I do not for an instant believe all muslims to be terrorists or vice versa, and anyone who believes so is wholly ignorant. However, I do recognize that there is a notably substantial minority of muslims, those extreme practicioners, who threaten the safety of american lives and the west. It is fear of this minority that drives the appeasement of muslim demands, such as the building of this mosque. It is only an extreme and anti-western islamist who would desire the building of a mosque in a place that would provoke such great hurt and grief in the hearts of so many who lost loved ones there, that day. American have spoken out strongly against the mosque's establishment, with cries of 'USA' being heard at rallies. http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/11/new.york.islamic.center.rallies/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn There are few, i find hard to believe otherwise, who are supportive of the mosque's construction. Obama himself stated that while they have the right to build the mosque, he is unsure of its wisdom.
It appears to me that the building of the mosque is being permitted not out of genuine belief in the right of muslims to practice their faith, but out of fear for national security if such a request be denied. The islamist leader behind the building of the mosque has stated that the USA's handling of the matter will affect its national security. In my mind he ought simply to have issued a terrorist threat. Pastor Terry Jones backed of his stated intention to burn koran books if such a mosque be built, due to Obama's appeal not to endanger the safety of troops in Afghanistan. Fear of extremist muslims prevented an american exercising his right to speak freely and express his anger. Yet no significant opposition has been made to the mosque's establishment. Their right to build it has gone for the most part unchallenged. As americans, we hide behind a facade of 'rights', the 'right' of a faction living within our own nation to build a temple of their own on ground where thousands of our own died at their hands. While it is true that these terrorists did not represent all muslims, they represented a notable sum, enough that a country's government refused to hand over the instigator of the attacks, driving us to war, where even more of our own died. If the muslims building the mosque wished no conflict, they would not choose such a site for the mosque. Yet we appease them.
This appeasement of islam stretches beyond New York and the USA. In the united kingdom, sharia courts have been granted the right to enforce muslim law on muslims living within the country. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece These courts can enforce the power of british law, passing judgements which often favor men over women. Surely, within a democracy, the law should apply equally to all? It seems the UK has its own version of democracy, though, where groups can live under differing laws of their own if they push hard enough. In France, as the muslim population grows rapidly, the french way of life has come under threat as public facilities such as swimming pools have begun to adjust their schedules to the muslim calendar and daily practice of prayer five times a day. For the first time in its history the rich and diverse culture of France has shown an inability to assimilate a group of arriving immigrants into its own practices. It would seem arriving islamists are determined to spread their own practices throughout the country until they supersede the nation's own culture. Yet France places no lines or barriers. It appeases.
At some point the west will have to step up and face a hard truth. Or perhaps we will suffer some form of repeat of the dark years of 1939-45. Who knows? All I know is I've lost faith in humanity's ability to learn from its mistakes.
Daniel, I think your post was both insightful and well-informed, which is hard to do considering the polarization that surrounds this issue. I wholeheartedly agree that the mosque should not be built out of fear of Muslim extremists and I think that's a point that has been largely overlooked in some of the debate over this topic.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am critical of your stance on the right to build the mosque. You say, "Anyone aware of the climate in muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia, and moving away from the middle east, Afghanistan, would laugh if they heard of plans to construct a church or synagogue in one of their cities. Forget constructing one on a sight of national tragedy, but simply in a town of theirs, the idea would be absurd and suicidal, as those countries certainly don't consider our rights to practice our faith." This suggests that because Muslims in other countries have limited the rights of their citizens, we should in turn deny Muslim-Americans their basic American rights. Isn't that exactly what your post warns of? That America will lose its foundation of equality and freedom due to the spread of Islam?
Yes Max, im sorry i actually edited that statement out of my blog before reading your comment, the argument was flawed on my part. Yet i do think that those who argue the prevention of the mosque's establishment would infringe people's rights and make us tyrants need to step back and look at true tyranny in the world before being so quick to condemn their country to tyrannical status. The USA does not come remotely close to tyranny on a global level at all, and one needs to make sure to keep things in perspective. Another site could simply be provided for the mosque. Having said that, i clearly see your argument and realize my comparison to islamic countries was really contradictory to my argument itself.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I think you would be highly benefited by cutting down the length of this post significantly-- a lot more people would read it and be able to respond. It's gigantic, and hard to read because the lack of clear paragraph breaks makes it look a bit like a textwall. Your entire introductory example about Hitler is interesting, but takes up a lot of space and is unrelated to the general topic of your post-- you don't need it at all.
ReplyDelete". It is fear of this minority that drives the appeasement of muslim demands, such as the building of this mosque"
I absolutely disagree with this. First of all, Park 51 is an Islamic cultural center, not a mosque, built with the intention of creating greater cross-cultural understanding and acceptance of moderate Islam. Do you have any sources indicating that it's fear of not following "muslim demands" that's responsible for it not being built? This is the first time I've heard that kind of description.
"It is only an extreme and anti-western islamist who would desire the building of a mosque in a place that would provoke such great hurt and grief in the hearts of so many who lost loved ones there, that day."
Actually, this is quite an assumption. The imam is a moderate, not an extremist, and has spent a fair amount of time writing about how Islam fits in to modern western society.
"The islamist leader behind the building of the mosque has stated that the USA's handling of the matter will affect its national security. In my mind he ought simply to have issued a terrorist threat."
It makes sense to view Imam Rauf's statements about national security as faulty logic, and it very well may have been an appeal to fear. But a terrorist threat? I think that's a stretch. Your blog post would be a lot more concrete if you quoted the Imam directly and had a link to a source.
The discussion of France is interesting, but might be better for a different blog post, because again, it just adds a lot of new information.
"For the first time in its history the rich and diverse culture of France has shown an inability to assimilate a group of arriving immigrants into its own practices"
I have to wonder-- is this actually Muslims' fault? If France's culture is so usually-diverse and accepting, why are Muslims who are born and raised in france treated as 'others,' who aren't as entitled to shape French culture as others are? Also, while I don't know much about Sarkozy or French politics at all, I'm not so sure they're that open to diversity or new immigrants. I spent some time in France and a girl I lived with told me that the president blamed a lot of the country's problems on immigrants. Interestingly, the girl's mother is a first-generation immigrant from Russia who married a Frenchman in France, and I was told even people like her were talked of in this manner. Of course, this is very anecdotal and I have no way of supporting this, but I think it would be worth your while to look in to how diverse and open French culture truly is.