By now, I’m sure you’ve heard of the Cordoba House, the name of the proposed mosque and community center near Ground Zero. What began as a simple local zoning matter became the latest flash point in our post-9/11 society almost overnight. What’s striking to me isn’t the fact that some religious organization wants to build a house of worship near the site of the greatest tragedy in recent American history, but rather I’m shocked by the nationwide reaction to the proposal. Then again, I suppose I should have seen this coming. Ever since 9/11, American Muslims have been demonized to the point where we’ve alienated the very community that could prove instrumental in stopping the next 9/11. This point has been hammered by many more-influential voices than mine over the years, but it just keeps getting worse.
Now, we’re at the point where we are compromising our own core values as Americans just out of fear of something different. What really strikes me as hypocritical is that most of the inflamed rhetoric is coming from the conservatives – people who, at least in theory, should be supporting the mosque as a defense of the Constitution. After all, anyone who knows even one fact about the Constitution knows about the First Amendment. Culturally, we have come to view the First Amendment solely in terms of freedom to say whatever the heck we want to say. However, there’s another piece to it; here’s the complete text of the First Amendment from the National Archives (emphasis mine):
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” – Amendment I, United States Constitution
Technically, yes, the text of the Amendment refers to Congress, however nearly 220 years of legal decisions and Congressional legislation have extended the protection of religion to apply to all parts of American society. That fact alone makes this even more surprising: according to the New York Times, New York State Governor David Patterson has offered to pay the institute behind this controversial cultural center to move to state-owned land. Not only is this a cowardly move by Gov. Patterson, but it is also blatantly unconstitutional!
Can it be any more obvious?
Paying someone to build a house of worship on government land instead of the site they chose seems pretty obviously against the “no establishment of religion” part. Further, it is extremely cowardly that Gov. Patterson would suggest caving to the demands of an inflamed minority just like that. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg may very well be one of the only elected officials left in New York State, much less the country as a whole, with the guts to defend one of the founding ideals of our great country.
That being said, I do think that placing the center two blocks north of Ground Zero is in bad taste and a little insensitive, especially given the still-raw feelings many people have. Some of the justifications people have for opposing the mosque are quite frankly outrageous. I do understand some of them, but let’s get something straight: not all Muslims are extremists. In fact, only a small minority are, and the Muslim community largely looks on them the same way you and I do; that’s just common knowledge that “fell through the cracks”, so to speak.
The Politics of Fear
What really gets to me is the fact that the viewpoint I just shot down is a very common one in our country. I’d be willing to bet any of you that there wouldn’t nearly be this much outrage if, instead of a mosque with community center, it was a Christian church, or even a synagogue being built there. In fact, I’d even wager that such an effort would be viewed as righteous and sacred, an appropriate response to the tragedy that occurred. Why should a mosque be any different? Just because the 9/11 hijackers were Muslim? What if, hypothetically, a Christian was behind the next major terror attack? Would we then demonize Christians? No, people may delude themselves into thinking it is all about religion, but there’s something much more mundane at play here.
Quite simply, the people reacting to the Ground Zero mosque are motivated by fear and hate. A fear that is completely irrational to me, but nonetheless driven ultimately by the belief that Muslims are fundamentally different from Americans. Just because the 9/11 hijackers were Muslims is no reason to automatically categorize the world’s approximately 1 billion Muslims as terrorists. Yet that is what has happened and is happening around the country. According to the New York Times, the fight over the mosque in New York City is part of a larger trend.
Across the country, people are doing whatever they can to stop a mosque from being built in their communities. Call it NIMBYism at its worst; people opposing the mosques simply because of perceived stereotypes of Muslims (i.e. they’re all terrorists here to wage jihad on America from within), and never mind reality. It may be too much to ask for in these times of the failed “Summer of Recovery”, a War in Afghanistan that seems to grow worse by the day, in which, by the way, we’re fighting the real Islamic extremists, and the most partisan Congress in decades, but can we please take a moment and realize just how we are trashing a belief so central to the United States of America that it is the First Amendment to the Constitution?
We need mosques to be built in the United States; in fact, to not have them would leave us that much worse off. The diversity of the peoples who call themselves Americans is, in my opinion, what makes this country strong. If we’re so readily willing to stereotype Muslims like this, what does that say about our society as a whole? It’s been almost nine years since 9/11. Sure, the Patriot Act may still be largely in force, we may still be fighting the War on Terror, but can we still respect the fundamental laws of our great country? Or does the Bill of Rights only apply when politically convenient?
If it’s the latter, we’re all in trouble. However, I like to think that there’s still some hope for us to move beyond the politics of fear and bigotry. As I’ve already stated, I can understand the hesitation and unease about putting a mosque close to Ground Zero— to a degree —but the reaction to other mosques around the country is completely inexcusable no matter which way you look at it. Even with the Cordoba House, the reaction is only understandable because of the tragedy that happened at Ground Zero, which is obviously still sensitive and rightfully so. Personally, I believe that the ideologically moderate mosque and cultural center should be a few blocks north of Ground Zero. If we still truly believe in the Bill of Rights, American values demand nothing less.
The In Defense of The Constitution by The New Age of Politics, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
RSS
Twitter
Tumblr
Facebook
LinkedIn
Digg
Well put. But too often people's fears override their better judgement.
Another great post. It is unfortunate to see a local zoning matter descend into a national fear contest. I never had any objections to building the mosque there, but didn’t give much thought to it. However, when I saw the usual suspects lining up against it and heard their (lack of) reasoning, I became a die hard supporter. There is no reason to oppose it. The notion that because a mosque is Muslim that it insults the 9-11 victims is absurd. 9-11 victims included Muslims, too, like every race, religion, ethnicity, etc. And the idea that because they don’t allow churches or synagogues in Mecca means we shouldn’t have a mosque here is equally crazy. Do we really want to compete with the Saudis in that category? I really hope the issue gets resolved soon and the mosque is built. Keep in mind though it’s not just a mosque and it’s not “at” Ground Zero. Once again, the Republican Party has decided to cater to the worst elements of American society. With this and their 14th Amendment attacks, they’re really on a roll.
Charles,
Interesting post on a complex issue. It is certainly emotional for all sides. The history of our great nation is full of issues that are controversial. The nation is best served when the decisions are made with clear constitutional interpretation and without either political motivation or legislation from the bench.
Chris Paulsen
Charles,
There are a few things I will agree with you on. It is not strictly a mosque, and it is not exactly on “Ground Zero”. But, as you point out, it is close enough that it could cause tension. I agree with you that ‘religious tolerance’ is paramount in a free and open democratic society and that many people still have incorrect assumptions about people that practice Islam.
But, I will challenge a few of your points. One is that Governor Patterson is not trying to use state or federal power to challenge the mosque on legal ground in a lawsuit or executive decision. In fact, the blog post you linked to said that Patterson wanted the commissions to make their decisions about zoning and planning free of political considerations. I think Patterson’s extending public lands for the mosque is not cowardly, or unconstitutional. He is trying to make a politically expedient decision that will appease voters- that seems to be par for the course for politicians these days. I also do not agree any of his actions would be, or are unconstitutional.
You also mention he would be pandering to an angry minority, but 53 percent of New Yorkers oppose the Mosque location, according again to your linked blog post, and this CNN report indicated 68% nationwide oppose: http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/22/new.york.mosque…..
I also feel like your argument on the 1st Amendment is not exactly applicable. A private corporation is trying to build a private place on private property. Unless there is a violation of zoning laws, there cannot really be legal action taken to prevent this. If Congress or the New York Legislature or even the New York City Council passed a law specifically disallowing the building of this mosque, THEN and only then would there be a letter of the law violation of the first amendment, in my opinion. What seems to be happening now is that the majority of people are protesting the mosque, and some politicians are saying the mosque’s location is in bad taste and do not support it. No one is trying to take legal action to stop it, there are only people trying to use the fourth branch of US government, public opinion, to make a change.
But, there is sort of an argument for a violation of the spirit of the 1st amendment- kind of shaky still though. On the same token if you want to offer 1 amendment “spirit of the law” protection to the builders of the mosque, you should also consider offering letter and spirit of the law 1 amendment protection to the protestors whose speech (as long as it is not hate speech) is fully protected.
-Danny
[...] was originally going to write this in as part of the last “In Defense of the Constitution” post, but after I realized that, once again, my writing on the First Amendment was getting [...]