The Ground Zero mosque must be built

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The Ground Zero mosque must be built

By Kathleen Parker

Wednesday, August 18, 2010; A15

It is hard to imagine that anything has gone unsaid about the so-called Ground Zero mosque, but an important point seems to be missing.

The mosque should be built precisely because we don't like the idea very much. We don't need constitutional protections to be agreeable, after all.

This point surpasses even all the obvious reasons for allowing the mosque, principally that there's no law against it. Precluding any such law, we let people worship when and where they please. That it hurts some people's feelings is, well, irrelevant in a nation of laws. And, really, don't we want to keep it that way?

Confession: I would prefer that the mosque not be built so close to the ground where nearly 3,000 innocent souls perished. That's my personal feeling, especially as I imagine the suffering of so many families whose loved ones died in the conflagration.

But why do so many Americans feel this way? The answer is inherent in the question. Feeling is emotion, which isn't necessarily bad, but it bears watching.

Reason tells us something else: The Muslims who want to build this mosque didn't fly airplanes into skyscrapers. They don't support terrorism. By what understanding do we assign guilt to all for the actions of a relative few?

Even so, as others have noted, civilized people and nations are careful to avoid trespassing on the sorrow, suffering and sacrifice we associate with hallowed grounds. As Charles Krauthammer pointed out, Pope John Paul II ordered Carmelite nuns to abandon a convent they had established at Auschwitz, among other examples.

We would like to think that others would be as respectful of our own horrors. And yet, we should beware what we demand lest others demand the same of us. Count the number of times we've heard "sensitivity" invoked the past several days. Muslims should be more sensitive to the families of those who perished, we've heard repeatedly. Even the Anti-Defamation League, defender of religious freedom, urged the mosque's leaders to situate the building farther from Ground Zero -- out of sensitivity.

Many couldn't agree more, and yet it goes without saying -- even if President Obama felt it necessary to state -- that American Muslims have the same right as any other citizens to practice their religion and to build on private property.

Some might wish that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who is behind the proposal, were more sensitive, though opinions are mixed. Others have argued that a moderate Muslim such as Rauf is just the sort of person we hope will help influence a more-moderate Islam. Might an Islamic center near the spot where the religion's worst adherents slaughtered thousands, fellow Muslims among them, be useful to that end?

These are all reasonable arguments. But the more compelling point is that mosque opponents may lose by winning. Radical Muslims have set cities afire because their feelings were hurt. When a Muslim murdered filmmaker Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam, it was because his feelings were hurt. Ditto the Muslims who rioted about cartoons depicting the image of Muhammad and sent frightened doodlers into hiding.

The idea that one should never have one's feelings hurt -- and the violent means to which some will resort in the protection of their own self-regard -- has done harm rivaling evil. It isn't a stretch to say that the greatest threat to free speech is, in fact, "sensitivity."

This is why plans for the mosque near Ground Zero should be allowed to proceed, if that's what these Muslims want. We teach tolerance by being tolerant. We can't insist that our freedom of speech allows us to draw cartoons or produce plays that Muslims find offensive and then demand that they be more sensitive to our feelings.

More to the point, the tolerance we urge the Muslim world to embrace as we exercise our right to free expression, and revel in the glory and the gift of irreverence, is the same we must embrace when Muslims seek to express themselves peacefully.

Nobody ever said freedom would be easy. We are challenged every day to reconcile what is allowable and what is acceptable. Compromise, though sometimes maddening, is part of the bargain. We let the Ku Klux Klan march, not because we agree with them but because they have a right to display their hideous ignorance.

Ultimately, when sensitivity becomes a cudgel against lawful expressions of speech or religious belief -- or disbelief -- we all lose.

Source

[Sofiyya 1,687]

John Stewart sees the contradictions of the opposition clearly. Fox actually played this clip, but left out the part that shows Glen Beck agreeing with a "controversial" statement made by the "radical" imam behind Park51.

Link

Edited August 19, 2010 by Sofiyya

[sandinista! 1,816]

ot, but against my will i had to listen to the beginning of glenn beck's radio show this morning (that'll teach me to forget to charge my ipod) and he was actually speaking admirably about a high school football team in dearborn, mi that is postponing their football practices til later in the evening during ramadan. they practice around 7 pm, and then later in the evening til around 4 am. he thought it was great, that it was honorable for these kids to show that degree of dedication and devotion to their religious belief and still get to participate in a sport that's so physically demanding. i was like, huh, this is glenn beck saying this? it was so weird.

the smearing and outright lies being spread about feisal rauf are one of the hardest things to take about this whole pile of dog refuse "debate". he's one of the good guys, someone who actually stands up and speaks out against the things that the islamophobes are always saying they never hear muslims speak up about. and then they just trash him for getting too "uppity" thinking that most americans can distinguish the difference between terrorists and plain old everyday muslims. it sucks. apparently the us state department thinks highly enough of him to send him to mena to talk about muslims in the us. so he's good enough for the state department to represent the us, but meanwhile he's colluding with terrorist funders? good enough to help the fbi back in 2003 as well. "Feisal Abdul Rauf was dispatched on speaking tours by the past State Department on multiple occasions to help promote tolerance and religious diversity in the Arab and Muslim world. In 2007, he went to Morocco, the UAE, Qatar and Egypt on such missions, a State Department official confirmed to the Huffington Post."

so the bush admin. thought he was pretty safe too, even after making the comments that made glenn beck start foaming at the mouth?

[ready4ONE 5,400]

John Stewart sees the contradictions of the opposition clearly. Fox actually played this clip, but left out the part that shows Glen Beck agreeing with a "controversial" statement made by the "radical" imam behind Park51.

Link

There are contradictions on both sides of this argument. Deciding voluntarily to relocate, not to satisfy the haters, but those who are honestly expressing injury by this would be a serious olive branch and show Muslim's have some sensitivity too.

I absolutely stand by their right to build though. The ball is in their court.

[sandinista! 1,816]

but there's not a legitimate "game" to swat a ball back and forth in though. the sensitivity argument is completely moot because it's built on such a blatantly false, wrongheaded and ignorant premise. the muslims who wish to build cordoba house would not be doing anyone any favor by caving in to the wrong premise that islam is indistinguishable from the terrorists who murdered 3000 people a couple blocks away. they will never be one and the same, and yr never going to goad us into saying we are the same for sensitivity's sake.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

but there's not a legitimate "game" to swat a ball back and forth in though. the sensitivity argument is completely moot because it's built on such a blatantly false, wrongheaded and ignorant premise. the muslims who wish to build cordoba house would not be doing anyone any favor by caving in to the wrong premise that islam is indistinguishable from the terrorists who murdered 3000 people a couple blocks away. they will never be one and the same, and yr never going to goad us into saying we are the same for sensitivity's sake.

Exactly. It's the protesters problem, not anyone else's. They need to get over it and themselves.

[sandinista! 1,816]

Exactly. It's the protesters problem, not anyone else's. They need to get over it and themselves.

i'm glad you see it that way, and yourself, along with aj, hal, #### and esp. sofiyya have tirelessly been pointing this out for the last several days. (if i forgot anyone else who has as well, my apologies)

[zqt3344 21]

Ok you muslims want a church built right across from the most horrific tragic event to happen to the innocent people of the USA then fine. I want to build a Christian church right across the street from Mecca and Medina mosques now and I also want to know why all your muslim countries do not allow freedom of other religions to be practiced in their countries and especially in Morocco! Stop the double standard of being a hypocrite toward the USA and clean up your own back yards first. This idea of building a mosque at Ground Zero is nothing more than a middle finger in the face or eye of America and a way to promote this horrible thing called a peaceful religion which it is not,and I have read your Koran it promotes violence, it is nothing more than a political doctrine of mind control. And sharia law is just another tool of the muslim religion to oppress us all so stop the nonsense now, over 80% of NY is opposed to building it and so is the rest of the USA! Unreal what muslims will try to do to others, no compassion or sensitivity or common sense at all!

The Ground Zero mosque must be built

By Kathleen Parker

Wednesday, August 18, 2010; A15

It is hard to imagine that anything has gone unsaid about the so-called Ground Zero mosque, but an important point seems to be missing.

The mosque should be built precisely because we don't like the idea very much. We don't need constitutional protections to be agreeable, after all.

This point surpasses even all the obvious reasons for allowing the mosque, principally that there's no law against it. Precluding any such law, we let people worship when and where they please. That it hurts some people's feelings is, well, irrelevant in a nation of laws. And, really, don't we want to keep it that way?

Confession: I would prefer that the mosque not be built so close to the ground where nearly 3,000 innocent souls perished. That's my personal feeling, especially as I imagine the suffering of so many families whose loved ones died in the conflagration.

But why do so many Americans feel this way? The answer is inherent in the question. Feeling is emotion, which isn't necessarily bad, but it bears watching.

Reason tells us something else: The Muslims who want to build this mosque didn't fly airplanes into skyscrapers. They don't support terrorism. By what understanding do we assign guilt to all for the actions of a relative few?

Even so, as others have noted, civilized people and nations are careful to avoid trespassing on the sorrow, suffering and sacrifice we associate with hallowed grounds. As Charles Krauthammer pointed out, Pope John Paul II ordered Carmelite nuns to abandon a convent they had established at Auschwitz, among other examples.

We would like to think that others would be as respectful of our own horrors. And yet, we should beware what we demand lest others demand the same of us. Count the number of times we've heard "sensitivity" invoked the past several days. Muslims should be more sensitive to the families of those who perished, we've heard repeatedly. Even the Anti-Defamation League, defender of religious freedom, urged the mosque's leaders to situate the building farther from Ground Zero -- out of sensitivity.

Many couldn't agree more, and yet it goes without saying -- even if President Obama felt it necessary to state -- that American Muslims have the same right as any other citizens to practice their religion and to build on private property.

Some might wish that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who is behind the proposal, were more sensitive, though opinions are mixed. Others have argued that a moderate Muslim such as Rauf is just the sort of person we hope will help influence a more-moderate Islam. Might an Islamic center near the spot where the religion's worst adherents slaughtered thousands, fellow Muslims among them, be useful to that end?

These are all reasonable arguments. But the more compelling point is that mosque opponents may lose by winning. Radical Muslims have set cities afire because their feelings were hurt. When a Muslim murdered filmmaker Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam, it was because his feelings were hurt. Ditto the Muslims who rioted about cartoons depicting the image of Muhammad and sent frightened doodlers into hiding.

The idea that one should never have one's feelings hurt -- and the violent means to which some will resort in the protection of their own self-regard -- has done harm rivaling evil. It isn't a stretch to say that the greatest threat to free speech is, in fact, "sensitivity."

This is why plans for the mosque near Ground Zero should be allowed to proceed, if that's what these Muslims want. We teach tolerance by being tolerant. We can't insist that our freedom of speech allows us to draw cartoons or produce plays that Muslims find offensive and then demand that they be more sensitive to our feelings.

More to the point, the tolerance we urge the Muslim world to embrace as we exercise our right to free expression, and revel in the glory and the gift of irreverence, is the same we must embrace when Muslims seek to express themselves peacefully.

Nobody ever said freedom would be easy. We are challenged every day to reconcile what is allowable and what is acceptable. Compromise, though sometimes maddening, is part of the bargain. We let the Ku Klux Klan march, not because we agree with them but because they have a right to display their hideous ignorance.

Ultimately, when sensitivity becomes a cudgel against lawful expressions of speech or religious belief -- or disbelief -- we all lose.

Source

[Susita 175]

I find it funny that its mostly republicans from other states that have such a big problem with this.

Oh and I also love how they call it the 'ground zero mosque' when its actually an islamic center being built down the block

I live in NY and everyone I've talked to so far about it here doesn't see a problem with it.

[Eddyy 5]

I really don't get why people are so against it? I mean it's not gonna be a just a big mosque built on ground zero. It is gonna be a comunity and part of that place will be a praying room where muslims can go pray. What is wrong with that?

Yes the guys that flew the planes were muslims but why when it comes to muslims we conect the nationality with religion? I mean you have the basques in Europe who are planting bombs but when they blow something up nobody is saying"oh the catholic terrorist organization blew a car bomb and killed 20 people"

Muslim themselves are fighting against these extremist that honestly are not muslims. Real muslims who have read the Qor' an know what it means to be a muslim and in noway justify the actions of these individuals connected with 9/11 etc...

[Susita 175]

Zqt3344 ~ I'm being honest. Most people actually thought it was being built in Ground Zero and then when they find out its down the block they don't mind. In terms of NYC you can have a lot between a block.

And I don't lie or make things up. I don't know who did that survey that says 80 percent of NYers are against it but the people I've talked to aren't so I guess I talked to the other 20 percent.

I've never really thought of myself as a propaganda pusher either

So please don't be rude to me because I don't share your point of view.

[Eddyy 5]

Ok you muslims want a church built right across from the most horrific tragic event to happen to the innocent people of the USA then fine. I want to build a Christian church right across the street from Mecca and Medina mosques now and I also want to know why all your muslim countries do not allow freedom of other religions to be practiced in their countries and especially in Morocco! Stop the double standard of being a hypocrite toward the USA and clean up your own back yards first. This idea of building a mosque at Ground Zero is nothing more than a middle finger in the face or eye of America and a way to promote this horrible thing called a peaceful religion which it is not,and I have read your Koran it promotes violence, it is nothing more than a political doctrine of mind control. And sharia law is just another tool of the muslim religion to oppress us all so stop the nonsense now, over 80% of NY is opposed to building it and so is the rest of the USA! Unreal what muslims will try to do to others, no compassion or sensitivity or common sense at all!

Honestly guy open your eyes before you post something like this. Have you ever been to Turkey? Do you know how many beautiful churches are there? I have a friend from Turkey, ortodox and she has no problem of going to an ortodox church.

The post I posted down is pointed to the ignorant people like you. People from different nationalities were flying the planes and people = with all muslims. Really good, I aplaud your logic man.

Germans who are catholics started the WW2. Does it mean Catholics are responsible for WW2? I mean if we follow your logic it would mean so. But no, I don't think that because I have the brains to make my own conclusions.

[Eddyy 5]

http://daryllang.com/blog/4421

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Ok you muslims want a church built right across from the most horrific tragic event to happen to the innocent people of the USA then fine. I want to build a Christian church right across the street from Mecca and Medina mosques now and I also want to know why all your muslim countries do not allow freedom of other religions to be practiced in their countries and especially in Morocco!

Mecca? Medina? Really? We're Saudi Arabia now? I thought this was the US.

And then this gem of yours: "...especially in Morocco." Have you taken the time to read up religous matters in Morocco? In case you haven't, here's a report from the US State Department.

The Government provides tax benefits, land and building grants, subsidies, and customs exemptions for imports necessary for the religious activities of the major religious groups, namely Muslims, Jews, and Christians.

The Government's annual education budget funds the teaching of Islam in public schools and religious instruction in separate Jewish public schools. The Government also funded the study of Jewish culture and its artistic, literary, and scientific heritage. At the University of Rabat, two professors teach Hebrew and one teaches comparative religion in the Department of Islamic Studies. Throughout the country, approximately 12 other professors teach Hebrew. The country is the only Arab nation with a Jewish museum.

The Government continued to encourage tolerance, respect, and dialogue among the religious groups. During the reporting period, senior government officials, including the Minister of Islamic Affairs and Endowments, received delegations of U.S. Christian and Jewish leaders.

The Government organizes the annual "Fez Festival of Sacred Music," which includes musicians from Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, and Native American spiritual traditions.

Government informers monitored campus activities, primarily those conducted by Islamists.

There were no reports of religious prisoners or detainees in the country.

The U.S. Government regularly discusses religious freedom issues with the Government as part of its overall policy to promote human rights. U.S. embassy officials encountered no interference from the Government in making contacts with members of any religious group.

U.S. government officials met regularly with religious officials, including the Minister of Islamic Affairs and Endowments, Islamic religious scholars, leaders of the Jewish community, Christian missionaries, the leaders of the registered Christian communities, and other local Christians during the period covered by this report. U.S. programs focusing on religious tolerance and freedom using the U.S. model took place.

U.S. government officials met regularly with members of religious communities to promote tolerance and freedom. Officials actively promoted and facilitated meetings between the Ministry of Islamic Affairs and Endowments and visiting U.S. religious leaders.

But hey, you haven't bothered with facts in the past. Why start now?

[Eddyy 5]

Exactly Mr Big Dog. If you go to Cairo, Istanbul you will see a lot of churches. Go to Dubai and you will see new churches.

But I rest my case here with this whole issue. No point discussing it with someone who hasn't even taken an effor to go to these countries or do a little bit of researching before posting...