August 19, 2010

Ground Zero mosque atrocity

Those who espouse religious freedom as a fundamental right aren't arguing their case for allowing the mosque at Ground Zero of the September 11th atrocity as intelligently as they could be.  But even if they were, they'd still be on the losing side of this one.

The logical argument is not that this is a First Amendment right, as the left asserts.  If it were, conservatives would be on board.  No one is denying Muslims the right to their religion, or to espouse their beliefs how they wish.  The real argument is where they wish to do so.

A smarter argument for the left might be along the lines of the right to free speech and freedom of religion does not require that you be pleasant or nonabrasive.  People are allowed to say and believe stupid things.  Take Nancy Pelosi for example. (Jay Tea talks about how to deal with the obstinate on this issue, in detail at Wizbang).

But there's still a problem with that argument as well.  Firstly, freedom of expression not requiring sensitivity to political correctness sort of goes against the entire liberal vibe.  They love political correctness because it often mutes the right.  So they are willing to allow non-political correctness - insensitivity to the victims, families and most Americans - in this case, because the offenders are Muslims.  That's I guess a little bit like Affirmative Action.  Call it Affirmative Insensitivity. That's hypocrisy.

But there's a bigger problem with the liberal argument.  And again it involves hypocrisy.  What if the United States were to buy property in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to erect monuments to the Enola Gay?  Would they endorse that insensitivity?  Of course not.  They would eschew it as American imperialism in terrible taste. Would they support the building of a mega church in Tehran?  Of course not.  But then again, I don't think anyone in the Western World would be that foolish or ostentatious.  That's because a healthy distance is sometimes okay.

Yet the same crowd who screamed anti-war vitriol against President Bush for violating Iraq's sovereignty for oil are willing to sublimate America's cultural sovereignty for - what?  What exactly does this buy America? Peace?  Respect? Co-operation in anti-terrorism efforts?  Honestly, I don't see much of an upside to this.  If it's all about principles, then we're back to the hypocrisy issue. If it were a matter of principles, then these people, wouldn't be under suspicion either.


  1. There are so many facets to this argument that we could all keep posting "...and another thing:" And at the same time, it's galling that this continues to be an issue that demands attention when there are more intellectually profitable endeavors that we could be discussing.

    Brilliant take on it, by the way.

  2. Agreed. I was reluctant to post on the issue, but it seems to have become the new Gulf Oil spill issue and required some attention.

    I'm ready to move on to more important issues, but I do understand that for some people affected by the September 11th attacks this will continue to be a big deal.


Disagreement is always welcome. Please remain civil. Vulgar or disrespectful comments towards anyone will be removed.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This