orwellian,
You did not comprehend the plain meaning of my words which I thought were pretty clear. No one contends that there isn't a legal right to build a mosque. No one argues we should make a legal exception to the 1st amendment. Got that? The issue is whether the site is appropriate for the placement of a mosque given the totality of circumstances, notwithstanding the legal right to build one. Your attempt to ridicule by reiterating the 1st amendment only demonstrates a lack of decent reading comprehension skills.
I am informed the Cordoba Project will house a mosque. This distinguishes it from the 92nd St YMCA, the pentagon chapel, etc. Yes, there will probably be other non-denominational facilities as well, but there will be a mosque. Who will use that?
You state: "So using [my] logic it's safe to say that Christianity is responsible for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, right? "
Are you saying that because I believe Islamic religious doctrine motivated the invasion of the USA that ipso facto Christianity motivated the US invasion of Iraq? My position is that certain Muslims launched an attack on the US because they perceived the US was at war with Islam by virtue of US support for the existence of Israel and the US presence in lands considered holy to Muslims and off limits to infidels, (Saudi Arabia in particular). That, and the killing of Muslims in Lebanon by Lebanese Christian forces in concert with the Israelis. That is what I recall Osama Bin Laden published as his rationale. Islamic religious authorities motivated and supported the 9/11 attack by Al Qaida.
I am not very knowledgeable about Christian or biblical theology, but I do not believe that contemporary Christian doctrine could so easily be interpreted to motivate making war on Iraq as the Islamic authorities can be employed to support the attack on the USA (and England, Spain, Australia/Bali, Hindu Mumbai, Russia/ Chechnya, etc). Maybe, you should dig up the bible passages that you contend support/motivate the US invasion of Iraq.
I do not rule out that George Bush, himself, may have an had an evangelical component in his desire to invade Iraq and Afghanistan; however, the decision to invade Iraq was conceived by others and was driven by non-religious factors. Our invasion of Iraq was ostensibly based upon a concern that collaborators of 9/11 were amassing WMD to use in other attacks against the US and that it was necessary to preemptively depose Saddam Hussein to prevent the smoking gun from turning into a mushroom cloud. In point of fact, I submit that the thirst for oil was a greater factor in the US decision to invade Iraq than any religiously based motive.
Sorry, I fail to see why you assert that based upon my position logic compels that it is safe to say Christianity is responsible for the invasion of Iraq. One isn't logically compelled by the other. Am I missing your point?
Also, what is the relevance of what I did for the first responders? And more importantly, what does that have to do with your accusation of racism? I trust you concur that it is a totally bogus claim that those opposed to Cordoba, or Muslims themselves, are racists. It's a belief system, not a race.
