This page was last updated on August 19, 2010.
No reason mosque shouldn’t be built; Marianna Mohney; Beaver County Times; August 19, 2010.
Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.
“In response to ‘Reid against plan to build mosque near Ground Zero,’ the First Amendment gives citizens of the United States the right to freely exercise their religion.”
[RWC] Ms. Mohney is making this issue about denying Muslims the opportunity to worship. It is not.
Ms. Mohney needs a course on the Constitution. The First Amendment does not “give citizens of the United States the right to freely exercise their religion.” The First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” There’s a big difference. The First Amendment says Congress can’t interfere with a natural right. The Constitution is primarily about granting rights to the government because all rights belong to the “citizens of the United States” by default. That’s why the 10th Amendment says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his opponent, Republican Sharron Angle, are both strongly opposed to a mosque being built on private property in downtown Manhattan near Ground Zero.
“I do not see how Reid or Angle is entitled to deny people the right to worship. Angle said earlier this week that ‘Muslims have the right to worship anywhere, but Obama’s support for construction of the mosque at Ground Zero ‘‘ignored the wishes of the American people, this time at the expense of victims of 9/11 and their families.’’’
[RWC] Ms. Mohney cut-and-pasted the above from an AP story but didn’t distinguish between what the AP said and what Ms. Angle’s spokesman (not Ms. Angle) said.
“As one of the ‘American people,’ I do not think my wishes were ignored. I feel that people should be allowed to build churches, mosques and synagogues anywhere we choose. We should be allowed to worship.”
[RWC] Is Ms. Mohney claiming “churches, mosques and synagogues” should not be subject to the same deed restrictions, zoning laws, etc. as all other buildings?
“As for being at the expense of the victims and their families, were there no Muslim victims during 9/11? Did they not have families? Do they want to visit the memorial at Ground Zero and then pray for their lost loved ones at a mosque?”
[RWC] The problem with Ms. Mohney’s position is the proposed mosque has nothing to do with worship. Remember, Islam is not just a religion; it’s a combination of religion, law, and politics. The mosque project’s purpose is to make a political statement as close as possible to the sight of a radical Islamist “victory.” Until people understood the significance of its name, the mosque project was named the Cordoba Initiative. Though that still appears to be the official name, supporters have taken to calling it “51 Park” in public in reference to the proposed mosque’s street address.
The significance of Cordoba? After Muslims conquered southern Spain in the 10th century, they established an Islamic caliphate and its capital was Cordoba. After Muslims conquered Jerusalem, they built the al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount. See the pattern? Intentional for some supporters, the symbolism of the proposed mosque in such proximity to the WTC site will become a recruiting tool for Islamist “radicals.” In other words, the Cordoba Initiative is really about building a shrine for the 9/11 murderers.
The Cordoba Initiative claims it’s about “Improving Muslim-West Relations.” If true, why pursue something it appears most Americans oppose? If the project were really about “Improving Muslim-West Relations,” why not start by building a church and/or a synagogue in Mecca and/or Medina? After all, 15 of the 19 9/11 murderers were Saudis. As a reminder, Saudi Arabia does not permit the public practice of any religion but Islam (meaning no churches or synagogues), non-Muslims aren’t even allowed in Mecca and Medina, and the distribution of Bibles is illegal.
As I wrote above, Ms. Mohney and folks who think as she don’t seem to get the proposed mosque has nothing to do with religion; it’s about building a shrine to the 9/11 murderers. Ms. Mohney doesn’t need to take my word for it; she can check with the Muslim Canadian Congress. On its website, the MCC says, “Many Muslims suspect that the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation, to thumb our noses at the ‘infidel.’ We believe the proposal has been made in bad faith and, in Islamic parlance, is creating ‘fitna,’ meaning ‘mischief-making,’ an act clearly forbidden in the Qur’an.”
The above notwithstanding, I don’t believe the government has legal grounds to block the project. At this point I believe the only thing that can stop the building would be demolition and construction companies/workers refusing to take the job.
© 2004-2010 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.