One of the blogs I follow, which is usually rational, came down on the same side as thrice-married Newt Gingrich and Palin, so I thought I would share it here, along with my response:
First off, it is not a mosque. It is a cultural center. Ever been to a YMCA? Kind of like that. You don’t find swimming pools and tennis courts in a ‘mosque’.
Second, as you noted later in the post, this is not at Ground Zero. This is two New York City blocks away. I’m not sure if you’ve been to NYC, but as someone who lives in the Northeast, I can tell you that two blocks in the City can be like driving a few miles elsewhere. It can be worlds apart.
Third, do you think no Muslims died in the WTC attacks?
Fourth, this is not the same group that attacked the WTC. They are in no way related aside from both being a part of the second largest religious group on the planet. Hard to draw a connection there. They are not related to Al-Qaeda in the same way that militias were related to Tim McVeigh. It is plain to see that building an Islamic center 2 blocks away is not intended to be a statement about anything. Their other center has so many members that it can’t hold them anymore, so they’re expanding, and this lot happened to be available.
This is akin to not letting (another) church be built near where Dr. Tiller was shot. It’s utterly ridiculous. That (hypothetical) church had nothing to do with Scott Roeder, even if the world sees them as all part of the same ‘Christianity’. Most Americans see the 9/11 Islam and this cultural center’s Islam as the same, but you should be better than that.
Fifth, is about intolerance of Muslims. If this situation were reversed, let’s say it was in Iraq. After we come in and wreck their country as “Christian” invaders, and some Iraqi Christians wanted to build a church there, would Iraqi citizens be right in opposing it? Do you think Sarah Palin would be for or against it? I can guarantee right now that she would support it, and not see the hypocrisy.
I’m an atheist with no love for Islam or Christianity. I see what religious ideas can do to a person’s mind, and understand that what those 19 hijackers believed about the afterlife caused them to fly planes into the towers. But there is a difference between hating ideas, and constricting the rights of people. In my perfect world, there would be no churches or mosques, not because they were banned; but because no one felt the desire for them.
Feel free to weigh in on your opinion of the building, or the national right-wing freak-out.
UPDATE: Response from the blog author:
First off, it is not a mosque. It is a cultural center. Ever been to a YMCA? Kind of like that. You don’t find swimming pools and tennis courts in a ‘mosque’.
OK, everything I’ve read about it has said ‘mosque’. I have seen references to ‘cultural center’, which caused me to understand that it was a mosque with a special area open to the public to teach about the peaceful aspects of Islam and promote religious tolerance. You have to admit, there’s a lot of misinformation out there.
Second, as you noted later in the post, this is not AT Ground Zero. This is two New York City blocks away. I’m not sure if you’ve been to NYC, but as someone who lives in the Northeast, I can tell you that two blocks in the City can be like driving a few miles elsewhere. It can be worlds apart.
Again, everything I’ve read about it has said AT Ground Zero. If it’s two blocks away, that does make it a different issue and certainly leads me to reconsider my position. But it doesn’t change the fact that many people are working from the same misinformation, nor does it change my point that they shouldn’t be called bigoted or intolerant.
Third, do you think no Muslims died in the WTC attacks?
Of course I don’t believe that. But Muslims were not the target of the attackers. This was not a Shia vs. Sunni affair, but an attack by Islamic fundamentalists on the West.
Fourth, this is not the same group that attacked the WTC. They are in no way related aside from both being a part of the second largest religious group on the planet. Hard to draw a connection there.
…Most Americans see the 9/11 Islam and this cultural center’s Islam as the same, but you should be better than that.
I understand that. Believe me, I do. But the fact remains that it was Islamic fundamentalists who carried out the attack. There are many degrees of belief in any religion. Some followers are peaceful, some are violent. But regardless of how they interpret their dogma, it comes from the same source and has a single name. We can distinguish between the brand of Christianity followed by Fred Phelps and his ilk and that followed by Southern Baptists, Lutherans, and so on. But they all exist under the blanket label of ‘Christianity’.
So when someone understands that an Islamic mosque (yes, I know now it isn’t a mosque, but people believe it to be) is being built where Muslims killed a few thousand of their fellow citizens, do you really expect them to make a distinction between the varying degrees of belief?
This is akin to not letting (another) church be built near where Dr. Tiller was shot. It’s utterly ridiculous.
I think it’s a different thing entirely. First, 9/11 had a much greater emotional impact on a larger number of people. Ground Zero has a special meaning to hundreds or thousands, if not millions, of Americans. It is a symbolic location. The site of Tiller’s murder only has that sort of meaning to those who were close to him. It’s a matter of scale and personal connection.
Fifth, IS about intolerance of Muslims. If this situation were reversed, let’s say it was in Iraq. After we come in and wreck their country as “Christian” invaders, and some Iraqi Christians wanted to build a church there, would Iraqi citizens be right in opposing it?
Again, a different issue. In general, I’m not opposed (nor are many others, as I mentioned) to building mosques, Islamic cultural centers, or other structures related to Islam or any other religion. Any antipathy displayed toward Christianity in general by Iraqis would be highly understandable if they perceived the war to be a Christianity vs. Islam thing. Would it be right? If they are motivated by hatred, of course not, no more than it’s right for people to oppose this project out of bigotry now.
Yes, there are people who are opposed to this idea because they hate everything to do with Islam. And they are absolutely wrong. Also, I concede that I was wrong about the details. I should probably write a post about it. But, as I said above, that doesn’t change my point in this post. Many people are opposed to this not out of bigotry or intolerance, but because they were emotionally wounded on 9/11. For them, this is not the time to be building a symbol of Islam at the location where Islamic terrorists caused so much death and destruction. It’s not about Islam itself, but about the site and how it is associated with the memory of the event and those who died.
Furthermore, I absolutely do not see this as a rights issue. The backers of this project have every right to build this thing where legally possible. But, everyone else has just as much right to oppose or support it. Public opinion has at times caused construction projects to be abandoned. And, in this case, Ground Zero no longer belongs just to New Yorkers, but to all Americans. You can’t ignore the right of the public to voice their opinion. But regardless of the amount of misinformation out there, it would be nice to avoid branding everyone who opposed the project as intolerant bigots. That, as the title suggests, was the point of my post.
I still think you’re not understanding this. The people behind Park51 are not in any way related to terrorists or their past actions. They are not deserving of a public backlash, simply because they have beliefs that fit under the extremely general umbrella of “Islam”. At some points you seem to understand that, and at others you seem to forget it, which is hard because it is at the base of your argument.
I think it comes down to this:
So when someone understands that an Islamic mosque (yes, I know now it isn’t a mosque, but people believe it to be) is being built where Muslims killed a few thousand of their fellow citizens, do you really expect them to make a distinction between the varying degrees of belief?
Yes, yes I really do. I think if they can’t understand basic facts, that invalidates their opinion, and makes them wrong. Maybe I just hold people to a higher standard than you, I don’t know. I prefer to not give into our base emotions and instead apply reason to the situation, and I fault others for not living up to that, the same as I fault myself.
I didn’t get a clear answer on the Iraq parallel. Say Iraqi’s had a public outcry about a Christian center being built in their country, and it’s not out of bigotry. It’s out of the emotional impact of the 100,000 civilians who have died since the Christian God told George Bush to invade their home. Would you support them then? That’s worse by a factor of 30, and I would still support the building of a Christian center there, if it had the same stated goals as Park51.
Now, I don’t think you’re a bigot, and I don’t plan to stop following your blog. But Gingrich and Palin (and teapartiers by and large) are bigots, and this fits in with their past spoken views. Maybe Palin’s exact words were not bigoted, taken alone in a vacuum, but she has a track record. Palin is doing this either out of bigotry or out of a cheap political trick to stir up bigotry; I don’t know which is worse. They are the ones leading this faux outrage, not you or someone with similar views. So it’s not inaccurate to say this event is being driven on the whole by bigotry.
As an addendum, this isn’t entirely about the location, this is about any mosques, or anything Islamic, at this point, mostly becoming an issue because 20% of this country has lost their flipping minds. See here: http://colorlines.com/archives/2010/07/we_have_to_admit_that.html
Posts
