Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, a former president of Chicago Theological Seminary and current senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, writes in the Washington Post today that fighting against the mosque in “Lower Manhattan” translates into an attempt to deny American Moslems the basic religious freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution.
“It is crucial that Americans show the world that we have the courage of that conviction, especially when it comes to a plan to build an Islamic Center in lower Manhattan.”
Ms. Thistlethwaite, your tour guide on this guilt trip through the Constitutional intricacies of religious freedom, is twisting the facts to make her point; just as President Obama did in his speech last week.
Fundamental religious liberties are not even an issue in the “Ground Zero” Mosque controversy. Moslems have built mosques all over this great and free country and have practiced their religion without prohibition for many years.
The largest issues in the “Ground Zero” Mosque controversy are: 1) the FACT that the Imam and financial backers of the mosque have proven ties to established Islamic terrorist organizations and 2) the obvious assumptions that can be, and have been, extracted from that fact. Those, not religious liberty, are the primary issues (but obviously not the only issues) behind the opposition to the “Ground Zero” Mosque.
I personally have no doubt whatsoever that the “Ground Zero” Mosque is intended as a “victory dance” on the graves of the “infidels” who lost their lives on 9/11. The “Ground Zero” Mosque is clearly a political statement, not an expression of religious liberty. We must remember that in the Moslem world, religion does not exist outside of or separate from politics.
Here in the United States Moslems have their religious freedoms — more so than they would have in Moslem controlled theocracies — and no one is trying to take those freedoms away from them. A slap in the face, however, is not an acceptable expression of religious faith.
Loading ...
6 users commented in " Ground Zero Mosque: Religious Freedom is Not An Issue "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackDoes any politician seriously think that allowing the Muslims to build this Victory Mosque will pacify them or prevent further attacks? In fact, it will only encourage them, in the same way that allowing Hitler to occupy the Rhineland led to his occupation of Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and then the whole of Europe.
The politicians should read the links under ‘Appeasement’ at EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT ISLAM
Do I like it? NO….. do I agree with it? No….
However much I don’t like it, every american is allowed to have their religious freedom. Whether they are Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, or Muslim, they deserve the right to their expression of religios freedom that is written in the constitution. Once we start picking and choosing to take away our liberties, this is a dangerous game. If the people behind this are truly tied to terrorist organizations as you suggest, then clearly that needs to be looked into, but that still should not take away ones ability to worship where they choose, again, as written in the constitution of this country. Religion and politics will never be separated as long as this very argument is being made as in this article. Christianity preaches forgiveness does it not? For those of you who think Christianity or the jewish faith is less violent than the Islamic faith, I urge you to read the book of Leviticus in the Old Testament. The bible teaches that it is ok to kill other human beings in the name of God for working on a Sunday, to possess slaves, and to oppress women. (I was born a christian and refuse to claim a faith, but remain spiritual)
Fine, Tiffany, but the thing is….they could build it ANYWHERE but they chose ground zero or even near it…WHY??????
Its 2 blocks from Ground Zero. Its not ON ground zero. I’m sure if it was 10 blocks from Ground Zero, we’d still be having this same exact conversation. Hell, I live in CHicago, and I see communities trying to block all forms of mosques being built anywhere around here. If we fight it, and they win, it indeed becomes a victory dance for them and a “slap in the face” as the author calls it. If we don’t fight it and be a leader and not a hippocrite of our own constitution, at least we have some dignitity. At least thats MY own opinion. It may not be others, but I like to think I have an open mind. I see both sides here, believe me. But if I have to choose, I choose my freedom.
I choose my freedom too, I guess I should have said I agreed with your post, BUT, it seems to me that two blocks is TOO close. That’s just my opinion. I am not against any one religion, I’m against all religion; but that’s another story. My opinion stems from the victims and their survivors. If these people truly believed in compassion and empathy, they wouldn’t have even had the thought to put it there.
First of all, you might want to bear in mind that even if this were somehow a case of political speech (which you assert, but never demonstrate) as opposed to religious practice or community outreach, the same First Amendment that provides strong protections for free religious practice also provides equally strong protection for political speech – even political speech you may find reprehensible. Your disapproval of a religion or of a political viewpoint doesn’t matter in the least when it comes to its legal protection.
As for the imam in question, you are aware that the State Department under George W. Bush dispatched Feisal Abdul Rauf to speak on its behalf in Arab and Muslim nations, right? Just checking.
Bottom line is that the right has made it socially acceptable (in some circles, fashionable) to be an anti-Muslim bigot, under the pretenses of “sensitivity” to the tender feelings of 9/11 families (many of whom are… wait for it… Muslims).
I know it’s hard to swallow, but their feelings (whatever they may be) and yours do not trump the freedom of religious and political expression our Constitution enshrines. They can build anywhere legally zoned for public assembly, and that’s EXACTLY as it should be. If you don’t care for it, buy some land across the street, and open up your very own protest organization. I’ll find your protesting loathsome and bigoted, but I’ll absolutely defend your right to protest in loathsome and bigoted ways. That’s what it means to live in a constitutional democracy.
Leave A Reply