Aug 18, 2010 at 2:54 PM
As an exercise in curiosity, below is a poll on the planned 'Ground Zero Mosque' in New York. I'm particularly interested in the views of the libertarians who frequent this site.
See this article for some background. Also, here is a previous post on the subject.
Posted in:
- Blog Policy
- Login or register to post comments
Connect with YAL
to the YAL channel on 
Upcoming Events
-
Info This seminar offers an introduction to the thoughts and thinkers of the...
-
Info The contrast between liberty and power in the history of the...
-
Info The summer’s final Freedom University boasts lectures on the hottest...
-
Info This is an all day, family-friendly convention for freedom-minded folks in...
-
Info Taking RSVP now for a June 30th - July 1st convention.We need to secure...
I am glad that the majority believe that they shouldn't build it even though they have the right.
I say they have the right and they should build it there. I say they should build it there because that's where they want to build it, and it's their property. So if you own property, if you want to build something there, and if you have the means to do so, then you should.
Tyler, you do realize that its a good 3-4 blocks away and its not even visible. Even if it were visible from ground zero, its a freakin community center with a swimming pool. God forbid we have Muslims swimming 3 blocks away from WTC site. Oh, by the way, there is a mosque 4 blocks away from the site thats been there since 1970, should we bulldoze it down?
I never said anything about bulldozing the Mosque down. Yes, they have the right to build it. No, I do not support it. They can do what they want. They have the right to believe whatever they want. All I am saying is I do not support it. I am not saying that the government should step in to stop it.
Can you give a logical reason why they shouldn't? I'm all for the right to disagree, but let's be honest in our reasons.
I'd sugges it's bad PR for Muslims. Check out a post from another YAL blogger, Jihan Huq (a Muslim herself), on the subject here.
As a Christian, Muslim, or man of any faith, I would fear the day we begin making religious decisions based on public relations, instead of what we hold true in our hearts - closed societies are built in such ways.
One could suggest that giving in, and not building this [mosque], would be worse for Muslims. It isn't too far outside the realm of possibility, to assume, that doing as such (not building it) would strengthen the anti-Islamic sentiment already vastly growing around this nation, and the rest of the Western world, by legitimizing the opposition's arguments.
Of course, that’s all speculative until a decision is made, and the implications of said decision come to fruition.
Here's an interesting piece, via Lew Rockwell:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis201.html
=)
I didn't mean to imply that you had suggested they shouldn't build the mosque based on -- what will more than likely be -- a strong negative response from the public; nor did I mean to imply that you would suggest that religious faiths make decisions based on PR. I just get a little knee jerk when I think about the idea that PR should guide the free will of any man, or faith, instead of what we -- as a free and open society -- hold to be morally true - that the right to private property and religious freedom is absolute. =)
I understand what you're saying, and as a Christian I would probably phrase it as being "damaging to our witness."
Either way, my point is that no one operates in a vacuum of public opinion, and if one is trying to advance a faith or even just generate goodwill in a community, it's important to consider the opinions of those around you. This may at times produce results we don't like for one reason or another, but it's still a real factor of operating in a free society where you can't force other people to like you.
Hm. I'm still developing, in a sense, my understanding of what relationship religion is too share with a secular society such as ours. The more I think about this whole "mosque" thing -- what I would normally consider to be a non-issue -- the more I concede to the notion that the plans to build it were ill conceived at best. However, I undoubtedly can not detract from my line of reasoning here:
It is my belief that we should vigorously defend, in this instance, the right to private property and religious practice, and in doing so, with some prudence, encourage the exercising of said rights -- no matter how ill conceived these plans may be -- lest we see the day enraged masses come looking to limit other, more precious enjoyments of our "free" society. That would essentially be the crux behind my argument.
I guess I just feel that giving in and not building this "mosque" would give the anti-Islamic crowd some ground to stand on, particularly with the xenophobic debate I believe is coming. (see Newt Gingrich)
I have no argument with your line of thought, which I concur to some degree; I just felt it best to better clarify my position. Thanks for the insight, Bonnie! =)
Seriousely? Think about it.
Cool! Polls!
Obviously they have the right, but I think that private property rights don't call for arrogance, they don't restrict it, but you have to use responsibility. If they really want to build it there than they should, but if they are building it there simply because they are more focused on pushing for Islamic tolerance, then I think they'd be wiser putting it elsewhere. I don't think for a second that the protestors are right because their logic implies Islam exclusively caused 9/11, but the issue is so emotional for people that, if it is for promoting tolerance, that it will likely backfire. People will see it as the stupidity of "political correctness" and not a legitmate outreach for islamic tolerance. Those people would be wrong, and pretty much all of the protestors are wrong, but just because they can build it there (and laws should not stop them if they choose to follow through), it doesn't mean they should.
I think that your main reason for them not building is the chief reason they should: this issue is too emotionally charged. People need to stop looking at legal/political issues from an emotional perspective. It's too easy to hide behind emotions like fear rather than approach situations with reason and logic.
After thinking about it more, I think they should go ahead and build it, I still think that an attempt to push for tolerance will backfire for the reasons I already stated, but in the long run I think more can be said for building it then not building it, either way, as long as no laws directly or indirectly force the building from not being built or to another location, I'll be cool with whatever they decide.
"They have a right to build it there, and they should." - CHECK!
Why should they build it, you ask? Because I believe anyone that wishes to exercise their right to private property or religious practice, even if I don't agree with them, should indeed do so, so long as they do not infringe on my rights or the rights of others. The day we start encouraging otherwise, is the day the Founders' grand experiment -- in the harmony of democracy, liberty, and law -- comes to an end.
Where's the "They have a right to build it there, and I don't care if they build it or not" option?
LOL! I was going to say that, but thought it best not to. Maybe I should have...=)
I was lookin for this as well.
My apologies for not including that option =)
I'll keep this brief as I've already debated this multiple times: As long as the property owners are okay with this, then the Muslims who'd like to build the mosque have every right to do so. I am surprised that so many people (both liberals and conservatives) who swear by civil liberties and property rights are so quick to play the compromise card because they feel that the mosque is in bad taste. Government has no power to rule against bad taste and if we take rights seriously, we have to do so even in times where the so-called majority stands against them. Freedom of religion and property rights overcome all compromises out of convenience.
Randy and Christopher Hill=Checkmate
If I were the people living nearby I would totally support the mosque, I mean its going into a building that used to be a retail store that has since gone under, and could very well rejuvinate the surrounding area. With that said, they have a right to build it there, and I don't care if they build it or not. I wouldn't try to stop them either.
I don't see why people are so against them building the facility even from a PR point for their religion. Muslims had nothings to do with the 9/11 attacks. It was a group of extremists who chose to use violence to acheive some sort of ends. Terrorists and Islam are not one in the same. The are completely seperate from each other. If people are upset with islam because of 9/11, their claims are unfounded. They should build the mosque because islam has nothing to do with the attacks, and those who blame islam are misguided. Building some sort of christian community center would be no different than this muslim facility. Just because people think it is wrong doesn't mean it is. If you ask me, those who think they shouldn't are just being xenophobic. There are those who choose to use violence to acheive their ends in all religions. Lets say a christian extremist decided to blow up a federal building in New York killing hundreds. Does this mean no christian churches should be allowed in the area where he commited the act of violence? I am having problems understanding the logic. The hatred of islam and intolerance to building the mosque is only because of a false belief that "muslims" are at fault for the attacks and they should respect people who are pissed off at them for no good reason.
It's good to see superstition alive and well. This non-issue is already absurd but when you pit one fairy tale against the other it raises it to camus levels of absurdity.