That most Americans are fearful of Islam and distrustful of Muslims is not new. Most polls show that 1 in 2 Americans has a negative view of Islam. Thus, it is not surprising that a majority of New Yorkers acting on such perceptions oppose the construction of an Islamic community center and mosque called the Cordoba Center, two blocks from where the World Trade Center once stood. Opponents of the Cordoba Center have often cited the negative public sentiments as a reason why American Muslims should voluntarily give up their right to freedom of religion. That argument was most vocally articulated by the storied and iconic Jewish group Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which opposed the mosque construction saying, "But ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is right." ADL's leader Abraham Foxman went on to assert that for the victims of 9/11, "Their anguish entitles them to positions that others would categorize as irrational or bigoted."
Supporters of the project have also been full-throated in their support. Jewish Rabbis such as Arthur Waskow and Christian leaders such as Bob Roberts have decried the opposition. However, the most articulate defense came from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. In a speech for the ages, Mayor Bloomberg succinctly framed the issue saying:
Whatever you may think of the proposed mosque and community center, lost in the heat of the debate has been a basic question: Should government attempt to deny private citizens the right to build a house of worship on private property based on their particular religion? That may happen in other countries, but we should never allow it to happen here.
Mayor Bloomberg drew attention to an often-ignored fact:
Let us not forget that Muslims were among those murdered on 9/11, and that our Muslim neighbors grieved with us as New Yorkers and as Americans. ... Muslims are as much a part of our city and our country as the people of any faith. And they are as welcome to worship in lower Manhattan as any other group. In fact, they have been worshiping at the site for better, the better part of a year, as is their right.
Perhaps the boldest stance was taken by Newsweek and CNN's Fareed Zakaria when he returned an award he had received from ADL in 2005. He urged ADL to reverse its decision and refuted its arguments by rhetorically questioning, "Does Foxman believe that bigotry is OK if people think they're victims? Does the anguish of Palestinians, then, entitle them to be anti-Semitic?" He then went on to mount a practical defense of the Cordoba Center, noting:
If there is going to be a reformist movement in Islam, it is going to emerge from places like the proposed institute. We should be encouraging groups like the one behind this project, not demonizing them. Were this mosque being built in a foreign city, chances are that the U.S. government would be funding it.
Cordoba Center was intended to bring people together, but unfortunately it is fueling divisiveness. Sponsors of the Cordoba Center were perhaps guilty of "insensitivity," but not for choosing the proposed site, but rather for not better anticipating the sometimes understandable but often contrived opposition. The opponents, on the other hand, may have a few legitimate concerns but are misguided in their opposition. Arguing against the core American value of religious freedom while purporting to protect America makes the opposition irrational and hypocritical.
Now that the Cordoba Center has won its legal right to exist, how can it win the hearts and minds of fellow New Yorkers, at least those who are willing to be fair? How can ADL gain back the moral high ground? Cooler heads must prevail. ADL should withdraw its opposition without giving up its right to ask the Cordoba Center to be sensitive about the pain being felt by so many people of good will. In return, Cordoba Center should also take steps to address legitimate sensitivity.
The Cordoba Center should pledge to not accept any foreign funding. While they have the right to seek donation and support from all legitimate sources, including foreign, it is right to make this institute an all-American effort. In the best traditions of Prophet Muhammad, who allowed a Christian delegation to pray at his mosque, the Cordoba Center could dedicate space for Jewish and Christian prayer services. During the eighth century the Córdoba Mosque in Spain set a good example of religious traditions sharing worship space. Why not recreate such convivencia in New York, where the Statue of Liberty beckons all to freedom?
Some people will never be convinced of the moral legitimacy of Muslims seeking a place of worship in some proximity to Ground Zero. Yet many may change. Giving that moderate center a fair chance rests partly with the organizers of the Cordoba Center. However, putting their vision into practice will also require the support of a broad cross section of civic and religious leaders. Groups like ADL and leaders like Newt Gingrich will serve America better by seeking ways to positively engage with projects like the Cordoba Center. Strident opposition and fear-mongering are not the answer. A vast common ground does exist, a point that the leader of the Cordoba Center, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, evokes in his book What's Right with Islam Is What's Right with America. There is no better way to defeat the morally bankrupt ideology of al-Qaida than to seek that common ground.
Professor Parvez Ahmed is a Fulbright Scholar and Associate Professor of Finance at the University of North Florida. He is also a frequent commentator on Islam and the Muslim American experience. You can read his articles at http://drparvezahmed.blogspot.com/.
Ground Zero Mosque - www.investors.com
'Ground Zero' mosque approved - Americas - Al Jazeera English
Fareed Zakaria: Build the Ground Zero Mosque - Newsweek
Ground Zero Mosque Rebuttal: The 9/11 Christian Center
Ground Zero mosque plan has backers and detractors as community ...
Islam existed long before 9/11, and to choose to alienate the one billion people who practice it by suggesting that they are not only unwelcome in lower Manhattan but that somehow their mere presence is offensive to the victims of 9/11 is not only nonsensical - it's wrong.
If one religious wack job considers a Muslim Center a win (or a loss) by placing it at such an emotional site it should not be placed there. There are many places for Mosques and cultural centers. In this case the building's placement is being determined for a political purpose which I personally feel is devoid of common sense.
Once again the incompetent Paterson proves he can not govern. But, then again Paterson could never really govern. “The Democratic Conference: Organizational and Operational Structure Report” is an eyewitness account of Paterson’s DYSFUNCTIONAL governing nature while Senate Minority Leader.
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM110_demreportfinal.html
Paterson’s office was criticized for PATRONAGE, LACK OF LEADERSHIP, INDECISIVENESS and INFIGHTING. Those interviewed in the report indicated that its chief of staff the disorganized Michael Jones-Bey had no management skills, and should be relieved of his duties.
Amazingly, for running such a DYSFUNCTIONAL CHAOTIC office, the disorganized Michael Jones-Bey was picked by Paterson to mismanage the Division of Minority & Women Owned Business Development (MWBE) at Empire State Development Corporation.
Now, that's the Paterson way, being rewarded for your incompetence.
They can build it where they want. I agree. But if they do, I will see it as completely inconsiderate of the feelings of millions of people. I won't see it as an expression of religious freedom. To increase trust and decrease fear among Americans, they should have considered these feelings when they were researching their location. The leaders of this effort know the world wide impact a 100 story Islamic Center will have in the shadows of the new Freedom Towers. Fear and loathing? Who is exactly at fault. You choose.
They have all the angles covered;
1. building a place "for interfaith baloney"
2. our faith has been attacked, lets build a big mosque
3. etc
The cultural center is an attempt to teach understanding and cooperation. If anything, it's exactly the kind of memorial to 9/11 that ought to be there.
No one needs to have the gov. or anyone step an inch over the line drawn by the constitution; we just need to make sure that the Cordoba people also do not step an inch over legal and constitutional lines. Got a Problem with that?
http://hereticscrusade.com
" Dr. Muhammad al Alkhuli, a popular Islamic scholar, says: "Islam is a religion, but not in the western meaning of religion. The western connotation of the term "religion" is something between the believer and God. Islam as a religion organizes all aspects of life on both the individual and national levels. Islam organizes your relations with God, with yourself, with your children, with your relatives, with your neighbor, with your guest, and with other brethren. Islam clearly establishes your duties and rights in all those relationships. Islam establishes a clear system of worship, civil rights, laws of marriage and divorce, laws of inheritance, code of behavior, what not to drink, what to wear, and what not to wear, how to worship God, how to govern, the laws of war and peace, when to go to war, when to make peace, the law of economics, and the laws of buying and selling. Islam is a complete code of life."
It is a complete system and it can not come under First Amendment as a religion.
Get over it. Islam IS a religion, whether you like it or not.
I bet a few years before 9/121 you were absolutely PASSIONATE about holding Christians and their churches to the letter of the Constitutional law and making sure that all priviledges they held were shared by all other religions with no double-standards... I was too, but you apparently never added a day's knowledge to your mind and fail to see that Muslims in the US are pushing for the regrowth of biases and inequities in THEIR favor that we have spent the last 60 years slowly taking away from Christians!
Justy what is a good thing about this retreat from secular government in favor of things like building foot baths for Muslims at State run colleges while enforcing religious censorship on free speech?
http://hereticscrusade.com
Really? Could you please be more specific about this outlandish charge? Which hate group? Which death threats?
And mosques firebombed? Where did that occur, exactly?
"Any mosque build on American soil is a reminder that all faiths are welcomed, any opposition reminds the insurgent that American's promise is not to keep and should be invaded."
Ok, so if Americans don't agree that a mosque should be built at a certain location, we should kowtow to Moslems so that we don't get invaded? No way, Jose. We have a right to protest if we disagree with something. The right to protest is just as legal as your right to build a mosque.
Bring it on. Invade away.
No. What's fueling the divisiveness are the folks trying to stop it. Whether they h@te Muslims, whether they have trouble telling the difference between a terro.rist and a religion, whether their grief is so great that 10 years later they feel justified in denying others' their rights, whether whatever un-American reason they can concoct - none of them wash.
One of the most intelligent and informed discussions of the issue is here:
http://article.nationalreview.com/438941/ban-the-burqa/claire-berlinski
1. Those opposing the center are bigoted.
2. Muslims also perished at Ground Zero on 9/11. This is a specious reference, and no one has been able to explain satisfactorily because some Muslims perished, the proposed mosque is justified. Look at it this way, what if only Muslims had perished on 9/11? Would that somehow make the proposed mosque less arrogant and ill-advised? Just the opposite, I think.
3. Mr. Ahmed implies that opponents want to prohibit the mosque. I don't think that is being argued seriously by anyone. We all understand that the developers have the legal right to build the mosque. Instead opposition is more in the form of lectures and advice--the site selection is wrong, disrespectful. It should be remembered that in the USA, opponents have the right to protest. And the protest may last a long time if the development proceeds.
And so on, right down to citing Fareed Zakaria's John Kerry-like return of the award.
I thank Mr. Ahmed for suggesting no foreign funds should be used on this project. If this is followed through, the mosque won't be built on the proposed site. Time will tell.
Then why are there protests all across the country to mosques being built? There is no 9-11 sites in Tennessee, Wisconsin or California. The 9-11 site is a red-herring.
Welcome to America. Deal with it.
What might be even better than that is to work on Governor Patterson's recent suggestion and swap properties to put the mosque a bit further away from the line of fire, say a couple blocks east, which probably would be better for actual Muslims working in the area. To be flippant for a moment, given Mayor Bloomberg's fierce advocacy of the project, maybe part of City Hall Park would be a good place to put it.:)
When cloistered nuns tried to establish a convent at Auschwitz the world called it inappropriate and the religious community abandoned the site.
There are many questions that should be answered first. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans, as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.
If Iman Rauf is serious about building bridges, then he could have dedicated space in this so-called community center to a church and synagogue, but he did not. He could have proposed a memorial to the 9/11 dead with a denouncement of the doctrine of armed jihad, but he chose not to.
I haven't forgotten seeing the images of horror on 9/11and I am still frozen in my horror. While the attacks were denounced by the governments of countries traditionally considered hostile to the United States, such as Cuba, Iran, Libya and North Korea, there is plenty of footage of Palestinians celebrating in the streets-so please don't try to play that card. Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's statement
in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, that "United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened." This is not a just a religious freedom issue.
America, is this the best that we can do?