Posted by: Nathan Schulzke | May 17, 2010

Ground-Zero Mosque

Well, I’m sure you’ve all heard a bit about the mosque that is planned near Ground Zero.

Plans to build a mosque two blocks away from ground zero have set off an emotional debate among area residents and relatives of victims of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.

Cordoba House project calls for a 15-story community center including a mosque, performance art center, gym, swimming pool and other public spaces.

A fifteen-story building with a mosque is planned only two blocks away from ground zero.  By the American Society for Muslim Advancement.  This is simply sickening.

If it were anyone but Islam, the media would be criticizing this to death.  If the “German Society for Aryan Advancement” wanted to build anything across from Auschwitz, that would be considered simply wrong.  If the “Indonesian Society for Japanese Advancement” wanted to build memorials along the Bataan Death March, that would not be okay.  Someone else could build the memorials, but it would be considered wrong for a group of people interested in the “Advancement” of the race that caused the tragedy to be building the memorials.

But because it is the religion that is considered by themselves and by the media to be above criticism, it’s perfectly fine.

The thing is, the people planning it may have perfectly decent motives.  But Islamic terrorists will see it as a victory for Islam.  That they can do something so terrible, and then have other Muslims be able to use it as an excuse for “Muslim Advancement”, that’s exactly what they are after.



  1. Interesting. I just wrote about this mosque and have been trying to figure out what the average person thinks about this controversy and groundbreaking on Sept. 11 2011!

  2. I’m actually not sure where I stand here.

    On the one hand, our country is presently being attacked by terrorists who profess to be Islamic and Muslim. On the other, this is the United States of America, in which people are supposed to be punished only for breaking the law, and in which people are supposed to be free to build and worship as they please, within the law.

    And it seems to me that this project is all well within the boundary of the law, though I cannot say that I am fit to pass judgment on that, nor to say for certain that such is true.

    So what’s the argument? That we cannot allow certain religions to legally construct places of worship? I know we’re facing Islamists and Muslims on the battlefield, and somewhat of what they do and have done and have threatened to do, but if there are people within this country who worship as members of these religions and are law abiding citizens, how can we deny them?

    I’m worried we’re inconsistent in defending our rights. When we oppose the idea or the people who are getting their rights snubbed, we have a tendency to join in on the snubbing.

    So, what I ask is this: Would it be appropriate for there to be a Christian church or Jewish synagogue nearby Ground Zero? Would it be appropriate for any one religion? If so, how can we maintain ourselves and deny any religion this privilege?

  3. My position on this has a lot in common with my position on the Snyder v. Phelps case. In both cases, I believe that the parties in question have every right to do what they did or do. I think it inadvisable and wrong, but I agree that they are constitutionally allowed to do it. I don’t think anyone is/was arguing that they didn’t have that right. I may have come off that way back in May, but that isn’t what I meant.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: