re: #171 Renaissance_Man

I don’t see the distinction you want to draw. Why would it only count as anti-Muslim if they opposed all mosques anywhere? They quite clearly object to not only the location, but also the fact that it is a Muslim centre. (They claim to not be a mosque, apparently, or at the very least not just a mosque.) They aren’t objecting to other places of worship in the area. They aren’t opposing other businesses or institutions in the area. Just this one, because it is a Muslim centre. How can you claim that their singling it out isn’t to do with Muslims?

Of course it has to do with the fact that it’s a Muslim institution. But that doesn’t mean that the opposition has to do with bigotry. They object to a Muslim institution there because of the location in proximity to Ground Zero, the site of a major act of terror committed by Muslims in the name of Islam. You say you understand why there was a controversy over the Carmelite convent in Auschwitz and why some feel it’s ‘insensitive’ to build this mosque. If you feel that opposition to both are the convent and the mosque is “irrational” and should be disregarded, then we don’t have much more to talk about, and we’ll just have to agree to disagree. If you think the opposition to the convent legitimate, but to the mosque illegitimate, I’d like to hear what distsinction you draw.