Ground Zero Mosque: A 13-Story Symbol of Tolerance
Just about everyone who’s anyone in the American political scene has spoken out on the proposed Islamic cultural center called the Córdoba House (or “Park51”), to be constructed about two blocks from the former WorldTradeCenter site in lower Manhattan. Former Wasilla, AK Mayor Sarah Palin, former Speaker of the House Newt Gringrich, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh are just some of the big names offering their two-cents on the issue.
As some have smartly pointed out, however, this is an issue that reveals much about America’s moral, political, and religious response to 9/11, nearly a decade later.
I was in sixth grade when America was attacked nearly nine years ago; it took me quite a while to wrap my head around what had happened and how the world had changed. But one thing I distinctly remember hearing for days, weeks, and months after the tragedy was that America is rarely as united and patriotic as it was in the immediate aftermath. Every citizen of this country seemed to stand united -- united at first in utter disbelief, then united in their sadness and anger, and finally united in a resolute commitment to mourn, rebuild, and move on as strong as ever.
At the time, it was only natural to sing the praises of the country we had grown to love even more in its time of need. Talk of America’s greatness flowed from the mouths of politicians, celebrities, and citizens alike. When President George W. Bush addressed the nation on the night of September 11, he said that “a great people has been moved to defend a great nation.” Now, more than 3,500 days later, this “great nation” has in front of it an issue which will allow it to prove that these praises were warranted.
The name of the proposed Islamic community center and mosque, Córdoba House, is an allusion to the atmosphere in Córdoba, Spain during the tenth century when the city was the center of the Islamic caliphate, where the world’s greatest Christian, Muslim, and Jewish minds collaborated and coexisted in a peaceful Eden. That is the vision for this community center as well. It has been misreported in the media that the center will be exclusively for Muslim use – this is false, all will be welcome to enjoy its benefits. The vision behind this proposed center belongs to Imam Feisal Abdul-Rauf, a spiritual leader of great repute in New York who is often praised for his outreach to those of different faiths and cooperation with non-Muslims. Those who brand the proposed Córdoba House as a symbol of Muslim intervention or invasion onto American soil apparently did not bother to do their research on the aims and goals of the center or its visionary.
Sarah Palin’s now-infamous tweet, “Peace-seeking Muslims, pls [sic] understand, Ground Zero mosque is UNNECESSARY provocation; it stabs hearts,” brings up a new issue: that the proposed mosque is simply in a bad location – it is simply too near to the symbol of an attack on America, the scale of which this country had never seen before. My opinion, however, is exactly the opposite: that this debate is a perfect opportunity for Americans to embrace a spirit of dialogue and understanding and promote an image of this great nation as the cooperative and tolerant place its founders had in mind centuries ago. What better way to show that we are resilient and value all creeds than to erect a Muslim cultural center in lower Manhattan – proving to all that Americans understand that it was not a religion that attacked the United States that September day, but rather nineteen extremely violent men who did not subscribe to the brand of Islam that this mosque will celebrate.
The National Republic Trust Political Action Committee, a well-organized and well-funded lobbyist group, recently attempted to air a commercial (warning: graphic images) speaking out against the proposal for the center on CBS and NBC networks. Interspersed with extremely graphic images of the September 11 attacks are calls to prayer from minarets around the world. The ad attempts to link the faith of Islam with vicious terrorism through its symbolic imagery. Both TV networks refused to air it, citing its ambiguous usage of the term “they,” which viewers could take to mean Islamic extremists or all Muslims collectively. Attempts to slander the Muslim faith like this are a grievous attack on traditional American values, most importantly the First Amendment rights of freedom of religion and freedom of speech. This is not what a united America stands for: uninformed, politically-motivated assaults on faith.
Others, including former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich have stated that “There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia.” Mr. Gingrich's rhetoric here is quite dangerous. He is implying that the staunchly secular nation of the United States should be held to the same standards of religious tolerance and interfaith dialogue as the fervently Islamic state of Saudi Arabia. The former Speaker is promoting that either Saudi Arabia – an independent, foreign nation (and a critically-important US ally) – become more secular and forsake its inherent right to religious uniformity, or that the United States should overturn the Supreme Court’s long-held precedent of separation of church and state and convert this nation into a Judeo-Christian theocracy.
Both of these ideas are highly offensive to those who have spent their lives defending the rights of all to practice their faiths freely in Cleveland, Seattle, Riyadh, and Tel Aviv. While it is understandable that there is a healthy debate about the subject of a “Ground Zero Mosque,” as the media has branded Córdoba House, I believe that if we let our minds direct the discussion, the rational conclusion is that the construction of the Córdoba House in New York City is the perfect symbol of American tolerance, resilience, and freedom.
France’s National Assembly – the lower house of Parliament – voted on Tuesday 336-1 in favor of a ban on burqas worn in public. The vote will now proceed to the Senate, where it is expected to pass easily in September. President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is a major supporter of the bill, said in June of last year that burqas and similar dress are “not welcome” in his country, and that women must not be “prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity.”
The vote comes in the midst of a heated debate in France and across Europe regarding social identity and the competition between secularism and religion. In 2009, France launched a nationwide initiative to define “what it means to be French,” according to the AP. The country has a long history of secular pride, and critics of the burqa contend that public dress that connotes a specific religious affiliation is an attack on French values.
Muslim advocates both within France and abroad have expressed strong disapproval of the movement to ban burqas and other face-covering veils. While such veils are not required by the Qur’an or by traditional Islamic jurisprudence, French Muslim advocacy groups fear that the ban will serve to stigmatize the Islamic community further. France has the largest Muslim population in Europe, and while fewer than half of one percent of Muslim women in France are believed to wear veils that are made illegal by this law, prosecuting Muslims (or any religious group) in secular courts for their religious dress is treading a slippery slope, according to many watchdog groups.
The bill does not make any specific reference to Islam or to burqas, but some French lawmakers worry that passing the bill will serve to revive tensions between native French and the masses immigrating to France from Muslim-majority countries. There have also been fears that terrorist groups will begin targeting France because of the decision on the burqas. Algerian-based terrorist organization al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb issued a statement warning that it will “seek vengeance against France” in response to Sarkozy’s support for the bill.
France is not the only country which is considering such a ban; both Belgium and Spain have expressed interest in similar votes within their parliaments. The issue at the root of the headscarf controversy seems to stem from an influx of Muslim immigrants into the heart of Europe. Some experts contend that by the year 2100, a full one in four Europeans will be Muslim. The enormous growth rate of Islam in Europe has created cultural and religious tensions which are being manifest by riots and civil unrest in places such as Paris, London, and Dresden, Germany.
Peter Osborne, a leading scholar on Islam-European relations from the University of Exeter in Great Britain, says that the media and certain politicians in Europe have given rise to an “atmosphere where hate crimes, ranging from casual abuse to arson to even murder, are bound to occur and are even in a sense encouraged by mainstream media.” Given the overwhelming public support for the anti-headscarf law just passed in France, it seems likely that this atmosphere of public indifference toward Islamic values will continue, and possibly be made worse by the influx of more Muslim immigrants in the coming years.
The Muslim community in France and across Europe will undoubtedly face many hardships as attempts at reconciliation and cross-cultural acceptance continue in the next few decades. The law passed Tuesday in France’s National Assembly, while not entirely inflammatory or outrageous, is not a good sign of what is to come as far as Euro-Islamic relations are concerned. Combined with the ban on mosque-building recently passed in Switzerland, this law and others which are likely to be passed in Belgium and Spain, there seems to be growing anti-Muslim sentiment in Europe. (Although, to be fair, this sentiment might better be characterized as anti-Muslim symbolism or perhaps pro-secularism movements). However you characterize it, the movements resisting Muslim “encroachment” on traditional Christian, western European values are not likely to cease anytime soon.
American Mosques: NOT Places Where “Terrorists’ Monkey-gods” Are Worshiped
As I’m sure you’ve heard by now, Tea Party leader Mark Williams recently responded to plans of building a mosque in New York City near Ground Zero by spewing bigoted hate-speech which Muslims have grown accustomed to. Williams mixed up his brown people when he said that the proposed mosque would be a “monument ... for the worship of the terrorists' monkey-god and a 'cultural center' to propagandize for the extermination of all things not approved by their cult." Williams did make a half-hearted, snarky apology to Hindus who he says “worship Lord Hanuman, an actual monkey god.” In contrast to the monotheistic God of Adam, Jesus, Noah, and Muhammad who is worshiped by people of Muslim, Christian and Jewish faiths whom he disparagingly likened to a monkey in a puny attempt to belittle Muslims.
Contrary to what Williams thinks, mosques are places where people come together and re-center themselves around God. Mosques are places where worldly problems are checked by humility in front of the divine. They are the very places which teach the true tenants of faith, and openly condemn the violent acts of a few. American Mosques provide a sense of belonging for those who feel alienated and ostracized by people like Williams, and spaces to engage with Muslims as well as people of other faiths. Mosques collect funds that are donated to charity, provide classes, and host soup kitchens. Some mosques are more liberal, while some are quite conservative. Some mosques are rather dogmatic, while some focus on spirituality. Some get political, some don’t. Mosques, like churches, in America are very diverse; however I have never witnessed the propagating “for the extermination of all things not approved by their cult” in any American mosque that I've visited, including the more conservative and dogmatic ones.
The fact of the matter is that people with extremist ideologies or tendencies stay away from mosques because they know they aren’t welcome. But if someone with a slightly more radical outlook does decide to join in on mosque services, that’s a couple of hours a week spent learning from a credible, learned imam and away from his computer where he’s probably on pretty goofy websites and engaging with other like-minded radicals. And if you’re still concerned, rest assured that there are informants-a-plenty in every mosque in this country.
Some say that it’s simply insensitive to build a mosque so near to Ground Zero because it’s a “slap in the face” for victims’ families. I read in an ABC News article that Rabbi Schmulley Boteach said "On the one hand, stopping a mosque from being built undermines the very notion of freedom of worship in the United States. On the other hand, the idea of building a mosque and celebrating Islam at the site where 3,000 innocent Americans were killed by Islamic terrorists is an affront to so many people that I see it dividing New York and the nation."
We have to remember that not all Muslims should be held accountable for the horrific, inhumane, and entirely unjustifiable terrorist acts of September 11, 2001. In fact, dozens of American-Muslims lost their lives that day while working in the Twin Towers.
The American-Muslim victims of 9-11 and the American-Muslim survivors of 9-11 living in New York absolutely have the right to worship God and erect a symbol of their true faith to stand in total opposition to the place where terrorists not only destroyed countless lives and families, but also perverted the message and meaning of Islam. People already pray at the proposed site which is an old Burlington Coat Factory. They simply want to improve upon what they already have and build something they can be proud of; a sanctuary from the residual pain which 9-11 brought to all New Yorkers, regardless of their relgion.
What would be more beautiful and more American than to have a glistening gold dome added to the skyline of New York City amongst the myriad of churches and synagogues? And honestly, what would be more defiant than to boldly state that no matter what, through thick or thin, freedom of religion is a core American value that should not be touched?
I was talking with a friend's father the other day about how difficult it is to secure permits for building mosques in this country. This man happens to work in Saudi Arabia and was quick to remind me that although it's unfortunate that we have to jump through so many hoops to get mosques built, in places like Saudi Arabia building churches is altogether illegal. This simple anecdote should put things into perspective for Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
Building places of worship should not cause people like Mark Williams to go off on racist tirades, but should inspire people to promote and defend American ideals.
SWITZERLAND NOT SO NEUTRAL WHEN IT COMES TO RELIGION: SWISS MINARET BAN
Earlier this week Switzerland, the world’s foremost neutral country, sidestepped impartiality by approving a constitutional ban on the construction of minarets. The referendum put forth by the powerful Swiss People’s Party (SVP), a traditionally conservative right wing party, was approved by a 57% majority. The SVP sponsored the ban claiming the construction of minarets represents the “creeping Islamization of Switzerland.” The ban was advertised through suggestively racist posters that juxtaposed a fully veiled woman in the foreground of what appear to be missile shaped minarets. Such xenophobic posters are nothing new from the SVP’s earlier campaigns to institute harsher immigration laws in the country.
The head of the SVP, Ulrich Schluer, argues that minarets are a symbol of the political aims of Islam. In an interview with Russia Today, Schluer contends that the “minaret is seen as a symbol for political attitudes, for political demands. For instance, to introduce step by step elements of the Shariah right, also in Switzerland.” He defends the ban by referring to various Imams and leaders of mosques, in Switzerland, that have openly stated their goal is for implementation of Shariah law. Rather than symbolize the spirituality of Islam, the minaret, historically used to initiate a call to prayer, is now perceived as a political icon. As a result, the future construction of minarets can be construed as a politically motivated objective to introduce other laws into Switzerland, specifically Shariah law.
There are an estimated 200 mosques in Switzerland. According to the Swiss government, most Muslims are former refugees from the Yugoslav wars waged during the 1990s and comprise approximately 6% or 400,000 of Switzerland’s 7.5 million citizens. The implications of such a ban are not only heartfelt by Swiss Muslims, but for Muslims all across Europe.
Fellow Europeans fear an extremist reaction within their own countries. Concerns have been raised over whether or not Sunday’s vote in Switzerland may provoke more anti-Muslim sentiment in Europe. Will the ban in Switzerland promote passage of similar policies in neighboring countries? The European Union is already hard pressed in trying to preserve each countries distinct cultural allure amidst a large influx in foreigners. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan condemned the act, remarking on the widespread Islamaphobia afflicting Europe since France’s widely publicized dispute over the burqa, a full length covering worn by Muslim women. Supporters of the ban mentioned that Prime Minister Erdogan has in the past equated mosques to Islam's military barracks, referring to minarets as Islam’s bayonets.
Worldwide criticism over the ban has emerged from Pakistan and Indonesia, to the Vatican. Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey openly rebuked approval of the ban claiming it restricts religious freedom, while other financial officials in Zurich fear losing wealthy Arab and Muslim investors. The UN, along with other international rights organizations, has denounced the Swiss populist vote citing the government’s violation of international conventions on religious freedoms and individual human rights.
President Obama, notorious for having an open dialogue with the Muslim world, demonstrated by his land mark speech in Cairo not long ago, has yet to give any official response on the U.S. position towards Sunday’s vote in Switzerland.
