A Mosque in America
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 at 11:29AM 
I've been meaning to write about this for a while now. It seems like everytime I get started something newly ridiculous is added to the mix. A local issue is taken up as a national cause by GOP politicians & activists, and Democratic leaders from the White House to the Senate hem & haw about where they do or do not stand. The temperature of the debate about the proposed Park 51, formerly called the Cordoba House Islamic Center, now dubbed the "Ground Zero Mosque," has gotten so heated that it may well become a campaign issue for conservative candidates this Fall.
The irony of all this is that the local community, city council & New York mayor's office have come out in vocal support of the Mosque's developers. Despite the cries that he's a muslim extremist, it turns out the man behind the initiative, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has not only been a longtime voice of religious tolerance, but actually worked for the Bush Administration as a State Department envoy to muslim communities under then Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy Karen Hughes. One has to wonder if the GOP will concede that the alleged radical Rauf was moderate enough to participate in GW's public outreach, or if they will sidestep the facts on this one...
The political hypocrisy doesn't end there. An excellent story this morning by Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun Times points out that in 2000 the GOP led Congress wrote & unanimously passed a law preventing the federal, local or state governments from interfering in the zoning rights or land use of religious institutions. The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) is expressly designed to "provide stronger protection for religious freedom in the land-use and prison contexts." Presumably when Republicans wrote the law their goal was to prevent government from impinging upon the rights of people of faith to freely build institutions of faith. What was not stated in the law was that the people they intended to protect were Christians. Then of course they couldn't have stated that because it would be unconstitutional - and Republicans love the Constitution...right?
Politicians love to wave the Constitution at any chance they get and conservatives in particular have declared themselves "strict constructionists" - they want to go by the letter of the law when it comes to Constitutional rights. Well let's actually look at what the Constitution has to say on this matter:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
This little known piece of historical writing is known in academic circles as THE FIRST AMENDMENT. People like to bring it up when they want to protect minor issues like their "freedom of speech" or "freedom of the press." But note that the FIRST protection afforded by the Bill of Rights is in fact "freedom of religion."
Now most political leaders don't have the gall to make an outright call for the subversion of the first item of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. So instead the call is for better "judgment" on the matter. We don't want to give the terrorists a so-called victory by allowing an Islamic edifice to be built just two blocks from 9-11. Never mind that the muslims building the Cordoba House were part of the Bush Administrations counterterrorism efforts. They were good Americans when we needed them. But like the Constitution we're apparently willing to discard them when it suits our political interests.
And yet the hypocrisy still doesn't end there. The sickest & most disgusting aspect of this entire political circus is not the frothing, sanctimonious swell of false concern at the prospect of an Islamic Center being built 2 blocks from the "hallowed ground" of Ground Zero. It's that when given the opportunity only a few weeks ago to vote for healthcare for first responders to the 9-11 attacks (only 9 years after the fact), Congressional Republicans overwhelmingly VOTED NO (GOP: 12 "For" to 155 "Against" - DEMS: 243 "For" to 4 "Against").
The lives of those lost in 9-11 have been used as a political football for far too long. The best way we can honor them is by honoring the values that make this the "land of the free." I know it's difficult & for many of us it genuinely hurts. But freedom has never come easy and never for free. This local saga may soon tell us if America is indeed the home of the brave.
Or if the terrorists have put enough fear in us that we have ceased to be the land of the free...
Reader Comments (4)
I mostly agree with you. There is a large double standard directly from fear, simple xenophobia. When one thinks about constitutional matters...freedom of religion is a fact that most know and understand. Some Americans forget that on 9/11 that many people of various nationalities, backgrounds, creed, religions, and color died. The building of the Islamic Center should not be noted as an insult but as a strength because as America, as Americans we allow and promote religious tolerance. Other countries, including some Muslim countries are not that tolerant and have cruel punishments like stoning or severe censorship. We should not be an eye for an eye country.
This controversy would not be a problem if there was a monument or a functional building in the former Twin Tower area. The bureaucracy of building a building is unbelievable---too many cooks in the kitchen, too many ideas, and too many emotions.
This is one of the most lucid pieces I've read on the make-believe mosque issue, right along with the recent piece in -- of all places -- the Wall Street Journal.
Should we prohibit a Christian Church from being built in the vicinity of the Oklahoma Federal building? Lots of Christians were killed there by a Christian. Does that make Christianity totally evil?
"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I'll meet you there." Mevlana Rumi
@Michael I think your right in that it wouldn't be such a big deal if we had actually "built something" already at Ground Zero. But it's been easier said than done & now the xenophobes are coming out of the woodwork with their bad ideas & intentions. We are not Saudi Arabia, no matter what Newt Gingrich would like people to think...
@Chiara thanks! Glad to hear the WSJ is making some sense on the issue as well. Did you see that their website reposted Lucia's HuffPo piece?
@Lenora precisely. Guilt by association can only take you but so far. It just happens to be that the road it will take you on, is a very short one to a very bad place...