Islamic group gets go-ahead to cut crosses off NY church

AP via FoxNews ^ | April 3, 2014

[Altenkrug]

SYRACUSE, N.Y.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

"was a neighborhood landmark built by German immigrants 100 years ago"

Germans being displaced by Muslims.

Another sign of the westeuropeanization of the US.

[headstamp 2]

Whatever makes you feel better, bert.

[WayneS]

They should have purchased the property themselves instead letting it be sold to muslims. What did they think was going to happen?

[WayneS]

...or loggerhead shrikes...

[WayneS]

Or maybe the wood is ‘habitat’ for some manner of endangered termite...

[WayneS]

Yup.

I don't mean nuthin' by it - I'm just sayin'...

[Altenkrug]

“This isn’t Riyadh” - Soon it will be.

“and we’re talking about what was basically an abandoned building.” - Does it mean that any abandoned building can be converted to a mosque? Tolerance, tolerance... The more mosques there are, the sooner the day will come when they teach us all how to live. Just take a look at what’s happening in muslim neighborhoods in Britain, Belgium or Sweden. You want this in the U.S.?

[G Larry]

Let’s not wait 400 years to put a stop to this crap like we did last time!

[struggle]

>>He said the crosses must be removed because the Islamic faith prohibits worship of idols and symbols.

[Gene Eric]

This is a disgrace.

Islam is a war plan. And Leftwing scumbags are using it to eradicate Christianity.

[jumpingcholla34]

Syracuse, where I was born and raised, has been in steep decline for decades. The beautiful gothic Episcopalian church I attended as a kid is surrounded by blight and was ready to shut down last time I visited. The Catholic church in the article probably was facing the same fate.

I understand that part -- but MUSLIMS? What brings muslims to an old rustbelt city in Central New York? What are they doing there? What sustains them, economically, unless it's New York State's welfare benefits? It's very creepy and strange.

[henkster]

I agree. It’s their mosque. They bought it. It’s not like they stormed the place and slaughtered the Christians like they did at the Hagia Sophia in 1453.

In my town, the moslems bought a building that had been used as a church. The windows of the church were in the shape of the Cross. They stayed about two years, to my amusement, before they were replaced. But after all, it is their building.

[Steve_Seattle]

"I would have to side with the muslims here. It is their property to do with what they want."

I agree, as long as the decision was consistent with applicable laws, rather than based on fear or political correctness, and did not give the Muslims an outcome that others wouldn't have gotten.

[Steve_Seattle]

"I understand that part -- but MUSLIMS? What brings muslims to an old rustbelt city in Central New York? What are they doing there? What sustains them, economically, unless it's New York State's welfare benefits? It's very creepy and strange."

There's a method to their madness - create enclaves within the larger society, eventually demand sharia law in those areas, frighten everyone else away, and - behold! - eventually you've got a network of independent Muslim city-states within the USA, something akin to Indian reservations. And much of it is funded with foreign money.

[logic101.net]

I don’t see anything about it being designated a “historic landmark”; so I don’t see how anyone could stop them.

[Steve_Seattle]

"He said the crosses must be removed because the Islamic faith prohibits worship of idols and symbols."

Then why do they call it "blasphemy" to insult Mohammed, a human being?

[Terry L Smith]

What has happened to the “save the old buildings of America” program?

I would rather it not, but this seems to be a case of “Jewish Lightning” just being ordered, aqnd ready to be delivered.

(if ya’s don’t know, ask a firefighter.)

[GreyFriar]

Islamic group gets go-ahead to cut crosses off Syracuse, NY church

[Steve_Seattle]

"I don’t see anything about it being designated a “historic landmark”; so I don’t see how anyone could stop them."

I even have problems with the "historic landmark" designation. It is often applied to buildings that are not in fact historic in the normal sense, but which for one reason or another appeal to the historic preservation boards as worth saving in their original form. In these cases, the actions of the boards can be almost confiscatory, either placing huge financial burdens on the property owners, or preventing them from making changes to make the property suitable for the owners' intended purpose.

[bert]

-— the boards -—

The actions take on near religious fervor