Baraka_Guru

We get this typical structural fallacy all the time on TFP: If something occurs, then the inverse would probably be true.

So, if we get a group of conservatives (Palin is the first to come to mind) opposing or otherwise attacking the idea of an Islamic cultural centre equipped with a mosque in the proximity of "Ground Zero," it must follow that the opposite is probably true.

In this case, Christians and Jews are the opposite or the inverse of Muslims, and "the left" is the opposite or the inverse of conservatives. So it must follow that the left would react much like the conservatives have if Christians and/or Jews tried to build a cultural centre equipped with either a chapel or a synagogue.

Well, duh. Of course it's true. The universe works this way all the time. That's how it's so easy to keep track of it.

I don't see it. I don't see how it would be a liberal or social democratic thing to oppose the peaceful social or cultural enrichment of a society, which is pretty much what this is sold as. It wouldn't matter what the religious group is, and that's the difference. But I don't speak for all liberals and social democrats. I'm just speaking towards their values. Multiculturalism being one of them. Religious tolerance another.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot