Πρόθεση για ανέγερση νέου καθεδρικού ναού στην εντός των τειχών Λευκωσία

"BUT: the same arguments seem to hold against the construction and hypocricy of the Mosque."

The correct way to put that argument is, of course, "AND the same arguments seem to hold against the construction and hypocricy of the Mosque". I don't understand why you're using the Mosque as an argument that invalidates the argument of the petition. If anything it strengthens it. By all means, start a movement of the mosque which I'm sure many people here will support.

"This is where I beg to introduce my points: If one wants to be objective and coherent, one needs to ALSO oppose the construction of the Mosque with the same diligence that s/he opposes the construction of the Christian Church. Otherwise, there seems to be a problem- an incoherence and a bias."

If a movement doesn't do what you want it do that doesn't cancel it. Think about this as an analogy for what you're doing: someone starts a petition, or a protest on the mosque but I argue against it with the argument that it doesn't include the issue of the Church.

In other words, your argument actually strikes me as a passive-aggresive way of saying "if you don't protest about the mosque, or as well, you're biased because clearly that's a more important issue and its inclusion is what's needed to validate your protest". Which, frankly, sounds like you're the one with the bias, indirectly trying to discredit this protest.

A more constructive argument you could have made, if your intention is to protest against both buildings, would be to propose joining forces with the people protesting in the North. How about that?