Ground Zero Mosque

Ground Zero Mosque

Now that our President has weighed in on the mosque controversy I know that many of you are waiting, breathlessly, for my opinion.

Ok, maybe not, but let me share my thoughts on this since I do often write about Islam.

I think that we as Americans must agree that President-O was correct in stating that it's "their right" to build a mosque in the USA.  This is, of course, one of the maddening things about being a free society.  There isn't a reciprocal right in most Muslim nations.  Islamic societies are not fair and open societies.  Islam cannot  stand up to the onslaught of free speech in which both secularism and Christianity have survived (in fact, thrived).

Thus, we are forced to conclude (correctly, I believe) that Muslims are taking advantage of us.

Many have pointed out that Muslims build mosques as memorials to battles they have won.  This is, of course, true.  To argue otherwise is disingenuous.  What's at stake is the ongoing claim of subjection that Muslims will make over the 9-11 site and America in general if they, in fact, build the "Ground Zero Mosque."

Liberal democracies like ours are not really good at fending off ideological warfare like this.  We don't have safeguards or other mechanisms in our legal system that protect us from ideology.

It is important to note that Muslims do not necessarily have a right to this particular spot. The New York Port Authority has not allowed a church to rebuild nor are they allowing them to build the sort of church structure they want to build (read about it here – if there is new info, please let me know) even though there was a church there before the terror act (the church was buried under the rubble of the two towers).

Why is it "no" to the church and "yes" to the mosque? There is evidently more going on than simple zoning and local ordinance issues being played out in a busy city context. Something tells me I don't have the whole story on this, but until I learn more, I smell a conspiracy.  President-O's statements over the past few days have only served to bolster my feeling that, for some reason beyond my understanding, he wants a mosque there and is going to help make it happen.

To be fair, there is no doubt that my views are prejudiced by what I perceive as an anti-Christian culture among the White House staff, on the part of the President, and for sure the left-wing political establishment in general. It seems to me that Democrats want to see an "affirmative action" plan for religion.  I think they believe that Christianity needs to be taken down a few notches to make room for minority religions in the USA.  If that is true, it is an unwanted government intrusion into religion.

So… my view regarding the 'Ground Zero Mosque?"  No thanks… but I am way open to hearing other views.

What do you think?

4 thoughts on “Ground Zero Mosque

  1. As I pondered this post, I realized that I didn't know much about this Ground Zero Mosque… so I decided to look into it. If you can cut through the "red" tape, then the immediate name of the whole issue falls apart. This "mosque" isn't a mosque, and it isn't at "Ground Zero" either. It's further away than the church you linked to the story about.

    I do not think that this is some crazy political conspiracy to knock Christians down a few pegs. It seems like the Cordoba House is trying to do exactly what Christians would have done if it had been some Christian zealots that had attacked the World Trade Center buildings; trying to improve the misconceptions of Muslims in America and disassociating themselves from their jihad-inspired peers across the seas.

    On a smaller scale, it feels like what I do when I hear Pat Robertson say something asinine about the plight of a country ravaged by an earthquake. "He's not with me!"

    I think there's a lot of unnecessary misinformation flying around about this. And it just feels like one more thing that people are latching onto to continue fueling their hatred of Muslims and the president. I think the focus is being placed more on a view of this as a hostile takeover, when in fact is isn't.

    The fact is that a group of Muslims would like to build a community center that will include plenty of things to improve the community, along with a mosque (run separately). Perhaps if the church that you'd referenced had decided to reach out to the community instead of opting for building a luxurious chapel just increasing the view of affluence=Christianity, it would already be built.

  2. You raise some good points, but I suspect that both the New York Port Authority's and the President's response are far less calculated to than you suggest here. In denying a church building, the NYPA was most likely making a fiscal decision in favor of approving a tax-generating edifice. However, when the Muslim organization came knocking, they realized they could not deny them without avoiding accusations of Islamophobia and discrimination. Of course, our bumbling President found himself between a rock and a hard place, and (as usual) instead of deferring to local authority, he embraced what he thought was a "teachable moment" to win points with Muslims, garner affection from his own fading base and instruct flyover Americans on the finer points of the Constitution they're so obsessed with.

  3. I think that this issue has been terribly distorted. While I do think that Obama seems to have a chip on his shoulder with the American Church, this story is certainly not an example of that.

    The Church is being reported as having been denied the right to build. This is somewhat misleading. The church is trying to swap land with the county in order to build on a slightly larger sight than its original home. The 9/11 Memorial needs the property title the church holds, and the reality of the situation is that it is more of a stalemate. To say the church has been denied access is only half the truth and one would be equally justified to say that the church has blocked the Memorial site's attempts to create a security center. Another interesting note, the story being reported indicates the church and mosque are in the same general region. Not true. The church is on a piece of property directly adjacent to Ground Zero, and the company in charge of building the memorial wants the piece of property for their tourism security center. There is a direct conflict of building interests. It's not that they have favored Muslims over Christians simply due to faith. The mosque is two blocks away in a space that previously housed a Burlington Coat Factory. It's not the "hallowed ground" being reported. The church and the mosque are completely unrelated issues!

    Besides… what about the right to religious freedom? This thing makes me sick. Let 'em build the church and the mosque! Neither should have been opposed. But as Christian's it shouldn't be "they can only have their mosque if we get our church."

    I say give them the mosque. Heap coals of kindness over their heads, and when the country has been swept out beneath us, who gives. Our citizenship lies elsewhere.

    1. I can't agree with you. If you want to argue the technicalities of the distance from Ground Zero, we can do that. It's correct that it's not adjacent but it's only one block away from the WTC footprint. It's also well within the range of the inevitable call to prayer loudspeakers. I am sure it will be great to have mourners listen to that while they visit the site of the relative's death. On top of that, the issue with the church is as much a symbolic issue as it is a legal issue.

      Here is an excellent article, written by a Muslim, that sums up the situation very well: Mischief in Manhattan.

      I will point out one quote which I think sums it all very nicely:

      "Do they not understand that building a mosque at Ground Zero is equivalent to permitting a Serbian Orthodox church near the killing fields of Srebrenica where 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered?"

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.