JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
1
Why do Japanese change their attitude when they communicate with foreigners?
-
2
Confrontation
-
3
U.S. Navy investigating how parts fell off aircraft near Atsugi
-
4
California court to decide if SeaWorld whales are illegal 'slaves'
-
5
Kuroki reported pregnant 2 weeks after denying relationship with Akanishi
-
- Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) in Kanto region
- RCS (RCSコーポレーション), Kanto
- Salary: ¥180,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month includes performance bonus
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - TOKYO - late-March start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - Kanagawa Prefecture - late-March start
- Interac, Kanagawa
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
0
SezWho2
If you want to know what kind of understanding the Imam shows at home, you might try listening to what he says rather than what other, agenda-stricken folks say he says. Your send-up of my comment certainly illustrates the intolerance the Imam is receiving.
Understanding has never meant capitulation. In fact, capitulation would be almost un-American. The Imam may decide to try to persuade the developers to build elsewhere, but that will be America's loss.
Posted in: New York Imam: Mosque fight about Muslim role in America
0
SezWho2
Muchakucha, I get your point. But as far as I can see your only post on this thread that was even remotely related to "taste", was the one you made about 10 posts ago (counting everyone's posts). This post has the effect of being a response to those who claim it's a matter of law, rather than the other way around.
In any event, you are right that everyone challenges the law from time to time. But I think you err when you suggest that the sum and substance of objections to the "bad taste" argument is "it's the law, get over it". There have been many counter arguments--first, that it is not in bad taste, that those who claim it is so have failed to show why it is and that perhaps claims of "bad taste" themselves are in bad taste; second, that what is really operating is prejudice combined with more than a little ignorance of what Islam is; third, that the majority's claims about "bad taste" are insufficient grounds to thwart the actions of a sizable minority; and so on.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
Imam Rauf: promoting tolerance abroad, receiving little of it at home.
Posted in: New York Imam: Mosque fight about Muslim role in America
0
SezWho2
I'm sorry. Did WilliB ask me that question? Has somebody proposed a Cultural Center there? Did the city of New York change it's mind about having a memorial and museum there?
This strikes me as an extremely silly question. So let me answer it like this: I doubt that there is any American Muslim group which has any ambition to build on the site of the former Towers. But if somebody wanted to build an Islamic Cultural Center there--and if the City of New York approved it--it would be OK with me. I personally feel that a modest memorial is appropriate at that site, not that NYC is into modesty.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
I don't think you have one shred of evidence to support the notion that the writer in question sees no distinction between morals and legislation or that he seems to think that no law should be questioned, etc. Americans are very fortunate to live in a country which honors the rule of law so that we are not victims of morality du jour.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
You can't be serious. Do you think that "liberals"--whatever that term means--are silent on issues like abortion, gun control, same-sex marriage, immigration, domestic intelligence-gathering and foreign wars? Or do you think they oppose laws they believe to be wrong?
Of course people's opinions matter. However, one of the reasons that we are a country of law is to prevent the tyranny of the majority in individual cases. For example, if a majority of people believe it to be in bad taste or morally wrong for a homosexual male couple to raise a child, they cannot employ their taste or morals to put a stop to this situation nor can they force the couple to move on down the road. They can, if they choose the low road, make life hell for the couple and their child, but only within the limits of the law.
As of August 20, visitors to the Simon Wiesenthal Museum of Tolerance in LA showed 37% support and 62% disapproval of the planned construction. I can see where such visitors might be more liberal than the nation as a whole, but still the numbers are fairly close to those reported nationwide. This is exactly the situation that the law is designed to protect. To me, it is morally repugnant that 70% of the population should enforce their "taste" on a 30% minority. In that sense, law is the only thing that matters.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
No kidding!
I can only hope that most of the people who say I'm wrong at least know what I have and have not said. Judging from the comments on this board, that doesn't seem to be the case with people who assess Rauf's words. In any case, where opinions differ, the law--rather than arbitrary notions of taste--should prevail.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
I think you go a bit too far when you say that I go too far in telling others something that I didn't tell them. I have no problem with people feeling that it's insensitive. My problem is with people who want to put a stop to the construction project on account of their feelings. And my suspicion is that a significant number of those feelings derive from prejudice and not from norms of good taste.
I believe to be wrong those who think that this proposed construction is insensitive. I would argue against their assertions that it is insensitive. But I don't see where I have ever told anyone that they shouldn't have their feelings. I think that rather consistently I have maintained that I can respect their feelings and still support the construction of the cultural center. What I think that people should not do is to entertain the illogical proposition that because I support the construction project I do not understand their feelings.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
I think the meaning is ordinary. Do people really know about Islam or do they believe the nonsense that is written about it? Do they know about Islam in America? Do they know who Rauf is? Have they heard what he really says? Do they really know the purpose of the site? Do they realize where the site actually is and its visibility from the site of the former Towers? And so on. If you think that I am saying that people are racists if they object to this site as being in bad taste, you aren't reading carefully enough. When arguments about bad taste are unattended with a plea to keep this a faith-free zone and when they are attended with anti-Muslim screed, that is where I become concerned about the "bad taste" argument.
I have never sidestepped the issue of taste. And you're right that it can be a legitimate argument "by some". I don't know why you think that I won't listen to arguments about taste. I've listened. I just haven't agreed. The arguments about taste are weak: "respect the families' feelings", "too soon", "too close", "that religion". I don't think any of these hold up under scrutiny. Operating against the families wishes shows no disrespect for their feelings; nine years is a suitable grieving period for a public place that has not been declared a memorial zone; if a non-visible building two blocks from Ground Zero is too close, then what eats at the heart is not the building but the idea and the idea cannot be removed from the heart no matter where construction takes place; it is that it is an Islamic center that has drawn the flak and in a country that respects all religions that cannot be and among a people who profess tolerance that should not be.
Well, that jibe might make sense considering that you seem to have thought that I am accusing you of racism. However, sure, it's quite possible that someone with the same opinions as mine could be looking for payback. So what? I am definitely not un-biased. No matter what I say you have to make a judgment about my intentions. Historically you seem perceive me as someone who disses America and supports our enemies. No matter what I say, I wouldn't be surprised if you filter my remarks through that lens. So, yes, it is a matter of judgment. You continue to say that the 70% of Americans who object to the "bad taste" of the proposed site don't necessarily have any prejudice. I say that is perfectly true. But I say that attempting to thwart the innocent on account of the religion of the guilty casts a heavy pall of doubt on some unmeasured and largely unmeasurable portion of the protesters.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
No, the argument is totally fair. You would be right to say that the argument is frail since no proof is offered. But then you would have to let it go at that if you could not offer proof to the contrary. And I certainly don't see that in your post.
You are right, though, that such is my opinion. However, I didn't claim that people who oppose the construction have failed to do the research. I claimed that "a good number" of them have so failed. Are you of the opinion that those who claim the construction to be in bad taste are, for the most part, well-informed?
Be that as it may, my argument certainly does not imply that there is only one answer when it comes to taste. In fact, I think I have said that the protest against the mosque is, in my opinion, incredibly bad taste. And I said where tastes collide, law must prevail.
As for location, sure, it's an issue. People have made it an issue. The motives of these people are also an issue. "Bad taste" is simply too convenient as a cover for other motives. I think there are very few people who would initiate a construction project that obtrudes on a normal period of grieving. I think that most people are even willing to carry the emotional freight for bereaved friends for a substantial period of time. But after nine years we do, in good taste, require those whose only bond with us is common citizenship, to respect the law and not erect barriers to our own pursuits.
Of course making reservations about location doesn't automatically equate to intolerance. However, the America that I see, with minority exception, either has its knives out for Islam or else avoids it as much as is seemly. Making reservations about location doesn't automatically equate to making reservations about location, either.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
Quite true. However, when I said that you have more to fear from Christianity than Islam, as far as the law is concerned, I am saying there is a greater danger that narrow Christian values will be imposed on our laws than there is that Sharia law will become the basis of our legal code.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
sailwind, Neda Bolourchi makes a strong appeal, but it is only that--an appeal. She takes the liberty of describing the construction as an ideological monument. Obviously she has a similar point of view as those who speak of it as the Victory Mosque. Yet, what is there in any of the communications of those who plan to build the community center that would indicate this is the case. She and others are projecting.
She fears that the construction would become a symbol of Muslim victory to militants around the world. And indeed, that might be the case. But what will those militants think of their victory when they discover that what is actually being preached at the mosque is an Americanized and moderate version of Islam and that militant Islam is not welcome?
She fears that it will cultivate a fundamentalist version of the Muslim faith, but why would it? More importantly, how would it do that in the United States?
Bolourchi at least does us the credit of calling for the site to be a faith-free zone. She does not want any religion to be represented there. And that is something that cannot be said of those who oppose the construction because it is Islamic.
Again, sure, oppose the construction. But the people to lobby against are not the people who plan to build on land they have purchased and the reason to oppose is not some trumped up "lack of taste". The people to register your protests with are city officials and the reason to oppose is that the site should remain faith free. Protesting the Muslim developers just shows anti-Muslim sentiment.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
Muchakucha, if you are an atheist and an American, you have far more to fear about Christianity's idea of worldly life than you that Sharia law takes root in America. Fear of being taken over by Muslim ideology is just about the least rational reason that I have heard to oppose construction of the mosque.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
I think the problem is that anyone can claim that something is in poor taste. Jimi Hendrix' rendition of The Star Spangled Banner was met with widespread criticism that it was in poor taste. Hendrix' reaction was that he thought his version was beautiful. I think it was, too. But against the back-drop of Woodstock, drugs, the Love Generation and the Vietnam War, it was too much for some people.
Personally, I think that much the same thing is happening here. But I also think that, just as with Hendrix, a good number of the people who subscribe to the "bad taste" theory have been guided by their initial reaction and then swept along by the winds of prejudice. It is their "impression" that it is in bad taste, an impression formed without having done the research. If you listen to the arguments against that are listed here, the arguments do not confine themselves to "bad taste". They range far and wide into anti-Muslim rants. The "bad taste" becomes "bad taste because Muslim".
So I think there is a third issue. That issue would be what really is driving the antipathy toward an Islamic Community Center (with mosque) that we can guess would not be driving plans for a Christian Community Center? But even if there were not a third issue, part of the bad taste issue would have to include the observation that there are those who believe that using a rapidly aging grief as an excuse to prevent construction is in bad taste and that an American failing to put aside differences in religion is in bad taste.
A couple of thousand years ago the maxim was that de gustibus non est disputandum. So, how does one resolve differences regarding taste? By popular vote? I think that in a society of laws, the only real way is the law. I don't think that anyone questions the right of New York City or the Borough of Manhattan to pass a non-prejudicial zoning ordinance which would mean that the center could not be built. I think it's sad that the "anti-mosque" crowd is so rabid about this issue, even sadder that they are complaining to the wrong people. They should be picketing the Mayor's office or the City Zoning Board.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
This is a tactic of drones of all stripe. If I had to look for original thinkers, I would look for people who could back up their arguments with reasonably cogent, non-prejudicial observations. I don't see much of that among the "anti-mosque" crowd here.
Ask almost any atheist and they will tell you that no system which believes in God is rational. Christianity is certainly not, especially fundamentalist Christianity. Whilst we're all sitting around waiting for the Rapture (if it hasn't already come--and wouldn't that account for a lot!), I don't think we ought to be depriving Muslims of a place of worship on account of the irrationality of their religion.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
It seems to me that Nazis were and are opposed to the existence of Jews in their country and that the KKK was and is opposed to the existence of blacks in their neighborhoods. American Muslims are opposed to what?
Posted in: Rallies over mosque near ground zero get heated
0
SezWho2
If there were a group for groups who are wandering in darkness, the Tea Party would certainly be a member.
Posted in: Beck, Palin: Help us restore traditional American values
0
SezWho2
"They" are not responsible for the attacks. But it's a good idea and I'm surprised that Glenn Beck hasn't already established such a hospital there.
Posted in: New York mayor tries to ease tensions after Muslim cabbie knifed
0
SezWho2
You are reading very selectively aren't you. I think I have said a couple of times now that, with the exception of several countries where we have thought to use military might and economic sanctions instead of doing something constructive, I don't think that people hate Americans. I think they reserve judgment until they get to know them.
What I said was that comparing American hatred of Muslims on account of the actions of a few previously marginalized extremists to foreign hatred of Americans on account of the actions of the mandated American government, it is the latter that makes sense if anything does. And if your incredulity inheres in my willingness to stand by that, then you'll have to continue to be slack-jawed.
As far as Sister Mary Joseph is concerned, I note the danger of arguing by analogy. I don't care much for your revisions to it either. We could play the "more like" game until the cows come home. For example it would really be more like a majority of people in a non-Catholic country hating the Catholic church because the good Sister rapped you on the knuckles in the name of Catholicism. You insist that Islam was the reason for the Twin Towers. I think it merely facilitated it. In any event you will either note the difference between prejudicing the many for the actions of the few or prejudicing the parts for the actions of the whole--or you will not.
Posted in: Rallies over mosque near ground zero get heated
0
SezWho2
WilliB, I read the transcript. That's why I posted the link. If you think it shows that Rauf is not a moderate, I think you are defining his terms according to your prejudices.
Posted in: Rallies over mosque near ground zero get heated