In fairness, we’ve been building ‘ground zeros’ near Iraqi mosques since March 2003.
UPDATE: Really great rant on this issue over at The Daily Beast, titled “America has Disgraced Itself”. I would try to excerpt it, but you really need to read the whole thing. It is fairly short and to the point. If you ever asked the question “what could be worse than a neo-con” you need to read it.
Abortion Bush Campaign Finance Cheney Climate Clinton Congress Conservatives Corporations Corruption Deficits Democrats Drugs Economy Education Election Elections Energy Environment Fox News Gays Guns Health Immigration Lies McCain Media Middle East Obama Palin Protests Racism Religion Republicans Romney Spying Supreme Court Taxes Tea Party Terrorism Terrorists Torture Trump Unemployment War
5 Comments
I heard an interesting view point the other day on this topic which I had not considered before. During the Muslim conquests in its early years, they would build a mosque as a sign of victory when they defeated someone. There are those who would consider a mosque so close to the twin towers as sign of victory of over the US.
I’m of two minds on this. If they claim victory is would be symbolic only. Even so, it might lead to less attacks as they have won. You might even go as far as say that they had “mission accomplished.”
The other side is the desire not to give in to sad radicals. Especially since there is information saying a cleric part of this effort is a believer that the US should be destroyed. That mind set puts me on edge and I want to push back.
In the end, I have not decided which I support. I do have a question though for those who say it should not be built because it would be 2 blocks from “ground zero.” How many blocks would be acceptable? Would it be acceptable to build a church there? What about religious freedom and the Constitution?
There are many layers to this issue which must be considered.
Brian, if Al-Qaeda builds a mosque at ground zero (literally at ground zero), then your theory of conquest may apply. These are americans who are muslims by faith and want to build a center (that includes a mosque).
As long as american muslims are treated like “others”, this thing is bound to happen.
There are Christians and Jews on the board of this new center, which is dedicated to understanding between different religions. I sincerely doubt that it is a “victory” mosque. This whole thing is being used for political hay (to some extent by both sides).
Brian – if the radicals are so sad, maybe we oughtta give in just to cheer them up a little bit 🙂
America needs to look hard at itself and become the nation it wants to be. Should the land of the free show prejudice against its own citizens on the grounds of their religious beliefs and those affiliated with them? Or is there some currency yet left in the ideas of freedom of religion and association? I wonder about those who oppose the construction of a religious centre anywhere: how do they justify opposing the rights of some religious minority, and would they view their own rights being taken away in such a circumstance?
Hassan, I agree that it would only be true if Al-Qaeda was the one building the mosque.
What I should have wrote to make it clearer is that ‘radical Muslims who are in other nations will consider it a victory if any Muslim cleric was able to build a Mosque near the terrorist site.’
It would be similar to a group in Kansas celebrating the take down of Saddam Hussein as a victory over radical Islam. It would be illogical because Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with radical Islam as he was a secular dictator. Along with the fact that taking out one person won’t stop a movement. And a group in Kansas probably didn’t have anything to do with it. (just because it is illogical to those who think about it logically doesn’t mean there aren’t those who believe it.)