[lit-ideas] Re: Washington Post's Greg Sargent on the Ground Zero Mosque
- From: Mike Geary <jejunejesuit.geary2@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 01:13:08 -0500
LAWRENCE: "Here's the problem with this argument: it doesn't reckon with the
question of whether it's legitimate to see the construction of an Islamic
center near Ground Zero as an *inherently provocative act. *Either it's
legit to see the building of the center as provocative, or it isn't." More
nonsense, Sargent. There are a lot more problems with your strawman argument
than this one. Who cares whether it is "inherently provocative" or not?
I would say it's an inherently constructive act -- you're the only one who
seems to see it as "provocative" And when did being "provocative" become
illegal? This is not China, Lawrence, although you seem to wish we had
restraints on freedoms such as the Chinese government has on it's citizenry,
we don't. Get used to it, fella.
LAWRENCE: "Rauf calls it furthering the spread of Islam, in "the World Trade
Center Rubble." Now *that *is provocative."
No, it's not. Christians such as the Westboro Baptists picketing the
funerals of gays, chanting insults, etc. -- that's provocative, but still
it's legal in this country and should remain so.
LAWRENCE: "The guy Mayor Bloomberg thinks is wonderful, Rauf, the guy behind
the Cordoban Mosque doesn't think the mosque is going to be a great bridge
between America and Islam, as some have said."
And you know this how? Sorry, Lawrence, but I trust Bloomberg over you
Way over you. I hope you get over your paranoia soon. At first it was
amusing but now It's getting boring.
Mike Geary
Memphis
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
> Read all about it at
> http://www.lawrencehelm.com/2010/08/washington-posts-greg-sargent-on-ground.html
>
>
>
> Lawrence
>
Other related posts:
