• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.

Should we be like Saudis re Religious Freedom?

New posts
One World Trade Center (previously coined the "Freedom Tower" by Governor Pataki) is the centerpiece of Libeskind's design. The building will rise to 1,362 feet, the height of the original World Trade Center south tower, and its antenna will rise to the symbolic height of 1,776 feet (541 m). The antenna's height refers to 1776, the year in which the United States Declaration of Independence was signed.....the designer is Jewish......Larry A. Silverstein (born May 30, 1931) is an American businessman, and real estate investor and developer in New York City. Silverstein was born in Brooklyn, and became involved in real estate, together with his father, establishing Silverstein Properties. Silverstein separated from his partner, Bernard Mendik, in 1977, and bought a number of large office buildings in Midtown and Lower Manhattan in the late 1970s. In 1980, Silverstein won a bid from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to construct 7 World Trade Center, to the north of the World Trade Center. Silverstein was interested in acquiring the entire World Trade Center complex, and put in a bid when the Port Authority put it up for lease in 2000. Silverstein won the bid when a deal between the initial winner and the Port Authority fell through, and he signed the lease on July 24, 2001, only weeks before the towers were destroyed in the September 11 attacks.....the owner of the property is Jewish, and this is nothing more than an religious tug of war.
 
Last edited:
I know what you're saying, Lucifer; however, I think it's humans who are doing the poisoning. For people who believe in higher power regardless of faith, I love their passion. For those who don't believe, I respect their beliefs.

The quote referred to religion not faith. Faith is spiritural with a different meaning to each person. Religion is man made and usually has a book of rules believers must adhere to or there will grave consequences. Anyone who challenges the rules of your book with their own book must be feared and eliminated in the name of whatever deity is in your book.
 
Last edited:
I wanted share my opinion but there's no need. Just read Shopper's posts.

This is a nonissue.

Now for a tangent.

9-11 was horrible. It changed this country in many ways. For a while it changed it for the better. It brought us together. But it also paved the way for the "war on terror"- our misguided, mismanaged, irrational, ineffective response to 9-11.

4,000+ Americans lost their lives that day. I do not believe 2 wars and bankrupting ourselves have honored them.
 
Show me a religion without an agenda:idontno:

When you see a man with a great deal of religion displayed in his shop window, you may depend upon it, he keeps a very small stock of it within

Charles H Spurgeon

IDK or really care any more about this issue. I just know that religion can divide - and I also wonder if this whole thing is a huge display in a shop window .

I personally would love to have seen a Y go up a few blocks from ground zero. You know they changed their name from YMCA to "The Y" and one reason was to include all peoples. I like that! I'm a member of the Y :D
 
I wanted share my opinion but there's no need. Just read Shopper's posts.

This is a nonissue.

Now for a tangent.

9-11 was horrible. It changed this country in many ways. For a while it changed it for the better. It brought us together. But it also paved the way for the "war on terror"- our misguided, mismanaged, irrational, ineffective response to 9-11.

4,000+ Americans lost their lives that day. I do not believe 2 wars and bankrupting ourselves have honored them.

I'll say again that, for me too, Shopper's posts reflect my feelings exactly on this issue.

I agree also w/ Geo's post, w/ one exception:
Geo, you say "this is a nonissue."
I wish everyone saw it that way.
BUT since some, unfortunately, want to restrict freedom of religion, it's not a nonissue.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
 
Fair point but to clarify- I believe that debates involving freedom of speech, religion and the right to bear arms are usually pretty easy to settle.
 
Fair point but to clarify- I believe that debates involving freedom of speech, religion and the right to bear arms are usually pretty easy to settle.

I'm completely at a loss to know whether you mean this sarcastically or sincerely.

Do you mean that freedom of speech, religion & right to bear arms are so fundamental that there could never be any question but to grant these rights in a totally unrestricted manner?

OR

Do you mean that freedom of speech, religion & right to bear arms are rights so fraught w/ difficulties & nuances that we'll never stop arguing about them?
 
Let me answer this way. If I was a SC judge I would approach every case with the mindset that these freedoms reign and that the burden is on the nuiances/specific to prove otherwise.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter












                               
Back
Top