Comments on Titanic Deck Chairs: More Thoughts on the GZM

My position has always been that the Mosque is a t...

2010-08-20T00:53:47.530-04:00

My position has always been that the Mosque is a threat, like burning a cross on the pavement outside a black man's home.

Freedom of speech and freedom of religion does not permit threats, and physical violence is an entirely permissible response to a threat.

Banning anything that "aids enemy morale"...

2010-08-19T19:53:42.344-04:00

Banning anything that "aids enemy morale" or "aids" the enemy in general is way too vague. And banning speech that promotes evil ideas, even those one is at war with, puts shackles on the mind at precisely the time when a society needs complete freedom of thought/speech the most.

During war it's not "anything goes" in terms of what the government can

Jason said: >a philosophically muddled typicall...

2010-08-19T13:38:31.797-04:00

Jason said:
>a philosophically muddled typically collectivist-statist-nationalist... fashion

Objecting to something during wartime on the ground that it would aid enemy morale is not muddled or collectivist. The crucial link is the fact that it's wartime and the symbolism would aid the enemy. Without those two features the defense falls apart.

I would say it'

If we are really concerned with symbols (though I ...

2010-08-19T12:50:24.807-04:00

If we are really concerned with symbols (though I find the concept of proclaiming domestic intellectual, moral support of bad ideas, even during a real war, as a crime, to be incorrect policy, a distraction now, and framed in a philosophically muddled typically collectivist-statist-nationalist "the mosque is un-American" Conservative fashion), then let's focus on the big, truly

“Man, the level of discussion here, on Stephen'...

2010-08-18T22:13:43.492-04:00

“Man, the level of discussion here, on Stephen's site, and on Objectivist blogs in general is just so much better than anywhere else.

I agree. It makes a big difference when people can derive and understand principles and the discussion is about the way they should be applied.

I do think there is a predetermined (I would say standardized or objective) set of actions

A, I agree with you about investigation of the f...

2010-08-17T21:59:18.644-04:00

A,

I agree with you about investigation of the funding source. I appreciate the distinction that you are attempting to make related to government regulation of property rights.

My problem with answering this question has been that it is the wrong question. In my judgment, the premise that Islam is at war with us is false. Further, I see success in stopping the mosque as

I set the principle at providing material support ...

2010-08-17T21:07:42.121-04:00

I set the principle at providing material support to foreign enemies. People can sympathize with evil all they want, but cannot actively assist enemies.

It would be pretty easy for our government to monitor and find such domestic enemies during a real war when the bulk of non-fanatical Islamic Americans would be going out of their way to disassociate themselves from the few criminal,

Steve D, you made a very good point: Using zoning ...

2010-08-17T20:52:38.010-04:00

Steve D, you made a very good point: Using zoning laws to block the mosque would do nothing to clarify the issue and might only obfuscate it. I totally agree. Such a move would make utterly no progress in terms of American values--though, as I said, I've regretfully concluded that I don't think it would do much harm either, considering how corrupt things are now.

The value of

Man, the level of discussion here, on Stephen'...

2010-08-17T20:49:33.922-04:00

Man, the level of discussion here, on Stephen's site, and on Objectivist blogs in general is just so much better than anywhere else. Awesome. Every time I read on this issue I have something more to think about :)

Steve D,

I don't think that there are a predetermined set of actions (i.e. physical attacks or support) that are the only things that warrant a response.

I wanted to comment further on this because I thin...

2010-08-17T19:10:37.267-04:00

I wanted to comment further on this because I think the principle is important. Regardless of the guilt or innocence of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf there will be cases where people will sympathize with the enemy but make no overt attempt to help them.

“I sympathize with the property rights defense; out of sheer habit, that is where I started on this issue when it first came up. But I'

Jason: Assuming at least one tenth of these claim...

2010-08-17T19:01:13.760-04:00

Jason:

Assuming at least one tenth of these claims is true that about settles this particular issue. I should point out though that the money donation makes him much more than an enemy sympathizer but an actual active enemy. It doesn’t change my view that you don’t lose rights just by sympathizing with the enemy. An active form of help (including disseminating propaganda) is necessary.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the founder and main org...

2010-08-17T17:08:50.824-04:00

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is the founder and main organizer of the Ground Zero mosque, and has terrorist ties.

He is listed as a key figure of an organization, Perdana, that provided about $350,000 to one of the key groups, Free Gaza Movement, that organized the Gaza flotilla.

This article is quite damning of his guilty ties.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/05/

I still don't think joining a bandwagon of bad...

2010-08-17T12:27:59.366-04:00

I still don't think joining a bandwagon of bad government behavior is justified simply because it's going to happen anyway.

As I posed to Stephen, what about a more extreme example; what if the government was shipping innocent people off to prison for no reason? Would it then be OK to have the mosque builders shipped off to prison to stop the building? Where do you draw that

In any discussion, knowing what key concepts mean ...

2010-08-17T09:28:11.604-04:00

In any discussion, knowing what key concepts mean exactly is crucial. In discussions of this issue -- What should I do about the proposed Ground Zero Mosque? -- several such concepts emerge. "Islam" is one. Another one is "emergency."

My personal definition of "emergency" is this: A situation in which there is a threat to life, a threat unfolding faster

I agree with you, Stephen. This is still very dif...

2010-08-17T08:13:40.909-04:00

I agree with you, Stephen. This is still very difficult.

Steve D and Jim, one thing I didn't mention in my post is that I don't actively wish the government to use zoning or other property laws to block the mosque. Instead, I want the FBI to look exhaustively into the backgrounds of the imam and all his funding sources, to identify the clear terrorist ties that are most

Thanks for your post, C. August. This has been--an...

2010-08-17T07:22:48.362-04:00

Thanks for your post, C. August. This has been--and continues to be--an unusually difficult challenge for me.

Steve D, your comment helped me see something that might be ambiguous in my sentence, especially when it stands alone. By calling government action an "incremental evil," I was referring specifically to the use of arbitrary force, such as zoning laws. I certainly did

It seems to me that the key argument of those advo...

2010-08-17T06:51:08.868-04:00

It seems to me that the key argument of those advocating using government regulation of property to stop this mosque at this location is that Islam is at war with us. If so, then wouldn't the appropriate response be to ignore the proposed potential mosque in NYC and instead conquer Mecca and destroy the Grand Mosque there so as to actually defeat Islam.

“would constitute a growth of arbitrary power” No...

2010-08-16T19:18:04.079-04:00

“would constitute a growth of arbitrary power”

No, not a growth, just one more exercise in the arbitrary power the government already has.

Just because the government has acted immorally in the past doesn’t make it any more moral when they do it again. This issue is not one of precedent but whether acting to stop the mosque is the right thing or wrong thing to do. Period.<

Quite a conundrum, isn't it? In a pincer movem...

2010-08-16T08:33:51.155-04:00

Quite a conundrum, isn't it? In a pincer movement between two evils, both of which seek to smother individual rights, capitalism, and so on, which one does one fight first? But, I've made this observation in past commentaries, and especially in the Towering Babble piece: The exponents of unlimited government power here would naturally side with the exponents of unlimited government (the