published Thursday, August 26th, 2010

The Opposition

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

133
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
Tax_Payer said...

The USA button is an exaggeration to the opposition faced in Manhattan, NY. The site where the proposed mosque is going up collectively was covered in ashes from the FALL 9/11 of the Twin Towers. Moreover, the Twin Towers shadowed the location where the mosque is being built. Just because it is a couple blocks away don't mean people are lying.

August 26, 2010 at 12:42 a.m.
chattreb said...

I'm for both buttons.

August 26, 2010 at 12:49 a.m.

I think it is up the the city of New York what type of building or structure is built on private property within the city limits. Freedom of Religion is protected by the COnstitution as is Private Property. however, what is built as far as coding and allowance is up to the City that it is a part of.

August 26, 2010 at 2:30 a.m.
dougmusn said...

For me, the conflict around the Park51 project in lower Manhattan reminds me of a profoundly moving bit of the screenplay from the movie Ghandi in which Ghandi suggests a way a man may find absolution for killing a child during the horrific process of the separation of Muslims and Hindus in the creation of Pakistan:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083987/quotes?qt0282928

Learn from the mistakes of history or repeat them...

August 26, 2010 at 5:36 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Let the mosque go up, but on two conditions. First, rebuild the Greek Orthodox church building that was destroyed in the 9-11 attack. Second, require everyone associated with the mosque ("cultural center"?) to sign a letter to the king of Saudi Arabia telling him they thank the Americans for letting them do this, and asking him to give Christians and other non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia similar rights to build worship buildings there, which are forbidden in the whole country, not just inside Mecca and Medina, and to leave Islam for other systems of belief. www.lohr84.com>

lkeithlu said...

A nice thought, Andrew, but the Saudis are not obligated to follow our constitution. We are, however. In addition, not all Muslims are Saudi. Why would someone whose heritage is Pakistani, Egyptian, or Iranian have any say on what the Saudis do in their own country?

The sad thing is that this issue has exposed a real hypocrisy in this country. We say we are for freedom, but only for those just like us. The only thing that prevents our mob from doing just as the Saudis do IS our constitution. That there are those who would replace it with the Bible is frightening.

August 26, 2010 at 6:52 a.m.
LZSally said...

WHO is my neighbor?

August 26, 2010 at 7:44 a.m.
woody said...

This can all be 'boiled down' to a simple, yet easily understood adage.

"Nothing personal, strictly business."

And the easily understandable part of it all is that we only have to concern ourselves with the 1st Amendment.

The Muslims and their supporters say it is a matter of Freedom of Religion, while the opposition is merely expressing its constitutionally guarded Freedom of Speech and/or Expression.

And, just as it should be, no other individual's right to anything extends any farther than their own 'personal space'. In other words, this is a case 'dueling rights'.

Okay, I am ready for the onslaught of differing opinions. However, keep in mind, I will only consider those which can conceivably explain how one person's or group's right to any facet of the 1st Amendment can overshadow or even negate any others.

Ready..start, Woody

August 26, 2010 at 7:56 a.m.
xsiveporsche said...

I have no objection to a Mosque being built in NYC. I have no objection to them building one next door to me even. But Reb nature most people against the Mosque are not against one being built but the ocation. People see it as hollowed ground and I agree with them. Why can not the Islams respect the feeling of the people in the country and find another location. Knowing all the objection the people have and their feeling toward the Mosque they should understand our passion about this and agree to build elsewhere. If Islam is a religon of peace then they should have no problem keeping the peace here by building elsewhere.

August 26, 2010 at 7:57 a.m.
hambone said...

The "my way or the highway" attatude this mosque has exposed in the American public is the very reason we have become hated thru out the world. It shows to the world the liberty we brag about doesn't apply to all.

August 26, 2010 at 7:58 a.m.
deltenney said...

The feelings of the survivors of 911 and those most closely affected should be respected and honored. The old building and neighborhood looks like it could stand an appropriate upgrade -- with the emphasis on "appropriate."

August 26, 2010 at 8:13 a.m.
OllieH said...

What's becoming painfully obvious about this protest is that many of those who oppose the 'ground zero mosque' are motivated by a much larger issue- opposition to Muslims in general. Often, when you hear the claim that this is not about abridging anyones' religious freedom, it's quickly followed by a condemnation of the entire religion of Islam.

And for those of you who continue to claim that this is JUST about the hallowed ground of the 9/11 attack, you should look at mosque protests across the country.

Of course, we all know about the planned construction of an Islamic Community center in Murfreesboro, and the fight that has developed there. But there's a very similar case in Sheboygan, Wisconsin. It was in that town that a few Christian ministers led a contentious fight against a Muslim group that sought permission to open a mosque.

In Temecula, California, a mosque that is seeking to build a new worship center on a nearby property was targeted for a protest by members of the local Tea Party. The group demonstrated outside the existing mosque with offensive picket signs and dogs. Why dog, you ask? Apparently, that was to offend those Muslims who consider dogs to be ritually unclean.

Nice.

Then there was the mosque in Bridgeport, Connecticut. Muslim leaders there, eventually asked the police for protection after an angry protest from the Texas-based Operation Save America. Those yahoos simply yelled hateful slogans at the muslims as they went to and from prayer service.

Insist, if you will, that this is just about restrictions at ground zero, but the facts of the story, and the words of the opponents seem to paint another, more frightening, picture.

And that picture looks a lot like the cartoon above.

August 26, 2010 at 8:19 a.m.
BobMKE said...

Just because you have a right to do something doesn't mean it is the right thing to do.

August 26, 2010 at 8:20 a.m.
eeeeeek said...

Just because the catholic church has the right to build another catholic school.. doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

August 26, 2010 at 8:52 a.m.
whoknows said...

I was about to type up a comment, but decided my comments are already listed above.

lkeithlu: Ditto. Woody: Ditto. Andrewlohr: Don't be ridiculous. Ollie: Thanks for the info. I didn't know all that. It's kind of sad really...

August 26, 2010 at 8:59 a.m.
librul said...

All more proof, as if it were needed, that religion and all the divisiveness and prejudice that it engenders, is the greatest tragedy of humankind.

August 26, 2010 at 9:01 a.m.
Sailorman said...

Some where pigs are flying - I agree with librul 100%. More idiocy has been done in the name of religions of all stripes than anything I can think of - even politics.

August 26, 2010 at 9:33 a.m.
rolando said...

To muslims worldwide, the building of a muslim mosque on GZ is EXACTLY like the Palestinians and other MidEast barbarians who laughed, sang, rejoiced and danced in the streets when the Towers fell because "They won!". And THAT is the exact reason the imams want that mosque built in that particular place and that place ONLY.

Sharia law will be observed within the mosque...and our "leaders" will fall over each other getting down on their knees before it -- Imam Hussain Obama leading them all. And you can bet the rent money that he WILL visit it...without his wife and female children, of course.

August 26, 2010 at 9:39 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Now it's clear why rolando has been absent. He's been getting major upgrades on his tinfoil hat; you know, more bandwidth, better propellers, air conditioning...

August 26, 2010 at 9:49 a.m.
rolando said...

Stole all that info from you, sweetie. You are chock full of upgrades to all that Area 51 stuff. [I'll make an exception to my rule of non-reply to trashy stuff this one time...just because it is you and you are so EASY. :O) Which sort of takes the fun out of it, BTW.]

August 26, 2010 at 10:25 a.m.
acerigger said...

It would be interesting to see a poll of the survivors and the families of the victims of 911 on their feelings about this.I've heard brief sound-bytes from both pro & con,but no wide,overall study.Although I lost friends in the attacks,and wish we could resurrect the animals who did it so we could kill them again,I will not hate or fear anyone and everyone of the Muslim faith.Many in this area,by this line of reasoning,could hate the Baptists,Methodists,Presbyterians for rounding up our ancestors and sending them on the "Trail of Tears"

August 26, 2010 at 10:36 a.m.
acerigger said...

"Imam Hussain Obama leading them all." Rolando,your common sense may have slipped a bit here. Are you referring to the pork-eating,alcohol-drinking,non-ramadan observing iman who states that he's been "saved by the blood of Jesus Christ"?

August 26, 2010 at 11:11 a.m.
hambone said...

Is Rolando big bird's alter ego?

August 26, 2010 at 11:24 a.m.
Snooksie said...

Freedom also means free to disagree with something. Just because someone disagrees with something doesnt mean they are racist or hypocrites. It simply means they disagree. I disagree because of the location. They should build else where.

August 26, 2010 at 12:37 p.m.
acerigger said...

Snooksie,everyone is free to agree or disagree,but in this instance,the furor over any and all mosques anywhere is plainly racist.

August 26, 2010 at 12:54 p.m.
Duford said...

Probably your best cartoon ever, Clay.

And I rarely like them.

August 26, 2010 at 1:27 p.m.
EaTn said...

rolando- it's good to have you back on board, even if you're still hitting the target but missing the bull's eye.

As for Obama, he's versed in the Constitution and took his oath to uphold it seriously, which does put him at odds to many who still think it excludes those non-traditional Americans. One thing for sure, regardless of who lit the fire the mosque issue will spread to all corners of our country and beyond.

August 26, 2010 at 2:16 p.m.
Snooksie said...

Wawatoosa.....Are you saying I am ignorant? If so that was not very nice.

August 26, 2010 at 2:27 p.m.
alprova said...

Rolando wrote: "To muslims worldwide, the building of a muslim mosque on GZ is EXACTLY like the Palestinians and other MidEast barbarians who laughed, sang, rejoiced and danced in the streets when the Towers fell because "They won!"..."


What some people may have done in other parts of the world, in response to what happened on 9/11 is meaningless when it comes to those who live in THIS country.

Holding any Muslim in this country responsible for those acts elsewhere is totally ignorant and irresponsible on your part. And for the umpteenth time, the proposed Mosque is not being built at Ground Zero. It would be BLOCKS from Ground Zero. It will not even be seen from Ground Zero.


"And THAT is the exact reason the imams want that mosque built in that particular place and that place ONLY."


Thank you Rush Limbaugh Jr. for that wonderful insight, not that anyone who would utter such a statement could begin to prove it.


"...Sharia law will be observed within the mosque...and our "leaders" will fall over each other getting down on their knees before it."


Uh huh, just as they do in front of the 1,462 currently existing Mosques that already exist in this nation?


"-- Imam Hussain Obama leading them all. And you can bet the rent money that he WILL visit it...without his wife and female children, of course."


Clearly, the level of your ignorance and disrespect for our President has sunk to a new low.

You Sir are a complete moron, not that this is something new or that you have not proven many times over.

I'm absolutely impressed, as always, with your demonstrations of the Christianity you claim to wear on your sleeves, that obviously escaped your soul years ago.

August 26, 2010 at 2:39 p.m.
alprova said...

Snooksie wrote: "Wawatoosa.....Are you saying I am ignorant? If so that was not very nice."


Go back and read what Wawatoosa wrote. The key word that prefaced the rest of Wawatoosa's remarks was..."Others."

He or she was referring to others than yourself.

August 26, 2010 at 2:45 p.m.
Snooksie said...

I got it but it was after I had already posted that. Sorry wawatoosa for the misunderstanding.

August 26, 2010 at 3:31 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Imam Hussain Obama leading them all." Rolando,your common sense may have slipped a bit here. Are you referring to the pork-eating,alcohol-drinking,non-ramadan observing iman who states that he's been "saved by the blood of Jesus Christ"? Username: acerigger | On: August 26, 2010 at 11:11 a.m.


And how would you not know he was saved ?

August 26, 2010 at 4:20 p.m.
FM_33 said...

President Barack H. Obama is the greatest president who ever lived and served in the oval office of the United States of America !

  • Nuff Said *
August 26, 2010 at 4:22 p.m.
FM_33 said...

The biggest mosque in Islam will be builded in New York city and there is nobody on this planet that will stop it from being built !

  • Nuff Said *
August 26, 2010 at 4:24 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Barack H. Obama is the magic negro.

August 26, 2010 at 4:26 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Barack H. Obama once said that if " a chicken did not come out of the egg then NASCAR is more popular then NBA basketball ".

Michelle Obama once said that she would like to " tour with the Greatful Dead playing lead guitar like Jeff Beck ".

Joe Biden once said that " if Sarah Palin runs for office in 2012 then he would throw a egg at her from a balcony ".

Jill Biden once said that " if Joe Biden did not throw that egg at Sarah Palin from the balcony she would throw a brick instead ".

August 26, 2010 at 4:33 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Barack H.Obama said last week that " if the tea baggers keep up there protest against him this will help him win a second term in office ".

August 26, 2010 at 4:37 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Barack H.Obama will go down in history as the president who appointed more US Marshals to positions of authority then any other president in modern history.

August 26, 2010 at 4:39 p.m.
FM_33 said...

And here is what our President Barack H. Obama is doing today.

No public schedule.

Hide Detailed Press Information Out of Town Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP TV Corr & Crew: CNN Print: Tribune

August 26, 2010 at 4:41 p.m.
FM_33 said...

This is what his ace partner is doing today as the Vice-President of the United States of America.

11:15 am The Vice President Biden travels to the Manchester, New Hampshire, to mark a Recovery Act milestone Manchester, New Hampshire, Private Residence | Show Details The Vice President will be joined by Representative Paul Hodes and Representative Carol Shea-Porter.

Open Press Space is limited.

August 26, 2010 at 4:43 p.m.
FM_33 said...

The worlds famous * Washington Post * newspaper has named Mr. Clay Bennett of the "Chattanooga Times Free Press" the most popular newspaper cartoonist in the South.

August 26, 2010 at 4:50 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Geroge W. Bush was playing golf last week and knocked a golf ball down a ravens mouth as it was flying by !

August 26, 2010 at 4:57 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Is Rolando big bird's alter ego? Username: hambone | On: August 26, 2010 at 11:24 a.m.


Rolando is one of the biggest Obama supporters in Chattanooga TN.

Hambone he is not a bird but he flys like an eagle.

August 26, 2010 at 5:02 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Clay's next cartoon will deplict the posters of the * Chattanooga Times Free Press * having dinner at the Sticky Fingers BBQ joint in downtown Chatty-Watt.

^^^ So Mote It Be ^^^

August 26, 2010 at 5:08 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Chattanooga TN is a great place to live and work because it has some of the best people from all parts of the United States.

August 26, 2010 at 5:11 p.m.
FM_33 said...

This is for who ever was thumbing my comment's down the last two days........

When you thumb down the witty and ever so intelligent FM_33 it is a thumb's up in my book.

I can't help it if some of you posters don't have a sense of humor and you like being around a certain click all the time.

LOL...so why not give me a thumb's up once in a while and show some love.

August 26, 2010 at 5:29 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

FM, I'll give you a thumbs up if you can say what you need to say in one or two posts rather than 15!

August 26, 2010 at 5:36 p.m.
FM_33 said...

FM, I'll give you a thumbs up if you can say what you need to say in one or two posts rather than 15! Username: lkeithlu | On: August 26, 2010 at 5:36 p.m.


Ok ......will try my best......have a good one.

August 26, 2010 at 5:38 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Ikeithlu when the thread is this slow somebody has to spark it up to keep it going.

August 26, 2010 at 5:40 p.m.

White male, middle aged, and skin headed. C'mon Bennett. You're so predictable.

August 26, 2010 at 6:09 p.m.
FM_33 said...

White male, middle aged, and skin headed. C'mon Bennett. You're so predictable. Username: bookieturnersghost | On: August 26, 2010 at 6:09 p.m.


Clay is Jewish so what was the point with that comment Bookieturnersghost ?

He was only tellin who was voicing the most complants in New York when Obama made the statement to support this project.

No whow does that make him a racist towards white people ?

August 26, 2010 at 6:17 p.m.
FM_33 said...

White male, middle aged, and skin headed. C'mon Bennett. You're so predictable. Username: bookieturnersghost | On: August 26, 2010 at 6:09 p.m.


Clay is Jewish so what was the point with that comment Bookieturnersghost ?

He was only tellin who was voicing the most complants in New York when Obama made the statement to support this project.

Now how does that make him a racist towards white people ?

August 26, 2010 at 6:18 p.m.
hambone said...

fm 33 the new dewey?

August 26, 2010 at 6:29 p.m.
FM_33 said...

fm 33 the new dewey? Username: hambone | On: August 26, 2010 at 6:29 p.m.


Thanks pal for the that new honey glazed ham.

LOL

August 26, 2010 at 6:45 p.m.
MountainJoe said...

No, FM_33 is the OLD dewey.

August 26, 2010 at 10:36 p.m.
Oz said...

Let's see....Muslims have a right to build a mosque near ground zero but Dr. Laura does not have the right to free speech?

A right is not always right. You can't have it both ways.

I do not agree with the statement made by Dr. Laura but it was her right to free speech.

August 26, 2010 at 11:12 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Oz, no one is denying her the right to free speech, but anyone else has the right to free speech also if they wish to criticize her words. Works both ways.

August 26, 2010 at 11:51 p.m.
Oz said...

I was trying to say... Just because something is a legal right does not mean it is moral right.

August 27, 2010 at 12:55 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Oz wrote:

"Let's see....Muslims have a right to build a mosque near ground zero but Dr. Laura does not have the right to free speech?

A right is not always right. You can't have it both ways."

First, "Dr." Laura was not fired. She quit. Threw in the towel. Took a walk. I understand how attractive that makes her to all you Sarah "half-term" Palin" supporters, but come on.

Everybody in this country can worship any god they want anywhere they want, as long as they have proper zoning. If you want to stand outside and yell until you're purple in the face, well, in this country you have the right to act like an idiot.

I noticed that the anti GZM crowd has conceded the legality of the issue, and are now arguing that the Muslim's are guilty of improper etiquette.

August 27, 2010 at 1:33 a.m.
alprova said...

Oz wrote: "I do not agree with the statement made by Dr. Laura but it was her right to free speech."


Everyone has a right to free speech, but no one has the right to be free from retribution as a result of one's choice of exercising the right of free speech.

Ask the Dixie Chicks about that one.

August 27, 2010 at 1:59 a.m.
irrelevant said...

At the very least, watch from 7:00 to the end...

http://bit.ly/aah2R6

Who knew that several years ago, an argument made by the former president of the NRA can (and should) be applied to this issue? But then again, it's like lkeithlu said, "The sad thing is that this issue has exposed a real hypocrisy in this country. We say we are for freedom, but only for those just like us."

August 27, 2010 at 3:06 a.m.
SCOTTYM said...

Let's take Al's latest post and change it a bit.

"Everyone has a right to -the free practice of religion-, but no one has the right to be free from retribution as a result of one's choice of exercising the right free practice of religion-."

That fits a bit better with the subject at hand, though I don't think the pro-muslim contingent would agree with the sentiment.

I find it deliciously ironic that many who claim that the Constitutional right to freedom of religion is sacrosanct in the case of this case of Islamic conquest are the same folks who believe that the the second and tenth amendment rights should be tossed out as being old fashioned and out of date. Just more of the same re: double standards coming from the far left.

August 27, 2010 at 7:43 a.m.
deltenney said...

These rants and raves are becoming idiotically repetitive and petty, victimizing logic, reason and common sense. Sorry, friends, my opinion.

August 27, 2010 at 9:24 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

ScottyM: "I find it deliciously ironic that many who claim that the Constitutional right to freedom of religion is sacrosanct in the case of this case of Islamic conquest are the same folks who believe that the the second and tenth amendment rights should be tossed out as being old fashioned and out of date."

Islamic conquest? I guess the 'red scare' just changed uniforms.

Anyway, here's what I believe:

The Constitutional right to freedom of religion is not a 'claim.' It's a not only a fact, but it's a key part of the foundation that makes this country great. You can't just pick and choose to uphold the rights you agree with, which leads me to my problem with the NRA crowd. They completely ignore the first half of the Second Amendment:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state..."

The Founding Fathers were ensuring, in my opinion, a State could maintain an armed militia to protect itself from both the federal government and other States. Part of the genius of our Constitution is the checks and balances built in to prevent any one part of the government, i.e., the military, the president, the Congress, whomever, of taking over.

The original 13 Colonies/States were concerned about the federal government becoming too powerful, the same way the federal government was concerned about the States becoming too autonomous.

I think the 10th Amendment tried to address that but I'm not sure it did.

Scotty, I am really curious about how you view the Constitution. Seriously. I think you need to sit down and write out a list of, "What I believe," and "What I don't." When you finish, ask yourself why.

August 27, 2010 at 10:26 a.m.
FM_33 said...

Let's see....Muslims have a right to build a mosque near ground zero but Dr. Laura does not have the right to free speech?

A right is not always right. You can't have it both ways.

I do not agree with the statement made by Dr. Laura but it was her right to free speech. Username: Oz | On: August 26, 2010 at 11:12 p.m.


Oz you're right and blackwater48 made a statement that she quit and was not fired.

She quit because she was moving on to another project and blackwater48 should check out her web site for more information and check out her close friend Tammy Bruce at www.tammybruce.com

Her right to free speech was attacked and by the way there is a few Tammy Bruce videos on c-span that blackwater48 needs to check out and that should wake him up a little.

August 27, 2010 at 11:01 a.m.
FM_33 said...

The thumb down Troll wil have there day.....then there thumb is broke !

August 27, 2010 at 11:02 a.m.
FM_33 said...

Islamic conquest? I guess the 'red scare' just changed uniforms. Username: blackwater48 | On: August 27, 2010 at 10:26 a.m.


Good to see that you're a student of the late J.Edgar Hoover.

August 27, 2010 at 11:05 a.m.
FM_33 said...

No, FM_33 is the OLD dewey. Username: MountainJoe | On: August 26, 2010 at 10:36 p.m.


Why thank you would you like to be pals ?

August 27, 2010 at 11:09 a.m.
FM_33 said...

Everyone has a right to free speech, but no one has the right to be free from retribution as a result of one's choice of exercising the right of free speech.

Ask the Dixie Chicks about that one. Username: alprova | On: August 27, 2010 at 1:59 a.m.


Dr Laura was only stating her personal opinion about the issue and the GBLT progressive Nazi movement jumped on her like a pack of dogs.

She had her rights placed on a back burner while they attacked her in a cruel matter !

August 27, 2010 at 11:14 a.m.

Wow. I'm not yet sure FM_33 is the old dewey, but they should definitely be introduced if they aren't the same person. They could be soulmates!

August 27, 2010 at 11:38 a.m.

As for the toon today, Skin head image? Really Clay? You do know muslims have a much better chance of wiping out the jews than the Nazis ever did right? They are more focused on it as well.

I do agree with the button the right. The effects of the towers disasters reached far and wide across this nation. The entire nation is ground zero. Like Pearl Harbor, it was a disaster that touched us all.

August 27, 2010 at 11:43 a.m.
alprova said...

Scott wrote : "Let's take Al's latest post and change it a bit."


And why would you want to do that?

"..."Everyone has a right to -the free practice of religion-, but no one has the right to be free from retribution as a result of one's choice of exercising the right free practice of religion-."..."


No one has a right to be free from retribution as a result of one's choice of exercising their religion of choice?

Since when?

I must have missed the legislation that made it legal in this nation to allow ignorant people to take it upon themselves to determine that a people who practice an alternative religion to Christianity, should not be allowed to live their lives peacefully and to worship as they see fit.

I sure missed the legislation that allowed ignorant people to determine that property rights are invalid for those who practice alternative religions.


"That fits a bit better with the subject at hand, though I don't think the pro-muslim contingent would agree with the sentiment."


Pro-Muslim? Nice twist. It simply couldn't be that there are those of us who are pro-freedom of religion...period.

You know, I imagine that following WWII, people in this country had the same kind of debates involving those who were Jewish, when our leaders brought tens of thousands of them here from Germany. Ignorance was in no short supply then too.


"I find it deliciously ironic that many who claim that the Constitutional right to freedom of religion is sacrosanct in the case of this case of Islamic conquest are the same folks who believe that the the second and tenth amendment rights should be tossed out as being old fashioned and out of date."


Sir, with all due respect, you've never read or one second, my interest in abolishing the right to bear arms.

However, when states take it upon themselves to pass laws in haste that violate the laws of their own citizens, then the Federal Government has a duty to step in, and thank God they did.

August 27, 2010 at 12:04 p.m.
acerigger said...

"I find it deliciously ironic that many who claim that the Constitutional right to freedom of religion is sacrosanct in the case of this case of Islamic conquest are the same folks who believe that the the second and tenth amendment rights should be tossed out as being old fashioned and out of date. Just more of the same re: double standards coming from the far left. Username: SCOTTYM | On: August 27, 2010 at 7:43 a.m I know of no-one on the "far left" who advocates tossing ANY amendments! Look to your right Scotty,the repubs have a list of roughly 14 amendments they'd like to toss.

August 27, 2010 at 12:08 p.m.
alprova said...

Two minutes. That's all it takes to understand the truth that you will never hear from those opposed to the proposed Cultural Center, otherwise known as the "Ground Zero Mosque."

August 27, 2010 at 12:55 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

alprova-Great find on the video. Thanks

August 27, 2010 at 1:16 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Great find, alprova, but don't go confusing the conservatives.

The believe what they believe, period.

In their case, however, we have to remember that you can't spell B-e-l-i-e-f without a L-i-e.

August 27, 2010 at 1:30 p.m.
acerigger said...

Thanx Al,maybe that link(if followed)will change some hearts and minds,but I'm a bit skeptical when it comes to the right-wingers, "left-behind"folks,and viewers of "faux news".

August 27, 2010 at 2:10 p.m.
acerigger said...

per Digby;what the h**l has happened recently that made everyone suspicious of Muslims all of a sudden? We haven't been attacked. There has been no public debate.

The only thing that's happened is that we elected a black president to whom his political enemies conveniently attached the Muslim label. And thus they have extended the hatred for him to hatred of Muslims in general. It's not that these people hate American Muslims. It's that they hate Barack Obama and everything he stands for. The conservative leadership has, as usual, very deftly tickled the racist lizard brain of their constituency once again.

August 27, 2010 at 3:08 p.m.
Snooksie said...

Al, how can I find that video on youtube. The computer I am on now will not let me go to youtube links.

August 27, 2010 at 3:25 p.m.
hambone said...

Time for a new cartoon. The barnyard has filled up again, watch your step Clay!!

August 27, 2010 at 3:26 p.m.
rolando said...

Well, EaTn, I had a reply to your last [way up there] but by the time I waded through the various logins and the trash above, I purely forgot what it was.

Such are the perils of surviving into one's seventh decade...

This forum has pretty much gone down the tubes...

Soon be time to search out a new one and, like old soldiers, just fade away.

August 27, 2010 at 3:33 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Will be looking for a cartoon from Clay on the Beck "rally" some time soon. Beck and Palin at the same rally? Fodder for any cartoonist.

http://mariopiperni.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Beck_WhitePeople.jpg

August 27, 2010 at 4:11 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Username: blackwater48 | On: August 27, 2010 at 1:30 p.m.


Did you check out the c-span Tammy Bruce videos yet ?

August 27, 2010 at 4:14 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Time for a new cartoon. The barnyard has filled up again, watch your step Clay!! Username: hambone | On: August 27, 2010 at 3:26 p.m.


500 post on a thread that's what should be the base number.

Clay do one cartoon a week and the topic's will keep a rolling until the next one is put out.

August 27, 2010 at 4:16 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Wow. I'm not yet sure FM_33 is the old dewey, but they should definitely be introduced if they aren't the same person. They could be soulmates! Username: FlyingPurpleSheepleEater | On: August 27, 2010 at 11:38 a.m.


Huh....sights.

August 27, 2010 at 4:18 p.m.
FM_33 said...

At the very least, watch from 7:00 to the end...

http://bit.ly/aah2R6

Who knew that several years ago, an argument made by the former president of the NRA can (and should) be applied to this issue? But then again, it's like lkeithlu said, "The sad thing is that this issue has exposed a real hypocrisy in this country. We say we are for freedom, but only for those just like us." Username: irrelevant | On: August 27, 2010 at 3:06 a.m.


I could say a lot but .......* puts hands over mouth *

August 27, 2010 at 4:21 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Beck has come out and said it would be inappropriate to bring signs to his rally. However, he said headgear and tasteful clothing were acceptable, especially if they conveyed the message of the rally.

http://wallstreetexaminer.com/blogs/winter/wp-content/uploads/tinfoilhat-755294.jpg

http://rlv.zcache.com/tea_bagger_tshirt-p235311670957246305t53h_400.jpg

http://www.internetweekly.org/images/teabagger_fashion_show.jpg

August 27, 2010 at 5:07 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Beck has come out and said it would be inappropriate to bring signs to his rally. However, he said headgear and tasteful clothing were acceptable, especially if they conveyed the message of the rally.

http://wallstreetexaminer.com/blogs/wint...

http://rlv.zcache.com/tea_bagger_tshirt-...

http://www.internetweekly.org/images/tea... Username: hotdiggity | On: August 27, 2010 at 5:07 p.m.


They should do it in the nude and that will get there point across real quick !

August 27, 2010 at 5:19 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Thumbs Down Troll F**k off !

August 27, 2010 at 5:30 p.m.
moonpie said...

Scotty, I don't think you're way off base when you say, "I find it deliciously ironic that many who claim that the Constitutional right to freedom of religion is sacrosanct in the case of this case of Islamic conquest are the same folks who believe that the the second and tenth amendment rights should be tossed out as being old fashioned and out of date. Just more of the same re: double standards coming from the far left."

The far left absolutely does oppose the 2nd ammendment.

There are many people who support freedom of religion and the second ammendment, though. If you are one of these people, scotty was not talking about you.

Build the mosque. Keep your gun. (Just not on an airplane, in a court of law, sports arena....)

August 27, 2010 at 7 p.m.
acerigger said...

"The far left absolutely does oppose the 2nd ammendment." Moonpie,on what do you base that statement?they are for sensible gun laws not against the 2nd amendment.As I noted in an earlier post(which somehow got deleted?)the right(repubs)have set their sights on no less than 14 amendments they want to alter.

August 27, 2010 at 8:26 p.m.
MountainJoe said...

There are no sensible gun control laws. All of them infringe to some extent and, well "shall not be infringed" is pretty clear to me.

August 27, 2010 at 10:09 p.m.
MountainJoe said...

And before anyone starts posting more crap about a "well regulated militia" note that:

That is just an explanatory phrase in the Second Amendment. The declaratory phrase is "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." It doesn't depend on the first phrase for its effect.

But let's assume for a moment that it did. Recall that in 1791 there was no National Guard. The militia consisted of every able-bodied, adult white male citizen. Since that time we have correctly realized that rights do not depend on gender or race. Therefore, the militia is every adult American citizen who is physically and mentally capable of owning and operating a gun.

August 27, 2010 at 10:13 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

bw48,

I'm curious as to what you think the founders were talking about when they inserted that part of the 2nd amendment.

I'll bet you're not familiar with what those words meant when they were written.

"Well regulated", in the common usage of the 18th century meant "well trained".

The "militia" they were refering to was every able bodied white male. We've expanded the scope of natural rights to include everyone now, regardless of sex or race. The "militia" is every one of us.

"Being necessary for the security of a free state" means it is incumbent upon us, that "well trained militia" to secure our own freedoms from a tyrannical government, or any other threat to our well being.

How about you tell me what "...shall not be infringed" means.

BTW, you'll notice I haven't advocated that anyone's rights be infringed. You've merely made that assumption.

"Seriously. I think you need to sit down and write out a list of, "What I believe," and "What I don't." When you finish, ask yourself why."

I've already done that. It takes a few years of reading texts that are contemporary to the times when the Constitution was written, as well as earlier texts the founders were modeling their ideas upon, to get a firm grasp on the whole thing.

Have you done the same, or are you operating on the revisionist B.S. peddled by the left.

Never-mind, I already know the answer to that question.


Al,

You're arguing with your own words, I merely inserted a different, but equal, right.

You have quite a gift for spinning things so much that even you do not know which way is up.

Here are some more of your words with a slight alteration,

"I sure missed the legislation that allowed ignorant people to determine that free speech rights are invalid for those who hold different opinions."

Now, argue against yourself some more, it's fun to watch.

BTW, I would not include you with those who would like to see the 2nd abolished. moonpie got it right. I had written such in my earlier post, but then cut it out before posting due to being in a low caffeine fog. Sorry 'bout that.

August 27, 2010 at 10:48 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

MJ,

We got crossed up in the intertubes. LOL


What he said!

August 27, 2010 at 10:51 p.m.
hambone said...

When you consider the state of weapontry at the time I can see The 2nd Ammendment. Had they forseen AK47s I bet they would have made some changes. On the other hand they were somewhat aware of the various religions of world and got that part right.

August 27, 2010 at 11:23 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67Q5BW20100827

Where are our resident far-leftists railing against the intersection of church and state.

librul, eeeek, how do ya'll feel about the above article?

If you two are consistent, you'll find yourselves standing on the same side of the street as the others who oppose the proposed Cordoba Project.

Or is it OK so long as it isn't the religion you hate?

August 27, 2010 at 11:26 p.m.
khaney said...

I want the Muslims who will be attending this proposed mosque in NYC to be allowed to build it on whatever property they'd like and this is why...I am a Christian and there could very well come a day, possibly sooner rather than later, when Christians are no longer the majority and I would hate to think just because I was part of a minority group that my wishes for my church or group were no longer important.

August 27, 2010 at 11:38 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

"Had they foreseen AK47s I bet they would have made some changes."

Why is that? The belief was that ordinary citizens should have access to same sort of arms that might be carried by those against whom they may face in battle. i.e. the very best available.

BTW, AK's are not exactly advanced weaponry. Their accuracy leaves much to be desired in a battlefield scenario.

"On the other hand they were somewhat aware of the various religions of world and got that part right."

Ever hear of the Barbary Pirates? Read up on it. You may be surprised.

August 27, 2010 at 11:38 p.m.
acerigger said...

"There are no sensible gun control laws. All of them infringe to some extent and, well "shall not be infringed" is pretty clear to me." Username: MountainJoe Yep,I'm with you there Joe! I only wish that it weren't possible for just anyone to get a gun,but I guess,like in the Wild West Days, these things have a way of working themselves out.

August 28, 2010 at 4:11 a.m.
eeeeeek said...

scotty if you read... and not casually glanced at comments made by myself and others you would know

NO religious institutions should be publicly funded. NONE.

That is also why I also feel their properties should also be taxed. Clergy shouldn't be able to write off their housing costs either.

They are being unconstitutionally favored, and the burden of the taxes is being passed on to the rest of the community.

I live in the East Ridge area... Doing a google map search for churches alone makes the area looks like it was infected with measles.. two of the pocks are within hobbling distance.

Heck, even the Rave theater down the road from me is infected with the nut... er net church end times death cult. I'm surprised I haven't heard that the Rave hasn't filed to be tax exempt as a place of worship.

August 28, 2010 at 7:12 a.m.
sd said...

SCOTTYM said, "The belief was that ordinary citizens should have access to same sort of arms that might be carried by those against whom they may face in battle. i.e. the very best available."

Agreed. The right to bear arms doesn't do us any good if we've got muskets and they've got machine guns and the FFs would have understood that. We can choose not to own or carry, but we should still have legal access.

eeeeeek said, "NO religious institutions should be publicly funded. NONE. That is also why I also feel their properties should also be taxed. Clergy shouldn't be able to write off their housing costs either. They are being unconstitutionally favored, and the burden of the taxes is being passed on to the rest of the community."

Agreed. If the argument is that religious institutions are performing a public service (e.g. helping the poor, hungry, etc.) and therefore deserve tax privileges I think, as a political necessity, you would need to make an exception for religious institutions that solely use funds for administrative, maintenance, and charity expenses, but when a religious institution becomes politically active or begins to operate like a business they should lose those tax privileges.

August 28, 2010 at 7:44 a.m.
xsiveporsche said...

Lets just all disagree peacefully without insults. After all this is Americas where we still have freedom of speech.

August 28, 2010 at 11:04 a.m.
FM_33 said...

Good morning everybody and may you all have a good Labor Day.

August 28, 2010 at 12:37 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Red necks and guns go hand in hand it's been the way of the South for hundreds of years.

They never practice gun control or obey the laws of the land MountainJoe.

August 28, 2010 at 12:40 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Come On.........Come On..........thumbs down troll !

August 28, 2010 at 12:41 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

acerigger wrote,

"I only wish that it weren't possible for just anyone to get a gun"

Let's play the game I've been playing with al, shall we?

"I only wish that it weren't possible for just anyone to speak freely, or worship as they please."

Still agree?

No? Rights are rights, it doesn't matter who is exercising them. This is a problem for those on the left who think they know better.

eeeeek,

That's what I'd hoped you say. For consistency.

I disagree with your assesment, but respect it alot more so long as it is applied equally to all religion.

Of course you are now one of those "racist, Islamophobes" just like the other 70% of the population who do not like the idea of the Cordoba Project, for whatever reason.

Welcome to the world of being painted with a broad brush by blind morons.

August 28, 2010 at 2:23 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Username: SCOTTYM August 27, 2010 at 11:26 p.m.


Hey I'll comment on that one Scotty.

I assume you have a problem with Tax-Exempt Bond Financing for Faith Based Institutions? Since you are never hesitant to address religious issues please tell us your opinion of this exemption since you asked the opinion of others on this issue.

As for myself, I am against all tax exemptions for churches.

As for yourself, read up on the tax code. There is nothing unique or precedent setting in allowing tax-exempt bond financing for faith based institutions. This is a cultural and/community center with a small area for worship.

What part of the article that says, "Tax laws allow such funding for religiously affiliated non-profits if they can prove the facility will benefit the general public and their religious activities are funded separately", do you oppose? This applies across the board to all religiously affiliated non-profits.

So are you against tax breaks for religiously affiliated organizations?

There are plenty of places to get this information other than the tax code. Here is one financial institution that gives a good overview. http://www.cornerstonecapitalcorp.com/tax_exempt_nonprofits.aspx

Meanwhile, please let us people from the far left know what YOU think about letting a church not pay taxes.

August 28, 2010 at 7:55 p.m.
rolando said...

Since you are so hot to defend Islam, hotdig, send 'em a check. Find a union contractor who will build it for them...if you can.

For the umteenth time, it is not a religious thing it is a "rubbing our nose in it" thing. Personally, I say the Hell with radical Islam and its appeasers/apologists. Let "em build it in Tel Aviv...at least the Jews have the gonads to help them on their way down instead of bowing to them.

August 28, 2010 at 8:19 p.m.
alprova said...

Rolando wrote: "Since you are so hot to defend Islam, hotdig, send 'em a check. Find a union contractor who will build it for them...if you can."


Union contractors don't want to build it? No problem. There's lots of people in the construction biz out of work at the moment who will be GLAD to build it.

That should appeal to your Conservative and presumably anti-union mindset, shouldn't it? They might even save a buck or two as a result of those who would cut off their noses to spite their faces.


For the umteenth time, it is not a religious thing it is a "rubbing our nose in it" thing."


And while your opinion is shared by many others out there who are equally ignorant and who have tunnel vision, that in no manner makes your opinion true or correct.

And it never will.


"Personally, I say the Hell with radical Islam and its appeasers/apologists."


Well now, you've said something that we all can agree on.

The problem is, that you apparently think that all of those who follow Islam ARE radical, and that is simply not the case Rolando.

You, like all the other ignoramuses on this subject conveniently forget the documented history of the Imam in question, behind the Cultural Community Center, is a man that GWB hired to SPECIFICALLY appease Muslims in several countries to resist and reject the teachings by radicals.


"Let "em build it in Tel Aviv...at least the Jews have the gonads to help them on their way down instead of bowing to them."


Totally different country, with a totally different kind of Government, and a totally different set of circumstances, or were you not aware of those facts?

You, like all the others who wade in on this from a position of ignorance, hatred, and fear, are absolutely running out of arguments.

But keep posting those silly arguments, and those of us who are a little better informed, and who do not hate or live in abject fear of those who are different from ourselves, will keep shooting 'em down.

August 29, 2010 at 12:51 a.m.
acerigger said...

acerigger wrote,

"I only wish that it weren't possible for just anyone to get a gun"

Let's play the game I've been playing with al, shall we?

"I only wish that it weren't possible for just anyone to speak freely, or worship as they please."

Still agree?

No? Rights are rights, it doesn't matter who is exercising them. This is a problem for those on the left who think they know better. No Scotty,your "game"in this case is pretty ignorant.

August 30, 2010 at 12:28 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.