I’ve been watching all these arguments about the mosque/cultural center at/near ground zero, and it strikes me as odd how people are taking so many differing positions on the issue. This issue seems particularly popular among atheists.
I’m going to get something out of the way first. I’m going to call this a mosque, because this cultural center has a mosque in it. I know supporters keep calling it a cultural center, and prayer center, but there is a mosque in this building, and no level of clever rewording is going to change that.
Everyone claims to be upset about the mosque, but I doubt they would be much less upset if it were only an Islamic cultural center anyway, so trying to play down the mosque part of things is rather fruitless. Any way you look at it, people just flat out don’t want Muslim symbols, such as a mosque, near what everyone has decided is the ultimate evidence of the evils of Islam.
Why Oppose the Mosque?
Now, I’ll go with those people opposed to the mosque first. It’s obviously an emotional issue. I see protesters with signs protesting sharia law, which has nothing to do with this whole issue, but I guess it makes them feel better about their position, and even being opposed to that is an emotional issue.
These people, many of whom lost friends and/or family in that attack, have every right to treat ground zero as a shrine. That is the place their friends and family died. In fact, it is entirely conceivable that body parts of some of the victims even fell on the building where this mosque will be built. The debris cloud definitely would have engulfed that building.
Whether or not the people that are building that mosque had anything to do with those attacks is secondary to the belief that it is the ideology behind Islam that caused those deaths, and they want no part of it near this shrine.
Why Support the Mosque?
The people that support the mosque are of multiple stripes. I am one that supports the right of the people to build the mosque, and I would never support any attempt to remove their right to build it, but I think they are extremely insensitive to the people that lost loved ones there. That seems to be where the majority of supporters stand. On the other hand, we have people that would like to tell everyone that is against the mosque that they are being irrational and overly emotional.
Are Protesters Overly Emotional?
Now, my position isn’t the one I really wanted to deal with here. When I say it’s insensitive, I believe that much is obvious based on the protesting. If people’s feelings weren’t hurt by it, there would be no protests.
What I really wanted to take issue with is this idea that the protesters are being overly emotional.
What are the supporters saying when they are accusing protesters of being overly emotional?
They say that the builders have every right to build the mosque, and there is nothing but an irrational/emotional reason to be against it. Why do they have the right though, and why should their right be given any deference? At the heart of it, it’s purely emotional.
You have the right to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the right to marry, the right to have children, the right to security in your possessions, etc. Why did we decide these were rights? Why would the signers of the Declaration of Independence claim that these are inalienable rights that no government can take away?
The reason is that we have an emotional attachment to these rights. We feel extremely strongly about these things, and have therefore decided that they are rights that everyone has since it is such a ubiquitous feeling.
There is not one single right or law that has ever been claimed or made that doesn’t have an emotional basis to it. That means that when people are out saying that these protesters are being emotional, and they have no good reason to want to deny the right of the people to build their cultural center/mosque, they are really saying, “My emotions are more valuable than your emotions.” That just doesn’t seem right to me.
How can one person’s emotions be more important than another’s? Does my freedom of religion trump your freedom of speech? Because I am an atheist, does that mean you don’t have the right to tell the world that I am somehow wrong in my belief or lack thereof? If I build a porno shop next to your house, do you not have a right to be upset? If I build a bar next door to an Alcoholic’s Anonymous center, do people not have the right to think I’m an asshole?
There are many things we have the right to do, but just because we have the right, doesn’t mean that other people aren’t allowed to be offended, or even to protest. Our emotional attachment to our rights doesn’t mean they trump the rights of everyone that is opposed.
I also find it rather strange that people would assert that these people are wrong for protesting, because of stupid things, like the fact that there is a Christian church close by, or there’s another mosque 4 blocks away. There is no valid emotion that you can give me, which includes emotions that have been made into law, that would convince me that these people’s feelings on the matter are any less valid than yours.
What I’m saying is, the only position that makes sense is to support both sides, even if you happen to feel one side or the other is right. If you are against the mosque, respect the fact that they have the right to build it. If you’re for the mosque, respect the fact that the protesters have the right to be upset and protest. That is the least emotional position, and if you can’t do that, you are at least as emotional/irrational as the people you are against.
Related posts: