The stupid, it BURNS!
(via)
Teabaggin' Tunes: Stop the Mosque
September 1, 2010 By 37 Comments
A reasonable blog on atheism, religion, science and skepticism
Follow Patheos
Atheist:
Subscribe through RSS
Follow Patheos on
Faith Channels
Religion Library
Topics
Resources
Copyright 2008-2012, Patheos. All rights reserved. Terms of Service | Patheos Privacy Policy
This could easily be a DVDA song if it wasn’t serious.
I’m going to go boil my ears in bleach now.
What is wrong wit these idiots? Its not at ground zero, its not a mosque and there is masque that close already. Oh wait, its for Muslims and all Muslims are the same and they are all responsible for 9/11. Frekin’ idiots.
Would they be happier if a gay bath house were built there instead? And if a muslim information centre is built there, would it last long before it’s bombed by fundie jihadists. Will there ever be peace and FORGIVENESS?
A gay bar is actually being built next to the “mosque”.
When they are both open, I’d say that area should become quite a fascinating place to be. Muslims hate gays, christians hate gays and muslims and gays hate fundies but will be too “into” themselves to bother noticing what holy war will be raging outside. I’ll have to get me a gin and tonic and sit and watch all the fuss.
And they have provided an alcohol free zone so they gay bar is open for all open minded Muslims that come and go to the centre to sample the hospitality of the gay people.
I wonder if the Muslims will expect the drag queens to wear burqas.
I want a Jedi center next to it!
YES!!! That would be sweet. Jedi center….
I think I am going to turn the song into a ring tone for my phone. Maybe use it for people I don’t like.
Which denomination, Ewok or anti-Ewok?
i wonder if you built a mosque on every corner will that act as a shied against further bombings.. didnt many American Muslims die on 11th September that year?
No since they bomb their own mosques
Well, no. “They” bomb other people’s mosques.
Mosques preaching a hard-line Wahhabist pro-killing-people line rarely get blown up by Islamic terrorist; just those run by namby-pamby live-and-let-live moderate Muslims.
Hard line, kill all infidels, Wahhabi (Sunni) nutjobs have no problem with blowing up hard line, kill all infidels, Shiite’s mosques and vice versa.
I have this song on my iPod already. Definitely playing this in a rave sometime. Big tune.
This is worse than every car dealership jingle I’ve ever heard.
The weird thing about the controversy is that I’ve heard a lot of mosque opponents say, “Yes, we have freedom of religion; and yes, there’s no legal way to stop the “mosque” from being built there … but still, it shouldn’t be built there.”
The problem here is that — when one is talking about true “freedom” — there is no “but”! IF the Muslims of NYC are truly “free” to build their community center there, then they are — well! — FREE to do so. WIth “freedom” there can be no “buts,” no exceptions, no caveats, no “you could, but please don’t” … because any such caveat or exception would effectively eliminate their “freedom.”
> The weird thing about the controversy is that I’ve heard a lot of mosque opponents say, “Yes, we have freedom of religion; and yes, there’s no legal way to stop the “mosque” from being built there … but still, it shouldn’t be built there.” The problem here is that — when one is talking about true “freedom” — there is no “but”!
I guess I don’t understand your argument. What if I said, “Yeah, you have the freedom (i.e. freedom of speech) to call your mother in law a cunt at Thanksgiving dinner, but you shouldn’t do it (out of basic decency).” Would your response be “then you don’t have true freedom”?
Personally, I’m not so sure I like the idea of a large mosque so close to the site. (I would feel differently if it were a small mosque.) But, for the sake of argument, try this thought experiment: let’s say a bunch of anonymous donors from Saudi Arabia buy the old World Trade Center site (the whole site). They construct a billion dollar mosque on the location. Would your response be “That’s perfectly fine because we have freedom of religion in this country?” Would you go even further and say “It’s considerate for them to do so”? We could go further: let’s say they bought a big sign that said “f**k all the people who died here”? Would you still be okay with it? I’m not saying that the Cordoba/Park51 mosque is the equivalent of that – it’s *not*. I’m just pointing out the difference between what’s legal and what’s considerate. I could also understand if American Indians were upset if the US government built a monument to the greatness of America on the site of the Sand Creek Massacre. Yes, the US would be legally allowed to do so, but it wouldn’t be terribly considerate.
A fair point, B, but as applied to the Cordoba House, it raises the question of what is “inconsiderate” about building an Islamic cultural center that contains a mosque at 51 Park Street.
For one thing, I wonder why it is so essential to the supposed case against the project that it be labeled a mosque rather than an Islamic cultural center: is it that a place of Islamic worship is somehow more inherently sinister or provocative than an Islamic cultural center?
Second, there is no telling what some people may be offended by. If, for instance, I declared it to be an offense against the memory of those who died on 9/11 to build a shoe repair shop near the former site of the World Trade Center, nobody (I hope) would regard it as “inconsiderate” to disregard my feelings, as such feelings would be utterly foolish.
So the question pertinent to your argument is: by what right does anyone consider it offensive that an Islamic cultural center—or, as they for some reason insist on saying (see my first question), a mosque—be built near the former WTC site? Your argument assumes that it is so. From that, I have to infer that one of the following holds: (1) you believe that the Cordoba House project is complicit with Al Qaeda or other Islamist organizations; (2) you believe that the 9/11 attacks showed the true face of Islam, so that a building project to promote understanding of Islam is in effect a pro-Al Qaeda project even if those behind it expressly disavow the ideology of Islamists; (3) although you do not hold either (1) or (2) yourself, you believe that the feelings of people who do hold such opinions should be respected as a standard of offensiveness. Which is it?
I’ve posted on earlier threads that I had doubts about the centre. From the ensuing discussions here, I became convinced of the value of the freedoms at play – eg, the freedom of religion, that certainly allows the building of the mosque. No question of that. And the strength of the US constitution to keep things in line.
But I think that a salient point is that the top floor (or floors?) would be where the place of worship will be. And at that height, it overlooks ground zero. As such, the centre will represent a (symbolic) victory for Islam over America.
Yes, Muslims have the legal right to build as planned, but common decency rules that they would not. If they do anyway, then I believe that it indicates that their driving force is not the practice of religious freedom, but spitting in the eye of a conquered America and its people.
Len, your reasoning is so disjointed that it baffles me. How is the fact that from the top floor of Cordoba House the former WTC site will be visible supposed to make the building “a symbolic victory for Islam over America”?
Is it so axiomatic for you that Islam = Al Qaeda that you cannot even subject this assumption of yours to questioning? Or is your reasoning is as follows?
(1) The people responsible for the 9/11 invoked Islam.
(2) The people responsible for the Cordoba House project invoke Islam.
(3) Therefore, the Cordoba House project represents the 9/11 attackers.
That was supposed to say “the 9/11 attacks,” not “the 9/11,” in proposition (1).
Islam has been sullied by the things that Al Qaeda and others have done in its name. I would like to see the common decency displayed that I believe should be owed to what virtually a whole nation sees as hallowed ground. That’s why I question the driving force behind this building.
Of course, Christianity has also been sullied by what its “followers” have done, over the years.
Any religion is a framework for otherwise good people to do bad things. That has been demonstrated again and again.
Anyway, I’m off for a two week vacation. I won’t be connecting to the ‘tubes so I can’t read anything until I get back.
See ya’ll in a while :-)
Be good.
Len, I still find no coherent train of argument in what you say. You repeat the stock phrase about “hallowed ground” but you have offered not the slightest explanation of how an Islamic cultural center on Park Street is a desecration of that supposed hallowed ground while the presence of businesses like these is not.
When you hold an opinion with great confidence but can offer no coherent, non-question-begging justification for it, don’t you think that it’s time you reconsidered that opinion?
Last one before I ride off into the, er, mist. Hmm.
I see this site as a place to discuss, to be convinced, and – just maybe – to convince. If I waited until my opinions were set in concrete before I posted, then it would be no fun.
I have reconsidered my opinion on this particular subject several times. I realise that my concerns are not particularly rational or logical. I understand the arguments about freedom of religious expression and the US constitution keeping things as they should be. That doesn’t stop me worrying that something is not quite right.
I’d also be upset if I heard that someone was planning a Christian centre there, but I’d probably be able to voice those concerns in a more coherent manner.
Anyway, maybe two weeks in the wind will clear my head. See y’all later.
You know what, I was afraid — immediately after clicking “Post Comment” — that someone would latch onto the idea that I was somehow “in favor of” criminality. Sorry but no. If I was somehow not clear on the matter, let me fix that. I am not saying that behavior deemed “criminal” is a limitation on freedom. Because it’s not. Criminality, by its very nature, inhibits the freedom and welfare of its victims, at the time it occurs. That makes it impermissible to start with. Therefore, banning it is not a limitation on “freedom.”
What I was really saying is, it makes no sense to concede that NYC’s Muslims are “free” to build their community center, if — at the same time — you also demand they not build it. The two actions are irreconcilable.
As for your hypothetical situations about Saudi Arabia, etc. … hypotheticals are meaningless and beneath discussion. It is, of course, always possible to conjure a sufficiently repellent but fictional scenario which appears to justify almost anything one wants to do. But appeals to hypothetical situations do not grant veracity. They just show how far someone will go to rationalize their subjective value judgements.
As for the community center in question being “too close” to the World Trade Center … may I suggest that it is also insensitive of Christians to have churches “too close” to the site of a staggeringly horrific Christian atrocity, that being the Massacre of Jerusalem in 1099. By your reasoning, all churches in the area of Jerusalem must be torn down because it is “insensitive” to the memories of the butchered Muslims and Jews of 11th century Jerusalem for them to be there.
If that’s the principle you want to operate by, I suggest you get to it. I doubt you’ll get much help in your demolition mission, but you can certainly try. When all the Christian churches in and near Jerusalem are gone, THEN we can decide that religions that perpetrated atrocities can never have their holy sites near where they took place.
Let me know when you get that worked out.
“As for your hypothetical situations about Saudi Arabia, etc. … hypotheticals are meaningless …”
I’ll disagree with this one as I find they can be useful to demonstrate that issues aren’t just black and white and indeed show that what is often argued about is what limits someone places on their own beliefs of what is right and wrong.
Actually, they are irrelevant. What Saudi Arabia does or does not do, carries no weight in the US. We are not required either to emulate them or to march in precise opposition to them. Maybe Gingrich thinks it would be a good idea to get into a pissing contest with the Saudis and their Wahhabist clergy over which country can be more religiously intolerant, but I find that kind of response juvenile.
“Actually, they are irrelevant. What Saudi Arabia does or does not do, carries no weight in the US.”
The statement was not what KSA does its own country but what hypothetical they did here. So it wasn’t a KSA wouldn’t except so “we” shouldn’t. The reason that it’s relevant is to ensure that it’s highlighted that what people are talking about is limits to what they think is acceptable and not some black and white situation.
I listened to the first 20 seconds; that was enough for me. It sounded like one of Matt and Trey’s parodies from South Park, but not as funny.
“We’ve got freedom of religion. I understand, but…”
That spot right there is where they lie.
… Mosquerade — sideshow by right-wing thugs
What’s God got to do with religion? Nothing!
• There are no religions only religious institutions.
Religions as institutions have two components, one imaginary and one real:
1. faith-based mythological and cultic claims — an imaginary supernatural component;
2. demands to exercise secular power — an illegitimate political component.
In our secular Republic, there is no executive privilege for God.
• Faith claims are vacuuous —
Pretensions to secular power based on them are dangerous. God has been dead since Copernicus. But, 460 years later US teems with religious institutions. They do exist, in disgusting abundance. Follow the money…
Religions are Ponzi schemes perpetrated by institutional hacks. Priest and televangelist, Pope and Supreme Ayatollah, bishop and imam are not God’s proxies. They are political ideologues making illegitimate claims to secular power financed by fraudulently obtained donations, illegal tax concessions, and taxpayer subsidies from the federal government.
Imagine a world empty of xian inverted snobbery, anti-intellectualism, wannabe dictators….
the anti-supernaturalist
This makes me actually embarrassed to be an American.
I think they should build a mosque for gay, black, gun control activists. They could do a sideline in flag disposal, perhaps by incineration. Then watch the consevatives´ heads blow off.
Am I the only one who was reminded of this song?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhnUgAaea4M
NSFW
Good Grief, where did the REAL LIBERALS GO?
for one, I don’t appreciate the fact that we tolerate the glorification of Human Right Abuses under ANY religion under some wimpy kiss ass cultural relativist bullshit, I don’t care if they are Jew, Christian, Muslim or Atheist, that’s right you heard me,
personally there shouldn’t be Any despotic regime/belief putting Anything near the site, period. Better yet, why not have a Human Rights Memorial,
you know, let’s see [and for the what goes on in Saudi not our issue, WRONG--AS LONG AS THERE ARE 8 YEAR OLD GIRLS SOLD INTO RAPE, MARRIAGE, AS LONG AS WORKERS ARE TORTURED FOR SPEAKING OUT, AS LONG AS THERE ARE MINORITIES WHO ARE PERSECUTED, IN THIS DAY AND AGE, IT IS OUR BUSINESS AND IT DOES EFFECT ALL OF US]
but lets see, how about a Center, Memorial that screams against
rape and mass rape in war, Congo, Peru, Nepal, Columbia, Chechnya, Afghanistan [on all sides], our Armed Forces [yea buddy, it's time to Do something about the promoting of men who rape/abuse a.k.a. Command Rape and the demoting of the brave women who FIGHT BACK],
anti-Slavery, oh yea…a Memorial that screams against the slaves in Dubai, worker slaves [literal slaves mind you] and trafficked sex slaves from Armenia, the thousands of trafficked sex slaves and domestic slaves INCLUDING INTO THIS COUNTRY thank you very much from all over Asia, Middle East, Pakistan, Caribbean, Africa, etc….and let’s END this human rights atrocity NOW, and stop ‘pandering to the barbaric shit’ either under religion, economy/Privilege, geo-political racism and worst of all, the hypocrisy of cultural relativism that is all about ‘protect ours’ but to hell with them over there Mentality
anti-Worker brutality, a Memorial that screams against the Concentration like Sweat-slave shops, the Blood Chocolate, the Blood clothes, the Blood Cotton, the Blood electronics, the Blood goods that kill the environment as well–how about the hypocrites other than religion because we KNOW what they are, get off the cultural relativism box and stop supporting and pandering to DESPOT ASSHOLES who are invited to This country while they Butcher Workers, Unions, Women, Children, from torture, to gang rape, to imprisonment for Thought much less Speech, like in IRAN, mind you, North Korea, China–yea Stop trafficking North Korean Women you asstards,
and last but not least,
a Memorial that screams to Back up their stand on Liberty, Justice, Human Rights rather than Selling out like COWARDS, LETTING A BARBARIC NATION REPRESENT WOMEN’S HUMAN RIGHTS, LIKE IRAN AT THE UNITED NATIONS [PATHETIC, TALK ABOUT PUKE], that screams to END THE GENOCIDES IN SUDAN, CHECHNYA, RWANDA, CONGO
and stop supporting the WAR LORDS in Afghanistan–get OUT of Iraq, etc etc etc
see it don’t matter, religious or non-religious anymore, the FACT that we are apologetic and cowardly to those who BLATANTLY AND UN-APOLOGETICALLY ABUSE HUMAN RIGHTS IN WAYS THAT MAKE THE WITCH -HUNTS LOOK TAME,
is just down right disgusting, especially when it comes from LIBERALS,
Need I say more–Liberals, it’s time to get some GUTS and BACKBONE,
it’s real easy to yell at Christian asstards, it’s High time, we yell at the rest of the butchers, baby killers, misogynist dicks and mass rapists, slavery empires [imperialism is imperialism, to support Slavery to fight Capitalism is just plain fucking stupid], and it’s Time to stop crawling into bed with them because we are too afraid to call a spade a spade.
If it offends, TOUGH
I’ll stop offending, when They stop gang raping little girls, torturing Workers and Union leaders, Butchering Human Right advocates, under SANCTIONED THEOCRACY, AUTHORITARIANISM, TOTALITARIANISM,
NOT until then….NO Muslim center [and Let's Stomp down on the FGMs and Forced Marriages WE know are going on in THIS country, want to do that, GO back to that B,C, DARK AGES land then--same goes to the Christians with their Raping compounds and their forced marriages/Cult abuses here--time to end this garbage, all there is to it], NO Christian center, No any religion center, no Ideology ‘fascism’ center either,
HUMAN RIGHTS, Either we Support them or we don’t.
all there is to it.
Jane