Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Has anyone been denied their constitutional freedoms? I haven't heard one person say that they shouldn't be allowed to build the mosque; just that they shouldn't. There is a huge difference. It's like saying a vegetarian is denying people their rights by saying that people shouldn't eat meat. Saying people shouldn't eat meat isn't the same thing as making meat against the law.
Both sides have a variety of supporters.
Yes, but get this. One of the "radically different" viewpoints is not only severely misinformed and bigoted, it goes directly against one of the most important concepts that our nation, along with any other modern democracy, was founded on. They have their right to object to the mosque being built. We have the right to call them out for being bigoted idiots, and potentially even to attack them legally for promoting terrorism. However, they do not have the right to prevent the mosque from being built, nor do we have the right to stymie their voices, however wrong and stupid they may be.
Now it's boiling down to pure subjective opinion, even though the first point is true.
Well hmm. Are all gun owners school shooters? No, not really. So, in other words, probably? Also, there's a difference between a fringe group supposedly operating under a certain banner causing people to protest all others operating under that same banner, despite them being wildly different, and a group of people who are accused of directly enabling a tragic event holding a show there. (That said, the people protesting that are also fairly bigoted).
If you would call the gun people bigots, then you're the exception. I guarantee you that the vast majority of people calling the people against the mosque bigots world not be calling anti-gun people bigots for protesting a gun show in Columbine.
I think there is some confusion on the definition of bigotry.
The mosque situation has nothing to do with race or ethnicity either.
If you stop believing in the Muslim faith, you leave that group too.
Which is, in itself, racist. If you think that Muslim automatically means Arab, you're the one being bigoted. Islam has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. Anyone can be a Muslim.
Anyone who views Muslim as an ethnicity is wrong. Ethnicity isn't a term that's open to interpretation. It has a very specific meaning, and being Muslim doesn't qualify as an ethnicity.
The people who assumed that the black guy was Muslim were racists. That has nothing to do with the objection that a lot of people have to the mosque.
That actually has everything to do with it.
Well, do you think it's possible for a person to tell that you are an atheist just by looking at you? Would it be possible for you to blend in with a group of Christians if you were to keep your views silent?
And we'll start with that one. Why is it in bad taste?
How so?
No, but a person couldn't tell if I were Muslim by looking at me either.
Yes. And so could a Muslim. Also, a Christian or a Muslim could blend in with a group of atheists if they kept their views silent.
Okay, fine. I identitify as a wrestling fan. So now nyone who says anything about wrestling, like that it's fake or stupid, is a bigot.
How? The only way you could identify a Muslim by looking at the is if they wear religious clothing of some kind; in which case they'd be choosing to tell you that they were a Muslim by choosing to wear the clothing. Likewise, I could choose to tell people that I'm an atheist by wearing a **** that says 'THERE IS NO GOD' on the front of it.
People use physical traits to determine whether or not someone is Christian or atheist. I can't tell you the number of times someone has said to me, "Where do you go to church?", as if they automatically assumed that I went to church. A guy who I used to work with was a Wiccan. He constantly had people assume that he was an atheist because he had a lot of tattoos.
I'm not physically distinguishable from Muslims either.
Physical appearance has nothing to do with your beliefs.
What makes you think that they're protesting the people. Do you think that no Muslim person has ever opened anything near ground zero since 9/11? If they're against the people, why aren't they protesting stores and restaurants being opened by Muslims? Why are they only against the mosque?
I guess for the same reason people would say that holding a gun show near Columbine High was in bad taste.
You can identify as whatever you want. But what happens next depends on how others view you. And you have little control over that part.
People often make that judgment based on perception of Middle Eastern descent.
True, but in the real world a lot of people don't bother to know your beliefs because they make snap judgments based on appearance. That is part of what defines bigotry and separates it from people who simply hold a difference in opinion. My argument here is that the anti-mosque group in the U.S. does make snap judgments based on appearance and attributes beliefs to that appearance.
Well, the footage of a crowd of anti-mosque protesters turning against a black man because they just assumed he was Muslim, for one.
Because they identify the group with the religion alone; I don't think they would know that a store or restaurant is being run by Muslim owners; I'm not sure they would bother to go out of their way to find out; I would also guess that they would most likely avoid themed establishments. The "mosque" at Ground Zero is a convenient symbol that they can attack.
And what is that reason?
So you agree that, because I identify as a wrestling fan, anyone who says wrestling is fake is a bigot?
Assuming that someone is Muslim because they're Arab is an example of racism. That has nothing to do with criticism of Islam itself.
Again, assuming that I am or am not a particular religion based on my appearance is separate from criticism of a particular religion. This has nothing to do with the ground zero mosque. People aren't falsely assuming that the mosque or the people running it are Islamic.
They aren't making snap judgments though. The jury is in on whether or not the building is an Islamic community center.
I never claimed to have the same position as the anti-mosque people. In fact, I said the exact opposite.
Help me out here... How is judging all anti-mosque people based on the actions of one group different than judging all Muslims based on the actions of terrorists?
You just contradicted yourself. You're argument the whole time has been that people can identify Muslims by their appearance, and now you're saying the exact opposite when it's convenient to your point.
Seeing a gun show in their town could bring back terrible memories to some of the people who were effected by the Columbine shootings, and, for that reason, some people would feel that it was inconsiderate and insensitive of me to hold my gun show in Columbine when I could just as easily have it in another location.
If others identify you as a wrestling fan to the point that you are considered a part of a cohesive community that is different from the norm, then sure. The thing about racism and bigotry is that it also depends a lot on how other people in society see you. You can identify as something, but if no one else sees you that way, then bigotry is not going to apply to you as far as that particular identity goes.
Yes. My point is that this view is mostly what I'm seeing from the anti-mosque camp. Criticizing Islam and being against the "mosque" on the grounds that it is offensive because of 9/11 are different positions.
Elaborate on that, please?
I meant my comments specifically for that group (and others like it) who turned on that guy. I was addressing that specific mentality.
I also said that those who act on prejudice often make the wrong assessment when they attempt to identify Muslims by appearance, as in my example of a crowd turning on a guy who was black but not Muslim. They made a visual assessment, and they were incorrect, but they still made it. Sorry for the confusion, but I never meant to imply that such assessments are accurate, just that the people making the assessments think that they are accurate, and so they persist in that behavior.
Do you consider that viewpoint to be prejudiced against gunowners?
