Politics of "what might happen if . . . "

Amid all the furious issues swirling around in the news these days, the number of basic philosophical and constitutional issues they raise could make for extraordinary lessons in civics and ideas about governance 'of the people, by the people.'

Several examples come easily to mind: immigration, health care reform, gay marriage, financial reform, jobs and the economy. If only we would look at what basic values and policy issues underlie the furious spin and talking points, we might learn something.

The fraught question of Muslims building a $100 million dollar Mosque and Islamic Center near Ground Zero in Manhattan is another good example. Religious freedom and religious tolerance are vying with a sense of insult to 9/11 victims, xenophobia, and specific mistrust that any Islamic group would not harbor or foment terrorism.

Now a Duke University study has shown that building such a center is likely actually to reduce the turn to terrorism. Calmer heads point out that nothing could be more American in upholding our ideals of democracy than welcoming this center. This is another example of what Mickey Nardo, in a recent comment to my Aug 6 blog post, calls the "what might happen if . . . " argument that lets fear determine our policies and, to some extent, even our laws. It's a favorite tactic of bigots and fear-mongers.

Even the Anti-Defamation League has joined the crowd that wants to refuse permission to build the mosque in that place. Somewhere else in Manhattan, yes, but not there. Would it not be consistent with other decisions that limit who can build what, where -- zoning laws and building codes that, say, restrict porn stores near schools, people ask? But there needs to be a good rationale for those restrictions. And here it seems based on fear, prejudice, and "what might happen if . . . "

Can we trust them to be a force for good? In the best outcome, it would not only be a place of worship for Muslims, it is planned to become an educational and social services center, a demonstration of the noble values of Islam, and a gesture of good will that could help break down barriers of misunderstanding between "them" to "us." Then it would be a positive thing, as Mayor Blumberg says, exemplifying our highest ideals of democracy and tolerance. But suppose we're wrong, and it becomes a haven for terrorists? What might happen if . . . ?

Both sides are saying "what might happen if . . . " One is based on optimism, one on fear. Far better if our leaders would engage in a debate about the real issues.

Ralph