Some law schools ask aspiring lawyers to ponder not only if a good lawyer can be a good person but also, in the realm of legal ethics, if a legally 'kosher' action is necessarily a good or proper one. The answer is no. Is it prerequisite to be a lawyer to agree that the initiators of Park 51 project -- the Mosque at Ground Zero, the Muslim 92nd Y several blocks away from Ground Zero, the Interfaith Center, the Victory Mosque, Cordoba House, or however you want to call it -- have every right to build it? The answer is no. Are we all for freedom of religion? The answer is yes -- President Obama is for it as well, as we learned. And is an appeal to common sense to not exercise a right, say, to build a project, a denial of that very right? No. (If you disagree there is no point in reading further.)
Before offering some points of observation on Park 51, a look at another controversial mosque constructions might be instructive: There was the saga, spanning from 1997 until 2003, surrounding the construction of a mosque opposite the Basilica of the Annunciation in Nazareth, where Christians believe the Angel Gabriel foretold the birth of Jesus. In a dispute that was not simply religious but also about political influence as well as real estate problem, the city's Muslim community had proposed a mosque in honor of a dignitary believed to have been the nephew of Saladin, who had defeated the Crusaders in the 12th century and whose tomb is located at the site.
The location was a square which Christians had wanted to turn into a promenade leading to the Basilica, for tourists visiting Israel for the Millennium. The promenade project had been blocked by Muslim protesters who camped out on the site. The Israeli government stepped in and gave the Muslim about one-third of the square, prompting Christian protest as they deemed the project so close to the Basilica as to be disrespectful. Despite these objections, Muslims then laid a symbolic cornerstone for a $2 million, two story mosque that could have accommodated 1,000 worshippers.
After government panels, Pope John Paul II, U.S. President George W. Bush, and Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had weighed in an Israeli court ordered the demolition of the foundations of the mosque, which had, in the end, remained unauthorized. However outrageous this decision will have seemed to the mosque's proponents, Israel upheld its policy of respecting the holy sites of all religions and assured the rights of Christians who consider the Basilica a sacred place. The tomb was renovated and incorporated into a public square. It seems fair to assume that had the project's initiator's done their homework, had they listened, had they requested broad input, had they been the sensitive bridge-builders, they would have been able to better analyze the situation. And it turns out that a) freedom of religion was not touched, b) proximity matters, and c) effective damage control is possible before facts are established on the ground.
As with the case in Nazareth where, in the sympathetic reading of the events, Muslims did not pay attention to the sensitivities of Christians, it is fair to assume that had the Park 51 project's initiators prepared, had they listened, had they requested broad input, had they been the sensitive bridge-builders, they would not have been caught off-guard by the storm of protest. Their voice has been either missing or was unnecessarily defiant and combative. If these comments are an indicator for their ability to communicate a positive message and actually build bridges and explain their vision for Park 51 then they - and we all -- will be in for a bumpy ride. The Park 51 initiators as well as leaders of the American Muslim community in New York and beyond could most easily contribute to the debate by positively explaining if and why the project's proximity to Ground Zero matters -- or does not matter for building bridges.
It is a sad fact that they got themselves into that hot water by terribly misunderstanding and misreading the environment -- physically and socially -- in which they plan to establish their project. The anger, grief, and agony caused by the failure of the Park 51 initiators to do their homework is regrettable. They failed to understand that the attacks of 9/11, the loss of life in Shanksville, Arlington, and New York, profoundly changed the lives of everybody and that the reverberations can be felt every day. Have you been at an airport lately? How could the Park 51 initiators miss that? How could they not think there would be opposition? And how can they believe that it will contribute to calm the debate and have a more rational conversation in which their vision is heard when they charge that opposition to their project is, obviously incorrigibly and invariably, "hate of Muslims." One would have thought that cogent arguments could be made for both sides.
There is obviously no desire for de-escalation. Unfortunately, it is safe to assume that the most vociferous opponents will take advantage on this tone-deaf and irresponsible behavior. Muslims in America are the innocent victims of this debate where emotional charges fly. Is there any hope that the debate will not stir hatred against Muslims? One is almost resigned to shake the head in disbelief. The last available FBI Hate Crimes Statistics, of 2008, lists anti-Islamic crimes at 7.7 percent of the 1,606 hate crime offenses motivated by religious bias. Anti-Jewish crimes registered at 65.7 percent, anti-Catholic crimes at 4.7 percent, and anti-Protestant crimes at 3.7 percent. Where will we be when the statistics for 2010 are being published?
Having a right and doing the right thing, for one's goals and one's community, might be two different things. What worked in Nazareth -- de-escalation through not going forward and making compromises -- still has the chance to work with Park 51.
Mark R. Cohen: The Meaning of 'Cordoba': Can It Really Symbolize Religious Tolerance?
Dr. David P. Gushee: 'Ground Zero Mosque' Controversy: America's Dreyfus Affair?
Nancy Fuchs Kreimer: Park51 Should Not Be Complicated for Jews
http://www.silive.com/eastshore/index.ssf/2010/07/the_complete_statement_from_th.html
http://www.silive.com/eastshore/index.ssf/2010/06/proposed_midland_beach_mosque.html
A group tries to build a mosque in Staten Island, and the same kind of nonsense comes up, minus the "hallowed ground" silliness. Staten Island is quite a distance from the WTC. Yet, the silliness brought up by the opposition eventually killed the project. Point blank, the people claiming that they'd have no problem with Park51 if it were built elsewhere are probably lying.
Maybe I'm dense, but why would the Moslems in NYC look to the Nazareth situation as a model to follow.
I was merely pointing out that when one group is looked at in a bad way, those same people looking at it in that way will never see any good from it.
When people dont want to hear the truth, they wont. Its that simple. This is going to set a precedent that is going to effect EVERYONE.
Peace be with you all inshALLAH.
Where have we heard this before?
Peace.....
where are the palestinians as judges upon themselves within all this?
in fact today the same Israeli courts and the Israeli government with US financial backing continue to act as Lords of the Palestinian physical and spiritual landscape: they are building a museum of tolerance over an ancient muslim cemetery against the protest of the local population and heirs to the cemetery
in Nazareth all are palestinian and nothing palestinian was involved. It was between two religions: christianity and Islam; there is the church and we want to build a mosque
In new York, if ground zero is a church then it is also a jewish temple and a mosque and a fetish and an idol and a sacred ground for every religion of every person who died there on the day of the attack. It is an american place.
christianity is not islam and islam is not christianity, you cannot be both
buy american can be muslim and muslim can be american
to say the mosque should not be built by the church so as not to affront its worshipers, that can be valid
but to say the mosque should not be built by the american memorial implies that islam is antithesis to it when it is not; that muslims did not die there on that day and were victims when they were; that on one side there is americans of every stripe and on another the muslims
in nazareth muslims and christians, all palestinians
in new york, muslims and everybody else, mostly american
?
Have you been able to present an argument as to why Park51 is a bad idea for any reason other than it is associated with Islam? No. Honestly, what I find funny about this, and more telling about a lot of the people involved, is that there is a battle over EVERY proposed new construction in NYC. You can practically count on it and many are based on very solid reasons. Yet, for Park51, the only reason that can be given is that it's a mosque that is somehow insulting to others?
As a local myself, what I find insulting is the hysteria and cynical manipulation of others surrounding an entirely harmless project that will bring in needed facilities to the area. Can you tell me where the closest public pool or gym is in the financial district? No, you won't be able to. Want to know why? Because there isn't one.
Furthermore, your Nazareth Mosque argument is a red herring. Park51 won't be blocking anyone one from anything, nor did anyone care about this building until they discovered that Muslims were going to do something with it. Have you ever even walked down this street?
You've won my respect...if the Muslim community just came out and said something like..."we've reconsidered the mosque site. We want to be sensitive to the feelings of the families of those killed in on 9/11 and we want to heal the wounds of 9/11 and so, it will be built at another site"
In that one gesture of humility and and sensitivity, the Muslim community would be embraced and respected enormously by millions of Americans!!!
Although oddly, the neighborhood in which they are building the community center turns out not to be one of the places they are not wanted by their neighbors.
really no offense, but Muslim-Americans are Americans, we can build where we buy and legally allowed to. We didn't fly planes into the towers some nihilistic whack-jobs did. ( BTW I could beat up an old lady and say it was in the name of billy bob thorton..it wouldn't make it so)
This is not Jerusalem. In America Constitutional rights supercede threats of violence. That's what it means to live in "the land of the free, home of the brave."
Oh, wait, they did that.
Or maybe they should have reached out and talked to the last group to build a religiously themed community center in Manhattan?
Oh, wait, they did that.
Or maybe they should have found out from the city what landmarks had to be preserved before they drew up their plans?
Oh, wait, that is what they were in the last stages of doing when this 'controversy' was whipped up by some people with a history of hating all Muslims, and those with a history of exploiting issues that shoulld have been minor for crass political reasons.