(Make sure to view the actual cover there).
You don’t have to be prejudiced against Islam to believe, as many Americans do, that the area around Ground Zero is a sacred place. But sadly, in an election season, such sentiments have been stoked into a political issue. As the debate has grown more heated, Park51, as the proposed Muslim cultural center and mosque two blocks from Ground Zero is called, has become a litmus test for everything from private-property rights to religious tolerance. But it is plain that many of Park51’s opponents are motivated by deep-seated Islamophobia.
Yeah, just like those homphobic kind: Absolutely no reason to feel the way they do. Just more prejudice, that’s all. Hateful people, everyone of them. Only one thing (and word): NOT
Does anyone read Time anymore? Or is that Newsweek? I forget – neither offers much objective coverage that I can see.
Far from revealing any so-called “Islamophobia,” the debate over Imam Feisal Rauf’s Park51 project is a shining witness to American religious openness. Were his proposal to build a Jewish or Christian place of worship anywhere in Saudi Arabia, for instance… well, just consider.
One does get tired of the Left and so-called liberals throw around insulting words and derogatory comments instead of debating issues. Is it because their positions are so weak or because their debating style is that of the kindergarten level.” Nah, Nah, Nah your a (fill-in-the-blank)phobic.” That seems to be the main or only point in so many leftward news stories (so-called) and commentaries.
How can there be “dialogue” when the likes of Nancy Pelosi accuse those of us who disagree with the Center of being funded to oppose it? BOTH sides need to cool the rhetoric!
I wouldn’t be surprised if the moderate muslims would be the target of violence of both Radical Muslims and the Islamophobes.
#3. That would be interesting, but… he’s an American, not a Saudi. Would we ask Christians to build Mosques?
I don’t think most people know much about Islam. It’s a very big, diverse and wide world.
Well, I would say we do have a “problem.” NYC has been stonewalling the efforts of a Christian church, St. Nicholas Orthodox, that wishes to rebuild. Yet they are making fools of themselves to accomodate this community center/mosque.
Maybe Mr. Wilkins could plant a Christian church in Saudi Arabia. I understand that Mecca is a wide open missionary field.
An article which claims that many Americans are motivated by a “deep-seated Islamophobia” and offers this as a point of evidence[blockquote]46% of Americans believe Islam is more likely than other faiths to encourage violence against nonbelievers.[/blockquote]is not an article to be taken seriously. That 46% believe something which is clearly true. The fact that I know, and many other people know, some very nice Muslims who do not wish to commit violence against non-Muslims does not change the fact that Islam’s foundational scriptures and many of its current religious leaders do permit or encourage such attitudes.
Islam is not just a religion, it is a theocracy that is incompatible with the Republic of the United States. One need only vew European nations (and even Canada) where Islam was welcomed to see that the Islamic groups demand Sharia once they are a critical mass. Mosques are used for political activity, not just religious activity. The writings of the Koran call for the violent overthrow of those that refuse to accept Islam. Therefore, since the US is a secular nation, the writings of the Koran advocate the violent overthrow of the United States. That is no longer protected speech. That is criminal activity. Please correct me if I am wrong with this line of thought.
[i] Comment deleted by elf. [/i]
[blockquote]”But it is plain that many of Park51’s opponents are motivated by deep-seated Islamophobia”[/blockquote] I doubt that Bobby Ghosh, who wrote this article is qualified to distinguish between rational fears and irrational phobias but in this article he shamelessly accuses “many†of the “Park51 opponents†of being “motivated†by nothing but a phobia.
It seems to me that those who remember the people who died in the tragedy of 9/11 should be respected and their realistic fears of Islamic Terrorists should not be belittled by pretentious journalists.
#10 John,
Say, that’s pretty good ad hominem. Let me try…gee, your post is so ridiculously ignorant that it fails to address the objections that I raised that clearly point out the various different histories of very different peoples and how that one group is seeking to overthrow the other. Making a false comparison about the history of Russia and of the United States, and using that as an attempt at an analogy of what I said is also ridiculously ignorant.
Now that we have played that game, let’s move on…
Informative quotes from the Koran:
[blockquote]
009.029
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
009.031
YUSUFALI: They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him).
PICKTHAL: They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)!
SHAKIR: They have taken their doctors of law and their monks for lords besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah son of Marium and they were enjoined that they should serve one Allah only, there is no god but He; far from His glory be what they set up (with Him).
005.051
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.
SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
008.060
YUSUFALI: Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.
PICKTHAL: Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others beside them whom ye know not. Allah knoweth them. Whatsoever ye spend in the way of Allah it will be repaid to you in full, and ye will not be wronged.
SHAKIR: And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them, whom you do not know (but) Allah knows them; and whatever thing you will spend in Allah’s way, it will be paid back to you fully and you shall not be dealt with unjustly.
008.012
YUSUFALI: Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.”
PICKTHAL: When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger.
SHAKIR: When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them. [/blockquote]
As I said, I don’t think that Islam is compatible with our Republic. In other Western nations, Muslims have pressed for (and in some cases have gotten) Sharia law. The Koran calls for the violent overthrow of those that don’t believe in Allah. So if someone wants to engage in dialogue (not just name calling and mud slinging) and discuss the impression that verses like these give to a Western Christian in the USA…well, I would like to hear it.
Source: http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/008.qmt.html
Br. Michael, you wish perhaps to take our religious tolerance cues from Saudi Arabia? Freedom of religion is Mecca is completely irrelevent to what we allow in New York City.
As for Islamic scriptures promoting violence, has anyone read the Jewish scriptures recently (Book of Joshua anyone)? Most faithful adherents of both religions recognize the violence in their scriptures as a legitimate chapter in their history but not a rule of faith in modern times.
Both sides in this debate need to be wary of name-calling. Not everyone concerned about Park 51 is a conservative, Glen Beck-watching Islamophobe, and most proponents are not naive, liberal bleeding heart fools.
#12
Jewish scriptures advocating violence are within both historical and geographical bounderies and as such were limited in scope to particular people groups existing at a particular time and in a particular place. The Koran does not have such restrictions. In point of fact, the violence is presently occurring, not 3,000 years old and is omnidirectional, not limited by the bounds of a covenant. Furthermore, you seem to be equating the revealed will of God found in the Jewish Scriptures with the false religious statements found in the Koran. If you are not Jewish or Christian, that is understandable. If you are Jewish or Christian, your equating the Koran with the Bible is not understandable. Jews and Christians share the same Hebrew Scripture of what is called the Old Testament by Christians. We recognize that these books of the Bible are inspired by God. We do not recognize the Koran as having that same inspiration.
The Jewish people were promised the land of Palestine by God, and they have not pursued military conquest to enlarge their territory beyond those boundaries. Islam has historically (and I would argue that it is presently) engaged in military conquest bent on global domination. There is a difference. That all Muslims are not soldiers is beside the point.
That all Muslims are not soldiers — in fact a very small minority of them are — is precisely the point. The the literal interpretation of the Koran demanding violence to non-Muslims is a minority view within Islam, yet too often it is assumed that this is a view shared by all Muslims.
Just as a few Jews have used the OT to justify violence against non-Jews in modern times, some Muslims have done the same in the name of the Koran. But that justifies neither antisemitism or Islamophobia.
With that being pointed out, I was disappointed in this Times article (at least the abbrieviated version on the website). It throws out accusations of Islamaphobia without providing much evidence, as far as I can see. The Park 51 flap seems to have brought a lot of distrust of Muslims out into the open, but it seems to me that very few people have actually advocated abridging the rights of Muslims to practice their religion.
Scott K, It is true that all Muslims are not soldiers, just as it was true that all Germans were not NAZIS, but either through fear or patriotism, all Germans did obey Hitler’s orders at the time when the NAZI party controlled Germany and the other countries they so cruelly dominated.
In my opinion, it is realistic for both Muslims and Americans to fear that Al-Qaeda and the Taliban might be allowed to spread their influence and dominate Muslim communities here in the United States. We certainly should at least recognize the threat and declaration of war that Osama bin Laden has presented to our country.
Scott K,: “Most faithful adherents of both religions recognize the violence in their scriptures as a legitimate chapter in their history but not a rule of faith in modern times.” This is true of Jews and Christians. I would like it to be true of Muslims, and this is what “moderate” Muslims are working towards. Unfortunately the rules developed from the Koran and hadiths are viewed as authoritative and still binding by a majority of Muslims, although many will shy away from advocacy of terrorist acts.
#14, if only a minority are the soldiers, it would be nice to hear from that vast majority of non-soldier muslims about how much they reject the call to bring death to non-believers and make all localities they inhabit Sharia complient.
That might tamp down a lot of the noise on this issue.
#17, there have been plenty of them speaking out since 9/11, but they don’t make exciting news coverage. Radicals make better copy.
The time is now for them to double, triple, quadruple their efforts or history will record them as silent.
Does anyone, except the news media, think that Muslim terrorists do not terrorize their own? That is probably why Muslims do not speak up. Publications like TIME magazine which invent a benign world only make the problem worse.
The Rev. Peter Moore offers some excellent thoughts at: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=13150
Fr. Moore says:
[blockquote]
….
We are a tolerant people, and religious tolerance is one of the hallmarks of our nation’s history. Indeed, it is one of the main reasons why this country was founded. Charleston itself can take pride in being among those American cities that from its earliest days welcomed religious minorities: Huguenots, Quakers, Jews, to mention a few.
So, why should we not be tolerant of a mosque at Ground Zero? If we will not use legal grounds, why would we use public pressure to “encourage” the Muslims of lower Manhattan to find a different location for their place of worship and cultural center?
[b]The answer to this may be somewhat shocking: the fact is that Islam is not a religion. At least, it’s not just a religion. Of course Islam has religious rites, ceremonies, and doctrines. It has all the trappings of a religion. But it has one other factor that changes the landscape entirely. It does not recognize the separation of “church and state”. Therefore everything Islam does has an inherent political implication.[/b]
……
Believers can thank the Enlightenment for one thing: it shamed religious zealots of all stripes for their use of violence to promote otherwise worthy aims. It threw the gauntlet down at the feet of those who would promote religion by the use of violence. On this point the Enlightenment echoed Jesus who had said: “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” And it reminded us that Jesus also said: “Those who use the sword will die by the sword.”
…….
….From the time of Jesus Christ onwards, it is clear, the civil and religious authorities are not inherently connected.
[b]But in Islam they are. Therefore Islam is not so much a religion as it is a “way of life.” It is a total cultural, religious, political unity. To separate any part of this is heresy.[/b]
…..
…But the larger issue is the merging of religious doctrine and the civil authority. It is why one cannot separate the building of a mosque at Ground Zero from the political statement that is being made – a statement that abjures Islam from any responsibility for 9/11 and turns shame into victory.[/blockquote]
I found very little information about “The Moderate Imam Behind the “Ground Zero Mosque†in Bobby Ghosh’s Time Magazine article. This is not an interview with the Imam, as you would expect, in fact the Imam is not quoted here at all; Newt Gingrich is quoted, Sarah Palin is semi-quoted and there is a quote from the Cordoba Initiative, but there are no quotes from “the moderate Imam behind the Ground Zero Mosque“. In fact there seems to be an absence of quotations from Muslims in Time’s other article “Does America Have a Muslim Problem?â€
If I rationalized the way Bobby Ghosh and Time Magazine do I would have to conclude, from reading this, that Bobby Ghosh and Time Magazine are so Islamaphobic that they are afraid to interview Muslims.