Mosque Talk

The topic du jour lately has been the proposed building of an Islamic Community Center, a.k.a. mosque, just steps from Ground Zero in New York City. This issue might have been limited to a local one, but then President Obama "stupidly" inserted himself into the equation by voting present and inflamming millions.

Protests, commercials and marches have followed, as well as conversations about the constitutionality of restricting the proposed building and conversations about just how peaceful Islam really is.

Here's an example. On Facebook recently, XEKE.com founder and Sr. Fellow Zach Myers said,

Anyone who thinks that the Mosque at Ground Zero is okay a.) clearly lacks common sense b.) is completely insensitive to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11 c.) needs to research Cordoba House when the Muslims conquered Spain d.) is so open minded that his/her brains have completely fallen out.

OK, so, I'm an open minded idiot that has no common sense? I was under the impression that Cordoba House is so named to refer to a time in Spain when, yes, the Muslims were in power, but lived peacefully with other Christians and Jews. Also, how is it insensitive? None of the bombers are going to be going to the mosque, just followers of Islam. I own a Koran, read almost all of it. I challenge anyone to read it and tell me that Islam is not a beautiful religion of peace.

Islam is not an inherently evil religion. Just because some whack-jobs misconstrue it and killed people does not mean that all Muslims are that way. This is a country of religious freedom, and if we ban certain ones from certain places, what makes us better than the whack-jobs?

One last thing: calling people that do not agree with your opinion idiots and insulting them isn't the best way to make you're [sic] point.

Clearly there was some history here, but we'll leave the emotional history aside and stick with the facts. The rest of the exchange follows:

Ryan Gates: One of us is clearly living in a parallel universe. Mr. Watson, your statements simply do not correspond with reality. There aren't just "some" whack-jobs killing in the name of Islam. And if Islam is such a beautiful, peaceful religion, why aren't the beautiful, peaceful adherents cleaning up their own house and disowning the radicals? I submit that it's because the radicals aren't so radical.

There are times to debate opinion, and there are times to call a spade a spade. 21st Century Islamic violence aimed at Western Civilization is not a time to debate opinion.

JD: I think I made my point pretty clearly, and I stand behind what I just said. If I could, let me recommend an AMAZING book: "The Life of Pi" by Yan Martel. Maybe it would help open your mind some.

RG: There is one area upon which we agree: that you made your point very clearly.

And let all who read this thread after us come to their own conclusion about whose comments are consistent with the current events that are visible to those who wish to observe them.

JD: Mr. Gates, are you seriously telling me that all Muslims are radical, homicidal murderers? Christians and Jews have had wars as well. The men who blew up the Oklahoma City building were not followers of Islam. Neither were the Columbine shooters. Do you happen to know anyone who is a Muslim? If so, ask them if they think what the extremists are doing is OK. Do we honestly go down the path of telling people of a certain religion that they can not worship in certain places? What's next? Making all Muslims wear a pin on green Islamic symbol? I see to remember that happening to another group of people back in the 1930s.

RG: I'm not going to defend a position that I have not taken, so I will ignore much of your rant that was addressed to me.

Suffice it to say that bad people do bad things every day. That's the nature of the world in which we live. Timothy McVeigh, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed in the name of athiesm. What's your point?

My point is that there's a startling trend occurring. Many younger Muslim men, and now women, are killing in the name of Islam, all over the world. It doesn't make someone a bigot to point this out and name the problem.

Why is there only tolerance for Muslims who behave this way? If Jews, Christians or Jehovah's Witnesses strapped bombs to themselves, flew planes into buildings, tried to set their underwear on fire on a plane, or were caught with blueprints and photographs of major buildings and population centers, there wouldn't be a fraction of the same tolerance.

There is one side to this conversation that includes an open mind. But this is yet another point about which we disagree.

A secondary point has been raised by many smart folks: Who should stop the building of the mosque? The government? That is a slippery slope, for sure.

It's high time we as a nation get past this notion of absolute freedom. We don't have it anyway! There is no greater advocate of Libertarian, Randian freedom than me, but that's not what we have in America, and it's been gone for a long time (did we ever have it?). The government tells folks every day that they can do this and they can't do that. So why, all of a sudden, are we concerned with a precedent that will be set if a government entity steps in and stops the mosque?

The precedent has already been set! A Greek Orthodox church's plans to rebuild next to Ground Zero (where they were prior to the Islamic attack) have been shelved by the government.

Ultimately, what XEKE.com would like to see is an equal application of the law. If an Islamic Community Center is to be built, then nothing should stop the restoration of the Greek Orthodox Church. But if the Church cannot be built where it once stood, then the Mosque should be scrapped. XEKE.com challenges anyone to come up with a rational, reasoned argument against our wishes. Good luck.

rg

8/28/2010