So let's be clear about the New York Islamic Cultural Center including a mosque being proposed for central New York.
1.The proposed site about 2 blocks away from ground zero.
2.There is at least one Jewish synagogue and one Christian church within that distance.
3.Over 650,000 Muslims live in New York State.
4.Muslims were killed in the 911 attacks.
So a foreign radical fringe group of a religion widely practiced in the United States effectively attacks and kills thousands of Americans on US soil in 2001. The emotional impact of this attack cannot be overstated, nor should the grief of those who lost loved ones be underestimated.
Now New York Muslims were no more a part of the 911 attacks then New York Christians were a part of the Northern Ireland terrorist bombings of the 80's and 90's. There simply is nothing to suggest that the religion of Islam is to blame for the violence that some of its radical members inflicted on our nation.
However there is an argument to be made that after an atrocity, there needs to be a certain sensitivity to the issue. That all things that might be associated with or related to the event should take a step back and give the aggrieved breathing room. The events of that day burned a sort of after-image into our national psyche – A scar consisting of a snapshot of everything that was tightly associate with the attacks. Islam, however misrepresented, was part of that after-image. This meant whether it was deserved or not, American Islam would have to dig its way out of a pit dug for it by the actions of foreign and extreme members of a their faith.
So the argument for not putting a Mosque so close to ground zero is born of pragmatism more than rights. Short of the lunatics who DO blame Islam for 911, it makes no effort to justify that prohibiting a mosque is fair or just, instead it suggests that because there is what amounts to a scar on our collective psyche, we need to avoid situations where our behavior aggravates that old wound. Whether deserved or not, building a mosque that close to ground zero risks doing exactly that.
But since when does avoiding a wound or illness or injustice ever cure it? Are we alright as a nation with putting the Red Letter on Islam and forcing their believers to tiptoe around these issues forever? The attacks happened almost ten years ago, and considering what else is permitted within the same distance of the original location of the towers, there really is no way to legitimately justify prohibiting a mosque except on the grounds that somehow we are offending the wounds of the survivors. But aren't we past the point now where such considerations should dominate policy?
At some point, the bandage has to come off.
The stitches have to come out.
The fact is that Muslim Americans HAVE been exceptionally tolerant and compassionate in the need to remain sensitive to victims. For nearly a decade they have endured horrible reprisals against the open practice of their religion and met those reprisals mostly with stoicism and understanding. If we are to see the rift between Americans healed, we have to stop treating Muslims differently than the rest of our citizens. They need to have the same rights and opportunities as the rest of us, and Islam needs an opportunity to show it's positive face.
It may be hard to swallow right away, but putting a mosque near ground zero along with the churches and synagogs and other societies of our diverse nation is exactly the kind of defiance against extremism we want to foster. We want to show that our unity is bigger than race, creed, or religion, and we want to give the message to extremists everywhere that UNITED we stand.
If the New York mosque was prohibited 10 years after 911, then all of Islam is indicted by the attacks creating a deep divide in our population and a overt statement that the US considers Islam the enemy. If it is embraced, we marginalize our enemy, define them as radicals who are mere insects crawling in the wood of this great American experiment. It gives us the ability to defiantly show them that whatever message they may have tried to communicate with violence and bigotry we answer with tolerance, steadfast opposition, and unity including those that share their religion.
Isn't that what America is about?
1.The proposed site about 2 blocks away from ground zero.
2.There is at least one Jewish synagogue and one Christian church within that distance.
3.Over 650,000 Muslims live in New York State.
4.Muslims were killed in the 911 attacks.
So a foreign radical fringe group of a religion widely practiced in the United States effectively attacks and kills thousands of Americans on US soil in 2001. The emotional impact of this attack cannot be overstated, nor should the grief of those who lost loved ones be underestimated.
Now New York Muslims were no more a part of the 911 attacks then New York Christians were a part of the Northern Ireland terrorist bombings of the 80's and 90's. There simply is nothing to suggest that the religion of Islam is to blame for the violence that some of its radical members inflicted on our nation.
However there is an argument to be made that after an atrocity, there needs to be a certain sensitivity to the issue. That all things that might be associated with or related to the event should take a step back and give the aggrieved breathing room. The events of that day burned a sort of after-image into our national psyche – A scar consisting of a snapshot of everything that was tightly associate with the attacks. Islam, however misrepresented, was part of that after-image. This meant whether it was deserved or not, American Islam would have to dig its way out of a pit dug for it by the actions of foreign and extreme members of a their faith.
So the argument for not putting a Mosque so close to ground zero is born of pragmatism more than rights. Short of the lunatics who DO blame Islam for 911, it makes no effort to justify that prohibiting a mosque is fair or just, instead it suggests that because there is what amounts to a scar on our collective psyche, we need to avoid situations where our behavior aggravates that old wound. Whether deserved or not, building a mosque that close to ground zero risks doing exactly that.
But since when does avoiding a wound or illness or injustice ever cure it? Are we alright as a nation with putting the Red Letter on Islam and forcing their believers to tiptoe around these issues forever? The attacks happened almost ten years ago, and considering what else is permitted within the same distance of the original location of the towers, there really is no way to legitimately justify prohibiting a mosque except on the grounds that somehow we are offending the wounds of the survivors. But aren't we past the point now where such considerations should dominate policy?
At some point, the bandage has to come off.
The stitches have to come out.
The fact is that Muslim Americans HAVE been exceptionally tolerant and compassionate in the need to remain sensitive to victims. For nearly a decade they have endured horrible reprisals against the open practice of their religion and met those reprisals mostly with stoicism and understanding. If we are to see the rift between Americans healed, we have to stop treating Muslims differently than the rest of our citizens. They need to have the same rights and opportunities as the rest of us, and Islam needs an opportunity to show it's positive face.
It may be hard to swallow right away, but putting a mosque near ground zero along with the churches and synagogs and other societies of our diverse nation is exactly the kind of defiance against extremism we want to foster. We want to show that our unity is bigger than race, creed, or religion, and we want to give the message to extremists everywhere that UNITED we stand.
If the New York mosque was prohibited 10 years after 911, then all of Islam is indicted by the attacks creating a deep divide in our population and a overt statement that the US considers Islam the enemy. If it is embraced, we marginalize our enemy, define them as radicals who are mere insects crawling in the wood of this great American experiment. It gives us the ability to defiantly show them that whatever message they may have tried to communicate with violence and bigotry we answer with tolerance, steadfast opposition, and unity including those that share their religion.
Isn't that what America is about?
I admit that when news of this first came out I was outraged as well. I was clearly in the camp of "It's too soon, and it's disrespectful to the victims." But after giving it some thought, I do agree that maybe this is a good idea, and it could, if done properly, lead to the healing that this nation so desperately needs.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I also think the public outcry is (unintentionally, for sure) a very good thing. If no one had said anything, then this mosque would be built, and no accountability for its purpose would have been presented. It could very well have been a breeding ground for home-grown extremists. However, with the public outcry, the man responsible for the project has been forced to come forward and address those concerns. This is a good thing, because now it creates a national issue out of something that could have just been a local concern. So, if it is successful, and it does do what he proposes it will do, then the good will it fosters will also be national. And that's of even more benefit than he probably initially intended. In essence, the outcry has created public oversight by putting the whole thing under a microscope. Is that fair? In light of how things have progressed since 9/11, I would say yes. It is a step in the right direction, and if Muslims can endure a bit of extra scrutiny, then the healing of the rift will be that much more. In the end, the benefit outweighs the negatives for all involved.
Irony = this Congress http://bit.ly/aO7Ga2 passing this Act http://bit.ly/9L4J73 which leads to http://bit.ly/9tjP6p (http://bit.ly/cBQTby)
ReplyDeleteOriginally I was like "gee what's the big deal" about this. Then a local radio show up here had two people on it about this topic. One was from the Organization that deals with Islamic relations in America.
ReplyDeleteHe ended up hanging up on the talk show host. Here's why.
Apparently... The leader of the group that is proposing to build the mosque is the same person that wrote a book called "A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post-9/11"
His view is borderline extremist, and it starts to look as if this proposed building is nothing more than a "screw you" to the states. It was explained that this new centre would be similar to a YMCA... but as was stated during this interview, a YMCA allows non christians, this new Islamic centre would not allow non muslims.
In the end, what i've come to the conclusion of, is that this building SHOULD be allowed, it SHOULD be permitted, because that is what America is. However it is in horrible taste and people should see it for what it is.
I also propose a Muslim only Gay bar across the street from it.
I'll have to investigate whether that's true. However again remember that whatever his motives, the principle at stake lies in what we as as society tolerate and permit, not the intentions of the owners. We don't want to make our rights and values subject to intention or we start down the road to thought police.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I don't mention, mostly because I don't have a second verification of the information is that there are 2 strip clubs within 2 blocks of the former WTC site. So it's not about the purpose of the business, it's about not using the laws to restrict access specifically because that access is requested by Muslims.