I want to amend what I wrote earlier today. My "ideal solution" to the controversy over the proposed mosque and Islamic center, I said, would be for the Islamic proponents to voluntarily choose another place, even in lower Manhattan, and then for the American leaders to join them in promoting the positive contributions of the center to the community -- a first step in demonstrating cooperation and a shared concern.
Based on what appears to be a whipped up politically expedient (they think) bigotry in the making, and on an informative article I just read in the New Yorker (Aug 16&23), I now want to retract that and stand firm against fear-mongering and bigotry. Here's my answer now: Do not only allow it to be built there but help them do it. And stand up strong against the opponents who would distort the whole project for political gain.
Here's what I learned from the article by Hendrick Hertzberg:
1. First of all, we should stop calling it the "Ground Zero Mosque." It is not at ground zero but two blocks north and is not even visible from the twin towers site. It would replace a run-down building in a neighborhood of restaurants, shops of all kinds, churches, office buildings. There is nothing about the site to suggest "hallowed ground."
2. Plans do not call for a grand mosque to be a house of worship for thousands. It is primarily a community center, with a prayer room. The building will house classrooms, galleries, a restaurant, a swimming pool, and -- get this -- a memorial to the victims of 9/11 !!! It will resemble nothing so much as the 92nd street YMCA, according to Hertzberg.
3. The people in charge of the plan are a New York couple, he from Kuwait and she from Kashmir. He is a Columbia graduate and has been the imam of a mosque in Tribeca for almost 30 years. He is vice-chair of the Interfaith Center of New York. He denounces terrorism in general and the 9/11 attack in particular. He has been invited by the FBI to do sensitivity training for agents. His wife actively promotes cultural and religious harmony through interfaith organizational work.
4. Not all of the 9/11 victim's families oppose the plan; many strongly support it. The local Community Board that includes the area endorsed it 20 to 1.
It is sad and ultimately shameful for this issue to blow up because politicians feel they have to have another divisive issue to rouse their base. It takes a strong person to stand up and defend the rights of the currently despised minority, especially when your conservative opponent is beating the bigotry drum (Harry Reid, take note). It is particularly sad when this couple and their project are exactly what we need to advance the cause of peace and good will and mutual understanding.
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
For a blistering rebuttal to Newt Gingrich and other fear-mongerers, see Kieth Olbermann at:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/16/olbermann-ground-zero-mosque_n_684272.html
It started as a genuine expression of concern that building an Islamic center in the vicinity of ground zero would disrespect the memory of those who were killed by the action of Islamic extremists.
ReplyDeleteThat has now been blown out of proportion, facts have been distorted, pandering to fear and prejudice has been rampant, and it has become the GOP campaign issue of the day -- an opportunity for yet another divisive wedge to excite their base.
While we might long for this to be settled quietly and peacefully by having the projected building moved to another location in New York -- that would in effect mean that once again distortion, bellicose pandering to fear and prejudice, and mean-spirited dirty politics would have won out over our constitutional freedoms.
That will be a sad day. It's a lot harder to stand up and fight for a principle in the face of rabid emotions clouding the issue -- it's easier if the good guys will just give in and compromise -- but that is a fight worth fighting and winning.
As Keith Olbermann says: it's "stupidity supported by rapacious politicians."