A friend has been asking me to blog about this for a while and I’ve resisted. Probably because I didn’t want to get somebody’s
knee-jerk reaction of being called an “Islamophobe” or “bigot”.
His question (or at least how I interpreted it) was “how can anyone oppose the mosque and still believe in freedom of religion?”
I can’t speak for everyone, but I think, Simon, it involves suspending belief in your worldview for a moment and being open to the possibility that your analysis is incorrect.
This is difficult for all of us. Any of us.
If you can do that, however, you look at the opposing worldview to yours which is that Islam may be a religion, but that it may also be a religion wrapped inside a totalitarian ideology.
While there is no doubt that there are moderate Muslim factions that don’t seek to replace the Constitution with
Sharia, there is equally no doubt that there are factions which would gladly do that.
To say otherwise, is to be ignorant.
For example, to claim that “Islam is the religion of peace” when in August, 2010, 196 Jihad attacks in 23 countries killed 811 people in the name of Islam (
source) denies an uncomfortable, but fundamental truth about a significant faction of Muslims.
Are all Muslims evil? Of course not!
Some, like Dr.
Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy are standing up to this strain within their own religion.
And while some Americans are in a tizzy about the fact that
“Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Sweeps Nation Amid “Mosque” Controversy,” the unfortunate reality is that of the
1,606 religiously motivated hate crimes in 2008 (according to the FBI), 65.7% were against Jews, with only 7.7% against Muslims.
No one is going around saying we have a problem with anti-Semitism?
So, then, what is it?
What it is, I think, or at least what I am interpreting (and let’s just leave out the
true racists and bigots from this debate, shall we?), so, what I am interpreting is that there are a group of people who view Islam as a totalitarian, expansionist ideology using the cloak of religion to gain protection from the government (and sympathy from open-minded people like you) to advance its agenda.
And, in this case, the hypothesized agenda is to erect a mosque as a symbol of conquest/dominance at the location where the battle took place, which would be a
continuation of much of Muslim military history.
And, as I am sure you have read, the original name (
Cordoba House) reflected the highpoint of Muslim domination when its influence extended into the middle of Spain.
So, while it may be easy to brand those who oppose the location of the mosque as
Islamophobes in an effort to silence them or deride them for their intolerance, IF the opposing view is indeed correct and the objective is the imposition of Sharia all over the world (which may be difficult for you to believe, but is certainly the stated goal of some Muslims), then the negative reaction to the mosque is actually more in line with your tolerant, liberal, open-minded values than you may originally surmise.
Now, let the name-calling and fighting begin….
Subscribe to RSS Feed