Opponents of Islamic center ignore religious freedom

A mounting controversy has erupted over the past few weeks regarding the construction of an Islamic community center and mosque near Ground Zero in Manhattan.

Opponents have brought several arguments on the matter, but all are irrational or, at best, irrelevant.

Opposition to the building of the Islamic center, known as the Cordoba House, near Ground Zero in Manhattan has most often been based on the following arguments: The center would serve as a symbol of Muslim conquest, a monument to Muslim extremism/terrorism; the presence of an Islamic center would unnecessarily pain the families of 9/11 victims; and because some predominantly Muslim countries, namely Saudi Arabia, do not allow the building of Christian churches.

The last argument, as Boston University professor Stephen Prothero points out on CNN's Belief Blog, is rather ridiculous. Prothero asks: "Since when has Saudi Arabia been the model for American civil liberties?"

It should be noted that Saudi Arabia also does not allow political parties and often severely impinges upon freedom of speech.

Should we ban the Republican and Democratic parties until Saudi Arabia begins to allow political organizations? Should we shut down The New York Times and USA Today until Saudi Arabia fully respects freedom of speech?

I do not believe so.

In regard to the first argument – that an Islamic center near Ground Zero would stand as a monument to Muslim extremism/terrorism – opponents of the Islamic center should bear in mind that Islam, with more than 1 billion followers, is the second largest religion in the world.

Muslim extremists are not representative of the entire U.S. or world Muslim population.

Many Americans have fallen prey to the sadly erroneous presumption that all (or at least most) Muslims are from the Middle East or, for many, the "terrorist" countries.

In reality, a vast majority of Muslims are not of Arabian descent, and the most populous Muslim country in the world is Indonesia.

One opponent of the construction of the Islamic center, retired New York City firefighter Tim Brown, told the Religion News Service: "Now is not the right time. They're telling us that we're against religious freedom? That's backwards. Our friends and families were murdered by these terrorists who were against religious freedom."

So, if I have got this right, Brown feels that since the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attacks were against religious freedom, we should now be against religious freedom as well. I am afraid Brown has contradicted himself here.

The Anti-Defamation League, like Brown, opposes the construction of the Islamic center, but on the grounds that it unnecessarily pains families of 9/11 victims.

However, sublimating the obvious rights of individuals on the basis of ill-conceived perceptions of an entire religion to the emotional reactions of others would destroy the very nature of rights.

The ADL also took exception with the Islamic center's stated goal, which is to promote "integration, tolerance of difference and community cohesion."

The national director of the ADL, Abraham Foxman, told The Huffington Post: "The better way for Muslims seeking reconciliation and moderation would have been for them to reach out to the families of the victims, who we are sure could have recommended any number of actions to achieve those goals other than the present plan."

But why should Muslims in New York City and leaders of the Islamic center project reach out to the families of victims for recommendations on a proper course of action?

Muslims, simply by virtue of their religious affiliation, have done nothing wrong. Followers of Islam should not be stereotyped as anti-American extremists with an insatiable appetite for blood lust. Muslims, again, simply by virtue of their religious affiliation, do not owe Americans.

I sincerely doubt that Christians would appreciate being judged on the basis of the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church – a group known for protesting at U.S. soldiers' funerals as a means to convey their belief that the deaths of U.S. soldiers are God's way of punishing the United States for being even slightly tolerant of gay people, among other things.

Finally, how close to Ground Zero is too close? Two blocks away is obviously too close for opponents of the Islamic center. But what should be the arbitrary boundary? Five blocks? Ten blocks?

Perhaps we should just ban the building of everything that is in any way affiliated with Islam.

One of the core values of America, inscribed in the Bill of Rights, is freedom of religion. Religious freedom is not conditional. Moreover, in regard to religious freedom, there are no special cases.

The emotions of the families of 9/11 victims are certainly justified, but they should be directed exclusively toward the perpetrators – terrorists associated with one small faction of the Muslim religion. Religious freedom and religious tolerance should not be selectively prized and upheld.