Ground Zero Anger

Will this be the final straw that caus­es the lib­er­als to loose the 2010 elec­tion?

So its OK, to advo­cate for one reli­gion over anoth­er, but is it real­ly con­sti­tu­tion­al, what about sep­a­ra­tion of church and state, should the pres­i­dent real­ly be com­ing out sup­port­ing a reli­gion?

If we have one man that will “reach out” to the rest of the world, then you need to send out oth­er reli­gious lead­ers to “reach” out too.

See this has no end­ing, it is not only wrong but it is against the con­sti­tu­tion.

Many peo­ple have ques­tioned the need to have reli­gious orga­ni­za­tions build church­es near ground zero.

It is a prob­lem, because where do you stop?

What is a reli­gion?

What is good enough to be wor­thy of being allowed to build?

What reli­gion? Bap­tist? Pen­te­costal? Catholic?

What about, Wic­ca?

Or per­haps dev­il wor­ship?

Where does it stop and why are we allow­ing a pres­i­dent to par­tic­i­pate in some­thing like this when the gov­ern­ment has no inter­est in this type of issue, more specif­i­cal­ly what about sep­a­ra­tion of church and state?

Did the pres­i­dent vio­late the premise of sep­a­ra­tion of church and state?

You see by giv­ing an opin­ion as pres­i­dent it could be viewed as a real mis­take, one has to ask the ques­tion, where does it stop?

Will we allow the KKK to have a tem­ple or what about hav­ing a tem­ple tem­ple, just where does it end?

It you think that just men­tion­ing the KKK is offen­sive, then you should care­ful­ly con­sid­er why a Mosque should be allowed to build near ground zero, because it is not good.

That is the real ques­tion here, it is not about the reli­gion but about all reli­gion, if you allow Mus­lims to build you have to allow all oth­ers to build as well, oth­er­wise you have cre­at­ed a dis­par­i­ty between what is and what should be.

It is dis­turb­ing to see this kind of thing hap­pen.

How can we allow one to build and say that all oth­ers can­not build, that is dis­turb­ing.

We should not be par­tic­i­pat­ing in dis­cus­sions as the leader of a nation, pick­ing a reli­gion and say­ing its ok for these guys but not for all oth­er reli­gions?

If its OK, for one it has to be ok for all of them oth­er­wise you have just cre­at­ed a con­sti­tu­tion­al issue where none exist­ed before and that is also wrong.

We need real lead­er­ship.

Not opin­ions but real valid lead­er­ship based on expe­ri­ence, in 2012 we need some­one that will keep the promis­es they make.

If as men and woman in this nation we can­not keep our word, then we are human­i­ty will nev­er suc­ceed in all the things we hope to accom­plish.