I was going to add my 2¢ with all the others opposing Krauthammer (I'm not sure anyone named Krauthammer should ever mention Auschwitz even in reference. [That's a joke.])
I wasn't going to add much other than emphasize the fact that it is TWO AND A HALF BLOCKS AWAY! Sheesh, how long does the hallo of hallowed ground extend?
Also, as others have pointed out, the relationship between 9/11 and the Muslim church is a somewhere between happenstance and a grandfalloon.
But, to add more depth to the discussion, I think that we should look more closely at the tenets of the church. I know this is slippery ground, but I agree with Myk that one should not promote ignorance and call it religion. So as long as the proposed Muslim Church is not promoting ignorance, build away.
We certainly hope that this mosque will not be promoting ignorance. As pointed out in an op-ed piece in the New York Times The Muslims in the Middle, "Feisal Abdul Rauf of the Cordoba Initiative is one of America’s leading thinkers of Sufism, the mystical form of Islam, which in terms of goals and outlook couldn’t be farther from the violent Wahhabism of the jihadists. His videos and sermons preach love, the remembrance of God (or “zikr”) and reconciliation."
The 12th century poet Rumi is perhaps the world's most famous Sufi. Two samples of his writing:
Christian, Jew, Muslim, shaman, Zoroastrian, stone, ground, mountain, river, each has a secret way of being with the mystery, unique and not to be judged.
Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it.
Definitely build then...and carve those two sayings around the facade of the building.
BTW, despite checking my posts I always make mistakes. 'hallo' sounds like some Pooh bear would greet you with; I meant 'halo'—the emanation, not the game.
While I agree with Harris about many things, his claiming that the Cordoba mosque is in bad taste is essentially the same argument I find so self-pitingly lame from many Muslim spokespeople whenever something satirical is written about their religion. From the Danish Cartoon Controversy to the censoring of South Park, and even to the fatwa on Salman Rushdie, we're invariably greeted by a chourus of whining from self-appointed Islamic leaders about "deliberate offensiveness" and "lack of taste". The argument is essentially, "Yeah, you have the right to satirize our religion, but it doesn't mean you should do it- it hurts people's feelings."
To claim "offense" has become a trump card that that one can just play without ever having to justify. It's a debtate ender, and it's too bad Harris got sucked into this line of thinking. As Hitchens sarcastically says in his pitch-pefect take on this whole non-story: "Why think when you can just feel?"
(Incidentally, this is actually why I pretty strongly disagree with Ebert on the Cinco de Mayo flap. Eugene Volokh wrote a succinct, thoughtful rebuttal).
Actually, I shouldn't have said "non-story". It is a pretty worthy opportunity for discussion and understanding.
It just seems that the First Amendment makes it abundantly clear that you're entitled to build a place of worship on private property. That's it. I don't like all this victimization talk on the part of anti-mosque people. They should be made of stiffer stuff.
For whatever reasons my kneejerk reaction to being an American are not positive; however, I teared up when the NYC Landmarks Preseveration Commission removed a major hurdle for the building of the Islamic Center. At the risk of falling victim to American Exceptionalism, I would say, "only in America." Actually, maybe only in NYC. That was Osama's big mistake-- taking out NYC, the most diverse, tolerant place on the planet. Man, you can't build a minaret anywhere in Belgium. I've come to see that the great thing about America is that it has no culture,nothing to protect from "outsiders". Its culture is in effect to have no culture, to have nothing to cling to. The other thing this whole episode shows is that the Republicans have absolutely nothing to offer. It's really astounding that with all the challenges facing us, they focus on a mosque and scrapping the 14th amendment.
I think Pete's comment is one of the most insightful we have seen on this blog and a fitting closer, but another story appeared today which dovetails into this issue and is not as positive.
I'm talking about the poll where 18% of Americans erroneously believe that Obama is a Muslim—up from 11% in March. It is especially strange because during the campaign everyone knew his pastor was the controversial Jeremiah Wright.
What I find disconcerting about this non-story, other than we have very short memories (Memento, as a political essay), is that it is implicit that a Muslim is less desirable than a Christian. ('Obama needs to counteract these Republican dirty tricks.') While I'm all for truth—let's get the president's religion right—it seems that we can get an African American elected president, but would have more trouble with a Muslim.
15 comments:
I was going to add my 2¢ with all the others opposing Krauthammer (I'm not sure anyone named Krauthammer should ever mention Auschwitz even in reference. [That's a joke.])
I wasn't going to add much other than emphasize the fact that it is TWO AND A HALF BLOCKS AWAY! Sheesh, how long does the hallo of hallowed ground extend?
Also, as others have pointed out, the relationship between 9/11 and the Muslim church is a somewhere between happenstance and a grandfalloon.
But, to add more depth to the discussion, I think that we should look more closely at the tenets of the church. I know this is slippery ground, but I agree with Myk that one should not promote ignorance and call it religion. So as long as the proposed Muslim Church is not promoting ignorance, build away.
We certainly hope that this mosque will not be promoting ignorance. As pointed out in an op-ed piece in the New York Times The Muslims in the Middle, "Feisal Abdul Rauf of the Cordoba Initiative is one of America’s leading thinkers of Sufism, the mystical form of Islam, which in terms of goals and outlook couldn’t be farther from the violent Wahhabism of the jihadists. His videos and sermons preach love, the remembrance of God (or “zikr”) and reconciliation."
The 12th century poet Rumi is perhaps the world's most famous Sufi. Two samples of his writing:
Christian, Jew, Muslim, shaman, Zoroastrian, stone, ground, mountain, river, each has a secret way of being with the mystery, unique and not to be judged.
Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it.
Definitely build then...and carve those two sayings around the facade of the building.
BTW, despite checking my posts I always make mistakes. 'hallo' sounds like some Pooh bear would greet you with; I meant 'halo'—the emanation, not the game.
While I agree with Harris about many things, his claiming that the Cordoba mosque is in bad taste is essentially the same argument I find so self-pitingly lame from many Muslim spokespeople whenever something satirical is written about their religion. From the Danish Cartoon Controversy to the censoring of South Park, and even to the fatwa on Salman Rushdie, we're invariably greeted by a chourus of whining from self-appointed Islamic leaders about "deliberate offensiveness" and "lack of taste". The argument is essentially, "Yeah, you have the right to satirize our religion, but it doesn't mean you should do it- it hurts people's feelings."
To claim "offense" has become a trump card that that one can just play without ever having to justify. It's a debtate ender, and it's too bad Harris got sucked into this line of thinking. As Hitchens sarcastically says in his pitch-pefect take on this whole non-story: "Why think when you can just feel?"
(Incidentally, this is actually why I pretty strongly disagree with Ebert on the Cinco de Mayo flap. Eugene Volokh wrote a succinct, thoughtful rebuttal).
Actually, I shouldn't have said "non-story". It is a pretty worthy opportunity for discussion and understanding.
It just seems that the First Amendment makes it abundantly clear that you're entitled to build a place of worship on private property. That's it. I don't like all this victimization talk on the part of anti-mosque people. They should be made of stiffer stuff.
This is the typo thread! "Pitingly" should be "pityingly" and "chourus" should be "chorus". Gah! Just thought I'd publicly self-flagellate.
Speaking of flagellation, if you could hand me the whip for a second: it should be "sterner stuff" not stiffer stuff.
Yikes. I give up.
For whatever reasons my kneejerk reaction to being an American are not positive; however, I teared up when the NYC Landmarks Preseveration Commission removed a major hurdle for the building of the Islamic Center. At the risk of falling victim to American Exceptionalism, I would say, "only in America." Actually, maybe only in NYC. That was Osama's big mistake-- taking out NYC, the most diverse, tolerant place on the planet. Man, you can't build a minaret anywhere in Belgium. I've come to see that the great thing about America is that it has no culture,nothing to protect from "outsiders". Its culture is in effect to have no culture, to have nothing to cling to.
The other thing this whole episode shows is that the Republicans have absolutely nothing to offer. It's really astounding that with all the challenges facing us, they focus on a mosque and scrapping the 14th amendment.
C'est incroyable! Who knew having no culture was a good thing?
I think Pete's comment is one of the most insightful we have seen on this blog and a fitting closer, but another story appeared today which dovetails into this issue and is not as positive.
I'm talking about the poll where 18% of Americans erroneously believe that Obama is a Muslim—up from 11% in March. It is especially strange because during the campaign everyone knew his pastor was the controversial Jeremiah Wright.
What I find disconcerting about this non-story, other than we have very short memories (Memento, as a political essay), is that it is implicit that a Muslim is less desirable than a Christian. ('Obama needs to counteract these Republican dirty tricks.') While I'm all for truth—let's get the president's religion right—it seems that we can get an African American elected president, but would have more trouble with a Muslim.
I think it is more that we have no defining culture but, instead, are a collection of cultures.
"I am large, I contain multitudes" Walt Whitman: Song of Myself
Whitman was somewhat sensitive about this and preferred the term "husky"
Bloomberg's smart, succinct response.
Peter--
I just googled "Fat Walt Whitman" and, I kid you not, this is one of his quotes:
“I find no sweeter fat than sticks to my own bones.”
Post a Comment