I Think I'll Rant Today

I want to talk about this whole issue of the mosque that some people want to build near the site of the destroyed World trade Center. I understand that some of you will not agree with me, and that's fine. It's more than fine. It's what I'm talking about, in fact.

First, the issue. Some Muslim group wants to build a mosque, a Muslim house of worship, in Lower Manhattan, near the site now known as "Ground Zero," the place the World Trade Center stood before it was destroyed by Muslim terrorists.

Is this a good idea? I don't think so. If the Muslim group who wants to build has ties to radical Islam, well, then it's just mean, and intended as a slap in the face to Americans. If this is not a group tied to radical Islam, and it's a moderate, normal American group of Muslims who want to worship there to show solidarity with non-Muslim Americans, and to show that they only want peace, well then, it wasn't well thought out because it's clearly not working, and they should withdraw. In fact, I think the city of New York should zone that entire area as non-suitable for religious institutions, and solve the whole problem for all time.

Does the Muslim group currently have the right to build a mosque anywhere not forbidden by zoning laws? Of course they do. The group that is planning to go to Ground Zero and burn copies of the Koran, the Muslim holy book, in protest? I suppose they have the right to do that as well, but it is disgusting and as anti-American thing as I can imagine anyone doing. It looks like the pictures of Nazis burning synagogues on Kristallnacht, the night of the anti-Jewish pogroms that led to the end of Jews in Germany and other parts of Europe.

And you know what else it looks like? It looks like the wars between the French monarchy in defense of Catholicism and the Huguenots, the French protestants who only wanted to practice their religion in peace, although most of them were eventually forced to leave France in the 1600's. It looks like the English monarchy's persecution of Catholics after Henry VIII declared that England was a Protestant country. It looks like any and every other religious persecution we have seen in the world and in this country. It looks bad, and it looks un-Constitutional.

From Wikipedia (but it's a no-brainer, anyone could say this): The Constitution of the United States of America is the supreme law of the United States. The first amendment to the Constitution, also from Wikipedia, is

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This means that the government sees no one religion as paramount over any other; all religions must be treated equally under our Constitution. If current laws allow a church to be built near Ground Zero, then a mosque must be allowed to be built as well, no matter how badly thought out a plan it is. Not only will the government not support one religion over another, it can't do anything to stop anyone from worshiping as s/he pleases. As for the protest, if their protest is peaceful, the first amendment protects them, too; it even protects their right to say any stupid thing they want to. (And your right to disagree with me, and vice-versa.) It does not protect their right to commit violence at that assembly, which I presume the burning of a holy book would be, or at least, would provoke.

I wonder how these same protesters would react if Muslim groups in another country burned copies of the Bible? Not well, I think. How do we feel we hear about American Christian missionaries in other countries being persecuted? But it's the same thing. If you want to see if something is morally right, imagine turning the tables, and see how it makes you feel.

Muslim terrorists are terrorists, just as Catholic and Protestant terrorists in Northern Island a generation ago were terrorists. What distinguishes these people is their politics, not their religion. Most Muslim people, like most people who self-identify as Catholic or Protestant or Jewish or Hindu or Sikh, are pretty much just people. Most of them do not follow the more radicalized, violence-supporting aspects of the faith, just as most followers of other religions do not. If you read the Old Testament, the ancient Hebrews could be pretty vicious at times. If you look at the history of the world for the last 2000 years, there's been an awful lot of violence and mayhem done in the name of Christianity. Do any of us really think that this is what Christianity stands for? Read the New Testament; it certainly isn't remotely what Jesus stood for. And yet it's been done, many times. The Spanish Inquisition leaps immediately to mind. (You weren't expecting that, were you? No one expects the Spanish Inquisition. heh heh.)

Perhaps I will rant another day on the absurdity that is now taking place in Arizona. It appalls and disgusts me as well. A former colleague of mine has got me on his email list -- he is a dear, sweet, gentle man; I don't know where he gets this crap or why he supports it -- about welfare queens who are illegal immigrants while disabled veterans get shat upon. If it's true, well you know what? The illegal immigration isn't the problem, the welfare and V.A. systems are. *sigh* Another day for immigration, perhaps.