Shinto Shrine Near Pearl Harbor! Where is the Outrage?

You are mistaken.
Catholicism is a form of Christianity.
While not all Christians are Catholics, all Catholics are Christian.
The article is correct.

You are confusing the word "Christian" with the word "Protestant".

The majority of Christians on the planet are NOT Protestant.

They are Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and numerous others that existed long before the Protestant reformation.

sorta like not all muslims are terrorists but most terrorists are muslims, pause for thought...

You did not pause long enough.

Not all Muslims are terrorists.
Not all terrorists are Muslim.

Unlike Catholics and Christians, one is NOT a subset of the other.

I'm guessing you never learned basic set theory in math class, did you?

my point was most are. most of the the rest are american home grown, even worse. uhh whats math?

Worldwide, you will find terrorists of every shape, size and color, in every nation.

Yes, religion does create an overabundance of terrorists though, especially the Abrahamic faiths.

a sad state of affairs

Sorry, but you are.
I am talking abut the actual history of your religion, and the actual meaning of words.

I'm sure you believe that only people who think exactly like you are Christian, but you do not have ownership of the word.

Again- all people who believe in Christ are Christians.

Christianity has many subdivisions- Catholicism is one of those divisions, and is the largest single division.

I fully realize you do not like the fact that Catholics are Christians, but what you like or dislike is irrelevant.

Here is another little tidbit that will blow your mind- Mormons are Christians too.

It's a temple, not a restaurant.

and your point?

I must say I agree, japanese food is way better than middle eastern food. MMMM sushi.

i like it when we can agree

it's rare but nice. well not terribly rare

Hey, that's MY question!

First, Rush Limbaugh, and the dittoheads who follow him, made the comparison based on their ignorance of the fact that Shinto shrines are near Pearl Harbor.

Second, the fact that terrorists act in the name of their Fundamentalist religion does not mean that all of the moderate non-terrorists who just happen to believe in the mainstream version of the religion suddenly lose their constitutional rights.

If it did, then no Catholic should be allowed within a mile of an Elementary school.

Well, Japan wasn't a secular nation during WW2. Most of them worshiped their God-emperor, which was a part of their Shintoist beliefs. They believed their God-emperor should rule the world through divine right.

Plus, a Shinto shrine is an unmistakable symbol for Japan. Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. So, a Shinto shrine at Pearl Harbor is definitely an apt analogy for a Mosque at 'ground zero.'

no where in the entire world is thier a radicalized version of shintoism that has prophecies directly linked to structures being built, but radical islam has that.it isnt pleasant and it is unfortunate, but its not like the descendants of the kamakaze fighters will see this and think "told ya so".
juhadists see the removal of an infidel structure as good, and it being replaced with a muslim one gods proof it is allgood.

Do you mean you think the Japanese man who wrote the article on JapanProbe.com is a racist?

Yes, Buddhism began in India, but it spread throughout the East, just like Christianity which began in the Middle East spread throughout the West.

Plus, while in the West we treat religions as highly distinct from one another, Eastern religions tend to blend. An individual can be a member of a number of Eastern religions at the same time, and most Japanese believe in a blend of Shinto and Buddhism. Even Japanese Christians have Shinto elements to their beliefs.

The ignorant one was Rush Limbaugh, who does not know the difference between Shinto, Buddhism or Hinduism.

shhh, we dont care. this is a dumb and a non issue

exaclty this whole ground zero mosque thing is a non issue, they have a constitutional right to build there place of worship whereever they merry well please. Therefore like it or not they have the right, stick to the values passed down for over two hundred years now and we will be fine. freedom of religion.

constituational right to worship what ever they like, not build what ever they like.

Tell that to Rush Limbaugh.

Yes but the point of the matter is the anger ect around the ground zero community center is that it will be muslim, if christians or jews hell probably even hindu's tried the same thing no one would notice let alone make noice about it, we cannot make decisions based on religion, whether we like that religion or not.

none of those folks actively workin on a jihad against the u.s.

i was offering him some advice just the other day. he's a kind and well informed man but still takes my direction from time to time

believe you me, as you know me well enough to know im none to pleased at the idealogical company i am presently alligned with.despite my reasoning being very different i have to unfortunately agree that no muslim representative structure can exist near that site.
my reasoning as to why couldnt be more different.

catholics were forbiden once upon a time from building thier church's, and how are they doing?
jews had to carve thier temples out of tenament basements, and judaism endured.
it is a sad state of affairs that islam has been highjacked by its radicals, but it is the case.while building a mosk or cultural center would bring joy to millions, those happy millions offer no protection to us from the hundreds that will use it as a tool of terror.

So are you saying we should ban Islam becuase it shares a religion with fundamentalists? Based on that argument then you could just keep on going and saying all christians want to rape little boys. The radicals of Islam have made themselves more dangerous than others but that does not give us the right to abuse and opress a whole people.

not at all im saying islam isnt a building, no religion is a building.abraham didnt need a mosk a church or a temple in order to be what ever he thought he was, nor did his decendants for thousands of years.the building has a symbolizism that is shared with islam.it is unfotunate that this is the case, but none the less it is the case thus creating strategic implications.
further more, of the various religions that have made thier way to us, islam has had it the easiest.i feel literaly no pity what so ever for muslims near ground zero who lack a house of worship.they literaly just have to take the subway,bus,or taxi to a regionaly distant mosk.compared to jews having to hide thier houses of worship, and catholics having to do the same, the inconvinience of travel doesnt really bother too much.
shit as i think about it, the town i live in doesnt have a temple.am i being persecuted as such, or denied the right to be jewish?of course not despite between 4 towns spanning 50 miles only one temple exists.

i have no problem with islam.in fact i see it as the same as judaism, just with a heavy arab influence.if i had to pick a runner up faith islam and buddism are tied.

most importantly how does the refusal to build this muslim community center opress or abuse a whole people?