re: #167 Charles

No, I did not know. The one at 45 Park Place? But again, it’s not about muslims not being allowed to pray (gee, they are); it’s about the symbolism. You can have a neo-nazi club near Auschwitz already in some deserted place, but if neo-nazis are going to buy a place near Auschwitz where everyone is welcome and call the Stuermer it must raise your eyebrows, mustn’t it? I just do not find it right for the victims of 9/11 to build an islamic centre with a mosque in the near of where their loved ones died. And some victims might still be able to overcome this sorrow and step beyond hatred or pain, because they feel it’s wrong to withhold others their freedom to practise their religion freely and anywhere, that’s fine and admirable. However, as long as there are victims of 9/11 who still feel the pain and fear that the centre will be considered a victory by those who took part in killing their loved ones,… these feelings should not be simply be dismissed by the rule “freedom of religion”. I think their pain - let’s call it the “freedom to feel sorrow and fear” weighs a bit more than the other freedom.

re: #171 Tweety

That’s my fear. The intentions might be good (don’t know), but I’m afraid it will be abused as a symbol of victory for islamic terrorists; rather than a peaceful dialogue centre where everyone is welcome.

And now something completely off-topic: in which language do muslims preach in the US? Personally I doubt that there is a ruling stating that sermons should be held in English, so I guess they can be held in any other language (which would be mainly Arabic). Is that correct?