The “M” Word

At the risk of being “politically incorrect” … yet again … I’m going to use the “m-word” in this article: 

“Mosque!” … “Mosque!” … "Mosque!" 

There … I said it! How’s that for exercising my First Amendment right to “freedom of speech?” I feel so relieved! Now, I won’t have to call Dr. Laura for any advice.

Speaking of the First Amendment, the proposed mosque in New York City that’s causing such a stir is really a “non-event.” The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” It seems pretty clear to me: people can build the church of their choice on private property anywhere. End of argument! It doesn’t require Presidential or news media endorsements; it’s simply the law. But apparently, a problem arises when people comment on the lack of sensitivity associated with constructing a mosque near what has been termed “Ground Zero” (the former site of the World Trade Center).

A terrible act of terrorism occurred on September 11, 2001, when Muslim extremists crashed planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a field just outside of Shanksville, Pennsylvania … killing nearly 3,000 people of a wide variety of ages, races, sexes, and religions from nearly one-half of the countries in the world. The 19 hijackers were obviously “equal opportunity terrorists.” They also represented an extraordinarily small percentage of the nearly 1.6 billion followers of Islam who populate the world.

If the Constitution and our Bill of Rights are to mean anything, the law must apply equally to all … and that includes religions. Therefore, the right to build an Islamic mosque in New York City within two blocks of “Ground Zero” is an “absolute.” Timothy McVeigh was baptized Roman Catholic, but I don’t remember Oklahoma City trying to ban the construction of Catholic churches anywhere nearby. And while I’ll grant that Timothy McVeigh didn’t pretend to be acting on behalf of his religion (whether he even had one at the time), those who worship as Catholics were not automatically “stained” by his treachery.

The “rub” comes when one chooses to denounce the lack of sensitivity associated with constructing a mosque in the location that is being proposed (a building that was damaged by the fuselage of one of the commandeered jets). It probably didn’t help when it was announced that the target date for its opening would be September 11, 2011 … the tenth anniversary of the attack (time to fire the mosque’s PR firm). Of course, I wouldn’t take the date too seriously. The likelihood of being able to build a mosque, which is to be topped by a 13-story cultural center with a swimming pool, … in New York City … with union labor … in only one year … is a construction project that even “the Donald” might not have the ego to attempt.

So, let’s just say that you think that it might be just a little bit insensitive to build a 13-story mosque and cultural center in the proposed location. Does that make you a bigot, a racist, or any other term which stereotypes you as an unfair, biased “pig” of some kind? No, actually, it makes you an American. You see, the First Amendment goes on to say that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech …” The last time I looked, that means that you have a right to express your disagreement with the choice of the location … or not to express it.

The President chose the latter. While he explicitly chose to reinforce the obvious (that the developer has the right to build the mosque on private property if it otherwise complies with local ordinances), he also chose not to comment on the site selection: "I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about."

In his position, one might wonder why the President felt the need to comment at all. He didn’t exactly jump into the fray when a group of Christian students was ordered to stop praying outside the U.S. Supreme Court building on May 5th (because the police officer thought it was illegal). He might want to take stock in the adage, “Silence is a virtue.” Besides, he has Vice President Biden to handle the Administration’s “foot-in-mouth” duties as well as Press Secretary “Glib” (who has recently gotten himself in trouble for telling the truth). Sometimes I think that the President succumbs to a self-imposed pressure he might feel to “step up” for groups with which he is perceived to be affiliated. That tendency usually winds up requiring an uncomfortable “clarification” or at least a Beer Summit in the Rose Garden. It also creates an embarrassing break within the Democratic ranks when “at risk” politicians like Harry Reid (speaking of racists) read the polls and quickly distance themselves from the President.

The media is a whole other issue. The banter between Liberal and Conservative media outlets is always entertaining. If a Conservative dares to suggest that the decision to build the mosque near “Ground Zero” might be inappropriate, the Liberal media immediately plays the “bigoted, racist pig” card … because, surely, no right-minded person (no pun intended) could possibly think that the selected site might offend anyone! In their view, Americans should look upon this as an opportunity to demonstrate our country’s “open-mindedness” to the world for the same reason so many predominantly Muslim nations proactively encourage synagogues to be built in their countries … preferably near locations of poignant national significance.

Luckily for the Liberals, there are a sufficient number of Conservatives who are stupid enough to assert that the developers don’t have a right to build the mosque … not that’s it’s just a really bad location from an emotional perspective … but that they don’t have a right … because of the whole “Muslim” thing, you know! So, for an extremely small subset of Conservatives (kind of like the terrorists among the Muslim population), the Liberal bantering may be appropriate. These people probably are “bigoted, racist pigs” … at least, to a degree. I might have to “give a pass” to those who lost a loved-one or friend on 9/11 and don’t care whether it’s legal to build a mosque there. You know how “bad feelings” can linger for awhile.

The interesting thing is that most pundits actually agree that the First Amendment applies and that the right to build the mosque definitely exists. Well … that’s almost the equivalent of bipartisan agreement!

What I find most interesting is the attempt by certain factions to “shut down” any expression of sentiment that the mosque shouldn’t be build near “Ground Zero.” I hate to bring up the First Amendment again, but doesn’t it also say, “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech …” and isn’t that all that this opinion is … an expression of free speech? Where’s the ACLU when we need them? Why is it that the same people, who clamor for the removal of religious artifacts of any kind from public property and who defend the rights of individuals to burn flags as an expression of “freedom of speech,” are nowhere to be found on this subject? Shoot! We’ve got “freedom of religion” and “freedom of speech” all wrapped up in one. You’d think they’d be all over this. Where’s their sense of “political correctness?” Where’s the shock and horror of those zealots in defense of the families of the victims of 9/11. If you were ever going to jump on a bandwagon in support of a “victims’ rights” initiative, this would be the one.

You can’t claim to support one part of the First Amendment without the other. You can’t argue on behalf of “freedom of religion” while condemning those who are merely exercising their “freedom of speech” when they express their belief that the selection of sites is in extremely poor taste. If you do, you must be some sort of “bigoted, racist pig.” I’m just kidding with regard to the last assertion. I just wanted you to personally experience how it feels when you do it to others with whom you disagree. So ends today’s lesson.

And as a special shout out to Dr. Laura … Dear Dr. Laura: don’t you wish you would have gone with a word that started one letter sooner? In the mean time: you are your kid’s mom … and I am my country’s Common Sense Czar. Now, go have a good day!

*****

Copyright © 2010 Dr. T.J. O’Hara. To support viral distribution, this article may be copied, reprinted, forwarded, linked, or published in any form as long as proper attribution is given to the author and no changes are made.