Pro & Con: Should a mosque be built near the 9/11 terror attack site?

YES: Allowing mosque shows America’s strength, tolerance for Islam.

By Jonas Kauffeldt

The current controversy raging in New York City over the establishment of an Islamic Center near the site of the 9/11 attacks constitutes a test of American ideals.

Tradition holds that this country is the international bastion of freedom and tolerance and that ideas and points of view are not quashed but rather debated and assessed by all.

In that spirit, the approval of a community center dedicated to interfaith dialogue and bridge-building initiatives, in probably the most international city in America, is exactly what serves to underscore that Americans as a people hold true to the strength and genuine meaning of their declared convictions.

In contrast to what many critics denounce as a sign of weakness and dangerous retreat in the face of political correctness, the decision by city officials to allow the project to move forward is a sign of American strength.

Not only does it reinforce the notion that Americans are unafraid of diversity and vibrant dialogue, and that ideas, whatever their nature, stand or fall not through regulation but debate.

It also very significantly represents an overt embrace of those Muslims, be they American or not, who want to be embraced by American liberties and ideals.

In a virtuous gesture to the often maligned community of Muslims in the United States, the approval validates Islam as a part of American society and reaches out to the sea of moderates who populate every corner of the country.

The decision also has profound international ramifications that are of paramount importance to the interests of every American.

Throughout much of the Muslim world many people are convinced that the United States and its NATO allies are engaged in a campaign against Islam.

This false perception needs to be vigorously resisted at every turn if the regional foreign policy goals of these Western governments are to have any hope of significant success.

Giving moderates and the leaders of the Cordoba Initiative, who are spearheading the center project, so public a platform in the heart of New York City is an unequivocal and needed statement that mainstream America is decidedly not anti-Muslim.

And unlike many other societies, where religious or other discrimination are commonplace, communities in the United States are not vilified by the actions of a few, nor does suspicion and mistrust replace dialogue.

In this country tolerance trumps ignorance, confidence defeats fear, and acceptance bridges differences.

Such sentiments aside, some still argue, including even some Muslims, that neither the location of the center nor the timing are right.

They suggest it stirs up unnecessary controversy and even undermines progress already being made to build trust and understanding across religious and ethnic communities.

But have we not also repeatedly heard calls for more Muslims to take a clear and overt stance against extremism and violence?

In my view, the Cordoba Initiative represents exactly that, an effort by dedicated American Muslims to stand up for themselves in the shadow of a calamity that was carried out not in their name.

Jonas Kauffeldt, an assistant professor at Gainesville State College, holds a doctorate in Modern Middle Eastern History from Florida State University.

NO: Building of the mosque is a political statement of ‘shocking arrogance.’

By Newt Gingrich

It speaks of the goodness of America that we have had such difficulty coming to grips with the challenge of radical Islamists. It is our very commitment to religious liberty that makes us uncomfortable with defining our enemies in a way that appears linked with religious belief.

But America’s commitment to religious liberty has given radical Islamists a potent rhetorical weapon in their pursuit of Shariah supremacy.

In a deliberately dishonest campaign exploiting our belief in religious liberty, radical Islamists are actively engaged in a public relations campaign to try and browbeat and guilt Americans (and other Western countries) to accept the imposition of Shariah in certain communities, no matter how deeply Shariah law is in conflict with the protections afforded by the civil law and the democratic values undergirding our constitutional system.

Shariah law is used in many Muslim countries to justify shocking acts of barbarity including stoning, the execution of homosexuals and the subjugation of women. Shariah does not permit freedom of conscience; it prohibits Muslims from renouncing their Islamic faith or converting to another religion. Shariah does not support religious liberty; it treats non-Muslims as inferior and does not accord them the same protections as Muslims. In these and other instances, Shariah is explicitly at odds with core American and Western values.

It is in this context that the controversy over the mosque project near ground zero by Feisal Abdul Rauf — an apologist for Shariah — must be seen.

On why he choose ground zero to build Cordoba House Rauf told CBN last May that “by being in this location we get the attention and are able to leverage the voice of the vast majority of Muslims who condemn terrorism.”

Yet, after 9/11 it was Rauf who condemned the United States as an “accessory” to the terror attacks and more recently refused to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization. Rauf clearly wants the Ground Zero location for a propaganda platform but it is also clear that it will not be for the purpose of condemning terrorism.

Rauf says his project is interfaith, but he didn’t propose the building of a mosque, church and synagogue.

Instead he is planning a 13-story mosque and community center that will extol the glories of Islamic tolerance for people of other faiths, all while overlooking the site where radical Islamists killed almost 3,000 people in a shocking act of hatred.

Building this structure on the edge of the battlefield created by radical Islamists is not a celebration of religious pluralism and mutual tolerance; it is a political statement of shocking arrogance and hypocrisy.