"Unity" Mosque Causes Deep Divisions

Ever since the media first started covering the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque," there has been a frenzy of strongly stated dissenting opinions.  Many on the left say we should accept the mosque at face value and accept it as part of the healing process.  Those on the right are suspicious of the imams and the financial backers' motives.  It's odd to see the left jumping to the mosque's defense and citing freedom of religion.  Aren't these the same people who started the Freedom From Religion Foundation?

While the left is certainly deserving of mockery for their selective outrage (would they feel the same way about a church being built close to the site where a believer bombed an abortion clinic?  Certainly they wouldn't tar an entire religion for the acts of one member, right?), that doesn't mean that the right is handling the issue well.  Some conservatives want to see building codes enforced to the point where the mosque is effectively blocked by the state.  Bad idea.  Republicans knew this ten years ago when they passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.  RLUIPA, as it is awkwardly abbreviated,  was aimed at local government bodies using zoning authority to prevent religious institutions from moving in or expanding their operations.  Land use laws are so byzantine that any building can be prevented from being built almost anywhere almost anytime.  However, by preventing the building of one mosque we would not only give government a stick to use against thousands of churches but we would also not be living up to the values that Americans hold dear. 

So does that mean the mosque has to be built?  Not necessarily.  Public pressure is still a legitimate way to deter the mosque being built.  To tar those who oppose the mosque as right-wing racists is lunacy.  A majority (52%) of New Yorkers oppose the mosque and Big Apple residents are not exactly known for their conservative bona fides.  This kind of pressure was legitimate when Jews opposed the monastery at Auschwitz.  Although no one doubted the Catholic nuns had the best of intentions in praying for those who perished in the Holocaust, Jews felt the ground was sacred to them and demanded the monastery be moved.  Pope John Paul II obliged and agreed it was "hallowed ground."  Even without suspecting the imam's motives, there are legitimate objections to the mosque.  

And for those who would like to take a closer look at Imam Rauf's motives, he is putting fuel on the fire.  A mere 19 days after the attack he contends that the US was an accessory to 9/11.




The imam also was caught on tape saying that America has more blood on its hands than Al Qaeda although the video has been quickly pulled by the copyright owner.  Also for someone who claims unity is his goal, he seems fine with opposing more than 50% of New Yorkers.  When it comes to funding he says he will not accept money from terrorist organizations but when asked if Hamas and Hezbollah were terrorist organizations, he refuses to answer. 

Whether you question his motives or just think that he should voluntarily be respectful of the land he is choosing to build on, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to oppose the mosque but if he chooses to press on, I would rather have a mosque at Ground Zero than a black mark on our history of the government not impinging on religious freedom.