Aa
The warriors for tolerance and the antimosque crusaders are both wrong.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703632304575451433090488678.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
A Muslim Reformer on the Mosque
The warriors for tolerance and the antimosque crusaders are both wrong.
By IRSHAD MANJI
Debates across America over Islamic centers and mosques won't soon be resolved. But this summer's hysteria is giving the upper hand to one nefarious force: the culture of offense.
Election-year politics, ratings-hungry media and deep personal fear foment raw emotion. In such an environment, "I'm offended" takes on the stature of a substantive argument. Too many Americans are mistaking feeling for thinking.
That's true not just among antimosque crusaders, but also among warriors for tolerance. Consider Bob, who feels so offended by antimosque activists in his state of Tennessee that these feelings alone drive him to support more mosques—without prior thought to what, exactly, he's supporting. "I found local citizens to be intolerant and un-American," Bob tells me over email. "So as a gesture of tolerance and Americanism, I donated to the mosque building fund."
Before pledging a penny, Bob should have asked the imam: "Where will the men's side of this mosque be?" It's a discreet way of discerning whether the project will replicate segregation, and thus whether the mosque will wind up bolstering the intolerant behavior that Bob can't abide.
I am not saying that Bob should cast his lot with antimosque demonstrators. I am simply saying he should not give them the power to commandeer his brain by hijacking his heart.
Now apply this point to Park51, the proposed multistory Islamic community center and prayer space to be erected at the edge of Ground Zero. Let me be blunt about my own emotions: I am offended by its proximity to the site of 9/11. I am also disappointed that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf—who is not an Islamist—has nonetheless played crass politics unbecoming of a man of dialogue.
So far, the imam has rebuffed accusations of insensitivity. Yet he made those very accusations about the Danish cartoons of Prophet Muhammad. In a February 2006 press release, Imam Rauf announced that he was "appalled" by the drawings. He called it "willful fomentation" and "gratuitous" to republish them throughout Europe. In the following weeks, almost no U.S. newspaper printed the caricatures.
Three years later, it is the imam who the majority of Americans believe is engaging in "willful fomentation." Yet his retinue has not publicly acknowledged that the feelings of these "appalled" Americans parallel how moderate Muslims such as Imam Rauf felt during the cartoon debacle.
More
* Bloomberg Defends Mosque
But for all the restless offense I feel, I step back and force myself to think. As I wrestle with the issues, I realize that an opportunity exists for something more constructive than anger.
Namely, accountability. If Park51 gets built, thanks to its provocative location the nation will scrutinize what takes place inside. Americans have the opportunity right now to be clear about the civic values expected from any Islam practiced at the site.
That means setting aside bombast and asking the imam questions born of the highest American ideals: individual dignity and pluralism of ideas.
• Will the swimming pool at Park51 be segregated between men and women at any time of the day or night?
• May women lead congregational prayers any day of the week?
• Will Jews and Christians, fellow People of the Book, be able to use the prayer sanctuary for their services just as Muslims share prayer space with Christians and Jews in the Pentagon? (Spare me the technocratic argument that the Pentagon is a governmental, not private, building. Park51 may be private in the legal sense but is a public symbol par excellence.)
• What will be taught about homosexuals? About agnostics? About atheists? About apostasy?
• Where does one sign up for advance tickets to Salman Rushdie's lecture at Park51?
These questions aren't gratuitous. I, for one, remain haunted by the 300 Muslims chanting "Death to Rushdie" on Sept. 10, 2001. They gathered outside a theater in Houston, Texas, to protest a visit by the novelist—the target of a 1989 death warrant from Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini. One Muslim told reporters, "The fatwa is valid even if the Iranian government no longer supports it." Another warned, "We have not forgotten about him and his evil act." That man affiliated himself with Houston's Islamic Education Center. Education or indoctrination? The question deserves an honest response.
Through engagement that emphasizes questions like these, Americans of all faiths and no faith at all may very well make the colorful neighborhood around Ground Zero host to the most transparent, most democratic, most modern Islam—ever.
As a proud New Yorker as well as a reformist Muslim, I think, and not just feel, that this would be a fitting salute to the victims of 9/11. It would turn the tables on the freedom-hating culture of al Qaeda. And it would subvert the liberty-lashing culture of offense.
Ms. Manji, a professor of leadership at New York University's Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, is at work on a new book about how to advance liberal reform within Islam.
A Muslim Reformer on the Mosque
The warriors for tolerance and the antimosque crusaders are both wrong.
By IRSHAD MANJI
Debates across America over Islamic centers and mosques won't soon be resolved. But this summer's hysteria is giving the upper hand to one nefarious force: the culture of offense.
Election-year politics, ratings-hungry media and deep personal fear foment raw emotion. In such an environment, "I'm offended" takes on the stature of a substantive argument. Too many Americans are mistaking feeling for thinking.
That's true not just among antimosque crusaders, but also among warriors for tolerance. Consider Bob, who feels so offended by antimosque activists in his state of Tennessee that these feelings alone drive him to support more mosques—without prior thought to what, exactly, he's supporting. "I found local citizens to be intolerant and un-American," Bob tells me over email. "So as a gesture of tolerance and Americanism, I donated to the mosque building fund."
Before pledging a penny, Bob should have asked the imam: "Where will the men's side of this mosque be?" It's a discreet way of discerning whether the project will replicate segregation, and thus whether the mosque will wind up bolstering the intolerant behavior that Bob can't abide.
I am not saying that Bob should cast his lot with antimosque demonstrators. I am simply saying he should not give them the power to commandeer his brain by hijacking his heart.
Now apply this point to Park51, the proposed multistory Islamic community center and prayer space to be erected at the edge of Ground Zero. Let me be blunt about my own emotions: I am offended by its proximity to the site of 9/11. I am also disappointed that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf—who is not an Islamist—has nonetheless played crass politics unbecoming of a man of dialogue.
So far, the imam has rebuffed accusations of insensitivity. Yet he made those very accusations about the Danish cartoons of Prophet Muhammad. In a February 2006 press release, Imam Rauf announced that he was "appalled" by the drawings. He called it "willful fomentation" and "gratuitous" to republish them throughout Europe. In the following weeks, almost no U.S. newspaper printed the caricatures.
Three years later, it is the imam who the majority of Americans believe is engaging in "willful fomentation." Yet his retinue has not publicly acknowledged that the feelings of these "appalled" Americans parallel how moderate Muslims such as Imam Rauf felt during the cartoon debacle.
More
* Bloomberg Defends Mosque
But for all the restless offense I feel, I step back and force myself to think. As I wrestle with the issues, I realize that an opportunity exists for something more constructive than anger.
Namely, accountability. If Park51 gets built, thanks to its provocative location the nation will scrutinize what takes place inside. Americans have the opportunity right now to be clear about the civic values expected from any Islam practiced at the site.
That means setting aside bombast and asking the imam questions born of the highest American ideals: individual dignity and pluralism of ideas.
• Will the swimming pool at Park51 be segregated between men and women at any time of the day or night?
• May women lead congregational prayers any day of the week?
• Will Jews and Christians, fellow People of the Book, be able to use the prayer sanctuary for their services just as Muslims share prayer space with Christians and Jews in the Pentagon? (Spare me the technocratic argument that the Pentagon is a governmental, not private, building. Park51 may be private in the legal sense but is a public symbol par excellence.)
• What will be taught about homosexuals? About agnostics? About atheists? About apostasy?
• Where does one sign up for advance tickets to Salman Rushdie's lecture at Park51?
These questions aren't gratuitous. I, for one, remain haunted by the 300 Muslims chanting "Death to Rushdie" on Sept. 10, 2001. They gathered outside a theater in Houston, Texas, to protest a visit by the novelist—the target of a 1989 death warrant from Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini. One Muslim told reporters, "The fatwa is valid even if the Iranian government no longer supports it." Another warned, "We have not forgotten about him and his evil act." That man affiliated himself with Houston's Islamic Education Center. Education or indoctrination? The question deserves an honest response.
Through engagement that emphasizes questions like these, Americans of all faiths and no faith at all may very well make the colorful neighborhood around Ground Zero host to the most transparent, most democratic, most modern Islam—ever.
As a proud New Yorker as well as a reformist Muslim, I think, and not just feel, that this would be a fitting salute to the victims of 9/11. It would turn the tables on the freedom-hating culture of al Qaeda. And it would subvert the liberty-lashing culture of offense.
Ms. Manji, a professor of leadership at New York University's Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, is at work on a new book about how to advance liberal reform within Islam.
I was involved with mosques for many years. I used to train a number of them who were learning to be EMT's and stole hospital supplies to maintain their ambulance. I also worked for the Saudi Royal family and have several islamic close friends. I am not a participant in the demonstrations.
I do know that in nine years I have never heard such anger amongst ordinary people toward Islam since this mosque proposal was brought up. Anger is not the appropriate descriptive adjective. It there was one single action on the planet earth that could potentially provoke violence in the City of New York, it was the action of this Imam to decide to pull this act of irresponsible, immature, childish showmanship.
Yes, we have the right to free speech.
That right does not include the right to yell "fire" in a crowded movie theatre with the doors locked shut.
I do know that in nine years I have never heard such anger amongst ordinary people toward Islam since this mosque proposal was brought up. Anger is not the appropriate descriptive adjective. It there was one single action on the planet earth that could potentially provoke violence in the City of New York, it was the action of this Imam to decide to pull this act of irresponsible, immature, childish showmanship.
Yes, we have the right to free speech.
That right does not include the right to yell "fire" in a crowded movie theatre with the doors locked shut.
I hope you're right. I think they're going to run into problems getting it constructed as well.
I need to find the article again but I did read where the Imam called this an "iconic" location. This story came out and then was later rewritten to edit out the "iconic" reference. Gee, I wonder why! But I'll go back through some stuff and see if I can't find it.
I need to find the article again but I did read where the Imam called this an "iconic" location. This story came out and then was later rewritten to edit out the "iconic" reference. Gee, I wonder why! But I'll go back through some stuff and see if I can't find it.
The mosque does not belong there. It is an inappropriate location.
There are plenty of places to build mosques, but the ruins of the World Trade Center is not one of those places.
I don't "wrestle" at all with the issues.
It is crystal clear.
It is a monument to the terrorists who brought down those buildings. No matter what this Imam states, that is what it is.
As for the "issues" brought up in the article they are irrelevant.
And it isn't going to get built. No matter what Mayor Milke says. There won't be a teamster truck in New York City to deliver the concrete, or an iron worker to put up the structure, nor a union bricklayer to put up the walls, nor a union electrician to wire the place.
There are plenty of places to build mosques, but the ruins of the World Trade Center is not one of those places.
I don't "wrestle" at all with the issues.
It is crystal clear.
It is a monument to the terrorists who brought down those buildings. No matter what this Imam states, that is what it is.
As for the "issues" brought up in the article they are irrelevant.
And it isn't going to get built. No matter what Mayor Milke says. There won't be a teamster truck in New York City to deliver the concrete, or an iron worker to put up the structure, nor a union bricklayer to put up the walls, nor a union electrician to wire the place.
This whole article makes 100% absolute sense to me. I agree with pretty much everything in it. All of the fighting is only serving to further divide. It is creating further hate and intolerance on one side, and a willingness to accept just about anything on the other. There is a peacful, meet in the middle solution if everyone would just start talking and stop fighting. Excellent article Sara.
Very thought provoking Sara thank you for putting it up
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the News from the past to the future to share and discuss Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
