Quote:
Originally Posted by flacaltenn
noOneReal:
My comment about security and the mosque locations goes both ways. For the members of the mosque, it's security issues due to being in a place with so many intolerant (and potentially angry folk). From the other side, there are legitimate concerns about security related to potential radical recruitment (which seems to be theme for all those incompetent bombers we are catching) and the advocation of adopting Sharia law.
Now -- like I said, I fully support the freedom to practice Islam openly and proudly in this country. And I'm truly dissappointed in the recent European decisions to "crack down" on Muslim practices in public. But the experience over there that forced the tolerant progressive Europeans to react was due to systematic lobbying for a separate "governance" authority. And this I do not want to debate in this country. Last time we granted internal sovereignty to the Indians, we ruined their chances of surviving well in this country. What part of "separate but equal" is ever a great idea?
|
Seems like we lefties agree with libertarians on several issues - usually social issues.
I would point out, though, that the same First Amendment that gives all religions the right to worship freely, also prevents the adoption of Sharia law or any other religious rule as governing law. Also, the owner of the building that would become the Muslim community center is a vocal opponent of radical islam.
Regards,
D-Ray