When people argue over religion, they tend to forget a simple question: Is it better to be happy or to be right? In societies that practice religious toleration, the answer falls to the side of happiness. Being right on matters of God is left up in the air. That’s a good practical reason to remind people that, of course, anyone who wants to build a mosque has the right to do so, even if questions of zoning, local acceptability, and so on also enter the picture. In the case of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf , a moderate cleric who has openly divorced himself from political issues, he can tolerantly be seen as a force for good — he describes himself as a bridge builder between cultures.
Anyone who tries to make hay out of this issue wants to battle over who is right and who is wrong. Politicians fan public controversy for their own gain, and it’s dubious if they contribute to anyone’s happiness. President Obama deserves credit for making a sane, measured, adult statement about the proposed Islamic center — that has always been his style. His later clarification, in which he said that he wasn’t endorsing the center or agreeing with the wisdom of building it, gave Republicans a wedge for some flip-flop rhetoric. The kerfuffle is just that. Hamas also saw something to gain by wooing Obama, very clumsily, in their endorsement of the project, but it’s an obvious ploy, as is the right wing’s cry that Obama, Rauf, and Hamas are on the same page.
Moderate Muslims chafe at being put into the same box with jihadis and other extremists. Right wingers jump into the box with them, however, because it holds any kind of close-mindedness, propaganda, xenophobia, and intolerance. That’s one of the perpetual ironies of such self-righteous clashes. Both sides need each other, and in their declared hostility they pretend not to notice that each is pulling one end of the same rope. It’s a sign of life returning to normal that most Americans aren’t interested in joining the tug of war. With a majority saying that the imam has a right to build his center, the 39% who disagree or have no opinion amount to the same percentage, more or less, that Republicans, Tea Partiers, and the right in general manage to attract at this moment. In tough times, when people are unsettled already, offering a bogey man works.
If the same Islamic center had been proposed before 9/11, it wouldn’t have attracted the slightest notice beyond zoning hearings. If it had been proposed the day after 9/11, one shudders to think about what Rauf would have been exposed to. But people are in a shadow zone right now, worried about terrorists, suspicious of Islam despite their best intentions, and jumpy about the Muslims among us who are doing nothing more dangerous than seeking a place to worship in their own way. Beneath the surface, it’s really our own consciousness that remains in uncertainty. One looks forward to the day when Muslims are not forced into the same box with their irate counterparts on the opposite side. That box is too full already.
For more information go to deepakchopra.com
PHOTO (cc): Flickr / Rudy Herman
Without a left, there is no right. Without a Them, there is no Us… unless the Us includes us all. Boxes – whether ours or theirs – are built of sides, which must be taken in the deliberate exclusion of those 'not like us'.
Growing up in and surviving Christian fundamentalism, I have compassion for those who imagine security within the box. But as long as it is secure 'in here', we must defend against them 'out there'. The terrors are endless, until the sides come down and the box includes us all, with our distinct voices, our blending colors and our common human welfare.
I respectfully disagree with your assumption that most of those who are against the Cordoba project are "right wingers" (and honestly, a little disappointed to find this kind of labeling in a post of yours). You cite polls showing the majority of people support Imam Feisal's right to build the mosque, but you ignore polls that show similar numbers are against him doing it. It's getting very frustrating to see this talking past each other…opponents say "we wish they would build elsewhere", to which the PC response is "but they have the right". This is a non sequitur. Most people I know….including myself…who wish they wouldn't build there, understand and support their constitutional right to do so.
I live in Manhattan. The polls here are showing close to 80% of New Yorkers (a very liberal city) do not want the mosque built on that site…yet I'm sure most would agree they do have the right. As someone else put it, just because they have the right, does not mean it is RIGHT.
If you must label me intolerant/bigoted etc. for wishing this project not go forward on this spot, so be it. But PLEASE…everybody…let's stop conflating constitutional rights with a debate over what is or is not advisable. We also have the right to that debate.
By the way…my point about 80% against in NYC is this… at best, 20% of the population here might be "right wingers" (whatever that means)…so the math does not work that anything close to a majority of those people here could fall into that category. Even nationwide, the latest polls are showing close to 70% against the Mosque, 70% supporting the right to build it.
Dear Ron,
I am an ex New Yorker and a Jew and I am not a fan of radical political Islam. It is only radical political Islam that embraces violence and terror in their quest to impose Sharia law on the world. This Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a Sufi. The poet Rumi was a Sufi. Sufism is the branch of Islam which is mystical, loving, and peaceful. This is not a mosque being built but a cultural center. As a Jew I could not enter a mosque, but I would be welcomed in this Sufi Imam's cultural center.
We must know enough to encourage those within Islam who embrace tolerance.
And Deepak my friend, you might be interested to know that the N.Y. Times called Imam Rauf the Islamic Deepak Chopra.
love and light,
Stuart
http://stuartmarkberlin.com