No, what I have a problem with is double standards.

I also have a problem with hyperbole.

2 blocks further away than the proposed mosque, you ahve this:

http://www.newsok.com/quietly-anothe...le/feed/175995

And they've been there for quite some time. But they don't get press.

Fact is, most muslims are as peaceful as most Christians. But organized Christianity gets a free pass.

Tell me, has anyone opposed building new churches despite the Catholic Church giving aid and comfort to the perpetrators of child rape? Where's all the outrage over THAT? Where's the outrage over the CONTINUING abuse?

We quite rightly invaded Afghanistan for harboring the 9/11 leaders. President Bush was very clear that he was not declaring a war on all Islam, just those who pervert (accoriding to moderates) the faith to justify their hatred and wars.

What did we do, as a nation, when the Vatican called a cardinal to Rome the day before he was to be served with a subpoena in Boston regarding the Church's behavior in the the innumerable abuse cases? Nothing. We didn't recall the ambassador (who may very well have been former Boston mayor Ray Flynn at the time). We didn't so much as send a protest.

Radical muslims murder 3,000 10 years ago and everyone's still out for blood. Not that I have a big problem with that until bin Laden is rotting in a jail cell somewhere....

Kids keep getting raped every day and the Vatican is *13* years late on a report they were supposed to deliver to the UN and it gets an occasional 1-paragraph mention in something Google News digs up.

I'm getting married Sunday. My wife-to-be is Christian. I have absolutely no problem with her religion. I *do* have a problem with a lot of the heirarchies of organized religion.

So if you're going to make claims that you know what I'm in favor of or not in favor of, I figure you should at least let me give you a little more of my opinion on the matter and where I'm coming from.

No, strictly speaking, I'm not "in favor" of the mosque. Nor am I opposed to it on general principle. I don't really care one way or the other except for the double-standard that is being applied.

My cousin Sean barely escaped 9/11 with his life. I watched the towers being built when I lived in NYC until 1974. I have mixed feelings about the whole "sacred ground" concept, to be honest. My adoptive mother killed herself in a hotel room in Nashua NH but I'm not about to demand that the room never be used. I know, uneven comparison by a long shot.

The arguments over the 9/11 memorial to me would have been amusing if they weren't so tragic - the kinds of arguments that people got into. All you have to do is look at monuments all over the country to get examples of what we should have done. Yet, almost 10 years later, what's on the site? Heck, they spent years arguing over insurance proceeds and whether 9/11 was one attack or two. This is how you treat a 'sacred' site? But I digress..

We are a nation of laws, not men. "We don't want their kind" is a dangerous reason to be exclusionary. One tends to lump too many people into a given category.