Ground Zero Mosque

At the center of the controversy over the proposed “Ground Zero mosque” in New York City lies a dichotomy between two opposing concepts: you can have an absolute right to pursue a course of action, and yet it is absolutely wrong to pursue said course of action.

The backers of the mosque have a right to build a house of worship anywhere zoning allows. The First Amendment, and over two hundred years of case law, establishes that fact quite clearly. However, I can see how some people could find it offensive to site a mosque only two blocks from the site of a massive attack upon America that was committed in the name of Islam.

I don’t often say things like this, but I do feel President Obama has struck the correct tone in his comments regarding this issue. You can defend the right to build the mosque, without being in favor of the project. In any case, this is a local issue, not a national one.

The Republicans howling about this project are doing the worst kind of demagoguery. They’re throwing stones, knowing that they don’t have to accept responsibility for actually taking any kind of action. If they were the party in power, they would be defending First Amendment rights as well. If Democrats were pointing this out, instead of calling Republicans bigots, they would have a more effective argument as well.

On the other hand, commentators who claim this is only a “cultural center” and not a mosque are deluding themselves, and attempting to delude the public as well. I don’t care that the plans for the fifteen story building include gym and an auditorium. There is a large Southern Baptist church only a couple of miles from my home. On their campus is an events center, an athletic center with four basketball courts, a school, and meeting rooms. Nobody is deceived that all of that is not ancillary to the real purpose, which is a church.

Ultimately, those offended by the presence of the Cordoba Center will have to make their peace with the project, for the concept of freedom of religion trumps all of the objections. And I think that is the best argument for allowing the project to proceed. The World Trade Center was attacked by extremists whose world view called for very little tolerance. What could be a greater repudiation of that world view than to promote tolerance by shutting up and allowing the project to proceed.?