CreateDebate


Debate Info

98
97
YES NO
Debate Score:195
Arguments:102
Total Votes:229
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 YES (50)
 
 NO (52)

Debate Creator

nckkiller(56) pic



DO YOU SUPPORT PRESIDENT OBAMAS DECISION TO BUILD A MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO

RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE AND OTHER VIEWS

YES

Side Score: 98
VS.

NO

Side Score: 97
4 points

i believe that persons should have the right to go somewhere and be recognized for who they are religiously and not for what their brothers and sisters have done in the past

Side: yes
Axmeister(4317) Disputed
1 point

ok then go to their country nuke it and then ask to build a church

Side: No
NuclearFish(182) Disputed
2 points

Not the same thing. Grow up. We've already done it, by the way, it's called Japan.

Side: yes
4 points

I think Nuclear made an important point of clarification: The mosque was NOT President Obama's idea. A more accurate question might be, "Do you support Obama's decision not to block/deny the construction of a Muslim mosque in New York City?"

Whoever framed this question needs to research the facts before contributing to further Islamaphobic fear-mongering.

The mosque is not really a mosque; it's going to be a community center (much like a New York City version of the Family Y): it's going to have recreational rooms and courts, offices, classrooms, fountains...and yes, rooms designated for prayer.

Also: the center is not going to be built on Ground Zero--but blocks away. Resilience to its construction is not acceptable, nor is denying its construction constitutional. The constitution of the United States protects freedom of religion in the 1st amendment. We cannot and should not, as Americans, resort to denying the presence and freedom to openly worship to ANY identifiable religious group--insofar as their practices do not impede on the freedoms of others. These people are legally purchasing property and using that property as a community space for their faith tradition. New York City is racially and culturally diverse; it is not remarkable that you'd travel one block and be in an Italian neighborhood, travel to the next one and be surrounded by Jewish schools. To deny the construction of the Muslim community center is racially motivated and unconstitutional.

This is a perfect opportunity for Americans (as WELL as Muslims) to give a new and positive definition to Islam as it is practiced in the United States. We should not respond with hatred and/or prejudice, but acceptance and bridges of understanding and open and respectful dialog.

I understand that there may be angry sentiments surrounding the attack on the WTC on 9/11, but keep in mind that these horrible acts were committed by Muslims who were part of a violent extremist group. When the Oklahoma City bombing occurred, no one seemed the least bit troubled to hear that Timothy McVay was associated with a violent extremist, Christian group. In fact, no one after that started saying we should stop building churches in Oklahoma City to encourage the terror! You see? Stop being bigots and embrace the freedoms you enjoy--and should extend!--of our Constitution.

Side: yes
3 points

Three misconceptions here:

1.) It was not and is not the President's idea.

2.) It's not AT Ground Zero per-se.

3.) Supporting an issue doesn't necessarily mean actively building it, it could mean letting pass (which is what's happening here).

It is un-Constitutional for the State to bar any congregation of any denomination of any faith, that has not posed an active threat against the Nation or its people (this is NOT Al-Qaeda), from meeting at a place of its choosing so long as the land is their own, public property, or owned by those who condone the worship on their property. It's not "Freedom of Religion, except." It's "Freedom of Religion."

Tolerance coming from a Christian, surprise.

Side: yes
2 points

Yes, I do. I am the only person - liberals included - that I know who is of this view.

If they are not allowed to build a mosque wheresoever they want, then the precedent is set for all other future first amendment (or, perhaps, more specifically, Freedom of Religion) cases.

Side: yes
2 points

Then you don't know many liberals.

Side: yes
2 points

Sure. Why not.

The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.

Side: yes
2 points

as about over 9000 people stated, its not obamas idea, and only religious zealots would be against it, all religions are manmade anyway, but i dont deny that there is a god

Side: why are you not suprised

Muslims were first responders on 9-11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahVaxoN20E8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVtup1bB7aM

should we stereotype them all as heroes instead of terrorists?

Side: yes

Partial List of Muslim 9/11 Victims:

Samad Afridi

Ashraf Ahmad

Shabbir Ahmad (45 years old; Windows on the World; leaves wife and 3 children)

Umar Ahmad

Azam Ahsan

Ahmed Ali

Tariq Amanullah (40 years old; Fiduciary Trust Co.; ICNA website team member; leaves wife and 2 children)

Touri Bolourchi (69 years old; United Airlines #175; a retired nurse from Tehran)

Salauddin Ahmad Chaudhury

Abdul K. Chowdhury (30 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)

Mohammad S. Chowdhury (39 years old; Windows on the World; leaves wife and child born 2 days after the attack)

Jamal Legesse Desantis

Ramzi Attallah Douani (35 years old; Marsh & McLennan)

SaleemUllah Farooqi

Syed Fatha (54 years old; Pitney Bowes)

Osman Gani

Mohammad Hamdani (50 years old)

Salman Hamdani (NYPD Cadet)

Aisha Harris (21 years old; General Telecom)

Shakila Hoque (Marsh & McLennan)

Nabid Hossain

Shahzad Hussain

Talat Hussain

Mohammad Shah Jahan (Marsh & McLennan)

Yasmeen Jamal

Mohammed Jawarta (MAS security)

Arslan Khan Khakwani

Asim Khan

Ataullah Khan

Ayub Khan

Qasim Ali Khan

Sarah Khan (32 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)

Taimour Khan (29 years old; Karr Futures)

Yasmeen Khan

Zahida Khan

Badruddin Lakhani

Omar Malick

Nurul Hoque Miah (36 years old)

Mubarak Mohammad (23 years old)

Boyie Mohammed (Carr Futures)

Raza Mujtaba

Omar Namoos

Mujeb Qazi

Tarranum Rahim

Ehtesham U. Raja (28 years old)

Ameenia Rasool (33 years old)

Naveed Rehman

Yusuf Saad

Rahma Salie & unborn child (28 years old; American Airlines #11; wife of Michael Theodoridis; 7 months pregnant)

Shoman Samad

Asad Samir

Khalid Shahid (25 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald; engaged to be married in November)

Mohammed Shajahan (44 years old; Marsh & McLennan)

Naseema Simjee (Franklin Resources Inc.'s Fiduciary Trust)

Jamil Swaati

Sanober Syed

Robert Elias Talhami (40 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)

Michael Theodoridis (32 years old; American Airlines #11; husband of Rahma Salie)

W. Wahid

Note: This list is as yet incomplete and unconfirmed. It has been compiled from the Islamic Circle of North America, the Newsday victims database, and reports from other major news organizations.

http://islam.about.com/blvictims.htm

Side: yes
4 points

President Obama didn't decide to build the mosque. He simply stated that we have no legal grounds for opposing it.

Side: yes
3 points

Hell no! The only thing that should be built at Ground Zero is a memorial for the victims. We should never get over the tragic day of 9/11/01.

Why there? Why now? Where did they get the money?

We gotta put our foot down somewhere and say enough is enough.

Side: No
Denouncement(15) Disputed
5 points

Why there? Because they have the legal and constitutional right to assemble and build on that property. The space probably provided the features for what they wanted to accomplish: a community center with many specs.

Why now? Who knows. Getting authorized for a loan can take time. Getting paperwork together and having all the officials in the organization signed (and all collateral appraised) takes a lot of time.

Where did they get the money? Probably the same way that churches get all of theirs: by people submitting a ridiculous tithe (i.e. a portion of their income) to their religious leaders, organizations, or instutitions.

Let me guess: you also want to deny them exemption from taxes? If so, be ready to show some consistency by turning that standard on all Christian and Jewish establishments as well.

Side: yes
trumpeter93(999) Disputed
2 points

If everybody was jumping off a bridge because it was their "constitutional right" would you do it? I wouldn't.

where did they get the money? Probably the same way that churches get all of theirs.

You don't have a definite answer. None of us do because they refused to disclose where they got their cash. For all we know, they could have gotten their money from a terrorist organization.

Let me guess: you also want to deny them exemption from taxes?

If they are American citizens and own private property then they should pay their taxes.

I am an atheist and I do not support nor subscribe to any religion.

I feel that this mosque disrespects the victims and their families and something about just don't sit right, so to speak. I am on the side of the victims families and not on any religion's side.

Side: No
Scumbarge(116) Disputed
2 points

First, it isn't at ground zero. It's eight fucking blocks away.

Second, it isn't taxpayer funded. It's a private enterprise. Which means that they can do whatever the hell they want.

Side: yes
TERMINATOR(6778) Disputed
3 points

t's eight fucking blocks away.

Eight blocks? Where the fuck did you get that number?

It's two blocks away.

Side: No
trumpeter93(999) Disputed
2 points

It's eight fucking blocks away.

So?

they can do whatever the hell they want

It's angering the American people and we are putting political correctness ahead of what we know is right.

Side: No
2 points

The only thing that should be built at Ground Zero is a memorial for the victims

The only thing being built at Ground Zero is a small memorial and a huge amount of retail and office space.

(Should Muslims be allowed to own or work in those offices and shops??)

Is the Chinese cultural center ok, or is it a smack in the face to our necessary borrowing of money from a Communist country?

"The building's first lease was announced on March 28, 2009, as a joint project between the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Vantone Industrial Co. based in Beijing, that will create a 190,810 sq ft (17,727 m2) "China Center", a business and cultural facility located between floors 64 and 69, that is said will represent business and cultural communities in China and serve as a hub for Chinese firms developing United States operations, as well as for US companies that wish to conduct business in China. The lease is for 20 years and 9 months"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park51

Side: yes
trumpeter93(999) Disputed
2 points

(Should Muslims be allowed to own or work in those offices and shops??)

This is not the premise of this debate. Why don't you create a separate debate?

Is the Chinese cultural center ok, or is it a smack in the face to our necessary borrowing of money from a Communist country?

China has a more capitalist economy which allows them to trade and borrow and lend large sums of money. Once again this is not what this debate is about.

"The building's first lease was announced on March 28, 2009, as a joint project between the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Vantone Industrial Co. based in Beijing, that will create a 190,810 sq ft (17,727 m2) "China Center", a business and cultural facility located between floors 64 and 69, that is said will represent business and cultural communities in China and serve as a hub for Chinese firms developing United States operations, as well as for US companies that wish to conduct business in China. The lease is for 20 years and 9 months"

Congrats on being able to copy and paste from Wikipedia.

Side: No
2 points

Why there

Because there is enough of a Muslim community in that area to support it.

A presence so close to the World Trade Center, “where a piece of the wreckage fell, sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.” - Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf

“We want to push back against the extremists,” added Imam Feisal

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/nyregion/14mosque.html?_r=1

Side: yes
trumpeter93(999) Disputed
2 points

Because there is enough of a Muslim community in that area to support it.

There is an even greater opposition to the mosque in that same community.

"where a piece of the wreckage fell, sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.

The Trade center was totaled. 3000+ people were killed. I know what message that sends to the American public.

"We want to push back against the extremists,"

So does everybody else. The terrorists can look at this as a victory, building a symbol of their religion on our sacred, cherished ground.

Side: No
2 points

Why now

It is being brought up now because we are close the mid-term elections, but it has been in the works for more than a year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion/09mosque.html

and republicans liked what they were doing there in Dec 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7WbTv_gsx4

Side: yes
3 points

Even though these people have the right to build the mosque where they please, it should not be built close to a place where terrorists, acting partly due to their religion, killed thousands of innocent people. You don't burn down someones house and kill the people inside in the name of Christianity and then ask to build a church next door.

Side: No
3 points

No i do not support this decision. A Mosque is sometimes built in places where Muslim extremist have attacked and they would build a Mosque at or near the place as a sign of victory. Since Muslim extremist attacked the World Trade Centers and destroyed them would you not agree with me that it is ironic that now somebody is planning to build a mosque next to it based on the information above? (President Obama did not make this decision by the way)

Side: No
2 points

Now liberals are all for freedom of religion LOLOLOLOL! They don't even want Jesus mentioned at Christmas but now they are the icons of religious freedom. They contridict themselves all the time. Basically to be a liberal is to be in love with pointing the 'How dare you' finger at everyone and anyone. Now thousands of Americans who lost loved ones to 9-11 are evil religion haters if they oppose a mosque at ground zero. Nobody hates religion more than them!!!

I'm getting sick and tired of their holier than thou bullshit. There's no such thing as a liberal making a situational adjustment because something is of bad taste, liberals are spineless and hipocritical finger pointers. THey are hipocrites because all they do is preach 'Tolerance' 'Tolerance' yet if someone disagrees with anything they believe they are totally intolerant of them. 3,000 murdered at ground zero and liberals are too stupid and insensitive to see how a mosque built there is a total slap in the face to the victums and their families. Anyone with common sense would say to themselves "Hmmm, in this situation I wouldn't recommend it." But I'm not even saying that muslim's rights should be violated or it should be illegal for them to build a mosque there. What i'm saying is for the love of God you are out of touch with reality if you can't simply admit "Hey, that is a poor idea." (Even though a legal one). Liberals have no down to Earth common sense. On top of that i believe it's a terrible idea because of the violent reaction it would create. People are irate over 9-11 someone will burn that mosque to the ground within a year if it's built

Side: No
NuclearFish(182) Disputed
4 points

I'm Liberal, I'm Christian. Doesn't matter if someone says Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, Happy Hanukkah, or whatever they want to say. I'm gonna smile and return the well-wishing. This time it's the Conservatives being uptight about it. Conservative Christians often confuse "freedom of religion" with "right to legislate our religion."

Added Note: I could care less if Prayer was in school or not. It shouldn't encompass the education, but if you want to pray, no one should bar you (and no one does). Prayer happened all the time in my High School. Many Christians and even one Muslim (who prayed between classes in private). To disallow one but not the other is a ridiculous double-standard.

Side: yes
Euroscope1(90) Disputed
2 points

Whether Christian, non-Christian, liberal or conservative I'm just saying that comon sense tells you that it is a very tasteless and disrespectful move (although i do agree it should still be in their legal right to do so). But why so terrified for a liberal to just admit it's a shitty move?

Side: No
skyeye(2) Disputed
2 points

I'm a conservative Christian. 'Anything goes' is NOT me! Jesus said, 'I am the way the truth and the life, no man can come to the Father except by me.' The Bible is my authority.

Why allow a pagan religion to propogate lies in a christian land? It will lead to distress and sorrow such as in 9/11.

We must love our brothers or have no part with Christianity; is that what Muslims preach? .....and then blow themselves up ...

Side: No
aveskde(1935) Disputed
2 points

Now liberals are all for freedom of religion LOLOLOLOL! They don't even want Jesus mentioned at Christmas but now they are the icons of religious freedom. They contridict themselves all the time. Basically to be a liberal is to be in love with pointing the 'How dare you' finger at everyone and anyone. Now thousands of Americans who lost loved ones to 9-11 are evil religion haters if they oppose a mosque at ground zero. Nobody hates religion more than them!!!

Liberalism has nothing to do with anti-theism.

Being liberal, IE open-minded and accepting new ideas will however make you intolerant of authoritarianism and charlatans. In this way liberals often attack religion.

Side: No
Euroscope1(90) Disputed
2 points

"intolerant of authoritarianism and charlatans?"

Untrue. A teacher in public school would get straight up FIRED for saying a prayer before class. You don't even have to aproach the level of authoritarianism to get in hot water with the liberal agenda

Neo Nazis can march anywhere and practice their freedom of speech but now liberals are turning any christian teaching that homosexuality is a sin into hate speech, and making it illegal. Now listen to what i'm saying, the BELIEF that homosexuality is wrong and that we should not hate homosexuals but pray for them is now hate speech! Whether you agree or not is not the point.

"Open minded and accepting new ideas?"

There are multiple cases now of science teachers being fired for entertaining the possibility of intelligent design (in a scientific way). Whether you think the arguements are weak or strong for intelligent design is not the point. The point is you will be fired for even mentioning the possitive arguements for it in public school. And i'm sorry but isn't science all about accepting challenges and testing out new hypotheses, etc. Make no mistake, liberals have a religion of their own and it is becoming more and more intolerant to oppose their beliefs (and even if their beliefs are true it is scary that religious people are being forced into silence). It is scary that people are not becoming freaked out that freedom of speech is in trouble

Side: yes
2 points

All that liberals and actual small gov conservatives are saying is - you can say Jesus at Christmas all you want - just don't take tax dollars to do it, and don't have the government teach my kid religion even if the majority says so.

Side: yes
2 points

Build it elsewhere. Building it there is a slap in the face. But hey, we Americans are getting used to being slapped and not reacting, right?

Side: Hell NO
2 points

Of all places... OF ALL PLACES WHY THE BLOODY HELL WOULD THEY CHOOSE TO BUILD A MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO???

If anything they should build a memorial, but not a mosque. Radical Islam is Islam none the less, and it would be disrespectful not only to the families who lost loved ones in the destruction, but the victims as well.

Side: No
2 points

while i support the right to the peaceful gathering of people to worship their deity, why don't people ask Muslim nations why we cant build on their land. Islam is a one way street. they build mosques and Muslim universities here in America but we are rejected and not allowed to build churches or Christian collage classes in most Muslim countries. also it is illegal in most Islamic counties to go to their country on the grounds of being a missionary that is not Muslim. and to continue my point it is illegal for most people to publicly display religious activities that are not Muslim. that means preaching publicly, carrying a bible, and going to church is illegal under law.

so why do Muslims hark intolerance at us but yet don't talk about what their parent counties do?

Side: No
1 point

So should we emulate those countries and block it, or be a freedom loving America and allow it?

Side: yes
2 points

Someone should open a bar and grill close to the mosque sight. You cant build a place of worship close to a bar.

Side: No

Serve BBQ, let the smell of the cooking swine waft their nostrils.

Side: No
2 points

I disagree with the placement of a mosque next to ground zero in the same way I would oppose a gun shop next to Columbine High School. Do all Muslims kill people? Of course not. And neither do all guns. But the connotation is still there, and it shows a lack of respect for those affected by both tragedies.

Side: No
1 point

Interesting analogy - I wonder how many who say No would have protested the NRA holding its meeting 15 miles from Columbine high school less than 2 weeks after the shooting...

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/1999/05/02/nra/index.html

Side: yes
Republican2(349) Disputed
1 point

The NRA should not have held a meeting at that location so soon. I can't answer for everyone else on the negative side of this debate, but I say, just like the mosque, they ought to have their meetings elsewhere.

Side: No

No..... wait.... Hell no.... wait.... Hell, shit no.... wait.... Hell, shit, fuck no.... OK...., that's better.... but mainly because it pisses someone off ;)

Side: No
1 point

The mosque should be built, but not as close to Ground Zero.

Side: No

There is an old tradition from the era of the crusades, in which Moslem's, when they would win a victory, would build a mosque over the battle ground and hold it as a place of spiritual significance. Now I understand the majority of Moslem's in the world do not partake in violent jihad anymore, but I don't think it was a coincidence that they chose this location for their "community center". First of all, the chosen location is not exactly prime real estate. It is priced far above it's actual value. Secondly, there are dozens of other suitable locations other than the one near ground zero that would have been a better value, have the same amenities, and ease of access. They would in fact be making it harder on themselves to use the building they have chosen, yet they have chosen it anyway. I find this connotation disturbing, and I also find it disturbing that no one can spare political correctness for the sake of a genuine debate.

Side: No
1 point

Seeing as how the victims of 9/11 were killed by Muslim terrorist I would personally consider it a slap in the face to their family's and to America as a whole. I realize that not all Muslims are terrorists but this is just in bad taste.

Side: NO
0 points

Absolutly not! For terrorist whose relegious belief is to see all Americans dead so they can go to heaven one day!!These terrorist with such beliefs fly two airplanes into the twin towers in New York City and kill thousands of innocent American people!!! These people with such beliefs come back under ten years later and want to build a church on the same grounds in which they performed acts of terror against the American people!! HAHA!!! Are you Serious?? Is this some type of Joke??! oh but Obama who agrees and shares the same relegious beliefs with the people who want to blow us all up says Oh but Muslim beliefs are considered a relegion!!?? So they obviously must have the rights here in America as Terroist-Americans to worship there ungodly beliefs in order to destroy America from the inside out!!?? Wake Up America!! Its time to repair the Busted and broken U.S. Constitution before its to late!!

Side: No