What is the benefit of having it built so close? Obviously this has become a divisive issue with many people, including those who lost friends and family on 9/11. There are plenty of other suitable spots in New York City. Why does it have to be so close, when it is causing all this trouble?
I live just outside NYC and know many people who died on 9/11. I believe that if the mosque is not allowed to be built because of its proximity to ground zero, then the United States is sending out the message that we believe all muslims are terrorists, which is clearly not true. The mosque should be allowed to be built and used because the first amendment clearly states that people have the freedom to practice whatever religion they chose.
Sure, In a truly ideal world, building a mosque as a "symbol or message of forgiveness" isn't a bad idea. But more than 70% of Americans "concur with the premise that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center"(TIME). Building a Mosque so close to a place where radical muslims killed nearly 3,000 innocent Americans would not send a message of tolerance to the world, but one of dishonor for those lost. I know thats not the message anyone wants proclaimed, but that is how it will be recieved. Currently 61% of Americans are against the building of this specific mosque project. Is it worth offending a large majority of our nation to satisfy the desire of the 26% who support it?
This project is not bringing people together or promoting tolerance; its driving an unnecessary wedge into our nation at a time where we already have enough divisive issues.
Preventing the building of a mosque because it may be founds insulting to the victims of the 9/11 attacks is holding an entire religion and its followers responsible for the wrongful acts of a few radical individuals. All muslims should not be held accountable for 9/11 nor should Islam be considered the driving force in the 9/11 attacks. Radical beliefs grow out of all religions (and even without religion at all). Once people understand that the only ones to blame are the few who planned and executed the attacks, I don't see how a Muslim mosque could be found insulting to the victims of 9/11.
I feel that the reason that this mosque is creating such controversy is because people wrongfully associate Islam with terrorists. If we allow the mosque not to be built, regardless of what majority would agree with such an action, we are promoting and reinforcing a wrong assumption and setting a precedent of intolerance and stereotyping in our nation.
And to address the argument that it would unnecessarily create tension and disunity in our Nation--just because an idea is popular does not make it right.
Not building this mosque would be a huge mistake for our foreign policy goals for the next coming years. Though it may be clear to us in the United States that we are fighting Islamic extremists who represent a tiny percentage of the overall Muslim population, this understanding is not felt universally. There is already a strongly held perception in the Middle East that the United States is avidly anti-Muslim in general(we already invaded two Muslim countries and have troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, home to the Muslim faith's most holy sites). This is a serious problem for a country that currently has its armed forces involved in two costly engagements in predominantly Muslim countries. Whether or not a majority of Americans support the mosque is irrelevant in the grand foreign policy picture. We need to show a little bit of tolerance and sacrifice on our parts as a show of good faith towards the religion of Islam in general in hopes that it might curry favor towards future negotiations with Islamic governments.
President Obama has already started a series of significant diplomatic negotiations with Israel and Palestine in the hopes that a new peace treaty can be signed (a longshot granted). How can we expect to receive any assistance from the Palestinian authorities if they see America as a bigoted, anti-Muslim country determined to suppress their religion? The same question can be asked in regards to our military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq and our attempt to reconstruct their governments.
This mosque should be built not only because the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion/assembly but because to not build this mosque would only further hurt our decades long effort in the Middle East.
Not building this mosque would be a huge mistake for our foreign policy goals for the next coming years. Though it may be clear to us in the United States that we are fighting Islamic extremists who represent a tiny percentage of the overall Muslim population, this understanding is not felt universally. There is already a strongly held perception in the Middle East that the United States is avidly anti-Muslim in general(we already invaded two Muslim countries and have troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, home to the Muslim faith's most holy sites). This is a serious problem for a country that currently has its armed forces involved in two costly engagements in predominantly Muslim countries. Whether or not a majority of Americans support the mosque is irrelevant in the grand foreign policy picture. We need to show a little bit of tolerance and sacrifice on our parts as a show of good faith towards the religion of Islam in general in hopes that it might curry favor towards future negotiations with Islamic governments.
President Obama has already started a series of significant diplomatic negotiations with Israel and Palestine in the hopes that a new peace treaty can be signed (a longshot granted). How can we expect to receive any assistance from the Palestinian authorities if they see America as a bigoted, anti-Muslim country determined to suppress their religion? The same question can be asked in regards to our military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq and our attempt to reconstruct their governments.
This mosque should be built not only because the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion/assembly but because to not build this mosque would only further hurt our decades long effort in the Middle East.
Of course not all muslims are terrorists. 9/11 is one instance where a handful of radical muslims acted on their interpretation of their religion and (in their minds) did what the Qur'an told them was 'right.' This does not make me believe all muslims are terrorists, but makes me wary when religious leader of the same religion wants to build a mosque at this site.
Say for instance, some mormons murdered everyone in the empire state building, and blew it up. Then a mormon preacher came and wanted to erect a momon church in it's place for no apparent reason. Would you be in favor of it in order to show your tolerance? Would you be suspicious of his motives? This doesn't make all mormons terrorists, but wouldn't that feel a bit like a victory monument?
In the case of islam, this has already taken place numerous times around the world, each time a mosque being erected at the site where they've wiped out a pre-existing cultural symbol. The central prophet (Muhammad) actually began this tradition in the Qur'an, the book of Islam. (Muhammad is a central figure in the belief system of all muslims, not only the radicals). If this is not a victory mosque, then why the necessity to have it so close?
So far I have heard reasons against stopping it(on the grounds of religious freedom, for future foreign relations, etc), but there is still no specific argument why it has to be built right there on site. If this isn't a victory mosque, why does it have to be so close? Why with plans to be finished on the 10 year anniversary of a terrorist victory, September 11th, 2011?
9 comments:
What is the benefit of having it built so close? Obviously this has become a divisive issue with many people, including those who lost friends and family on 9/11. There are plenty of other suitable spots in New York City. Why does it have to be so close, when it is causing all this trouble?
While I don't see obvious benefits to having the mosque built so close to ground zero, I don't see why it shouldn't be built either.
I live just outside NYC and know many people who died on 9/11. I believe that if the mosque is not allowed to be built because of its proximity to ground zero, then the United States is sending out the message that we believe all muslims are terrorists, which is clearly not true. The mosque should be allowed to be built and used because the first amendment clearly states that people have the freedom to practice whatever religion they chose.
Sure, In a truly ideal world, building a mosque as a "symbol or message of forgiveness" isn't a bad idea. But more than 70% of Americans "concur with the premise that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center"(TIME). Building a Mosque so close to a place where radical muslims killed nearly 3,000 innocent Americans would not send a message of tolerance to the world, but one of dishonor for those lost. I know thats not the message anyone wants proclaimed, but that is how it will be recieved. Currently 61% of Americans are against the building of this specific mosque project. Is it worth offending a large majority of our nation to satisfy the desire of the 26% who support it?
This project is not bringing people together or promoting tolerance; its driving an unnecessary wedge into our nation at a time where we already have enough divisive issues.
Preventing the building of a mosque because it may be founds insulting to the victims of the 9/11 attacks is holding an entire religion and its followers responsible for the wrongful acts of a few radical individuals. All muslims should not be held accountable for 9/11 nor should Islam be considered the driving force in the 9/11 attacks. Radical beliefs grow out of all religions (and even without religion at all). Once people understand that the only ones to blame are the few who planned and executed the attacks, I don't see how a Muslim mosque could be found insulting to the victims of 9/11.
I feel that the reason that this mosque is creating such controversy is because people wrongfully associate Islam with terrorists. If we allow the mosque not to be built, regardless of what majority would agree with such an action, we are promoting and reinforcing a wrong assumption and setting a precedent of intolerance and stereotyping in our nation.
And to address the argument that it would unnecessarily create tension and disunity in our Nation--just because an idea is popular does not make it right.
Not building this mosque would be a huge mistake for our foreign policy goals for the next coming years. Though it may be clear to us in the United States that we are fighting Islamic extremists who represent a tiny percentage of the overall Muslim population, this understanding is not felt universally. There is already a strongly held perception in the Middle East that the United States is avidly anti-Muslim in general(we already invaded two Muslim countries and have troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, home to the Muslim faith's most holy sites). This is a serious problem for a country that currently has its armed forces involved in two costly engagements in predominantly Muslim countries. Whether or not a majority of Americans support the mosque is irrelevant in the grand foreign policy picture. We need to show a little bit of tolerance and sacrifice on our parts as a show of good faith towards the religion of Islam in general in hopes that it might curry favor towards future negotiations with Islamic governments.
President Obama has already started a series of significant diplomatic negotiations with Israel and Palestine in the hopes that a new peace treaty can be signed (a longshot granted). How can we expect to receive any assistance from the Palestinian authorities if they see America as a bigoted, anti-Muslim country determined to suppress their religion? The same question can be asked in regards to our military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq and our attempt to reconstruct their governments.
This mosque should be built not only because the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion/assembly but because to not build this mosque would only further hurt our decades long effort in the Middle East.
Not building this mosque would be a huge mistake for our foreign policy goals for the next coming years. Though it may be clear to us in the United States that we are fighting Islamic extremists who represent a tiny percentage of the overall Muslim population, this understanding is not felt universally. There is already a strongly held perception in the Middle East that the United States is avidly anti-Muslim in general(we already invaded two Muslim countries and have troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, home to the Muslim faith's most holy sites). This is a serious problem for a country that currently has its armed forces involved in two costly engagements in predominantly Muslim countries. Whether or not a majority of Americans support the mosque is irrelevant in the grand foreign policy picture. We need to show a little bit of tolerance and sacrifice on our parts as a show of good faith towards the religion of Islam in general in hopes that it might curry favor towards future negotiations with Islamic governments.
President Obama has already started a series of significant diplomatic negotiations with Israel and Palestine in the hopes that a new peace treaty can be signed (a longshot granted). How can we expect to receive any assistance from the Palestinian authorities if they see America as a bigoted, anti-Muslim country determined to suppress their religion? The same question can be asked in regards to our military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq and our attempt to reconstruct their governments.
This mosque should be built not only because the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion/assembly but because to not build this mosque would only further hurt our decades long effort in the Middle East.
Of course not all muslims are terrorists. 9/11 is one instance where a handful of radical muslims acted on their interpretation of their religion and (in their minds) did what the Qur'an told them was 'right.' This does not make me believe all muslims are terrorists, but makes me wary when religious leader of the same religion wants to build a mosque at this site.
Say for instance, some mormons murdered everyone in the empire state building, and blew it up. Then a mormon preacher came and wanted to erect a momon church in it's place for no apparent reason. Would you be in favor of it in order to show your tolerance? Would you be suspicious of his motives? This doesn't make all mormons terrorists, but wouldn't that feel a bit like a victory monument?
In the case of islam, this has already taken place numerous times around the world, each time a mosque being erected at the site where they've wiped out a pre-existing cultural symbol. The central prophet (Muhammad) actually began this tradition in the Qur'an, the book of Islam. (Muhammad is a central figure in the belief system of all muslims, not only the radicals). If this is not a victory mosque, then why the necessity to have it so close?
So far I have heard reasons against stopping it(on the grounds of religious freedom, for future foreign relations, etc), but there is still no specific argument why it has to be built right there on site. If this isn't a victory mosque, why does it have to be so close? Why with plans to be finished on the 10 year anniversary of a terrorist victory, September 11th, 2011?
Post a Comment