! It’s blocks away.
Emily… there was news of this weeks and weeks ago. Including news of other communities trying to ban the building of Mosques all over the country.
I really hate you all, you ignorant pricks.
Who?
I love lamp.
LOUD NOISES!
I just burned my tongue.
I am all for Palin’s letter. I do not view this at all as a hate letter, but as a valid point.
This is almost like a Frankie Boyle joke brought to life…
I hate Sarah Palin but I really don’t see why this would be considered hate speech. She makes a valid point. That’s probably the only time you’ll hear me say that but I’m not going to lie because she disgusts me. The idea of building a mosque of all things in that spot just does not seem like a good idea.
It’s not on ground zero. It’s two blocks away.
SO WHAT IF IT’S NOT ON THE SITE? Two blocks away = still in the vicinity.
Crimson, I agree with your comment 100%.
Just gonna sit here and watch this all unfold. :3
I don’t understand how this is hate speech. If hate speach included hating extremists (of any affiliation) then okay it’s hate speach. If what she says is true and the people wanting to build the mosque have blamed the US for the attack.. Then it would be an absolute abomination to allow them to build a mosque so close to the site.
^
How close is too close for you?
I find it funny how many people immediately jump to a Right-wing’s throat for the sole fact that they are conservative, then side-step into calling anything they say “Hate speech.”
I guarantee had this come from anyone else it wouldn’t be getting NEARLY as much coverage.
the bigger fail than this post is the comments under it ¬_¬ not every Islamic person in the world is an extremist or a “terrorist”, and though I don’t think that should be built on ground zero, i also don’t believe any religious or otherwise biased building should be placed there, it should simply stay as a reminder of the people who lost their lives.. and a government so incompetent they practically caused it.
It’s not being built on ground zero. The site is a couple of blocks away.
I thought Ground Zero was were i get to fight Jinpachi. . .
Why is this on failbook? It’s political; stay the f**k out of politics.
win
i could go either way. my problem is that Sarah Palin is such a useless douche-canoe that i don’t know why anyone would spend a fraction of a second listening to her. I love America with all of my being and people like her just promote a terrible image of ignorance and stupidity.
tl;dr
agreed! lol
^
to effin long….im to lazy to read that sh!t
^ This
“Free speech is free speech, online or not.”
Free speech doesn’t mean what you think it means, Failbook. The 1st Amendment prohibits Congress from making laws that abridge the freedom of speech. In other words, it’s a right of Americans to be free from the *government* abridging their right to speak.
Facebook isn’t the government.
Can you re-word your opinion poll? You’re making a bunch of idiots on here think that Sarah Palin’s little hissy fit over a different 1st Amendment right somehow has something to do with her right to free speech.
Yes, this.
Free speech does not apply in this situation. If Facebook wanted Sarah Failin to stfu and get her hate speech off of their site, then it’s perfectly ok to do so.
Agreed. FB is a private entity, not the government.
First intelligent comment I’ve seen all day. +1000 internets
Bonus +500 internets for not feeding the trolls.
~3000th completely pointless comment I’ve seen today. -23 internets for looking for “intelligent” comments. Bonus -80 internets for handing out “internets”.
Your comment is completely pointless. I don’t have a problem with completely pointless comments, which is why I’m leaving this one.
But YOU get a fail for complaining about pointless comments by writing another one.
Why?
1. There’s an underserved muslim community in the neighborhood.
2. Land in the neighborhood is both expensive and hard to come by. Because it is a historic area, nothing can be torn down except in rare cases.
3. Because this happens to be a Burlington Coat Factory in poor condition, it’s a rare chance to tear down and build new in the area — without having the last name Trump.
It’s not to be “controversial.” It’s not out of a lack of “respect,” and it has nothing to do with being near ground zero — heck, it’s not even all that close. You can’t SEE the trade center from there — and couldn’t even when it was up — because there’s two blocks of buildings in the way.
Stop, Bob. You’re trying to explain NYC to people who’s notions of it are informed solely by re-runs of Law and Order and what their parents told them it was like in the ’70′s and ’80′s.
End of story is that this is a local issue being used as political fodder. Is anyone really surprised that Sarah Palin is the one serving up the hay?
And maybe you’re right. But whether anyone likes it or not, thinks it’s justified or not, it has become publicly controversial and the nature of the beast has now changed. So even though there may have been good, practical reasons to build a mosque there, it’s probably not such a good idea anymore. If they build a mosque there, which do you think it will accomplish more of – A. Effectively serve the Muslim community of that area or B. Be controversial and create more problems for the local Muslim community.
Not saying I like it, but hey…
And really, I can see other people taking issue to this other than Palin. Our political culture is becoming so Politician-celebrity centric – it’s a huge “he said, she said,” and both sides play. So yeah, I’m not surprised either. In any way. But now that so many people have voiced that it would offend them/be a slap in the face, bulldozing ahead with the a plan, regardless of their original intention, really is like a big “F-U we don’t care what you think.” It’s not in their best interest… you can hate people for making this thing an issue when you don’t think it should be, but moot point much? It’s already an issue. T’ain’t no going back.
You’re right that proceeding means ignoring those that voice irrational, angry, and possibly bigoted objections based on their own political ambitions. But I think we learned this week with the USDA employee that giving in to that sort of objection merely means being pushed further, having the lies grow bolder, and never having your name cleared.
Let’s say that the muslim community said “alright, we agree, we’re pariahs, so we’ll not build downtown. We’ll go without a mosque, because we don’t want you to hate us.” Do you think Fox News and their “friends” would praise the kindly muslims for their cooperation? No, they’d continue to be demonized — and this “win” would only encourage future demonization and attempts to push further. You’re not going to win any friends by accepting the ridiculous screeds and irrational demands of bullies.
Instead, build the thing and show everyone that it is peaceful. If someone wants to come report on it as a controversy, let them come — let them walk the two blocks, come inside, and claim that it’s somehow meant to be anti-American or a “slap in the face.”
You can’t SEE the trade center from anywhere
Building a mosque near where thousands died in 9/11 is as insensitive as eating meat knowingly in front of a vegetarian. Almost as insensitive, I say, because building that mosque would be the most insensitive thing one could do.
Also, I have Islamic friends. They are fine. But really now. Bad memories mean anything?
I don’t have any bad memories of Muslims.
I have bad memories from some crazy extremists.
Not the same thing.
Do you have any idea what the NYC real estate market is like? Other than that crap on Bravo?
So how far away must a mosque be to be considered sensitive? Three blocks? Seven blocks? Outside of NYC entirely?
I’m sure if you put up a poll with those answers, Cap’n, you’ll get quite a few people who will wish you included “Outside the USA” but would never admit it publically.
true…
Good one!
Palin’s a bloody moron, but she has a right to express her idiocy.
Mainly so we can laugh at it
I don’t even know what she said because anything with her name on it makes me want to vomit
Free speech IS free speech, but I believe that there are certain things that people in politics shouldn’t be saying… It’s legal to be racist, but it isn’t legal to act on those tendencies. It’s legal to say you don’t want to build a mosque and whatnot, but it shouldn’t be legal to actually refuse on any religious reasoning.
This is just another example of the left-tards opening the rear so the ‘tolerant’ Muslims stick it in them.
Don’t misunderstand me, I think Sarah Pallin is a puppet for the lobbyists and a fairly Derp Biggot, but at least she has made some sense with this post.
Warning of the impending apocalypse?
As someone who lives in an European country that has blindly followed the path of “tolerant” Islam apologetics… Please, America, don’t let it come this far. In ten year’s time this country has changed into a haven for Muslims who come here for more welfare (there are laws in place so they get more than any other minority, because of the so-called discrimination they could encounter over here), demand everything to be like in their home country (only halal food in schools, separate swimming classes, schools for Muslims only and much more) and spit on our culture.
Misanthrope: I agree 100%.
Look, there is no way this is hate speech. I don’t think any kind of center for worship or celebration should be built near Ground Zero. It would be disrespectful to the thousands of lives that were abruptly snuffed out in those two buildings. It’s not hate speech until Palin suggests that a Buddhist temple or Christian church or what have you be built there. Think about it for a minute before you go on with your life. It’s just that a mosque happened to be proposed before anything else. Not that she’s anti-Muslim.
AHHH!!!! SO MUCH F**KING SCROLLING!
SO MANY ANGRY PEOPLE!
I AM GOING TO BE ANGRY TOO!
I am going to type a wall of text so I can be like all the cool kids, even though my opinion really doesn’t matter, especially when I am posting it on Failbook……………
>_>
Anyway, here is my pointless opinion.
I do not think that this is hate speech.
Its her opinion, and has no “hateful” comments as far as I can see. Of course, one can interpret it as that.
Hell, you can interpret anything as anything.
She just doesn’t support the mosque.
But that’s my opinion.
Why don’t you go over there in the Middle East and see the pain that your allies cause in their ‘justifiable’ blockade of Gaza. Wake up and smell the coffee, there’s a whole world out there, not just your American heartland. All this goes to Mrs Palin’s rumblings. Too bad many Americans limit their sources of information to such ramblings. Look and you’ll see there’re many sides to every story. Form your own opinion, don’t depend on jingoistic hatemongers of whatever nationality. Political agendas are pushed behind your backs, if you don’t read between the lines. Unless of course it’s a case of pure and simple stupitidy.
I don’t know much, seeing as how I’m only a 13 year old, but I’m pretty sure that even if they did build a mosque there, it’d get blown up by somebody. Not saying it would be right, but who in the right mind would let them build one there anyway? To them, it’s probably like gloating. Now don’t get me wrong, I have friends who are Islamic and such and they’re great people, but geez.. common sense.
The mosque is not being built on ground zero. It’s in the neighbourhood.
You manage to word the same phrase in so many different ways, I applaude you Sir/Madam!
“Facebook shouldn’t be a farm used to cultivate hate speech.”
Hate speech? Really? I find it infuriating whenever someone doesn’t agree with something, they are labeled a “hater” or even a “-phobe.” Open-mindedness does not mean “everyone is right,” it means “listening to the opinions of others.” Listening does not require agreeing, but calling someone a hater or fearful simply because they don’t see things your way, THAT is closed-mindedness.
I agree that this is a country built on religious freedom, and I wouldn’t have it any other way — however, HONORING the Islamic faith in relationship to the 9/11 attacks is ridiculous. It’s not about accepting or even cherishing these religious views. 9/11 was brought on by extremists who THOUGHT they were honoring Allah(sp?). If we build a mosque in relationship to Ground Zero, we will be the laughing stock of the Taliban.
It reminds me of those shirts with Asian writing that say things like “Stupid American bought this shirt for twice what it’s worth.”
“HONORING the Islamic faith in relationship to the 9/11 attacks is ridiculous.”
Yes, that would be ridiculous. But of course no one is suggesting that. In any way. At all. Moron.
The whole argument is about the construction of a mosque near Ground Zero. So it could be, kind of, taken as such. Almost. Troll.
I can guarantee that I am not the only one who sees a multi-million dollar mosque 600 feet from Ground Zero as honoring the Islamic faith.
Insult-throwing doesn’t make you “right,” Captain Mike. Try typing in CAPS next time, it might make the message clearer.
You know that you can’t actually see Ground Zero from there, or vice versa, right? And you also know that if this mosque is going to be bigger than a 2-bedroom apartment, it has to be “multi-million dollar,” right? In NYC, multi-million dollar doesn’t mean “incredible, ornate palace.” It means “room for a stove.”
Does it honor the Islamic faith? Of course. It’s a mosque. But does it do so in connection with 9/11? I’ve never heard any rational argument suggesting that it does — the only argument I’ve heard is that it’s “too close.” But if two blocks is too close, what about three? Four? Ten? If there’s some “right” distance, then point me to a building that’s exactly that far away, and that also happens to be suitable.
and you probably believe Bin Laden is still hiding in some caves in Pakistan with his buddies in Al-Qaeda too right? haha
I can tell you with absolute certainty that he IS still at large and NBC & Fox have both reported that he *may* be in cahoots with the FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER as well as the Hamburgler
I call BS. He’s in the Lincoln Bedroom, waiting for Barry’s numbers to totally flat-bottom. George W. left him as a parting gift.
Last I heard, he’s also been conspiring with Candle Jack to
Aptly named, Trololo.
You already are the laughing stock of the Taliban. Has it occurred to you that building this Mosque could be a unifying act and help build support for the fight against the Taliban in other Muslim countries? By showing understanding, tolerance and freedom you send out a message more powerful than your entire Armed forces
I don’t mean to troll or anything, but we need to see the difference between religious belief and religious organizations.
Religious beliefs are what people personally believe. Believing in Allah is religious belief. Praying to him also is.
But Mosques are part of a religious organization that is dedicted to Islam.
Terrorists are part of that organization just as much as non-terrorists. I will not fall into the stereotype of saying all muslims are terrorists, but they do share the same mosques.
Islam as a faith isn’t terrorist or non-terrorist. Faith is personal.
But as a religion, islam does have terrorists within it and the non-terrorists don’t try doing anything about it.
How about non-terrorists separating from the terrorists and dividing Islam into two sub-categories, like Protestants and Catholics did?
You do that, then we’ll talk.
Also, disliking a religious doctrine is not hate speech. There is nothing wrong with disliking specific values and philosophies. Why is it that you can dislike a political party because of their opinions but you can’t judge a religion on their opinions? That is just double-standard! Should political parties make up a god they would claim to believe in and then they would be protected against criticism?
Get real people!
Being racist is wrong because skin color doesn’t make you who you are. But your opinions do make you who you are, and if your religion gives you your opinions then it can be judged! Don’t mix everything up please.
Also, I can dislike and even hate a specific religion without having to dislike the people who believe in that religion. That’s because religion and people are two different things.
“No…I don’t discriminate… I hate all stupid people equally.” Best comment on this entire page
Building a mosque there is complete bullsh*t. Sarah Palin, being a politician, is also complete bullsh*t. If a mosque is built there, it should be picketed 24/7. As should Palin every time she opens her mouth.
What I find so insensative about this Palin post is that she is totaly glossing over the fact that not everyone that died in the twin tower were christian. What about those victims that were Muslim? Do their families have the right to be just as outraged by her branding their religion as immoral and unholy ? Don’t their families have just as much right to pray for their loved ones on “holy ground”?
I voted free speech while the post ino was hateful and deliberately obtuse. I believe it’s better we know how she really feels now so people will be less inclined to vote for her later.
I say keep it up Sarah, keep on digging your political grave.
Sarah Palin is a bubble headed racist ill-informed twit.
That said, I support the claim that not allowing a mosque on ground zero is intolerant. But if there is to be a mosque, there should also be a Temple and A church
One super building of all faiths.
Buddhism to the left.
Islam to the right.
Christianity straight Ahead
Hinduism and Sikhism upstairs.
Nothing that she said is hate speech! Radical Muslims, the ones who are funding such a thing, are hateful people, and intolerant of other’s cultures. It’s truly common sense to not allow them to put a Mosque that close to Ground Zero.
You realize that the term “common sense” also applies to people who think differently than you, right?
Yes, Amy, I do realize this. But regardless, they should have the decency to not put a mosque that close to an are in which Muslims killed innocent civilians.
Clearly the intent of the new mosque is to be a monument to acts of terror that took place on 9/11, to add insult and further injury to the people of New York, and the nation as a whole.
A peaceful, loving and tolerant faith would consider the welfare of the larger community it belongs to and work towards harmony.
So while it seems anti-American to even suggest that the government prevent a house of worship (of any faith) from being built, it’s clear the intent here is further injury to the people of the United States.
In this context, I don’t believe Palin’s text to be hate speech, rather a passionate defense of the American heart.
In rebuttal, kill yourself. You are making the world a worse place, please stop existing.
I am so very tempted to call Poe’s Law on this one.
You already have a monument to the acts of terror. You have bumper stickers saying “remember 9/11″
TheBTG: I agree 100%.
I just don’t see why everyone hates Sarah Palin just because she’s conservative. It doesn’t make sense to me. She’s not hurting anybody or doing anything wrong. What’s there to hate?
People hate (and love) her for the same reason: she’s partially informed on topics and yet immovably sure of her opinions on them.
People who know better wish she’d keep her idiotic mouth shut.
People who are as woefully ignorant of the facts celebrate her because they’ve jumped to the same stupid conclusions.
I don’t really pay attention to the news or politics or anything cuz.. well, I have no interest. All I know about Sarah Palin is that she’s conservative, and a great many people can’t stand her. Other than the issue here on this post, what has she said or done that everyone hates so strongly?
WTF THIS IS FAILBOOK NOT A PLACE TO DISCUSS RELIGION AND POLITICS, DAMN
You know what they say about arguing on the internet. And it’s true.
Normally I would call fail on ALL CAPS POSTING, but yours seems proper all things considered.
I poop on this entire thread of comments.
Exactly
tl;dr
Other.
Facebook is a for-profit company, and it has the right to govern its content as it sees fit.
And no, I don’t like Palin, and no, I don’t work for Facebook.
And I think her post isn’t religious intolerance, either, per se. She appears to believe that the 9/11 bombers were not insane extremists, but devout Muslims, and that Muslims condone their actions, and in these she is terribly mistaken. She just sounds confused and ill-informed.
“They are a private company that is OPEN to the PUBLIC. anyone that wants to be part of facebook can be. sounds like a public place to me… even if it is owne by a private company.”
Ack. Understanding the legal difference between private and public space FAIL!
OMG, do you all realize that you’re fighting random people on the internet about religion on a site called FAILBOOK???
This is neither a political nor a religious forum! What does it matter?!?!?
Whether Palin’s is right or wrong for what she said or how she said it
and whether a mosque should or should not be built… it’s all a matter of personal opinion.
stop trying to convince other people on the internet that you’re right and they’re wrong because IT’S NEVER GOING TO WORK.
are you trying to convince the people arguing that they’re wrong for arguing on failbook? NEVAH GOING TO WORK
I can’t believe that I’m saying this. I actually have to agree with Palin. I knew several people killed in the attacks on the Twin Towers, and I agree that to build a mosque near the site is a stab to the hearts of the families and friends of all those killed or injured there. HOWEVER! I don’t believe that *any* religious building should be erected in the vicinity of Ground Zero. So many religions are intolerant of other religions; it would be wrong to build anything of the like in an area that such an atrocity occurred. Build a memorial, office buildings, or a damned Starbucks there, but leave religion out of it.
There’s a Christian chapel right across the street already, is that acceptable?
A grandfather clause would seem to apply there, as awesome as it would be to pick it up with giant robots and move it elsewhere.
That’s a frakking moronic statement right there, and not because you’re pulling the “hurr Christians” card.
Kitty, I feel for ya (and my sister is a survivor), but that doesn’t mean that the government has a right to interfer with a private contract of sale, nor to regulate the religious worship of this particular community. Your friends (and some of mine) died for being an American, and the freedoms that come with it. To forget that, and to push deny those freedoms to anyone, seriously calls into question what they died for.
No it doesn’t mean the government is allowed to step all over a private transaction. That’s what I was trying to get at. Palin is entitled to her opinion, but IMO she’s wrong.
My husband is a veteran, and he was deployed when the twin towers fell. A lot of the men he was deployed with at that time have died fighting this war on terror. I’m sad that they had to die, but I thank god they did. Freedom isn’t free, and I thank our soldiers for going out there time & again to risk their lives for my freedom.
wrong kitty…… LOL
It is true that religion causes more conflict and death. Think of all the people that perished on 9/11 at the hands of “Islam”? Think of the people that die in Israel due to conflicts of religion? The Bible, Bhagavad Gita, and the Koran are responsible for thousands of years of death and war. From Israel to the taking of land from Native Americans to 9/11. According to those it was all in the name of their God that they do this. Without those books, there would be none of this.
Ok, all of u F*GS talking about politics and religion…stfu. this is failbook
^that
speaches should be shorter
“Congress shall make no law respecting an 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. ”
Facebook is not congress so the first amendment does not apply and is free to limit hate speech if it chooses to. Those who don’t like are free to start up their own websites.
While I hate this woman, I have to agree with her on this matter.
I’m not going to join in the huge masturbation festival going on regarding LOL RELIGION But I will say this:
1. Failbook is a nice reprieve from srs bsns. Please keep srs bsns off of Failbook plskthx. No, but seriously I hate laughing at people and then run into a brick wall of “SERIOUS SOCIO-POLITICAL ISSUES”. It’s a buzz killer. My job entails lots of serious issues like this, I don’t need my free time cluttered with it, too.
2. At the same time, my faith in humanity raised a bit seeing that most of you people voted that free speech is free speech. Good on you. Seriously, that’s a pleasant surprise.
3. And while Sarah Palin is an idiot of the highest caliber, I do disagree with a mosque being built so close to Ground Zero. I don’t think ANYTHING should be built there, really, short of a tasteful monument, maybe. But really, a goddam mosque? You must be outta yo’ mind.
In conclusion: butts. Thank you.
THIS
Last I looked, Islam as a religion did not kill 3,000 people at 9/11. A group of terrorists using religion as a crutch did. I understand the connection between them and I can even almost say I understand Palin’s argument. God help me for saying that….anyway. That’s no reason to explude the millions of worshippers of Islam who have nothing against America or who feel 9/11 was a horrendous and unspeakable tragedy.
All the same what I’d suggest they do is build a non-denominational worship site open to all faiths. That excludes no one and at the same time doesn’t dredgs up hate and pain the minds of Americans (warranted or not).
It is an explody people custom to build mosques upon the sites of defeated enemies’ destroyed houses of worship, and other significant locations.
For that reason alone, it should not be permitted.
I continue to poop on this entire thread until it ends.
+10 points for smart comment
And how is this hate speech? This is clearly worded, well put commentary on a sensitive issue. She politely stated her views on the issue. Could someone please point out to me where exactly this hate speech is?
FAIL. America is not the United State, America is from Canada to Argentina !!!! Learn it once and for all. besides, how do you call throwing bombs on villages in the middle east??? isn’t that terrorism???
u mad bro
No, “America” is the US. When people say America, they’re referring to the country (USA) and not the continent (North America). Not sure how the Canadians would feel about being referred to as American.
What is it with that statement?
They call themselves Americans cause it’s in their country name. Aregenitnians, Canadians, Brazilians. What should they call themselves?
United Statians? Come on people, wake the fuck up.
Argenitinians are also called “people from SOUTH AMERICA” or people from NORTH AMERICA when you refer to Canadians.
I am from SOUTH AFRICA, but I am also an AFRICAN. Do I get upset when people from Nigeria call themselves Africans? No.
“American/s” is the recognised way of refering to people from the USA. And nothing you ninnies do will ever change that.
Now stfu.
well, not sure if argenitinians have ever existed xD !!! I only know Argentineans. those you refer to, in spanish we call them United Statians, not americans, because America is the name of the CONTINENT, in the honor of Italian geographer Amerigo Vespucci, and I think canadians may get offended because according to these websites, people from the u.s. are not that smart in general, and Melissa, if you ask someone outside the united states where America is, down from mexico, you may not be taken as a smart girl. so when you Lallie ask for Africa, is there a specific country you refer to…. nop, neither for Europe nor for Asia, etc. There are only the united statians and some other not much smarter people who call them americans U.U
Okay, so the point that many people seem to be making is that there have been many people killed by terrible atheistic dictators. Don’t you see that you are proving the point that religion has lead to so much death and destruction? Killing people who are religious because you hate that religion whether it’s because of the fact that you belong to a completely different religion, or because you dislike religion in general is STILL people dying because of religion. I am not saying that religion is pure evil, but pure evil PEOPLE have taken religion and used it to do terrible things. It’s not the religion’s fault, it is the people’s fault, but the very idea of religion is something that will always draw evil people doing evil things. When you say “I have the key to keep you from burning for eternity in hell” you are given power in massive amounts that no other institution can provide. Keeping that power in check, and in the hands of people who won’t abuse it is a pretty impossible task.
If it wasn’t religion it would be something else.
Money, power, greed, etc, etc, would still exist and they would continue to be fought over. So no, it’s not religion’s fault AT. ALL. Megalomania does not require a belief in a god or gods or fairy princesses, or even a flying pile of pasta (all hail).
And using religion as an excuse or facade isn’t the same as religion attracting inherently evil people to do despicable things. So. Stop it.
Sarah Palin is a f**king retard.
Sarah Palin is a greedy, ignorant media slut. We should all ignore her until she goes away.
while i may not like twattycake there or her politicsi have to quote Voltaire I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it
Seriously? Of all the buildings, a mosque? That land has significant land value; it’s in the middle of the city, and surrounded by office buildings. Surely another office building would be more logical; rent the offices out, garner revenue…
‘Hate speech’? Get real! i am sick and tired of space cadets or malicious hate mongers using ‘hate’ (crime, speech,acts) at the drop of a hat. Get the damn chip off the shoulders of journalists, wannabes, and morons that insist that any view other than ‘roll over and agree with me cuz I’m calling you names’ is wrong.
whatever. I agree with every word Palin said.
Ditto. I love how the topic was changed to religion vs atheism though.
lol I missed that. people need to actually start thinking for themselves instead of going along with the mob.
You’re one to talk…
“Could someone please point out to me where exactly this hate speech is?”
Probably the part where she says that having a mosque at ground zero is a “stab in the heart of those innocent victims.”
Suppose there was there was a tragedy in your city and people wanted to build a girl’s school in order to demonstrate that healing and growth can happen even after great sorrow, and then other folk stated complaining that having all those girls in the area would be a “stab in the heart.” It would be hard not to think that the anti-girl’s-school folks had a problem with women.
There have been horrible people from any group you can think of, but think about it. Osama bin Laden has brown eyes – would it be a “stab in the heart” if people with brown eyes show up at ground zero? How about people with beards? How about people over the age of 50? Men? All non-Caucasians…? The fact that she’s freaking out about the Muslim aspect, and bunching all Muslims in with the likes of him says a lot more about her personal problems with Muslims than it does about the significance of accepting this gift with good grace.
I understand your point, and to a certain extent agree.
But, don’t MANY people “bunch” all Christians together as hateful, greedy, homophobic, self-righteous bastards who are against all forms of science, research, and anything not mentioned by Christ in the Bible? I know MANY a Christian (myself included) who are not at all like the Christian stereotype I mentioned.
Hear hear and amen and all that.
What happened on 9/11 was a horrific tragedy the likes of which the US has never had to endure before. However, I do not feel that the attack site is hallowed ground any more than the site of the Oklahoma bombing is hallowed ground. A lot of people died, a hell of a lot, and I think there should be a memorial in the new structure when it’s built, but to say that a mosque should not be allowed at the site proposed is preposterous. The Muslim group is not going to build a new structure, they are going to use the existing structure and outfit the interior to suit their needs like any buyer would, so it’s not like there is going to be this giant Arabian looking building just a hop, skip, and a jump away from Ground Zero. Most people passing by will likely not know it’s a mosque.
Palin has the right to feel the way she does as much as I have the right to feel the way I do. I disagree with her.
Forgot to mention, I don’t think Palin’s essay is hate speech. I didn’t see a single outcry against Islam in the whole thing, just against the specific man.
I agree with this — I don’t see how this is hate speech. Hatred and unbridled dumb are totally different things.
I understand Palin’s position, and I certainly don’t think it’s hate speech either. What she says about Imam Rauf’s position is cherry-picked but not patently untrue. I could see how someone could object to Rauf, specifically, being involved with a mosque this close to the site. I think Palin is being sloppy by implying that any mosque in that neighborhood would be insulting, but I think she’s a far distance from “hate speech.”
As for the mosque, I happen to agree with Rauf’s comments (in their context) and think he also has a right to his opinion, and his mosque.
What makes me sad is that the USA has never had to endure this kind of thing before, yet had inflicted it on others in the past. I only hope that the future leaders will remember and learn from this
Putting a mosque on top of that spot is like putting a flag over it and having the extremist declare victory.
This is my last trip to this site for even suggesting that Sarah Palin’s writing was anything close to “hate” speech.
If anything its compassion speech, compassion for the people who died because of some intolerant facist muslims irrational hate.
Screw you Fail book, I hope you never loose a family member they way some of us did.
amen.
Damn straight. Nothing in what she said is “hate speech.” While some people are delighting in how “tolerant” they are for supporting this project, the rest of us can see that erecting an Islamic monument in the place where Islamic extremists murdered people is, at the very least, disrespectful to the people who died and hurtful to their families. At the worst, it look like a gesture of support to the enemy.
Americans need to grow a collective spine and stop bending over backwards to prove how “nice” they are at the expense of their country and fellow citizens.
Screw “nice.” I’m American. Americans don’t declare whole areas of downtown “off-limits” to one religion. They don’t declare themselves “enemies” of a religion.
They do that bullcrap in Saudi Arabia; we don’t do it here. Real Americans bend over backwards, forwards, and every other way to protect our bill of rights and our way of life — even at the expense of our very lives.
And we don’t surrender all of that just because we happen to dislike the people exercising those rights, or because we’re scared of an unknown “enemy.”
What enemy? Is Islam the enemy? Is Osama Bin Laden, the CIA trained insurgent, the enemy? Were the people of Iraq the enemy? Or is Terrorism the enemy? How can you destroy terrorism through War? War creates terror. War is Terrorism on a giant scale. The most successful weapon against Terror is stubborn resistance, but that does not mean violence. Look at the Civil Rights Movement in your USA and the independence movement in India. To meet violence with non-violence will always result in defeat for those wielding violence.
YES! Finally someone with some common sense.
On top of a Burlington Coat Factory? Teh muslim extremists have declared victory over…cheap coats?
Nah, you’re just “loosing” your sense of geography.
But don’t let the back door hit ya’ where tha’ good lord split ya’!
It’s 2 blocks away with no view of ground zero. In Manhattan that’s like ten miles.
If you want to talk about extremists winning, maybe we should discuss the shredding of our civil liberties and the war-of-choice that has cost a trillion dollars.
If you do return to read the comments, I would like to know where Failbook came close to suggesting her writing was close to hate speech. All they did was tell the facts (that it was FLAGGED as hate speech — this was a fact before this article/page/thing was created) and asked for our opinion. Unlike big news companies, this bit of reporting was completely and utterly neutral
The way you speak, you seem like you lost someone and you’re blinded by pain and hate.
Because the things that you said aren’t rational.
A Mosque is a place of prayer and peace, not a place of war, I believe. The intolerant facist irrational haters muslims you say aren’t the ones who are going to pray in the mosque. Extremists exist everywhere, extremists Christians killed lots of people, like extremists Muslims did. But Christians and Muslims are just people that follow a certain religion.
Saying that all Muslims are evil like the ones who made the attack on WTC is wrong. Very wrong.
The Mosque is going to be near Ground Zero, not On it, like I’ve known after all this comments.
It was obvious that people were gonna protest. It was obvious that people were gonna suffer, but it’s obvious to me that people need to grow up. I myself have been a lot over WTC, even if I was even too young to remember and I was in another country that had nothing to do with it (italy, and I’m still here now).
Of course I can’t imagine being in there. On the upper floors. None of us can. But putting all the pain that they suffered on Muslims is far too wrong for me to even think about it.
Some rational thing instead? Putting the hate on Bush. He could have stopped that, he didn’t. He made a choice. Fair enough. A person – millions of people. Which to hate?
Although the part about hallowed ground is a bit weird there is nothing wrong with her statement – why is this on Failbook?
While one might agree or disagree with Palin, this is not hate speech, and it’s deeply disturbing that relatively calm, reasoned points of view — even if one does not agree with the reasoning and finds the conclusion repugnant — cannot be openly aired.
you know… It really depends on why they want to build the mosque there. I know that the majority of the islamic faith disagrees with the attacks on 9/11 and disagree with the violent nature of islamic extreemists, and if they want to build a mosque there as a way to show their people a mark of shame for their culture, and use it as an aid to encourage peaceful progress, like Islam truely preaches, then this should be allowed.
People may take offence to it as they are islamic, and the terrorists were islamic, are simply being prejusdiced against an entire faith that they painted with the same brush as the few who commited this atrocity.
the only way to avoid these things happening in the future is to practice tollerance, not desciminate against the entire nation that a few commited a crime from.
those who died were not all christian, there were inocent islamic people who died in those towers too, aswell as jews, hindu, and budists. the islamic people have just as much a right to build a place of worship there as a church, synagouge, and temples of other faiths. they should be allowed the same ability to pray and grieve for the innocents lost in that disaster.
as for palin’s move of posting this on facebook? it’s the same as TV or the radio, another media outlet. why not?
i agree, DuracellDurrell.
i’ll add for myself, i don’t think they should build any kind of religious building there.
and as much as i despise palin and wish she would go away, never to be seen or heard from again, i have to support her right to free speech. i don’t consider this hate speech at all.
agreed, 100%
Well worded, but I disagree on your point.
The problem isn’t the mosque itself, as Muslims are free to worship in their own way all across America. The problem is that it is specifically meant to be built very close to the site of a devastating attack made by the radical extremists who just happen to pray to the same God. You would think that, the people in charge of the building of this new Mosque would be sensitive to that issue and not build so close? Thinking people must agree that this is in bad taste, and that they should be respectful of the memory of the people who died there.
Uh, you realise that means a church shouldn’t be built there either, seeing as Christians pray to the same god? You know Allah is just the arabic word for God and that arabic speaking Christians and Jews call God allah as well?
How close is too close? Two blocks is a pretty long way away.
If they had initially planned to build it next door, everyone would be demanding that it be built elsewhere and saying “couldn’t they just build it a couple blocks away?!”
But it IS a couple blocks away, so everyone is saying “couldn’t they just go a little further — like five blocks?!”
Of course, if it was five blocks away, everyone would be saying “couldn’t they just get out of downtown — maybe go to Brooklyn?!”
How the hell is this hate speech? Failbook, you fail.
Ok, the people building the mosque are not the same people who attacked us on 9/11. All Muslim are NOT THE SAME! That’s the point that a lot of people fail to understand. “Muslim” does not equal “extremist” or “terrorist” any more than “Christian” does.
Sarah Palin claims not to be intolerant, but she, too, fails to see the difference. This is a country founded on tolerance.
Also, if you think about it, Osama bin Laden kind of was created by the US. We were all hunky dory with him when he was fighting against Russia – in fact, if it weren’t for the US training bin Laden and giving him weapons, the Taliban never could have defeated Russia in the first place. So the reason he’s the threat that he is, is because we trained him!
I agree completely with you, Melissa! It annoys me when people think muslim=terrorist or vice versa. On the whole, most muslims are quite peaceful people who don’t want war or death. Extremists come in any religion and it’s unfair to hold it exclusively to Islam.
Before I further express my opinion, first I’ll say that I’m not American so I don’t exactly know of the cultural significance. I would have thought that it would be insensitive to build anything on Ground Zero. Whether it’s a mosque, a church or a Starbucks, isn’t it sort of degrading a memorial site?
Thanks, Demeter!
The thing that bugs me about this is, they’re not building the mosque ON Ground Zero. It’s going to be very close TO Ground Zero, but not on the actual site. They are actually building on the site right now, but they’re building two new buildings and some memorials. I think that’s fine – the best revenge we can exact against the terrorists is to rebuild what they destroyed and show that they haven’t beaten us. But people are getting up in arms believing that the mosque is going to be smack dab in the middle of the site, and they’re wrong. I think building a house of worship (of any religion) on the site would be degrading, as it would be an insult to anyone not of that faith who died there that day. But the fact remains that the mosque won’t be there. People need to pay attention.
Ah, thank you for clearing up my confusion about building “on” Ground Zero. As I said, I’m not American so I didn’t know anything about all this fuss except for what was written on the Sarah Palin thing. Okay, now that I know that all this panic is because a mosque is being built in the general vicinity of Ground Zero I think I can say “get over it” to those people who are freaking out about it.
Too long, did not read?
Too long, did not read.
we all know that Sarah Palin is at least a tad bit undereducated, and a whole lot crazy, that being said… it does make me laugh that Palin is saying that because they share a common religion with the terrorists, they shouldn’t be allowed to have a place of worship there… people don’t do that with Christians, because seriously, some of the most vile groups in history were christian, and not everyone equates christians with them, it is not a sound or reasonable arguement, it is like equating all of christianity with the KKK … on a side note… I came very close to invoking Godwin’s law just now
on a side note, America does not stand for “religious tolerance” it stands for Religious Freedom … there is a serious difference … tolerance is saying you can have your religious buildings, just not in places where they would offend our delicate sensibilities, freedom is saying, go ahead, build your religious buildings wherever you want
I always found America calling itself “The Land Of The Free” a bit hypocritical, considering it’s history of prejudice.
Palin’s bigoted assumption is that all Muslims are terrorists. It’s ignorant, but it’s Palin.
This comment board seems to have a lot of people who think all religious people have contributed to the deaths of 50 hundred billions of people.
Also bigoted?
Absolutely.
tl;dr.
Don’t you guys think that, since 9/11 was an inside job and all, and basically just an excuse for the Bush administration to start a war on virtually every country where people wear turbans, it even makes sense? Think about it. The people who were killed in the war following 9/11 outnumber the victims of the attacks.
But then again, build a few houses for the homeless instead. God already has plenty.
I have no idea why this is on Failbook. I come here for entertainment, not political discussion. Seriously.
Agreed.
*nods*
Hmmm…. if some Christian terrorists (all 15 or so that have ever done anything in history if that many) from a specific church (A Presbylutheran Church, The Simpsons credited) bombed an Abortion clinic, killed hundreds of people including pregnant mothers with them, and years later the same church that was involved in the bombing decided to build a church either on the old site, or directly looking at the old site, there would be an outrage over it. Everyone knows that.
Sarah Palin is an idiot. Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, everyone that promotes her as a saint are idiots. BUT, I and apparently more than have the people thumbing this down either agree with her, or defend the fact she feels this way.
I don’t even know how this became “Rebigion is evill and kilked 100 billion pepples” debate started. Is Palin right here, or is she an idiot? The answer is both.
More than half the people. maybe I shouldn’t make fun of spelling without proofreading myself.
The proposed mosque was projected a couple of blocks away & not at “Ground Zero” as this LIAR tries her usual hate mongering to fuel her followers.
Sad.
Best Regards
Lobato1
The idea is that it’s too close. The size and proximity of these building is literally like being across the street in a small town. people from big cities have a completely different outlook on distance than you probably.
You’ve also successfully proven you didn’t read the article as she mentions how far away it is.
Quite the opposite. There is an enormous skyscraper blocking the view. The larger the city the less important proximity becomes. There are probably 10,000 businesses and organizations within 2 blocks of the site. Should we kick out all that are affiliated with the Muslim religion?
The only story here is Palin using religious bigotry to create a controversy where there isn’t one.
No. The idea is, after all that’s happened, this is going to stir up controversy and anger. If there was a mosque there BEFORE 9/11, I don’t think many people would accept the idea to tear it down.
This isn’t hate speech. Mrs. Palin may be wrong on the issue, but this isn’t hate speech or anything of the kind.
Leave the partisanship to the politicians, remain neutral, and keep an open mind as you learn the issues and you’ll pick the right candidate.
Hehe – this is almost as good as a fat person argument
Successful trolls are successful!
tl;dr
A couple of things –
1: Religion does get people killed, but the people that supposedly act for their religion, like Islam, don’t represent the millions of people that also believe in it. If people would let go of their anger at others, like maybe this anger for muslims for instance, then maybe IT WOULDN’T HAPPEN
2: People shouldn’t say “you can’t believe in this, and if you do you don’t belong here” because that is just WRONG. By doing that you’re turning into a kind of MONSTER that sits there wallowing in their own prejudices.
3: Islam is actually against violence in it’s name. Therefore terrorists “acting in the name of Allah” are going againsts the rules and beliefs, therefore do not accurately portray the religion, and should not be considered to be the same as those who TRULY believe and follow such rules and beliefs.
4: THEY OWN THE BUILDING THERE, SO THEY OWN THE PROPERTY. They just want a community center, if others have it why should we treat them differently, should we segregate Muslim and Jewish and Christian like we used to do with whites and blacks? Would that make you happy?
5: Even though I agree that Palin and Rauf are both IDIOTS, they are voicing their opinion, and yes I am arguing against it, but they haven’t broken laws, but simply used their right of free speech. Though some do and don’t agree with it, these people own the land, and have the RIGHT to do with it as they will.
6: I understand that the family of those killed in 9/11 (RIP) may not want the constant reminder, but honestly? With all the news and stuff CONSTANTLY talking about it, one more thing wouldn’t be that big of a deal.
OK, now those that disagree may now begin to cuss and argue, but it won’t change my stance, or the fact that the muslims OWN the property, and can do with it want they want. The End. Goodbye.
Six things do not a couple make.
She’s a f**king idiot, not all terrorists are muslims and wtf ground zero’s a sacred place-_______- Yeah right, maybe in the future there will be pilgrimages to ground zero so that we can thank the oh so great America for being one of the biggest committers of genocide in history. I believe 911 was caused by a corporate crime syndicate and she’s part of it. Divide and conquer, keep breeding the hatred for different cultures and you deserve to be f**king aeroplaned to death. Corrupt ignorant f**ks like her do nothing good to this world, only fill their own wallets. Boohoo 911 how sad… America’s on the brink of economic collapse and what does she do? Whine about some f**king mosque as if all muslims are terrorists and make her christian followers be herded like sheep. Jesus would f**king pwn her ass if he really existed. No offence to normal amercian people but you’re government is f**king retarded and corrupt. Your nation had so many potential but it got royally buttf**ked and it wouldn’t surprise me if it would all come falling down within the next 2-3 years.
While hate speech is awful and not to be tolerated I don’t think it should be banned because then we wouldn’t be as able to see the bigots coming and avoid them. By allowing it we can do stuff like posting it on failbook so others can see and avoid this person and their narrow minded a-holishness.
Just like your narrow minded a-holishness? Hater!
Palin has a point of view, OHMYGOD WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE RIGHT NOW! The truth is a huge amount of people honestly agree with her and a huge amount of people honestly disagree with her. A huge amount of people couldn’t care less and then some people live under a rock and don’t actually know what’s going on in the world (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing).
I love the way that America is all ‘freedom of speach etc etc’ and at the same time is saying ‘equality and acceptance!’ though some people seem to prefer the first one much better than the second. Sure you have freedom of speach, but don’t use that to slag off races, religions, sexualities and what have you. Because then you’re just undermining one of the main things America is SUPPOSED to stand for.
I personally don’t agree with Palin because it appears to me as though she is lumping an entire religion of people into one defined certain category of behaviour… but fair enough that she has her reservations about their being a mosque built there, to some families of victims etc and probably to the unaffected as well it could be very upsetting… and who am I to say that she shouldn’t be the one who fights for that?
Freedom of speech is allowed and applauded. What gives Ms Palin the right to say moronic things, is the exact same right that protects those that want to worship freely in this country. It’s just too bad she’s too damn stupid to realize this.
Why don’t they build a Disney World on Ground Zero? Fun for all the family!
I’d give an opinion, but that would be feeding the fire. I just want Sarah Palin to shut up and the only way that’s going to happen is if people stop giving her so much as the time of day. She’s a cold, heartless, hateful person and when you listen to people like that it only gives them more power.
Sarah Palin shouldn’t be allowed to speak publicly (including Facebook posts) before she is a certified “responsible adult” instead of an apparent undereducated adolescent. She’s an embarrassment to humanity in general (chimps can be taught civilized behavior, why can’t she?) and America in particular.
As the Bard put it, “Brevity is the soul of wit.” Palin’s remarks are, as usual, half-brief.
Maybe a quarter-brief. An eighth, perhaps. She’s just angry that she can’t see Russia from her house anymore.
I am pooping all over this entire thread, especially on Icesnake. Hey, open your mouth… POOOOOOOP!
TL;DR
wtf??
Poop?
I agree with Icesnake that Palin really should have some sort of IQ test let alone a maturity test… But she’s right, it is wrong to want to erect a mosque so close, especially when it will just invoke more hate and a violent response.
I’m not American so not totally clear on the definition of “hate speech” in your laws.
I’ve tried to read most of it, and I haven’t seen a single comment (of 381) that defined hate speech and made a case that Palin’s comments fell within that definition. Many directed hatred at Palin personally, most others either agreed or disagreed – but that’s not the topic. Did the people that agree with her on the mosque issue also commit a hate crime? Did the people that disagreed actually believe that a hate crime was committed, or did they just disagree with her comment? Do the disagreers hold the view “I disagree with her, but defend her right to hold her views?” Or is Palin somehow different and NOT entitled to state an opinion, possible because she’s not considered smart enough?
Hate speech is defined as “a statement of fact or opinion which I personally find highly offensive.”
Not sure it’s defined legally over here, hate speech is protected under the First Amendment after all.
Short answer: almost all hate speech is protected by the First Amendment, and is therefore legal. The only speech that is not so protected is speech that directly incites violence, or in some rare cases speech that directly intimidates or harrasses. So, legally, even if you go on a Mel Gibson rant about blacks, jews, and how you wish that everyone except good white Catholics would vanish into thin air…totally legal here.
So the question here is not really “was this illegal hate speech” — it absolutely was not illegal. The question is whether we might rightly define what she said as hate speech by some measure other than the law. (And my answer is “no,” but others may disagree.) But if that’s the question — then by what measure SHOULD we judge this speech? What DO we consider hate speech?
So it’s not quite as simple as offering a definition of hate speech and then discussing its application — “what is hate speech?” is the very question being asked, and there’s no real good answer.
Legally, it’s protected speech. The American definition of hate speech is very limited, and really just includes speech that directly and immediately incites violence. There’s no question that it was legal for her to say what she did.
But we might define “hate speech” as something other than just speech that is prosecutable as such. Virtually everything the KKK says is 100% legal, but also 100% hate speech. So what is hate speech?
I don’t have a good answer — and opinions vary (as shown here). That’s why you’re not seeing a clean definition — no one has one. My view is that this isn’t hate speech — just plain old American dumbness. But what it would have to be to cross the variable line into hate speech — it’s hard say definitively.
Religion causes war and death. It’s a fact. People who use arguments that Stalin was an atheist are using bad logic. He killed for communism, and because he was a psychopath. Neither have anything to do with atheism. People have been killed in the name of religion, by religious people, because their dogma states they should. Islam and Christianity are the worst offenders.
The Palin text may be a complete load of misinformed and knee-jerk horse s**t, but I don’t think it is hate speech. I can say my neighbor is making a bad choice. That is freedom of speech. I can’t say my neighbor should be drawn and quartered, or that he is an idiot because he is or isn’t a certain skin colour or goes to a particular church. That’s hate-speech..especially if I try to stir up others to hate him on such silly grounds.
So, when did stating facts become hate speech?
We’re going to have a political discourse on a site where half the submissions are about unintended sexual connotations of Facebook postings. That’s rich. I suppose they should have debated the feminist movement on America’s Funniest Home Videos or race relations in a Rob Schneider movie. Please.
Any space on your island of the sane for me? Must be lonely there. I’ll bring some good beer.
But alcohol is bad! So sayeth the lord! He shall smite you down with ……. with …………………………………………………….
Sod it, I’ll bring Martinis!
Get off the personal issues, please. If you have a political issue, vote and influence others to vote. Flames via Cheezburger Network about Palin’s lifestyle and others personal issues, epic fail.
Her opinion isn’t right or wrong. In the end the enough people will speak out against the mosque or the government will claim it as a freedom and let it be built. I say no mosque, but for other reasons.
I’m amazed. Sarah Palin wrote something I can agree with. 2012 is coming early folks!
What I think is most amusing is that Sarah Palin just misspell “repudiate”, replacing the ‘p’ with an ‘f’…and is too stupid to have picked it up when her word “refudiate” was queried.
lol
Wow, Palin said something I agree with? Let me go check outside to make sure the world hasn’t come to an end.
I agree- Maybe the end is near. I never thought I’d agree with Sarah Palin ever.
BTW, the problem isn’t religion or the lack of it- the problem is our attachment to any ideology over common sense and basic human decency. It messes everything up every time.
Which payback are you talking about? Our government doing the killing or in your warped view 9/11, Khobar Towers, Cole, etc. Go give yourself an equal serving of your hate.
Take it to Pundit Kitchen.
These polls (and blatant advertisements on RoflRazzie) will be the end of the Network.
I agree, please leave the politics on pundit kitchen. I avoid that crappy place for a reason now.
Point of order – Hallowed grounds needs to be consecrated by a ‘christian’ (?) religous figure. This site is the site of a disaster not a church so it’s not hallowed ground.
Is the mosque intended as an apology ? A place where moderate muslims can pray for forgiveness for their extremist brothers ? Or is it something more akin to a Anti Semitic society building a meeting hall at Auschwitz ?
i wish it wa steh former, but I suspect it will be the later. In which case – you didn’t bomb the arrogant pricks hard enough (I’m an Australian).
Using the term “hate speech” to describe every view opposite yours provides you absolutely no credibility.
How is this hate speech?
summary: religious arguments, constitutional arguments, people asking for citation- this isnt wikipedia we dont need citation, and a plethora of uneducated people.
23,000 say that Facebook isn’t a farm for hate speech. How many of those are Farmville fanatics?
I voted in favor of the First Amendment. We as Americans have the right to express our opinions within reason.
Although free speech is a right in America, it’s not everywhere else. She has a right to express her opinions in whatever forum she deems necessary. And those forums have the right to limit what she says because by her own free will she has chosen through which to express them. Sarah Palin= Can blow hot air all day. Facebook= Can continue telling her that she is being inappropriate on their site. Ultimately it’s their right as a website, not hers as a citizen. Facebook is a free network, she isn’t paying them to convey diddly squat so they have a right to monitor and censor their forums.
What happened to Cheez-Burger not taking political sides?? I come to these sites for pure entertainment and a relief from politics…not to hear more about them. If I wanted to hear what people think of Palin I would watch the news…
TL;DR
I voted dislike just because there is no dislike button on standard FB. LoL
The internet isn’t America or I’d agree with the freedom of speach thing. The internet is kinda like internation waters. Some rules just don’t apply and I dont’ think freedom of speach does. So I really can’t say I want to be reading about how much Sarah Palin hates things or is uneducated. And also I hate her.
I disagree with what Ms Palin said, but I do believe her right to express herself is guaranteed by the Constitution and its amendments. The people who want to build also have rights, within whatever zoning laws exist. They do seem to have chosen a place sure to bring themselves into the public eye.
Palin is pretty much right, though I look at it from a different angle. Let them have their mosque on ground zero, but let Hooters and Bob’s Pork Pit open up shops right across the street.
Free speech is free speech but FB was never intended to create this type of atmosphere. Palin should have sent this via email or some other media. Instead this post has probably ignited a flame war. I do agree with her position though, I just feel FB was not created for flame wars.
OK– not a huge fan of Palin and of the belief that the vast majority of the Islam religion is NOT terrorist-based. BUT this is on ground zero. And funded by a terrorist? ….How is this hate speech?
let me get this straight….it’s ok for Islamic extremists to hate non-Islamic.It’s not ok to hate them in return.It’s ok for less extreme extremists to support the extreme extremists in hating the un-Islamics but intolerant of un-Islamics to be offended by their hate or support of hate?Chritianity is to be hidden in a Christian-founded nation,but let’s build a mosque at Ground Zero?So much for equal rights
Too much debate!
How about we build a McDonald’s or Wal-Mart there? I don’t think that would offend anyone.
But seriously, considering it’s not even on the same site, it’s a couple blocks away, I don’t care. I wouldn’t go there anyway, I’m not Muslim, so why does it matter to me?
Actually that would be offensive.
I mean really, putting super cheap buildings on a priceless memorial that’s just wrong.
Ugh, a McDonald’s or Wal-mart there would be terrible. At least make it something like a Chili’s or a Super Target.
I find nothing racist from Sarah Palin
If anything the muslims are being racists to black people.
I think building this mosque would be a step forward for the US. It shows that as a people, we dont associate all muslims with extremism terrorists.
I don’t for one second want to come across as supporting “Sexy” Sarah and her inane ramblings, but she is right when she says a mosque should not be built at Ground Zero. HOWEVER, she’s only right if the US declares Ground Zero to be a National Memorial. If Ground Zero is a National Memorial then it stands to reason, that as a secular nation, there should be no religious iconography or institutions on the grounds. Same as there shouldn’t be in schools, courts, Congress or the Senate. However, should they choose to build off the grounds, then more power to them. Hell, next door they should build a Synagogue and a Church, perhaps a Hindu Temple as well.
People don’t even know what hate speech is… instead they label speech they don’t agree with as hate speech, which is really quite a shame given that it lessens the impact of real hate speech when it does show up every once in a while (or every night, if you’re one of the 8 people who still watch Keith Olbermann)
I think people have a right to say what they think regardless of how stupid it may.
i also think I have a right to say i completely disagree with this stupid woman
Don’t get me wrong, I am no fan of Sarah Palin. I think she is uninformed, bigoted, fanatical and neo-conservative to the point of insanity.
However, I agree with her on this issue. If, for example, it had been CHRISTIAN extremists who bombed the WTC, I would have the same views on it. It is disrespectful, plain and simple.
Furthermore, I don’t see why the world needs ANOTHER mosque. Please keep the mosques in the Middle East. Religion is one of the major causes of the conflict in the Middle East, why does no one see that? Five hundred years ago, Christianity was the same as Islam is today. The common denominator? RELIGION.
I have no issue with freedom of religion, but I also believe that we should be allowed freedom FROM religion. There is such a thing as “too tolerant”.
Timothy McVeigh was Irish Catholic.. does Oklahoma City ban Churches?
So every time a guy goes around killing prostitutes because he thinks God told him to in the bible, how far does the exclusion zone where we’re not allowed to build new churches reach?
No, you just ban the prostitutes. +1 for me.
tl;dr
I didn’t think Palin knew how to use technology…
My opinion, worth exactly $0.02:
Sarah Palin is an idiot. Since they do not require someone to pass an Idiot-Free test to post things on Facebook, she is free to say anything that doesn’t break the Terms of Service. If she broke them, then they should absolutely do whatever they need to so they can keep Facebook the way they like it. She is then free to start her own website on whatever topic she likes, with whatever Terms of Service please her.
As for the contents of her message, the ultimate implication is that Islam (the religion) caused 9/11, and should therefore be banned from the area. Unfortunately, nutty extremists were the cause of 9/11. And to quote from a favorite book of mine: “Nuts don’t need religion to make them nuts, but it does seem to give them a certain added sense of commitment to whatever goals their nutdom decides to embrace.”
Final thought: Ms. Palin was concerned about the fact that the people building this mosque would not divulge the source of the money. They don’t have to. Once they are considered a legal church under IRS tax laws, they don’t pay taxes and aren’t even requires to KEEP records relating to financial matters. At all. And, honestly, if they do have records as to who gave what, and when, do they really want to turn the list of donors over to any person who might print said list and open up their members to even more hatred and potential violence?
“None of these accurately portray my views so I’ll be leaving you a wall of text in the comments.”
*ahem*
tl;dr
why is this sarah palin crap on a humor site? another case of liberal impulse control problems?
This is a very touchy subject.
There could be two main outcomes for this situation if the mosque were built.
It could bring the two religous groups closer.
or
It would more likely incite a riot in the ‘Death-To-all-Muslims’ americans.
How does building a temple for one viewpoint bring two opposing viewpoints together?
I hate religion! It’s a disease that kills and confront people everywhere it spreads! Do I believe? YES I do! I believe in my family and myself! I don’t pray to any gods! Gods… they are imaginary friends created to control and fear low IQ people …
And after all … we all know that 9/11 was an inside job!
I hope you were joking about that inside job part… Someone has been watching too much south park
But South Park says that it was a couple of pissed off extremists.
The government tried to make people think it was them because 25% of the american population is retarded and would vote for them because they would do anything for power.
Just quoting South Park here, american people.
Free speech doesn’t apply on facebook because facebook is a private company, not the government and not public space. They have every right to restrict speech on whatever grounds they choose. If you post on facebook, you accept their rules, and one is that anything deemed offensive by enough people is deleted. No one is saying she should be arrested for this (which is what right to free speech is about), but if facebook doesn’t want to host it, they don’t have to.
What kind of church? Catholic, Baptist, Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, the list goes on and on and on, and if you pick one a lot of the others will throw a tantrum. The Mosque gets the land because they paid for it, if that is changed on account of them being the wrong religion, that’s discriminating and insulting to all the Americans who aren’t Christians. We count just as much as they do.
Normally I think S.Palin is an air-headed twit. On this though I happen to agree with her. As many others have probably stated, letting a Mosque be built on/near ‘ground zero’ would be a “flag of conquest” for the Muslims. They’ve done similar things in other countries where they’ve terrorized the people into submission. This is America though, and even though America does some f**ked up things sometimes, one thing we DON’T do is back down and let other people walk over us.
tl;dr
Usually if someone wanted to ban the setting up of a religious centre in case it offended someone’s delicate sensibilities (which they think should over-ride the freedom of American citizens to practise whatever religion they like, where they like) it would be called political correctness. Palin seems immune from this tag, even though she’s the most whiney, political correct little twerp America’s seen for a long time.
Building a mosque next to ground zero is like taking a blind and deaf person to the greatest laser show on earth, Its cruel and unfair, If they do build it, I hope someone blows that s**t up.
That comment was so incredibly hypocritical.
After having read the article on the CBS page, it struck me that the mosque is being built TWO BLOCKS away from Ground Zero. It is not on the site, it is not across the street, it is two whole blocks away.
Get over it America. They want to open a Mosque two blocks away, not a military base on Ground Zero. I’m an atheist, but I respect the right for others to follow religion and have access to places of worship. Why is the building of a Mosque in New York so controversial, when the city loves to be famous all over the world? That’s cool as long as the rest of the world stays out?
Christian missionaries travel all over the place educating people about their religion. Good for them. But if other religions want to spread their thoughts in America, it is met with hostility.
Double standard.
As if many American-born/ naturalized Muslim’s lives weren’t changed by 9/11 as well? Let them build their mosque, which has NO effect on what actually happens on the sacred space of Ground Zero.
Where is the hate speech? No where in the message did she use any slang words to describe the group people who want a Mosque @ ground zero.
Two points – While I am not a religious person, even without religion in this world man (and woman) would find a reason to want to kill each other
If this statement came from anyone else….it wouldn’t be viewed as ‘hate speech’
how is ground zero “sacred ground”? did anybody rise fromt he grave there? + go to Jerusalem and count the mosques, churches and temples of all 3 mayor religions over there. This is a non issue…
@noreligion > Amen to that, brother! Heh.
ALL religion is evil and if you believe the “official” 9/11 report is a true and accurate account of what happened… then you’re an idiot… or an American… or worse, a religious American.
All of you who think this mosque should be built should have to look every single one of the widows and widowers, the children who lost a parent, the family members of rescue workers who have died or are dieing as a result of their ceaseless effort to rescue whoever may have survived in the rubble and tell them to their faces that you think a mosque should be built so close to the site where they lost someone they love because some fundamentalist zealot used religion, more specifically Islam, to convince a small group of men to commit mass murder. If you believe in your heart that you can look them all in the face and tell them you think this mosque should be built then more power to you because I know I wouldn’t be able to look into the first pained face, let alone the second or third, etc.
For many of us who are against this, the issue is not religion. It’s about seeing the families of people you know left forever scarred by the tragedy of 9/11. This is about doing what is right and respectful to those who perished and those who were left to grieve. New York is a large city. This mosque can be built in any one of five boroughs. New York City covers an area of roughly 305 square miles. Just don’t build it so close to the site of ground zero.
I don’t know, nor do I care, what Sarah Palin’s motives behind being against the mosque building are. Nor do I care that she posted on facebook. This isn’t about restricting Muslims from practicing their religion. This is about how close is to close to ground zero. In my humble opinion, this proposed mosque would be built to close.
I still think it should be built. The entire Muslim population DID NOT commit the crime, a few extremists did. The issue, is “blame the whole for the mistakes of the few”. If everyone actually learnt the fact that just because a group has a singular name (in this case, Muslim), It does NOT mean they are all identical in their beliefs and actions.
If a group of white Christians flew planes into the WTC, there would not be an uproar over the construction of a Christian church 9 years later.
In my opinion, if this building is going to be a religious education center…everyone should go and learn something about respect for other cultures (ESPECIALLY in New York, where people of many different heritages interact daily).
I’d like to know what exactly you think gives you the right to speak on behalf of every single one of those people. Maybe you should look into their faces and tell them why you think that you do.
Not even to MENTION those who died in the building (and surrounding area) who WERE Muslim or Islamic (and YES there IS a difference between those two).
And before anyone TRIES to say “there weren’t any”…I KNOW for 100% FACT there were. I PERSONALLY KNOW because I had three friend/coworkers who died in the second tower.
What is the difference between an Islamic person and a Muslim… A Muslim is just one who practices the Islamic faith…
I hate this lady SO much she fails on so many different levels.
I love her SO much that our feelings toward SP probably cancel each other out. You betcha!
POOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP!!!
Look, anyone can say what they want on the Internet, there is freedom of speech and it is what our country stands for. And as much as I completely LOATH saying this…SP MAY have an inkling of a point there. However, her point is not based in logic, but rather in hate. If we built a mosque, temple, and church there it would signify that we are still one people who are looking for a road to happiness. Islamic extremists account for a percent of Muslims with a distorted view of Islam. It never preaches violoence or hate, a quote from Muhammad himself “Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you”. sound familiar? It should. “Treat others as you would wish yourself to be treated” -Jesus. Search up the ethic of reciprocity.
Ironic, then, that the internet is not under the jurisdiction of the U.S.A and is rather a conglomeration of servers located in various countries of the world. Further, free speech as it’s defined by the U.S. constitution is only a consideration on federal property, privately owned property, (e.g. Facebook), can censor anything they feel like. “Do unto your neighbor as you would have done unto yourself.” is an ancient principle of Judaic philosophy, Jesus was only repeating what his forefathers had told to him. Muhammed’s statement is based on the same philosophy.
The people who run this blog, for some odd reason, feel the need to pour they stupid politics into it. It’s a humor blog, people. There’s nothing HUMORUS about 9/11, religious politics, or fighting over whether Palin is the anti-christ or the savior of all man.
Jeez.
Please, pretend to be funny again, Failblog… ’cause you suck at politics.
Many people do not understand any religion fully other than their own. In fact, it would`t be that hard. Islam, and Christianity are surprisingly similar. Both the Qu`ran and the Bible have Cain and Able, Adam and Eve, Noah, One true god, Garden of Eden. I could go on for a long time describing the similarities. Of course, there are differences, but the point is, they are remarkably similar. But I understand the argument against the Mosque near the GENERAL location, as it was Islamic nutjobs that did the cruel deed of attacking the world trade center. So I understand the Christian point of view in this argument (I`m a Muslim). In fact, I`m against building it, as it will generate a lot of anti-Islamic hate and prejudice. Perhaps building it further away will be acceptable, but this Imam is trying to stir up hatred in my opinion.
^+1
I agree that both of these religions are very similar – they are full of crap.
Jesus Christ, a MOSQUE of all things is being planned to be built near the 911 place? Holy hell, those islamic people sure are insensitive to the 911 victims.. Damn all those religions to hell, always starting conflicts and stuff.
8====D
Please, all of you.
Shut up. Go find something constructive to do rather than having ultimately pointlessly arguments on Failbook.
I’m sorry Dan but your point is illogical. To say that the Qu’ran (and therefore Islam) is similar to the Bible (and therefore Christianity) is wholly flawed. At best it is like saying water (H20) is like Hydrogen Peroxide (H202).
Christianity holds first and foremost to the *divinity* of Jesus Christ and his *singular* ability to atone for the sins of others (in fact of everyone) before God/Allah. The teachings of the Qu’ran are wholly Anti-Christ, reducing him to the status a totally mortal man and *perhaps* a prophet with no salvivific ability.
Christianity under both Jesus and Paul prompted an overall message of pacifism that even clashes with the more violent stance taken in the Old Testament. The Qu’ran is *wholly* violent, demanding that “all believers” take up the Jihad (and anyone who tells you that Jihad is meant to be a purely spiritual battle needs lessons in the Arabic language, for the 100+ verses that describe the violence to be done include (but are not limited to) cutting out the tongues of non-Muslims, beheading them, taking unrepenting infidel women as sexual slaves without fearing punishment for adulterous behavior with them, cutting off the fingers of non-Muslims, etc. … those aren’t spiritual acts, they are physical and brutal.
Christianity attempts (and sometimes fails) to harmonize itself with the prior prophecies, rules, and stories of the Old Testament. The teachings of the Qu’ran are put into order according to the Law of Abrogation which says that Allah absolutely can “go back on his previous word/rules” and so even if there was a message of peace before, then if there is a call to violence now, then that later call supersedes the former instruction.
If you want to know what Islam *really* teaches, keep the Law of Abrogation in mind, and then put the chapters of the Qu’ran in order from first written to last written and watch how it progresses as its author(s) go from attempts at societal reform to violence to fanaticism and butchery.
I’m not sure how removing it from Facebook would be violating her free speech. People always like to forget that free speech doesn’t mean you can say whatever you want, offend whomever you wish, and have no consequences. It means the GOVERNMENT can not impose consequences based on your words (but, being a Republican, Sarah Palin should know that’s crap anyway…the Patriot Act violated so many constitutional rights, including our right to free speech, it’s ridiculous). Facebook is NOT the government, it’s a social website, and if they feel she has violated their TOS or if enough of their members feel that she posted something socially unacceptable, they have the right to remove it.
Would someone please just send her back to Alaska and unplug her internet? Jeebus, this woman is atrocious.
someone needs to start a drinking game based on this thread. My votes are the following words:
“retard”
“idiot”
“racist”
“tolerance”
“zero”
“Palin” –clearly only for the most committed of drinkers
“sex” believe it or not, it happens, even on a thread about Sarah Palin.
“Imam” -for the more attentive among you.
Have fun!!
i poop on this thread
Thanks. I was starting to lose bowel activity. But I’m back. POOOOOOOOP!
9/11 terrorists are to Islam what the KKK is to Christianity.
So, why can’t they simply pick another place, one that won’t anger a horde of people?
I guarantee Sarah Palin did NOT write that. No way did she write that.
I’ve got a great idea… I’d like my comedy web sites to leave politics from both sites OUT OF IT.
I think most people are missing the point Palin is trying to make. Its not about discrimination against muslims but the fact that the Imam of this mosque has been quoted to be an anti-US, Hamas sympathizer that most likely has gotten his mosque bankrolled by wealthy Saudis who also fund the same extemist groups thats caused 9/11. Personally I dont mind that a mosque is being built in the name of tolerance and religious freedom, however that does not seem to be the case. Kinda tired of seeing the main stream media and most liberals cry “racist/discrimination/hate!” every time someone disagrees with them.
I think Palin is right on this one, and no I don’t usually agree with her.
I find it rather amusing that Palin wants to turn Ground Zero into a Holy Site. Whats so Holy about Ground Zero? It seems only Christians can turn a site of a massacre into Holy Ground, are Christians that lacking in Holy Grounds? Or are they just fascinated with death, misery and torture? Why can’t sites where Christians mass murdered people be turned into Holy Ground, why not say Aushwitz or just about any place in the Middle East that Crusaders landed? Jews and Muslims don’t seem to turn sites where they were mass murdered into Holy Sites and Christianity claims to be a Abrahamic faith.
Something is wrong with Christianity making something very very wrong with Christians. After all it is only Christians that like to uphold Secular Laws as Christian Laws against Islamic and Judaic Laws.
Building anything on ground zero besides a memorial is inappropriate.
Thank you.
1. You left out, “That isn’t hate speech.” Which it isn’t unless hate speech is quite perniciously defined.
2. Why the f**k do I have to put up with politics on a site I go to for laughs? Keep this up and you’re off my daily checklist. What the hell are you doing putting a “who here approves of Sarah Palin” poll on your nominally humor site? What are we going to have next, a poll on whether health care reform is a good idea or whether Barack Obama has a valid birth certificate? Good God Almighty, what a terrible idea this was.
ok, a long time ago i wrote a comment on one of her notes that proved sarah palin was full of crap. now im banned from posting on her page, the comment was deleted, and so has every other comment that wasn’t “i love sarah palin!” IN ALL OF HER NOTES. WTF????
tl;dr
She said it right in the speech, its NOT ON GROUND ZERO ITS 600 FEET AWAY! What distance would it take to make it be ok in her mind? 700 feet? a mile? ten miles? She is a bigot and I refudiate her.
Seconded.
*thumbs up!* agreed^
The thing that stuck out most to me is people are acting like no muslims died at the tower. Like only non-muslims worked there. Everyone deserves to be remembered, regardless of their religion.
Who cares? She’s an idiot, either way.
I don’t think that anything should be built on Ground Zero. I am aware of an idea for a monument commemorating the Twin Towers, which wouldn’t be too bad. But personally, I like what we have right now: http://larue.kyschools.us/PublishingImages/GroundZeroLights-w.jpg
Yeah, but they’re building things there as we speak.
Not a mosque, though. That’s going to be two blocks away, in an area that no one would legitimately consider “ground zero.” An abandoned Burlington Coat Factory, next to a bar, to be exact.
it not being on ground zero itself should make it ok…i don’t think a mosque would be well-recieved, but it may end up being a good idea since people will see that not all muslims are terrorists.
One question: Why is it that (for the most part) we (the US) have forgiven Germany, Japan, Italy for what happened in WW2, about 70 years ago, but when talking about how Christianity is invalid, the Crusades are almost ALWAYS mentioned? The Crusades happened a very long time ago, in the 11th/12th century! Obviously, those people are different than those today. Speaking as a Christian, I admit, the Middle Ages were messed up when it came to Religion. But that was centuries ago? Doesn’t it seem possible/probable that Christians today are very different than those of the Past? And think of the people who say/said they’re Christian: Martin Luther King Jr, John Paul the 2nd, many others. As always, there are people who pervert the truth found in different religions for their own gains. It’s unfair to base one’s perception /opinion of a religion and it’s followers on one occurrence.
Srsly? America’s running the neo-Crusades in Iraq and Afghanistan as you read this… The only difference is the superiority of the gun powder and gas powered armies of today over their middle eastern conventional counterparts. Despite that, the locals are beating back our technologically superior forces using guerrilla tactics that WE taught them (Osama and everyone else of that age who fought in Afghanistan) to fight the Ruskies. How is this any different from The Crusades when Saladin drove the Christians from Jerusalem? God didn’t save Christians then and they are’t saving us now!
The difference between Christian extremists and their Muslim counterparts is that the Muslims are fighting for their misguided ideals and the Christians have bought into the American dream and just want to get rich at the expense of the weak and gullible; excluding the Catholic Church (wrong time to invoke JP2), they’re getting rich on the anal virginity of little boys during this time and the current pope did his damnedest to sweep it under the rug before ascending to the Papacy.
I’m sure this seems to be an attack on Christianity, but I’m just responding to your post. I have no doubt that organized religion is the second leading cause of death aside from old age in the recorded history of man. Having said that, your (generally, not specifically) personal beliefs should not influence state policy in global politics; they have no basis in fact and no place in the real world where people’s lives are decided based on the decisions that you make.
Humanity needs to leave the wrathful god, the Jewish zombie, and the 72 virgins and all their other imaginary friends to their place in history and move on to achieve great things that don’t involve the first truly nuclear war (Iran/US|Israel) in which two parties obliterate the 1% of the globe that they haven’t already screwed up royally with their free enterprise ambitions.
Exon said:
> Doesn’t it seem possible/probable that Christians today are very
> different than those of the Past?
Three words: Bombing abortion clinics.
The fanatic minority is much more visible than the silent majority. And that type are the only ones we see in the news.
the mosque wouldnt actually be built on the groud zero site, rather in the vacinity.. personally i dont see a problem if its just close to it. just because a small number of muslim extremists react to what america done to them and their country, they cant complain about a mosque being built as “offensive” because many muslims were killed that day aswell.. but sure, its america lol sarah palin has a right to voice her opinion, for the simple fact it gives us something to laugh at =] … what a ganch
what she said
As promised, I continue to poop on this thread.
bowel loosening palenema!
it’s clear that whoever is building that mosque has never heard the word “redneck” before.
Of all the idiotic statements online, you of course pick the conservative. Me thinks the liberals at cheezburger are scared that Sarah Palin will beat Obama in 2012…
Ha! That’s funny. I am the biggest liberal you will ever meet, and I am BEGGING the Republican party to nominate Palin in 2012! George H. Bush made a huge mistake when he didn’t replace Dan Quayle as his running mate in 1992? How could the GOP not have realized after four years of Quayle’s foolishness and the public ridicule it engendered that they should cut ties with the man. If the Republicans still think Palin has any future as a Presidential or Vice-Presidential candidate, then they have learned nothing. Again, let me say as a registered Democrat, that if I alone could pick the 2012 Presidential nominee, I would pick Sarah Palin! The only voters who should fear Palin as the candidate are the Republicans!
Clearly if you’re the ‘biggest liberal (I) will ever meet’, you wouldn’t want Palin to be nominated.
Ya know what, I think I’ll play this the liberal way. OH MY GOD YOU’RE ALL SEXIST IF YOU DISAGREE WITH A FEMALE YOU MUST BE SEXIST ROT IN HELL! Kinda sounds like the junk I hear form the lunatic left directed at the tea partiers and other conservatives, accusing them of racism….
I second that.
Personally, I thought this was TL;DR
Facebook should mostly be used for the trololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololols
TLDNR
I think that if we were going to build a house of worship, it would be wrong to just build one. build many, a mosque, a church, a Synagogue, a Buddhist temple etc. That’s more in line with what America is….or should be
TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT TEXT
Hey. You asked for it.
I agree.
boy, do i agree….
On the one hand, I don’t think the government even has the right to stop work on this mosque, nor should they, to do so would be discriminatory and would start us down a very slippery slope. Its their land, if they really want to build a mosque there, the government should not be able to stop them. Whats next, the government denies the Catholic church the right to build a chapel because of their stance on abortion? Do you see where this could easily lead?
On the other hand, shame on the Muslim group building this mosque. How about a little more salt in the wounds to all the families of the victims? Despicable! Even if their intentions are good (which I doubt) the extremists in their religion will regard this mosque as a monument to their cowardly “victory.” If they have any respect for New York, Americans, or human life they should cancel this project now. But they don’t, so they won’t.
Anyone mention the “gentleman’s club” approximately the same distance from the hole in the ground as the proposed Mosque yet?
This woman (Mrs. Palin) is obviously not only gnorant, but also stupid and bigoted. I say she would have made a great running mate for that bumbling moron George W. Bush. I just figured out one reason why people would fear Barack Obama: he is obviously intelligent. And that scares a lot of people.
I poop on you, Chris-a-f-tard. POOOOP!
Then we gotta stop electing intelligent people cuz they’re ruining our economy…
OMG, f#cktards are STILL posting here, so I will continue to POOOP POOOP POOOP all over this thread. All of you, open up… I AM POOPING IN YOUR MOUTH for your inane comments and thinking anyone gives a f#ck about your atheism/religion/liberal-ass/conservative-whatever.
Dear Failbook Admin guy or gal. You Fail on this one. So seriously. I… I… I want to poop on you. But… I don’t want to get banned. So I’ll just keep pooping all over this thread.
POOOOOOOOOOOOP!!!!!!
TL;DR
OK….So Building the the mosque would be intolerant to americans, but not building the mosque is intolerant to Islam…. I smell a war arising hehehe…
not necessarily. Are the muslims pushing the issue to have a mosque built? If not, than nobody gets hurt if it isn’t built. If American Muslims are pushing the building, then perhaps they also need to recognize that because we are a “tolerant” nation, they should have the decency to be tolerant of others’ wishes in not building the mosque.
I’m high as balls right now. Lol
I don’t see a museum for the crusaders being built in Mecca.
You won’t see a bible there either
Actually Mecca has several different christian organizations within its walls so technically, yes, there are bibles there. Secondly, what does crusaders and Mecca have to do with two office buildings and rec center for Islamic faith believers? I don’t see the comparison.
So a man with money bought a building and intends to make a rec center and a small mosque (technically again, more or less a chapel in christian parlance) inside of a normally shaped office building. Stop feeding into the lies and stupidity. Go read up on the subject before you fire off your stupid mouth.
I just have to point out that
(1) this won’t be on ground zero and
(2) ITS NOT EVEN A MOSQUE! It’s a community center with a prayer room in it. It will also have a swimming pool, gym and theater in it.
So Sarah Palin is not spreading hate speech here. She’s just spreading ignorance (again).
In Islam (and many countries that practice it as a language) the building of a mosque on a land is a sign of victory of that nation. Look it up and you will see many examples of this done in the religion’s history. It may just be me, but I THINK that may the reason why many Americans are against the idea of having it built on the site of one of its worst attacks.
Build one down the road and pray at it on your way to your religious gathering? Seems like a perfectly fine plan to me. That is, if they are TRULY just building the mosque there to show respect for the victims.
I also read many statements above about the involvement of religion in death, war, etc. I support the very fact that we as a people are allowed to have these disputes and do so without the threat of death in the air. These talks should not be done in anger, though. They should be done with the attempt at building understanding between those who you have a disagreement with. Maybe learn something from their position while you are at it?
Regardless, I am proud to see such a hot topic tackled by such intelligent men and women. It is a wonderful thing.
What you’re talking about is the muslims who took control of Spain and other nations. They erected mosques in cities and countries they took control of. Just like Catholic crusaders erected churches and settlers in America built chapels. Nothing new and again it is a prayer room inside of a normally shaped rec center. If there is a secret meaning it’ll be so secret nobody but those who go there will ever get it.
Try asking Palin to get offended at the vicious hate mongering church that protests funerals for vets of the current wars. That seems more in line with what your argument is about.
This is funny to me, since I consider 9/11 an inside job anyway. :/ Don’t just blame it on the Muslims.
I don’t think it’s really matters; build the mosque.
I, uh, don’t see a memorial for the Japanese at Pearl Harbor.. I mean, yeah I get it, freedom of expression and religion. But we aren’t African Americans, Muslim Americans, White American, Asian American, we’re all simply American. Separating the sects of those lost only creates a further divide amongst the different races, at least that’s my take on stuff. If there’s gonna be a memorial for Christianity, Judaism, Black Theology, Scientology, and The Solar Temple, then yeah man, Islam deserves a spot. But if they aren’t, just leave em all done. Let those who died remember for who they were, not what they did or didn’t believe in.
Leave them all down* not done. Now I feel retarded.
I’m gonna ignore the hotbead topic of what she is actually saying and just comment on the poll. A lot of people voted free speech, but there is no free speech on privately owned websites (that’s all of them). Facebook is private property, and just like any message board, they can delete anything they feel violates their ToS. If you walked into a shop of some sort and started spewing obscenities, the shop owner is totally within his right to kick your ass out, or not.
Whether or not this would constitute hate speech and thus violate facebook’s ToS is of course another matter altogether.
this was too well put together to have actualy been Sara Palin. i agree with it though, from the keys of an Australian
So now not agreeing with some one is is hate speech.
Just like screaming RACIST!! when you lose an arguement.
Okay everyone before I start, lets all take a deep breath. Okay, so people don’t want a Mosque that close to Ground Zero. I understand this but why don’t they just move the Mosque further away, doesn’t that sound reasonable? New York is a big city so I imagine that maybe a mile or a half-mile away would still be in NYC. So why not just move it? Why do they seem so delbrite, (grammar police, please correct this), on building a Mosque that close to it? To me it seems like they are trying to offend and then, they are trying to pull religious rights on it. It just seems like they are trying to offend. ANYWAYS, thats just my opinion. (Grammar police please correct spelling and grammar for me because I know I made some errors in there.)
Unnoticed bottom comment is unnoticed =(
They own the land, now, right? If they get the proper building permits, then they build. They don’t have to tell ANYONE where their funding comes from, unless it’s required to get their permits. THE END. Doesn’t matter WHAT they’re building, as long as it’s not illegal.
As for the “justifiable blockade”….THAT nonsense made my brain boil. There is NO excuse to treat people the way Israel treats the Palestinians. It’s awfully disgusting to treat the Palestinians the way the Jews were treated during WW2.
It’s hard to tell Muslims they can’t have a mosque there, since they are devastated over the event themselves and Islam isn’t to blame anyway. If a Christian had done it, building a Christian church would be no big deal… but since it’s a less popular religion it becomes the black sheep instead. That’s how I feel, anyway.
+5000
freedom of speech is one of my favorite rights that we have i support it in all it’s forms from the idiocy spewed by neo cons and tea baggers to burning the flag in protest with that said sarah palin needs to stay in alaska and away from the main land and possibly muzzled
If you leave a comment but no one wants to scroll to the bottom of the page to read it, does it still make a sound?
It’s a kinda “woosh” sounds.
Only if somebody replies to it.
While I find her remarks to be incredibly bigoted and highly offensive, I feel that free speech is free speech. But, as Voltaire once said, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
However, technically websites fall under the jurisdiction of their creators, because they are treated as private property. You have to pay for web space after all. Ergo, facebook is allowed to delete any comments that are deemed unsavory in any way, unfortunately. But, once again, if everyone were allowed to post everything, then we’d have a social network version of /b/, which we all know is utter chaos and must be avoided at all costs… unless you’re into that kind of thing or something…
I don’t think I’ve ever heard / seen this addressed; and I’ve only just now wondered: Did NO Muslims die due to the 9/11 attacks?
Darn it, I mean other than the bad men in the planes.
This is not hate speech at all. She has a point, and that is that. Not saying I’m not open to other arguments, but let’s just agree that it wasn’t hate speech.
I think it’s pathetic that people would take what she said in her original tweet, which was simply a slip of the fingers, an honest mistake anyone could have made, and use it as an attack against her.
Apparently some liberal blogger said that if Republicans want immigrants to speak English, then she should too. This is ridiculous, I mistype all the time. If that blogger would have mistyped, it wouldn’t have been a big deal.
It’s the same with all these things about misspeaking politicians: Bush’s “nukular,” Obama’s “corpse.” If any random civilian would have made the same mistake, it might have been noticed and laughed off, it wouldn’t be a big deal. But oh no, God forbid a politician make the same, simple, human mistake! People who try to build their points off of things like this are ridiculous. It’s stupid, it’s juvenile. Otherwise, they’re just trolling, but I find that very unlikely.
It doesn’t matter anyways, it was an inside job… build the stupid mosque and a church right next to it. line em up.
Other–That’s a hoax account. Sara Palin is too stupid to figure out how to use the internet.
OMG U BLIEVE IN GOD
OMG U DNOT BLIEVE IN GOD
U ARE ALL BAD
Hey, let’s just keep arguing over subjective things and deeply-held personal beliefs! I’m sure someone will change what they think at some point!
And, to stay on the original original topic of this whole thing: Sarah Palin needs to do herself a favor and actually LEARN about Islam. She doesn’t have to believe in it per se, but even a cursory glance at a couple of textbooks and the Qur’an can make it pretty obvious pretty quickly that Al-Queida has warped and distorted something beautiful and good and used it for their own evil ends. I don’t really see anything wrong with putting up a Mosque near Ground Zero.
BUILD. THE. MOSQUE.
for those idiots that equate islam with terrorism: too friggin bad, i can’t enable your ignorance.
For those idiots who say its a slap in the face to who died there or their families: no its not. it might feel like a sting but chances are to them every mosque burns like a thousand hell fires.
To those idiots that say its too close: find them another spot then so that the muslims that work in those office buildings or live in close by apartments have a place to pray.
To all the other idiots: please to the world a favor and shut up.
I chose “Other” for a few reasons.
First of all, I don’t see this as hate speech at all. She is not calling for anyone to attack/murder Muslims because of the mosque. There is no call for violence or even a condemnation of all of Islam.
Second of all, free speech has nothing to do with what any given privately owned website chooses to allow on their site. It only applies to laws passed by Congress. So any way you look at it, this really isn’t a free speech issue.
Finally, I happen to agree with her. I don’t think that they should be legally blocked from building there, but I do think it is in extremely poor taste. Having lost family on 9-11, this just feels too much like a slap in the face. Is there any reason they can’t build this mosque somewhere else?
No there isn’t any reason a mosque wouldn’t be built a couple of blocks further away, but why? Hamas and the Taliban interpret their religion as differently from normal Sunni’s and Shi’ites as Jews do from Christians (That darned Jesus fellow just HAD to be the Messiah). A regular Muslim is no threat, and if you asked him/her, he’d be disgraced with the men who hijacked the planes.
Reading this reminds me of something. 9/11 was caused by Islamic extremists, and they get uptight about some wanting to build a mosque at ground zero.
But if you remember the Oklahoma city bombing, that was done by CHRISTIAN extremists. Yet no one would have a problem about a Christian church being built near there.
Except that it wasn’t done in the name of Christianity. It was done as a strike against the government. Oddly enough, partially for atrocities commited in the Middle East. So, not really the same thing. Intent matters.
I’m curious, if we’re really looking for “hate speech” on Facebook, did anyone happen to submit a shot of the even “Kill a Jew Day”?
That, my friends, is hate speech.
Sorry, Ground Zero is not hallow or sacred. It was just the site of a tragic event. Though it may somehow seem like “national sacrilege” or something ridiculous like that, look at it this way: Placing a mosque on Ground Zero would be a HUGE slap in the face to organizations like Al Qaeda. As for Sarah Palin, can we please send her back to Alaska where she belongs?
o^^o
I dunno, maybe instead of thinking that the mosque is stepping on the toes of 9/11, just maybe building this place on the hollowed ground is a constant reminder of those who went to far and a bit of shame and humbling effects, not of islamic pride at the event
The building of this temple should happen. It would show the world that not all islamic people believe like those terrorists did. It’s an act to get the public back on the islamic side. There’s nothing wrong with the religion, just people.
Can we please build a proper memorial at ground zero FIRST before we allow a mosque to be built nearby?? How many people are aware of this vital piece of information??
Religion poisons everything.
RELIGION
POISONS
EVERYTHING!
Religion is a vile creation of human beings that has always, and continues to, inject its venom into everything it comes into contact with. Goodness can exist without religion. Goodness cannot endure within any religion. All religions eventually corrupt and destroy any goodness within them. Evangelists who attempt to spread their exclusive and restrictive beliefs always, in spite of intentions, harm the people they believe they are attempting to help. Religion poisons everything. God is change, nothing more.
This is not hate speech. Her problem is with the leader of this congregation and remarks he made that WERE hateful. I, too, am inclined to question this man’s motives for wanting to put a mosque just there.
What folks are failing to understand (and pardon if it’s been mentioned prior, it’s been a horrid couple of weeks [and I'm roughly 10 shots and a beer in, so scrolling's beyond me]) is that the extremists that were behind 9/11 are not the poster-children for Islam. That would be along the lines of saying that each and every Christian is exactly the same as the conquistadors, or that every Caucasian can be likened to a slave-owner. To build the mosque at the site of ground zero would be opening our arms to those folks who are as horrified by the actions of those responsible for the attacks as we are. We’re brethren in our disgust.
Plus, last time I checked, Timothy McVeigh was a Christian – terrorism and violence do not need a religion, all they needs is hatred and ignorance. Look at Israel, look at Darfur, look at the mess that was the former country of Yugoslavia back in the 1990′s.
What this thread boils down to, though: I do not agree with Sarah Palin’s remarks, but I will defend to the death her right to say them. She’s a vapid piece of s**t that cost the Republicans the election (and I’m a registered Democrat, but happily acknowledge what is as what it is), yet that doesn’t negate her right to voice her opinion.
“I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” –Voltaire.
And so says the constitution of the United States in the First Amendment.
And I defend the First Amendment to the death for this and for the other freedoms found in it: Freedom of the Press–which includes the Internet–and freedom of religion–which includes Christianity, Islam, and my religion as well as yours and yours. To be able to practice my faith in the open in the United States is a right I cherish as much as everything else.
The rest of the world may declare state religions or practice institutionalized intolerance of other’s religions, but it is my privilege to have all three of these rights that are bespoke in the First Amendment. I will not let it go lightly.
Yes, I think Sara Palin is stupid. I think a lot of radicals have gotten their hackles raised on both sides of the aisle and both ends of the spectrum and in the middle for a very stupid comment. It is one which dooms her from the hope of ever becoming president, even if she had her eye on that or any powerful elected position.
But she has the right to speak and write stupidly in public forums and private. I demand she keep those rights so I may keep my holy book and my temple as much as an American Muslim may keep her mosque and her Quran. And an American Christian may keep his Bible and his church.
The mass ignorance of the American public is just plain astounding
While this all spawned an epic debate (as I’m sure it will continue to do) do we really want to have this HERE? On a site most (if not all) of us come to for some laughs?
Lets get on with the LOLS and leave the politicians to debate whether or not a religious building of ANY sort should or shouldn’t be built on “ground zero”.
Really, wouldn’t it make much more sense in the long run to :
A) leave it empty as a national reminder (which isn’t needed really)
B) Build a park/memorial to those who lost their lives (which would ALSO need to be done in the Pentagon and the field where the other plane came down)
C) (my choice) Just BUILD THE DANG TOWERS AGAIN! (the most sense and the BIGGEST slap in the face to the group for taking them down the first place!)
If you were that group all proud you had destroyed the “economic center” of the US…wouldn’t you be much more P.O’d if we shrugged it off and built said “center” right back?
Think history, folks, weren’t we the country that ALWAYS did this? Chicago : rebuilt after the fire; San Francisco: rebuilt after the earthquake; New Orleans: (sort of) rebuilt after the hurican/floods….why can’t we do the same with an act of destruction that ISN’T “mother nature”?
tl;dr
tl;dr
Wow. She can say what she wants. In fact, let her, because she’s only making herself sound ignorant and intollerant.
TLDR
Muslim Americans are still Americans. They have the same rights as everyone else. They should be allowed to build their mosques wherever they choose, provided they go about the process legally.
Some people forget…Jesus was a Jew. JESUS DID NOT create Christianity. Some of his followers did, decades after his death. Mohammud was given the word of God (a.k.a. Allah) from which he created Islam. Islam is the next version of Christianity, which is an updated version of Judaism.
Ask your Islamic friends. Ask them aboud Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus. All (definatly some, cant remember exactly) of whom are respected as prophets in islamic tradition. Ask your Jewish friends about the same people. Now how, pray tell, do three ‘different’ religions have all the same people in them? Because the last two are based off of the first. Because at the time, the first was ‘corrupt’. When Islam came about, it was Chirstianity that was ‘corrupt’.
People are fighing wars and committing atrocities ‘for’ the same god, all in the name of religion.
Religious freedom should remain just that. If a mosque is to be built, so be it. Has anyone thought that maybe it could be recognized as an apology by God? To build it as hope for the future, as a religious site, to remember what horrible things were done in the name of religion? For example… “It’s a seed of peace,” says Rob Townley . Plus, New York voted yes. I do not live in New York. So to me….it will not be part of my life. And at the risk of sounding uncaring, but being COMPLETELY honest with myself and you…I do not think of the victims of 9/11 every day. I do not cry over them. I am sure those who lost family and firends do, and for those people I apolagize, but still true.
Oh, and Dear S. Palin.
there is a difference between 600 yards and ‘on the site.’ Its not far away, but its not ON ground zero. Oh, yeah, not ONLY is it a mosque, there will be a CULTURAL CENTER as well. Plus, “Just down the street, the Museum of Jewish Heritage honors victims of the Holocaust, and St. Peter’s Church, New York’s oldest Catholic house of worship, is located around the corner.” – search “mosque at twin towers” and a list of sites will pop up that give a much better explanation than you (s. palin.) Yes, some people agree with the idea, and NO some people dont, but really, unless you LIVE near it and will be seeing it every day, I dont think you have much to worry about.
And dear ‘I can see Russia from my house’ Palin…just stop. Dont be hypocritical. Dont spout about ‘America’ (dont you mean the UNITED STATES…Canada is ‘America’, Peru is ‘America’, Mexico, Venezuela, Chile, Brazil…All ‘AMERICAN’) and her religious freedoms and then rant about a mosque (a.k.a. religous buildiing) being built. Do not hold the United States and Chrisitanity in one hand and the rest of Earth and her religions in the other. Some of us United States citizens ARE NOT Christian. Hypocracy doesnt make anyone look better, or smarter.
I wish to apolagize for my spelling mistakes, and also for how long this turned out to be.
I don’t agree with just about eveything Sarah Palin says publicly, however on this subject I do. Having a Mosque built by an Islamist Extremist, who is on record as stating that the people who died in 9/11 are at fault for what happened, is just not on. It is Wrong. Type ‘imam faisal abdul rauf’ into google news and read the news articles from a variety of papers from around the world.
I agree with her. I am not American nor Islamic but i have to say that it is rather immoral for someone to put a mosque in such a delicate place. Even though years have passed since the happenings, it still is a delicate matter.
I don’t find it wrong for her to post it on facebook. Being a public figure as she is, i don’t think it is difficult for her to be heard, but with this tool (which at the end, it is a tool) she can really get her message. Just look at us, giving our points of view and opinions. Mission Accomplished
If you are Religious in any way shape or form, you probably know the importance of forgiveness.
Heck, if it really means that much to you, YOU would apologize to the Islamic Extremists that went so far as to send men to their deaths for their cause.
Yes, i know what they believe in regards to martyrdom, but look at it this way… Did Jesus say “F*%KING BURN THESE PEOPLE IN HELL FOR ETERNITY FATHER!!! RWARGHGHGGH!!!”
No. he said “Father, forgive them, because they do not know what they are doing.”
Innocent people died in New York because of hostile views from others, part of being a mature adult is learning when to let things go and stop the cycle of bloodshed. There is a word that can bring about peace, its called love.
“Love is patient; love is kind.
Love does not envy;
is not boastful; is not conceited;
does not act improperly; is not selfish;
is not provoked; does not keep
a record of wrongs;
finds no joy in unrighteousness,
but rejoices in the truth;
bears all things, believes all things,
hopes all things, endures all things.
Love never ends.”
1 Corinthians 13:4-8
These words are spoken at around 75% of all Christian, Catholic, Non-denominational, Baptist, etc… weddings. yet many people that have heard these words and believed in them and still claim to do so, are quick to judge, get angry, and lust for revenge.
Call me crazy but I think its about time people that believe in Christ start answering to their call and stop worrying about things such as “9/11″
Yes, it was a tragedy, but if you really believe in (our) God (and his word) , you would start showing it.
Forgive, and leave the things that are for God to concern himself with, to God.
That’s all I have for now. You may flame me all you want but you are forgiven for it already.
Well done.
I’m sorry, but Sarah Palin and the whole Tea Party Movement irk me. I really don’t have an issue with a mosque that’s close to Ground Zero. Yes, Hamas is a MUSLIM extremist group, but Mrs. Palin conveniently forgets the EXTREMIST part of that phrase. The average Muslim is not bent on destroting the USA, so Sarah needs to pull her religious right/conservative head out of her ass, put on her big girl panties, and deal.
You just made my day good sir. I applaud you and your open minded outlook.
Gee, cause it couldn’t f**kin’ possibly be that the guy wants to say “look, we’re right near the site, promoting tolerance and showing people that we can come together in a a free and open manner in a religious center of the people you think are nothing but terrorists. Let us show your community We Are Part Of The Community Too”. No, nothing like that, it has to be “suspect the f**kin muslim, cause hey, he’s muslim” and let’s face it, that’s the ONLY!!! reason this is an issue.
I think there is two issues that people are confusing. I think building a mosque near ground zero is a great idea. Because it’s not the religion that is the problem. There are millions of peaceful Muslims around the world. If people have a problem with the leader of the organization that wants to build the mosque that’s a different issue. If you are against that one guy for his comments, that is ok. But then the headlines should be about that guy not the fact that they might be building a mosque. Hating a person because of something he said, and hating a religion because what a small, violent group of it’s members did are two completely different issues.
You seem to be confused. That dude that everyone has a problem with, is the same one building the mosque.
Hey, um wtf failbook admin?
am i not entitled to my right to say something here? you deleted my post from last night!!!
my post was about letting things go, forgiveness, and love.
at least i had a message to give that meant something other than “this post is just meant to show people i too can spam on a thread.”
yes, it was a long post, but i felt passionate about giving a mindset for others to view.
i take it back… what a glitch.
it disappeared and re-appeared!? i feel like a fool.
please forgive me.
Sarah Palin is an idiot, and I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone who think otherwise. Everything she says is more hilariously stupid than the last, and I can only assume that those who support her are the same stupid ilk that supported Bush.
However repugnant I find her and her laughable views, she has every right to say them. So, let her keep posting contradicting arguments like this on Facebook. The people who swallow it are a great example of the depressing ineptness that is the religious and conservative line. At least the modern equivalent.
You know, there ARE Republicans who think things through, and are actually intelligent, and who have valid viewpoints. People who will just swallow everything Sarah Palin has to say are clearly not the smartest fish in the pond, however people who consider her opinion and agree with it aren’t necessarily stupid. The world wasn’t made to run on one sort of person, it takes all sorts.
That said, I do think that this little tirade of hers is dull-wittedness at it’s finest, Sarah Palin isn’t cut out for what she’s trying to do.
Here’s something we can all agree on: Sarah Palin’s a dips**t.
The end.
She’s not making a hate speech… to build a mosque on Ground Zero isn’t so right, after they’ve been doing nothing with it and trying to come up with some great memorial, a mosque wouldn’t be so fair…
Go on CBS. It’s in the post. The news story says “Proposed Mosque Near Ground Zero Stokes Debate”.
Key word? NEAR.
Sarah Palin says ON.
tldr
She’s allowed to say hateful things on facebook like that?
Fairness and all that. Wouldn’t want to piss off an individual, right? Just an entire race or religion, THAT’S okay!
Don’t get me wrong, dip**** up there has every right to say what she wants.
So do I.
Sarah Palin is the least intelligent human being that I have ever had the displeasure of hearing the ramblings of. And I lived with a kid who thought he was a GOD last year at college. She is prejudiced, and probably doesn’t even quite understand what a mosque is. She is John McCain’s worst decision in his life. She is an embarrassment to America. And I personally wish to tell her this to her face some day. She just angers me so much.
I’ve never heard a single non-prejudiced or intelligent word spewed from her gaping maw.
Freedom of speech, right Sarah?
im a moderate conservative and i disagree with this. let them build thier mosque! they have every right to do so.she says they shouldnt build a mosque in a sacred place when a mosque IS a sacred place.
if someone tried to stop someone from building a church i would be raising some hell and it shouldnt be any different in this situation.
if shes running for president then she just lost my vote.
too long did not read
I find it incredible that this level of ignorance and stupidity exists, even amongst the ranks of the Republican party, which embraces such qualities as if they were virtues.
OK, I’m confused. Palin said they’re building it ON Ground Zero. CBS says they’re buildig it NEAR Ground Zero. Seeeing that they both conflict with each other, I’m going to assume CBS is correct and they’re buuilding the mosque near ground zero. So…
1. I’d be OK with the mosque being built
2. Palin, as usual, FAILS.
9/11 was an inside job
\m/ (-_-) \m/
I agree with Lys & I’m completely sober.
There is no hate speech in the text Sarah Palin wrote. How about an option on the poll that says “This isn’t hate speech.”
Two things:
A) Freedom of speech applies to everyone, but using it for such hateful rhetoric is an irresponsible use of it that should not be encouraged.
B) Freedom of Speech only applies to government control, not corporate control. It’s well within Facebook’s rights to not tolerate what they deem hate speech… and for users to bring posts that might qualify as hate speech to their attention.
I think Sarah Palin is obnoxious usually BUT this is an issue I agree with her on. So many people have been hurt in the event and aftermath of 9/11. It is not considerate or wise to erect a religious building that many associate with the tragedy of September 11 near or on the very ground where it took place. What Sarah Palin wrote was not hate speech! Hate speech is just what it is called; speech that involves HATRED. There was no hatred in Sarah Palin’s post. In fact, there is compassion for those hurt by 9/11 in the note.
TOO LONG DID NOT READ!!!!TOO LONG DID NOT READ!!!!TOO LONG DID NOT READ!!!!
She’s right. While certainly it was Islamic extremists that were responsible for 911, until such time as the rest of the Muslim world denounces the continued terrorist attacks, and ceases all funding of the extremists, they are of contributing to an atmosphere in which terrorism florishes.
Oh, as to the critizism that Palin mis uses a word, Look of the Presidents misspeaking the word Corp as in Marine Corp (sounds like core) pronouncing is as corpse (like a dead body). http://www.rights.com/2010/02/08/corps-man-according-the-president-obama-and-the-press-corpse-ignores-it/ Perhaps it was a Freuding slip.
Palin’s comment was not hate speech. It was an honestly-felt belief. Some (even lots) may not like her sentiment, but just because it offends people does not mean she is being hateful in her remarks. The bloggers who jumped all over her for her “refudiate” and beliefs are arguably demonstrating the hateful attitude.
^^^ This
Sarah Palin + ground zero + mosque = 9/11 -> relatives death stories -> religion -> wolves -> hunting -> rights -> speech -> Facebook. Where will it go next? Let’s see.
Wow. To all the people saying religion is the cause for so much war in the world and it’s history, you’re all idiots. That’s like saying men are the cause of so much war in the world and it’s history.
To all the people that think the topic is whether religion or atheism has killed more…you’re all idiots. The question was whether facebook should censor people’s opinion when it might be construed as hate speech, with a bit of elaboration on whether what Sarah Palin said constituted hate speech, and maybe whether you agreed with her or not.
Now I don’t think what Sarah Palin said was hateful. She might have been angered by it. But I didn’t see how calling the project to build the mosque or the one’s trying to build it insensitive and audacious was hateful. She never suggested that we treat them, or Muslims as a whole with hatred, let alone suggest that we do anything about it at all. The strongest suggestion she is making is to build the mosque somewhere else.
Claiming that this is intolerant is like saying it is intolerant to stop someone from carving a 30 foot fallic symbol in front of a grade school. You might be right that it is intolerant, but when people act in a way that is inappropriate, a certain measure of intolerance is acceptable. This is a non-violent intolerance that even members of it’s own faith agree with. There are members of every faith, from multiple countries around the world, that are protesting this mega-mosque from being built. Whether you believe in a faith or not, ask yourself if you have the right to tell the victims of 9-11 and their families that they have to deal with a monument built by people who agree with the perpetrator’s of that tragedy. I for one can’t say I have the right to judge the one’s who want to build the mosque, but I also can’t say that the one’s protesting it are intolerant hate-mongers. I feel that this is inappropriate if everything I have read is true. About as inappropriate as labelling everyone with a faith as being in a religion, and then labelling the religion as the reason for so many wars.
To the people who think that free speech applies here. Facebook is a privately owned website and IF they decided to delete whatever someone wrote they may. Free speech, as protected in the first amendment, only applies to things said in publicly owned places.
So all of you who voted for the “free speech is free speech” option wasted your vote.
Sorry.
Ungh… see I’m torn. I believe in the right to free speech, but Sarah Palin is just such an abhorrent idiot.
But hey, as Chomsky said “Standing for free speech means standing for speech you don’t agree with.”
Sarah Palin is basically -functioning idiot that doesnt even contain the common sense needed to effectively run a drive through, much less any sort of political office. The fact that she said something stupid, again, is not surprising or concerning in the least, because she is too stupid to know any better. The thing that worries me is the amount of right wing nut jobs think she is the next leader of the free world. Holy s**t it is scary to know people can be so far gone, and believe something so obviously wrong and idiotic…
OH-ho-ho-ho-ho. Gosh…*scratches head* I just don’t know what to do with all the
moronsLiberals who promote double standards only when effective for their perverted views to be supported. Obama is a sad, sorry excuse for a leader, but you guys love him, whereas, say, Palin, is ridiculed for simple mistakes. And I gotta say, Obama is substantially more pathetic, with his failure to actually do something useful in his presidency.I don’t really see any hate speech here… She is not spreading views that I share, however, she is not being hateful in any way… she is saying she doesn’t think it is appropriate.
hate speech is WAY more offensive that this, you can read some of it in the comments that were left here.
just because those that crashed planes into the world trade centre where islamic extremists, doesnt mean that all islamic people are extremists
I do not see any hate speech, she merely pointed out her opinion. She attacked a cleric, not islam. The only reason this is an issue is because of the fact it was said by Sarah Palin. I am tired of the PC crowd calling anyone who disagrees with their blatant attack on free speech as racists or whatever other term they wish to use. In the end it is the PC crowd that is guilty of hate speech.
I challenge anyone to point out how that post was hate speech. And to tell me why your hate speech is legal, where anyone elses is not.
Remeber we are no granted the right to live in a hate free world, only that the government will not infringe on OUR rights. Put on your big person pants, life is not fair, people are different. Instead of purging that difference, we should accept it.
Amen…
TOO LONG
did not read