Mosque and Sept. 11: Wrong Time, Inadequate Space
Published in Listin Diario
(Dominican Republic) on 4 September 2010
by Ricardo Trotti (link to
original)
A few days before the ninth anniversary of Sept. 11, plans to build a mosque and an Islamic cultural center a few yards from ground zero in New York reopened wounds and set off resentment against a religion many perceive as a refuge to extremists and fundamentalists.
Never before has an event related to terrorism and the attack in 2001 on the Twin Towers aroused so much controversy.
Emotions and passions are divided, which makes sense considering that the discussion focuses on the collision of constitutional rights of equal value: the freedom of religion and the right to honor.
The controversy may exasperate American politics all the way to the November elections, as parties and political forces take strong stands to position themselves to their respective electorates, which can be seen as diametrically opposed.
For many, the focus of President Barack Obama on the Constitution, which defends religious freedoms and the right of everyone to build a temple to practice their religious faith if not violating any laws, is nothing more than a slap to American patriotism. Surveys have found that an increased number of people think Obama is Muslim, although he has proclaimed himself to be Christian.
In contrast, the preaching of former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin to the feelings of the victims and the honor and dignity the victims’ families ask for, argues that the construction of the mosque at ground zero is an unnecessary provocation. However, this can be seen as evidence of religious intolerance and could encourage further terrorist attacks motivated by religion on the country.
The polls reflect those paradoxical views. The majority considers the freedom of religion essential, but there are also opponents who argue that the 15 floors and $100 million promoted with passion by the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf does not come at the right time and is not given proper space.
The issue of time is valid, because sometimes the span of a few generations is needed to forgive or forget, as happened to the Americans with Pearl Harbor, or the Japanese with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As for space it should be pointed out that the very controversy occurring in New York is taking place in the state of Tennessee right now, where a community is furiously trying to avoid the building of another mosque.
Such a position is justified at ground zero because the mosque can be seen as a serious offense to the families of the victims, and so further irritation, division and hatred should be avoided, as former Mayor Rudolf Giuliani believes. But in Tennessee or elsewhere, this does nothing but demonstrate discrimination against a particular belief and a violation of religious freedom.
This unwittingly helps raise anti-Western feelings and has already encouraged American Muslim clergyman Anwar al-Awlaki, who is conscripting fanatics for his crusade on the Internet, against the U.S. and also possibly against France, which in July sanctioned a law that prohibits Muslim women from wearing the burqa or full veil in public places. This is a debate between those who promote religious freedom and those who advocate civil rights and women’s duties to the state.
What emerges from these debates is that in an increasingly globalized world, there is a need for governments — both Western and Eastern — to encourage education about religions and cultures to promote more understanding and less friction.
Imam Abdul Rauf should be more sensitive. Erecting a mosque at the wrong time and the wrong place not only affects the memories of the victims, but also attracts anti-religious sentiments, divisions and resentments, the very issues to which his work is opposed.
If the objective is to have a space for reunions and prayers, a few miles should not affect their Muslim beliefs. Nevertheless, that display of charity in regard to other peoples' pain, and demonstrating that freedom of religion and worship comes with responsibilities, could earn more supporters and comprehension for the Islamic faith.
Never before has an event related to terrorism and the attack in 2001 on the Twin Towers aroused so much controversy.
Emotions and passions are divided, which makes sense considering that the discussion focuses on the collision of constitutional rights of equal value: the freedom of religion and the right to honor.
The controversy may exasperate American politics all the way to the November elections, as parties and political forces take strong stands to position themselves to their respective electorates, which can be seen as diametrically opposed.
For many, the focus of President Barack Obama on the Constitution, which defends religious freedoms and the right of everyone to build a temple to practice their religious faith if not violating any laws, is nothing more than a slap to American patriotism. Surveys have found that an increased number of people think Obama is Muslim, although he has proclaimed himself to be Christian.
In contrast, the preaching of former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin to the feelings of the victims and the honor and dignity the victims’ families ask for, argues that the construction of the mosque at ground zero is an unnecessary provocation. However, this can be seen as evidence of religious intolerance and could encourage further terrorist attacks motivated by religion on the country.
The polls reflect those paradoxical views. The majority considers the freedom of religion essential, but there are also opponents who argue that the 15 floors and $100 million promoted with passion by the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf does not come at the right time and is not given proper space.
The issue of time is valid, because sometimes the span of a few generations is needed to forgive or forget, as happened to the Americans with Pearl Harbor, or the Japanese with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As for space it should be pointed out that the very controversy occurring in New York is taking place in the state of Tennessee right now, where a community is furiously trying to avoid the building of another mosque.
Such a position is justified at ground zero because the mosque can be seen as a serious offense to the families of the victims, and so further irritation, division and hatred should be avoided, as former Mayor Rudolf Giuliani believes. But in Tennessee or elsewhere, this does nothing but demonstrate discrimination against a particular belief and a violation of religious freedom.
This unwittingly helps raise anti-Western feelings and has already encouraged American Muslim clergyman Anwar al-Awlaki, who is conscripting fanatics for his crusade on the Internet, against the U.S. and also possibly against France, which in July sanctioned a law that prohibits Muslim women from wearing the burqa or full veil in public places. This is a debate between those who promote religious freedom and those who advocate civil rights and women’s duties to the state.
What emerges from these debates is that in an increasingly globalized world, there is a need for governments — both Western and Eastern — to encourage education about religions and cultures to promote more understanding and less friction.
Imam Abdul Rauf should be more sensitive. Erecting a mosque at the wrong time and the wrong place not only affects the memories of the victims, but also attracts anti-religious sentiments, divisions and resentments, the very issues to which his work is opposed.
If the objective is to have a space for reunions and prayers, a few miles should not affect their Muslim beliefs. Nevertheless, that display of charity in regard to other peoples' pain, and demonstrating that freedom of religion and worship comes with responsibilities, could earn more supporters and comprehension for the Islamic faith.
Next article![]( "U.S. Endgame in Afghanistan: The Evil of Three Lessers")
