In response to tremendous public clamor, I shall share my views on the Cordoba Islamic Center near Ground Zero.
My views are kind of mixed, but mostly negative.
When I first heard about it, I thought, “What’s the big deal? It’s not directly on the 9/11 site. It’s just a mosque.”
But things I’ve been reading and hearing on the radio suggest that it’s not just a mosque, and that the very name is a statement of Islamic triumphalism.
I don’t know. I’m suspicious of conservative paranoia, but I’m also aware that symbolism is a very big deal with Muslims.
The thought that keeps recurring to me is, “We are told again and again, when dealing with the Islamic world, that it’s tremendously important to be sensitive to the feelings of Muslims.
“So how come that doesn’t work both ways? How come Muslims have no obligation to be sensitive to the feelings of 9/11 victims?”
I guess that’s what irritates me most. What I believe I perceive in the attitude of Muslims generally, is an attitude that says, “Tolerance is important, when you’re tolerating us. Not so important when it comes to us tolerating you.”
Tragically, this attitude fits like a jigsaw puzzle piece with the standard western liberal attitude that says, “America is always in the wrong. Third World people are always in the right.” (This arises from a misunderstanding of the David and Goliath story. Liberals interpret it, not to mean that being in the right depends on whether or not you stand with the Lord, regardless of your size, but that the little guy is always right. Hence Charlie Chaplin movies. Which I hate.)
Greg Gutfield, professional wisenheimer over at Big Hollywood, and on Fox News (I’ve never watched his show, because I don’t have cable and wouldn’t stay up that late if I did) recently announced he was opening a gay bar, catering to Muslims, right next to the mosque.
One is tempted to delight in this—“You want tolerance? Here’s a chance to show some.”
On the other hand, if someone did the same thing next to a Christian church because of its stand on homosexuality, I’d be outraged.
On the other, other hand (I’m borrowing a friend’s), if the church was built precisely to provoke the homosexuals, that would change the dynamic.
Because we’re commanded to love our enemies. As Muslims are not.
In any case, I think I’ve come up with a formulation which succinctly explains, in Occam’s Razor fashion, the liberal view on conservative Christianity vs. conservative Islam.
To a liberal, a Muslim is never violent, even when he kills someone.
To a liberal, a conservative Christian is always violent, even if all he does is think a thought the liberal doesn’t like.
Well said. I hope the Cordova project fails, because it appears to be evil symbolism. Let’s set up a Soviet tribute to forced starvation while we’re at it, but that could be easily misunderstood by Princeton grads as a recommendable achievement by the honorable Soviets and St. Stalin.
Why don’t we compromise with the terrorists? In exchange for denying the mosque, we will rename New York Islamabad.
I believe we should allow the Mosque. It is part of our system of values that religion is not restricted by the government. Unfortunately, that also protects annoying religions.
At the same time, I love the idea of using it as a trap. As you said, Muslims don’t seem to be very tolerant of our beliefs. Therefore, anything annoying within the law is fair game. Gay bars, pork eateries, and stores selling Muhammad cartoons.
BTW, Phil, I’d like to see a Communist themes casino in Las Vegas. That would be the ultimate insult.
I mostly agree with your post. Especially since if we are supposed to be sensitive to Muslims, they need to understand that 9/11 and that site are things that they must be sensitive to. They obviously do know that unless they’ve been hiding under a rock. (If they’d been hiding in an Afghan cave, they’d definitely know.)
New York is a very international city with a sloppy mix of cultures, nationalities, and yes, religions. I can imagine someone there thinking this is no big deal, just another part of the mix. If so, they need to think some more or get a bigger mind.
Aside from the enjoyment we’d get from putting a gay bar next to their building, why not? The ultimate test of our freedom and laws is to do a thing and stand behind it.
I’d rather not stand behind a gay bar. Just saying. The Leningrad Palace Casino, on the other hand . . .
I agree with just about everything in this article by Lars….
My son has fought in most of the hot areas in the middle east…. He has repeatedly told me that the general, run of the mill, “John Doe” Muslim, really isn’t interested in killing or insulting westerners.
They really just want to be left to do their own things…like we do….
But, when it comes to these Islamic leaders who are more pro-Taliban or the like, (they are the ones stirring up the pot to do what they can to bring Islam up to a world dominating power…)…to heck with America, etc…. The militant Imams are the real villans here….
The big problem; John Doe Muslims are run over by rabid Muslims as easily as Americans are. So, better to go with the rabid dog you know, rather than the weird Christian you don’t know.