The Supposed "Ground Zero Mosque" should be built.

"With a "should" resolution, if something should be done, then the presumption is that even if a Constitutional amendment is required, then that should be accomplished." With a "should" resolution, and especially with this one, the presumption is that that something SHOULD be done given the facts/background of the "something" in question – especially this one, which I went on to clarify in the first round, even before you accepted the debate. The resolution says it should be built. Why should it be built? Because the alternative is that it will not be built which I contend is wrong. This intent of the resolution is obvious given the content that I put forth in the first round. My intent was that it the mosque should absolutely not not be built (meaning that it should) because on certain facts and a certain position. This is obvious if you read the first round, which I used as an introduction and clarification of the resolution, but somehow you took my position to be "building a Mosque at Ground Zero is literally the best case scenario; it is morally perfect in every way possible and is superior to any alternative situation that might ever be proposed." I can't stress enough that I am and have been arguing something entirely different to that, and that by doing so I am not conflicting my own resolution. "A parallel real case in 1993 is that of Carmelite nuns having built a convent a the site of the Auschwitz concentration camp. Jews objected, on the grounds that having the convent was "Christianizing" a place sacred to Jews. Pope John Paul II ultimately ordered the nuns to relocate. http://online.wsj.com...... Carmelite nuns do not proselytize, they only pray. Nonetheless, the cultural confrontation was posed. It was resolved by relocation." The case is different because the nuns were not living in a time and place where they were quickly becoming "at odds" with society and desperately needing reconciliation with it. Plus, the Holocaust and even Auschwitz is on a much greater scale than what we were talking about now if only in terms of simple numbers. But you're still missing my point. Everything I'm saying in favor of the Mosque is founded upon the fact that a black/white, yes/no decision is going to be reached. I can't reiterate this enough because that is the basis of the debate and the stance I took in it. It is also why I mentioned the constitutional issue and had I intended to speak of strictly the "moral" approach I would have avoided mentioning it entirely. If you cannot understand that, you cannot understand my position. When I started the debate, and when I end it, the decision to build the Mosque will either be a conclusive "yes" or "no." In light of that, I've made the case that in light of "no" we should say "yes." Because we must first all understand the difference between a mosque and a community center open to the public. Because we must understand that two to three blocks away from a site is not at the site itself Because we must recognize the importance of the constitutional right, which the support for the building is founded on. Because we cannot simultaneously acknowledge a right and try to suppress it. Because we must realize that the plans for the community center predate the 9/11 teror attacks. Because the Muslims behind the building are not the ones who flew planes into our buildings, and we have to reinforce the distinction between the two - peaceful Muslims and terrorists. Because in rejecting it, the message we would send to all American Muslims is that if they are true, good citizens, they will give up their American rights. Because the terrorists (who would certainly pretend to "celebrate" an Islamic victory even if the Mosque was built because that is who they are, while in reality, they could never stand to endorse anything by peace promoting relatively normal Muslims who don't have a problem with their women not covering their heads) will then be able to see the real effect of their acts of terror unfold if we stop the building and further promote the not-so-latent Islamophobia in our society. Because we can't rub anymore salt on our wounds. Because we're forgiving. Because America supports freedom of religion, one of the founding principles of our country. Because we don't let the actions of a few speak for everybody else in a particular group. Because a real Mosque has already existed in the same proximity without causing any problems. Because, given these facts, we can see that the response of even calling the project a "Ground Zero Mosque" is a purely emotional one, not rooted in ANY rationality whatsoever. And accepting the fact that there is no rational, logical reason for there not to be a mosque built in that area, we cannot change the laws of our country based on an unintelligent, irrational, and purely emotional response.