Ron Paul Defends NYC Mosque

If Ron Paul runs for president and gets the ticket I would leave the demo faction in a heart beat and change to a Republican.

If more Republicans were like him I might be a Republican lol

reply to post by sporkmonster


Damn thats a damn good point you made in your post! What a better way to bring this country back together. Have millions of people who believe that the mosque not be built there pitch in some $$ to purchase the property. Absolutely brilliant!!!

Mount your defenses: someone will be along shortly to scream "it's a terrorist organization and therefore their speech isn't protected by the First Amendment" and they'll come with fallacious arguments blazing.

I'm tired of sounding like a broken record. If you wouldn't mind, would you please tear them a new one for me?

ETA: Go Ron!


TheAssoc.



[edit on 24-8-2010 by TheAssociate]

Ron Paul for Prez and its ASAP

why do i always agree with the guy ... !?!?!?

because he is always right



Edited for S&F

[edit on 8/24/2010 by Ben81]

I just watched Dr. Paul SMOKE CNN's Sanjay Gupta on this issue.

Sanjay was doing all he could to try and get Ron to comment on his son's opinion or bite on the racism card; he didn't just bite it, he spat it back into Gupta's face.

The look on his face when Ron slammed him for not only trying to steer the interview in that direction but also for fanning the hysteria while there are substantial problems being ignored completely...

PRICELESS.

Honestly...you can see Gupta's thoughts...

I LOSE

I realize that everything is being done to hyper-inflate this issue and that either stance is going to make one enemies. Regardless of his side, it was a very welcome change to see someone get one of these "journalists" to shut the hell up for a minute and be chastised for thier total lack of integrity across the board.

Go Ron!



[edit on 24-8-2010 by [davinci]]

Originally posted by bowlbyville
Ron Paul just lost my vote. His propterty stance is correct but I'm not bending over while these Islamist Jihadists try to stick it to us.

I have a relative in Northern N.J. - at the time of 9/11 he worked in the police department for one of the small towns in Morris county. The police office received a report on 9/11/2001 that there were Palistinians in Palisades N.J. (that overlooks the Hudson & NYC) that were cheering in the streets.

I still have a copy of that police report - I'll have to make it into a PDF and post it on ATS some day...in the meantime, the Jihadists can stick their Mosque somewhere else.

oh give me a break!!!! for crying out loud are you so introverted and egotistical to think building a mosque by the WTC is a slap in the face? Supposedly, arabic descent men who believed in islam carried out the 911 attacks, so it must mean that all islam is evil!!! right, shaddup!!!!

maybe they are building it there to show their sympathy for the tragedy that happen but because of you cynical egotistical view all you see is hate for someone different from you and you believe the media and not the truth!!!!

go shove it because of people like you this world will know misery, because you cant find a single good thing for anyone who is not like you!

Originally posted by whatukno
The mosque thing is an interesting test of the 1st Amendment isn't it?

Never mind it's location, because it doesn't matter where a mosque is built in the US right now it's going to be protested against. The funny thing is, both sides are doing the right thing according to the Constitution.

The people that are against the Mosque have the absolute right to voice their opposition to it, it's freedom of speech and a fundamental tenet of the bill of rights.

At the exact same time, those that want to worship the way they want to have the right to do so and so have the right to build places of worship. Again, a fundamental tenet of the bill of rights.

People have the right to protest against anything they feel is unjust in this world, I am sure that there probably is someone out there that want's to picket NERF factories for some odd reason, and they would have the right to.

I think the point I am getting at is, there really is no point to this. It's a distraction technique.

Does anyone ever think what they build these mosques or churches from? I think it should be illegal to fall any living tree to build a "church" or mosque, because that wood would be hypocrisy.

Yep, this is what Republican-Libertarians stand for and always will stand for. We are no xenophobes.

If you like private property then you agree with the Mosque.

Originally posted by gator1177

Originally posted by bowlbyville
Ron Paul just lost my vote. His propterty stance is correct but I'm not bending over while these Islamist Jihadists try to stick it to us.

I have a relative in Northern N.J. - at the time of 9/11 he worked in the police department for one of the small towns in Morris county. The police office received a report on 9/11/2001 that there were Palistinians in Palisades N.J. (that overlooks the Hudson & NYC) that were cheering in the streets.

I still have a copy of that police report - I'll have to make it into a PDF and post it on ATS some day...in the meantime, the Jihadists can stick their Mosque somewhere else.

oh give me a break!!!! for crying out loud are you so introverted and egotistical to think building a mosque by the WTC is a slap in the face? Supposedly, arabic descent men who believed in islam carried out the 911 attacks, so it must mean that all islam is evil!!! right, shaddup!!!!

No Islam is the most peaceful religion the world has ever seen.
Dude, do you ever read history?

maybe they are building it there to show their sympathy for the tragedy that happen but because of you cynical egotistical view all you see is hate for someone different from you and you believe the media and not the truth!!!!

Sympathy? They are building a trophy mark to show their sympathy?

Clearly, you know nothing of Islam.
When has Islam shown sympathy for anything non-Islamic?

So, following your logic, by blowing up the Buddhas of Afghanistan (after conquering the land and converting everyone to Islam first) they were just showing their sympathy, I see.

And the pyramids of Egypt?
There was no dynamite then so they couldn't fully show their sympathy;
instead they only stripped the limestone to build their mosques.

Ooops, community centers, sorry.

And now, the land of the Pharaohs is full of Islamic community centers!

What sympathetic fellows these Islamic folks are!

Edit to add: Ron Paul lost my vote too.
Saying that Al Quaeda is to blame for 9/11 but not Islam is like saying that National Socialism is bad but Socialism as ideology is just fine.

What gave birth to Al Queada's ideology, Buddhism? Or Jainism, perhaps?
Sorry, Ron Paul. No vote.



[edit on 24-8-2010 by tungus]

Ron Paul agrees that a Mosque at ground zero is in line with the Constitution and that painting the whole Muslim religion with a broad brush is wrong...

He is correct

Ron Paul says that "Al Qaeda did 9/11" and that we should blame them for it...

He is INCORRECT

Zionist/ Mossad / Rogue agents from Israel MADE it happen, with American rogue forces. "Al Qaeda" is a ruse and Bin Laden is a ghost..

If anything, those that oppose the Mosque should be opposing Jewish Temples, according to their 'logic'.

How many times must we go over this? 9/11 was a joint venture from rogue elements of AT MINIMUM the Israeli and U.S. Government and has been touted for years as a 'security blunder'

It's 2010 and I will keep saying till I die because it's where all the evidence leads. Just because it is 10 years later, do not think all of us will forget that fact and succumb to the brain washing that "Al Qaeda" did it.

I don't care HOW many times the Media, and even RON PAUL, says it is so.

ETA: I voted for Ron Paul and still believe he would be the best man for the job. But he is GROSSLY ignorant of the evidence of 9/11 and still touting his 'blow back' mantra years later. He is wrong. A good guy with good intentions, but wrong nonetheless.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by Prove_It_NOW]

I don't think there should be a Mosque, Church, Synagogue, Temple or any house of worship built anywhere in this country because A) all organized religions have agendas and thus should be eliminated, and B) you don't need to go into a physical structure to talk to God, nor do you need to pay a fee for spiritual enlightenment.

I disagree with Paul on a lot of things, but on this he is absolutely right, and good for him.

I hope that he will get through to many who may be among his followers who are otherwise against the Mosque. Maybe they will hear his arguments and come to learn something about right and wrong and what freedom is really about.

This topic amuses me.

TPTB are obviously trying so hard to raise a little fury there. When (not if) this mosque is built, it's sure to be targeted by "local terrorists". This time, it could even be done by a non MK ULTRA victim.

Simply perfect.

Originally posted by zzombie
Ron Paul Rocks !

Ive yet to disagree with him on a single issue.

You do realise this implies you are a creationist.
Don't get me wrong. I love Ron Paul, but this thing is just an incident waiting to happen.
All it takes is 1 diluted mind that watched too much tv.

Not a rare thing in NY I suspect.

Let's protect the freedom of religion and freedom of speech to those who have no clue to what freedom of religion and speech is (yeah muslims).
Isn't libertarianism all about this? Protect the rights of those who fight the rights?
Good luck having a jihad nest in the middle of new york.

You can't talk in terms of American Law for those who hate america and the only Law they know is Shariah.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by ProdigalSon]

Although I personally agree with the logic and constitutionality of Ron Paul’s argument on this inflammatory and highly emotional issue it is a source of frustration and disappointment to see what has become of the American Republic and a source of deep concern about where it is all leading.

It is my opinion that America was founded a Christian nation, but over the course of the past two centuries, it has increasingly become secularized, most notably since the end of the Second World War, which has resulted in the multi-cultural, multi-racial, multi-religious mess that prevails today. Major culpability for this rests with the interposition of the Federal Government to interpret every aspect of life within these United States.

I appreciate that others will have a different opinion to mine, but in relation to the issue at hand, my understanding is that the First Amendment originally forbade the Federal Government to legislate concerning religion, speech or the press. Such power was invested in, and reserved to, the States alone. In fact, various States did have religious establishments at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. And this is one reason why they rejected the idea of a federal religious establishment to govern them. It is enlightening to note the comments of Episcopal bishop of the Diocese of Vermont, John Henry Hopkins, who wrote, over fifty years later, on the Christian character of the U.S. Constitution in The American Citizen: His Rights and Duties, According to the Spirit of the Constitution of the United States (New York: Pudney & Russell, 1857), pp. 77-8:

The religious rights of the citizen of the United States consist in the enjoyment of his own conscientious choice, amongst all the forms of our common Christianity which were in existence at the time when the Constitution was established. This must be taken as the full limit of fair and legal presumption, as the two first chapters have sufficiently proved. Therefore I hold it preposterous to suppose that a band of Hindoos could settle in any part of our territories, and claim a right, under the Constitution to set up the public worship of Brahma, Vishnu, or Juggernaut. Equally unconstitutional would it be for the Chinese to introduce the worship of Fo or Buddha, in California. Neither could a company of Turks assert a right to establish a Mosque for the religion of Mahomet. But there is one case, namely, that of the Jews, which forms an apparent exception, although it is in fact supported by the same legal principle. For, the meaning of the Constitution can only be derived from the reasonable intention of the people of the United States. Their language, religion, customs, laws, and modes of thought were all transported from the mother country; and we are bound to believe that whatever was tolerated publicly in England, was doubtless meant to be protected here. On this ground, there is no question about the constitutional right of our Jewish fellow-citizens, whose synagogues had long before been established in London. But with this single exception, I can find no right for the public exercise of any religious faith, under our great Federal Charter, which does not acknowledge the divine authority of the Christian Bible.

I appreciate that nowadays most Americans would vehemently disagree with his position, but at the time this was the predominant view, and there was an extensive legal history supporting such. What is a pity, however, is that the Constitution has all too readily been used, or misused, in my opinion to promote philosophies and practices that are diametrically opposed to the Christian character in which it was written.

Originally posted by pjslug
I don't think there should be a Mosque, Church, Synagogue, Temple or any house of worship built anywhere in this country because ....

So are you a communist or something?

It is a shame people refuse to use common sense anymore. The constitution is not some document created by a "god", but written by man. The constitution does not have to guide all our decisions, we can use the brain we were created with from time to time. The fact of the matter is that this mosque is intended to disgrace America.

It is placed in a financial district with no muslim community. The only intention for this mosque is to be a shrine to the all of the animals, so they can celebrate their victory in killing our civillians. Everyone knows this, it is not a secret, yet people still defend it. Why? So people can side with the morons in congress because they are of the same party, or so people can parade their "tolerence" around in front of everyone to point out how superior they are.

The constitution says ........, this is a weak excuse for being spineless and brainless. Have a little pride in this great country and have a little respect for those whose lives were taken for NO reason by sub-humans. It is OK to say something is wrong, we as Americans have forgotten that, no law should ever cause you to ignore common sense.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Lostinthedarkness

 

The Mosque hired architects to design and give cost estimates for the facility (the Mosque that is already there......) they have not done any Coding, no Planning and they don't even have the funds estimated to cover the cost.....

Understand the story.. don't just read the summary on MSM news sites.

This will come as a shock to some people but many of the often rabid, blatantly insulting mosque protesters have convinced me…convince me to…

TO MAKE A DONATION!

To see it get’s built.

I don’t know what’s scarier, Proto falling off his wallet to support a religious cause, or Proto agreeing with Rockpuck and whatukno both on the same thread. When you throw Schrödingersdog public stance in support of the mosque into the mix those who have Godlike Wisdom on ATS are eerily in agreement in supporting the rights of all Americans to practice religious freedom.

Could this be proof positive once and for all that it’s not the gods who are crazy but the people?

You HYPOCRITES.

Obama says THE SAME THING - and he's a "muslimer" whatever that is, and renowned hater of America - a jihadist against her freedoms, spitting on the graves of those killed in 9/11.

Then, Ron Paul says THE SAME THING and "woa, he's actually right. What a level headed guy. Turns out our consitution isn't a religious docment (unless it suits us!)." As if this is some sort of epiphany!

Still, NOBODY defends Obama for saying THE SAME THING first, or even ACKNOWLEDGES the fact that he did so.

So much for giving credit where credit is due.

This site and it's users are ridiculous - the level of hypocrisy on here is nothing short of breathtaking.

This thread: PROVES that the ATS user base comprises nothing less than a biased mob mentality. Stick to the tabloids people, you're better suited to them!

[edit on 24/8/2010 by TailoredVagabond]