Libs, would you have voted for 'historical landmark' status to prevent a mosque from being built at Ground 0?

Question

Libs, would you have voted for 'historical landmark' status to prevent a mosque from being built at Ground 0?

Answer 1

No, because the right to build a religious institute is constitutional. It seems many skip over the First Amendment quite often

Answer 2

No. That just sets the precedent that the government can dictate where religious buildings are placed.

Answer 3

I say no---because the building is too damaged.

Answer 4

It should have been an infamous landmark.



We have many infamous landmarks.





Marilyn Died Here: $3.6 Million Hollywood Landmark



http://www.housingwatch.com/2010/07/19/marilyn-died-here-3-6-million-hollywood-landmark/



Dealey Plaza Historic District

U.S. National Register of Historic Places

U.S. National Historic Landmark District

View from southwest, with the former Texas School Book Depository Building at left, and the Dal-Tex Building, right next to it

Location: 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas

Coordinates: 32°46′43″N 96°48′30″W / 32.77861°N 96.80833°W / 32.77861; -96.80833Coordinates: 32°46′43″N 96°48′30″W / 32.77861°N 96.80833°W / 32.77861; -96.80833

Area: 150 acres (60 ha)

Built/Founded: 1940

Governing body: Local (City of Dallas)

Added to NRHP: October 12, 1993[1]

Designated NHLD: October 12, 1993[2][3]

NRHP Reference#: 93001607



Dealey Plaza (pronounced /ˈdiːli/), in the historic West End district of downtown Dallas, Texas (U.S.), is the location of the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963. The Dealey Plaza Historic District was named a National Historic Landmark in 1993 to preserve Dealey Plaza, street rights-of-way, and buildings and structures by the plaza visible from the assassination site,



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dealey_Plaza

Answer 5

No, not legitimate.

A vote for "historical landmark" has to do with the building being voted on, and not on what else might be constructed in it's place.

If the building met the requirements to merit a "historical" designation, then yes, I would have. But quite clearly, this building did not.

Typical conservatives, trying to bend the rules to get the outcome they want....

Answer 6

Let’s see if they would allow a synagogue at Mecca. Then we will talk about a mosque at ground zero....the biggest terrorist attack in history fueled by Islamic radicals.

Answer 7

WOW obviously you are slow!!! so I will copy and paste. maybe if you read my answer twice it will sink in!!!



FOR GODS SAKE!!! there is already a mosque 3 blocks from ground zero,it is not a huge one,but it has been there since the 70's!!! matter of fact there are a few in manhattan.



Why people cannot do a little research on there own,instead of being fed info from both sides of the media is beyond me!!! have most people become brain dead??

Doesn't it make you wonder why neither liberal or conservative media has mentioned the mosques already there???

Makes me wonder,but then I think for myself!!



Don't believe me? here is the link

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&um=1&i…

3 minutes ago - Edit - Delete

Answer 8

umm, no.

Answer 9

Nope...and it's not being built at ground zero.

Answer 10

They'll vote no on the historical landmark there to build a Mosque, but try to build a shopping mall on pastureland where there's a little shack on it in the middle of no where...that's falling apart....and they'll call it HISTORICAL since it's more than 50 years old.



They use "historical landmark" status to block things they do not want. See it all the time.



You liberals on here with "it's not on the site" are a bunch of drones. Just listen to yourselves....all collectively droning it out with the oatmeal dripping down your chins. You know damn well what the issue is, but you instead grab your exacto knife to split hairs.



Drones, I'm surrounded by drones.

Answer 11

The building near ground zero isn't much of a historical landmark, having been used for a wide variety of businesses. In addition, this would not block the mosque's construction, but only imposed a new layer of bureaucratic codes on the remodeling.



"Historical landmark" is a designation which does not prohibit use as a house of worship. This would not be a legitimate or constitutional.

Answer 12

It was not for us New Yorkers to vote on. Its ultimately the decision of the mayor and city council to do as they want. I was opposed to the idea at first but after a while, I just gave up the argument. Now I think its a statement saying that not all Muslims are radical and should not be given the same treatment. Once it gets built though, there will be many problems.

Answer 13

No.

This country was founded on the principles of freedom of religion and a right to own and control private property. Islam is not responsible for the attack of 9/11. Stripping a congregation of their right of religious practice on their private property because of 'feelings' is about as un-American as it gets.

Answer 14

if it was a historical landmark... maybe?



I would have to hear the argument...



you can't just vote it to be a historic landmark to block people...



but... if THAT is a historic landmark... THEN ALL THE LAND AROUND IT IS...



do we just do a mass imminent domain and take a huge chunk of lower manhattan?

Answer 15

Yes,



build a large Statue of a Milk Cow on the spot............ and brand it with a Star of David to show ownership



with prints " We are tame, willing and very stupid "

Answer 16

Liberals hate America, dude. I don't think you quite understand that yet.

Answer 17

but the mosque isn't at ground zero...