Not true. Not even close to true.
All kinds of things get blocked from being built for all kinds of reasons. There are thousands of rules and regulations that can be used to disallow things from being built...and they are used every day in communities all across the country. And many times, things that appear to be being designed within the confines of the rules...get blocked purely because the community is up in arms, and is willing to go speak in front of the council.
It seems folks here seem to think that free speech is only their free speech. Most of the lawyers know this, but "When the law is against you...argue the facts. When the facts are against you...argue the law". That's what we are seeing in regard to this.
Originally Posted by Rudyard K
there appears to be a couple of possibilities regarding the mosque and its location
1. a tin eared, genuine lack of sensitivity, which when confronted became obstinence and bullheadedness, regardless of the stated goal of bridge building.
2. an understanding of the location and its import, although given the world view of the proposed mosque's adherents, was seen as projecting the dominance of Islam, and giving Islam its rightful place, as Islam means submission and was seen as a tool of conversion. whether or not the principles of this project had any tinge of gloat or truck with the more extreme elements of islam, their ultimate goal is the same, creating the kingdom of Allah in this world by sword or persuasion. This is diametrically opposed to what Christ said when he stated, "my kingdom is not of this world".
as far as a first amendment right..well yeah..so what? obama as the school marm and "the smartest person in the room" schooling us as to the constitution is rather galling. we know that and its not the point. the point is what he then said he will not comment on, because he wont take a stand, the wisdom of the thing.