Friday, August 27, 2010

The better angels of our nature

My great-grandfather was a member of the Ku Klux Klan back in the “good ol’ days” of the 1920s.

He was a Methodist minister in North Dakota; the focus of the Klan’s ire there was Catholicism, the faith of many central European immigrants who came to the Great Plains to farm.

He came to repent (more or less) of his bigoted zeal; it was the nature of the times, you see. The spreading of Catholicism by a large wave of central and southern European immigrants was seen as a threat to the American way of life — a white and Protestant way of life.

America was undergoing tremendous change in those days. More and more people were leaving the farm to take up jobs in urban centers, whose populations were exploding due to internal migration and external immigration. Then, as now, immigration was a hot topic. Congress passed immigration restrictions in 1921 and 1924 aimed at excluding Asians and restricting those mainly-Catholic immigrants from southern Europe.

Americans of northern European, Protestant descent feared being swamped by “alien” races and religious faiths.

If all that sounds familiar, it should. We are undergoing massive demographic and socioeconomic change again. That, to me, is at the root of the controversy over the so-called “ground zero mosque” (which is neither at “ground zero” nor a mosque). Our cultural anxieties have pushed the issue to the forefront of the national discourse.

On one level, it is easy to understand the reaction of those who oppose the Park 51 project. The World Trade Center site will always have profound symbolic meaning to Americans, like Gettysburg or Pearl Harbor. People are sensitive — and should be — about such sites.

But an Islamic community center near (not at) the site is only an affront if you believe that Islam itself perpetrated the criminal acts of war that occurred there and at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

That is fundamentally false. Islam did not attack America; 19 men, mostly Saudis, poisoned by hatred and a vicious perversion of Islam, attacked America, backed by a terrorist network that has also attacked and killed thousands of other Muslims in violation of the tenets of their own faith.

Do not forget that Muslim Americans were murdered in the September 11 attacks, too.
We must allow “the better angels of our nature” (to borrow Lincoln’s phrase from another time of bitter division and anxiety) to come to the fore on this issue. As my friend Andrew Gorayeb argues in an opinion piece in next week’s Nugget, our Constitution guarantees the right of worship (I would add the protection of the right not to worship as well) to everyone. The religious freedom clauses of the first amendment are a pillar of our national faith. This is a chance to live up to our highest ideals, rather than succumbing to our lowest passions.

There will always be those who profit from stoking our fears and resentments. The 20th century was rife with demagogues who focused that fear on the “other” in order to enhance their own power. It’s happening now.

But America is great enough to change — even at the price of excrutiating pain — and be better for it. We’ve done it many times before. By the 1940s, those Catholic immigrants my great-grandfather feared were an integral part of the fabric of the nation.

The cliched platoon from countless World War II movies revealed a truth: America was, indeed, made up of the tough Italian kid from New Jersey (John Basilone anyone?), the cocky Irish kid from Hell’s Kitchen, the Pole from Chicago, the slow-talkin’, straight-shootin’ Georgia boy, the clean-cut college boy from New England.

Within a couple of decades, the black kid from Alabama was there, too, along with Latinos, Asians — even women.

The Park51 community center debate is a great opportunity to remind ourselves and the world of American exceptionalism. We made a choice more than two centuries ago to be a beacon of liberty in a dark world. We haven’t always lived up to our own standards, but always, eventually, those “better angels of our nature” have won out.

We set aside our fear and adapt to change and welcome people of all creeds and cultures to enjoy the blessings of liberty.

That’s how we roll.

Jim Cornelius, Editor

21 comments:

  1. If it is not considered "at ground zero", then why was the building vacated by the owners of the Burlington Coat Factory? (Because the landing gear of one of the terrorist flown planes came through the roof). If Park51 is "not a mosque", then why does it need an Imam? If Imam Rauf was such a moderate, "why would he have said in 2005 that America has blood on it's hands, more than Al Qaida"? How is it that the financiar of this project was a waiter just eight years ago, and now he's able to buy hundred-million dollar buildings? And finally, if the Imam has "reconciliation in mind", why would he continue to push having it so close to Ground Zero (knowing it would invoke such passion?).

    Most people do not believe all Muslims are evil. But the people in control of the Park51 project have possible ties to Brotherhood of Islam, who use mosques all over the world (and up to 80% of the ones in the U.S.) to spread sharia law.

    You, dear editor, are in the minority of Americans on this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jim may be in the minority, as am I. Since when do we allow or disallow what people do with private property based on what they say --first amendment protects free speech..remember?

    If a non Muslim white American went from waiting tables to financing large construction projects, we would tout that as a realization of the American dream, not a cause for suspecting him of plotting against America.

    Bigotry and Racism always have its rationale. They always have their evidence. Germans believed Jews were responsible for all their problems in the 1920's. They had lots of evidence.

    Racism is having a dangerous rebirth in this country. And demagogues from Newt Gingrige to Sarah Palin to Dr.Laura to Ruch Limbaugh are encouraging it for their own personal gain. They have clever arguments and lots of"philosophical points", but itis all just racism wrapped up in shiny new package.

    Lets remember some lessons from Kindergarten

    Hating people because of their religion is wrong.

    Using the N-word is wrong.

    Hating people because their ethnic background is wrong, even if they are Latinos or Arabs.

    Easycure, Stop hating.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Of course, I'm racist. That is an old tired song, don't you think? All I did pose questions, of which none were answered.

    This is an issue based on the war on terror. Of course, if you don't believe that we are in a war against terrorism, then it's a 1st Amendment issue and anyone just questioning the issue are racists.

    You gotta love the liberal elitists.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes racism in America is an old tired song. Oh you did much more than just pose some questions: you advocate denying these people their constitutional right to religious freedom.

    I'll answer your questions any way:

    1. If it is not considered "at ground zero", then why was the building vacated by the owners of the Burlington Coat Factory?

    ANSWER:It doesn't matter if it is considered ground zero or not. It is private property and they have the right to use it for a Mosque if they want to.

    2. If Park51 is "not a mosque", then why does it need an Imam?

    ANSWER: It doesn't matter if it is a Mosque or not, It is private property and they have the right to use it for a Mosque if they want to.

    3. If Imam Rauf was such a moderate, "why would he have said in 2005 that America has blood on it's hands, more than Al Qaida"?

    ANSWER: It doesn't matter if Imam Rauf is a moderate or not, It is private property and they have the right to use it for a Mosque if they want to and Imam Rauf can say what he wants, his speech is protected by the 1st amendment.

    4.How is it that the financiar of this project was a waiter just eight years ago, and now he's able to buy hundred-million dollar buildings?

    ANSWER: He was a successful business man. Also the answer from my previous post: If a non Muslim white American went from waiting tables to financing large construction projects, we would tout that as a realization of the American dream, not a cause for suspecting him of plotting against America.

    4. if the Imam has "reconciliation in mind", why would he continue to push having it so close to Ground Zero (knowing it would invoke such passion?).

    ANSWER: It doesn't matter what the Imam has "in mind". He has broken no laws nor advocated breaking any laws, and, finally, It is private property and they have the right to use it for a Mosque if they want to.

    It is not people who are "just questioning the issues" who are racists, it is people who would take away other peoples constitutional rights based on their race or religion who are racists. That is what you propose. That is what I am calling you out on!

    1st amendment gives practitioners of Islam the right to practice their religion as they see fit on their own property.


    The 1st amendment doesn't say "unless you are Muslim" or "Unless you have said things offensive to others" or "unless the location of your house of worship upsets others" or "Unless we don't like your religion".

    I am for defending our Constitution, and against taking away peoples rights because they have a different religion than I do. If that makes me a "Liberal Elite", then so be it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. So, Easycure, what would your position be if "Catholics" or "Mormons" or "Seventh-Day Adventists" wanted to start a "Community Center" in an abandoned building in Sisters.

    Maybe right next to the McDonald's that got torched a while back?

    I consider myself a moderate (you'd consider me a whacko left-winger), and yes, America does have blood on it's hands; way more than Al Queda.

    Al Queda killed (directly) around 3,500 people in New York, DC and Pennsylvania in 2001.

    How many were "we" (the U.S., U.K., U.N., the "First-World" in general) responsible for in the years leading up to the first and second Gulf Wars?

    The several hundred years before that?

    How many civilians have died in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last nine years?

    Remember "slavery?"
    Remember the "Indian wars"?
    Remember Mai Lai?

    Do your homework citizen, and get over the "we're above that" crap...

    Wouldn't it suck if you were held personally responsible for the U.S. Marines who raped and murdered an Okinawan pre-teen girl a few years back?
    Or the routine abuse that happens at Gitmo or occupied Iraq/Afghanistan, and god-knows where else we pay/torture/kill people to get bogus information?

    Maybe I listen to the liberal media too much, but if I'm not mistaken, the Catholic church has solid ties to some "celibate" dudes that bugger little boys and girls all over the world.

    Even in our own U.S. of A.

    Go figure...

    Frankly, I'd rather be torched by a misguided-but-well-meaning jihadist than, uh, "screwed" by someone who's saving me on one hand while fondling me with the other, all in the name of his, her or somebody else's god.

    ReplyDelete
  6. From noted liberal (not exactly) Ron Paul. Worth thinking about:

    It has been said, “Nero fiddled while Rome burned.” Are we not overly preoccupied with this controversy, now being used in various ways by grandstanding politicians? It looks to me like the politicians are “fiddling while the economy burns.”

    The debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque.

    Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be “sensitive” requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from “ground zero.”

    Just think of what might (not) have happened if the whole issue had been ignored and the national debate stuck with war, peace, and prosperity. There certainly would have been a lot less emotionalism on both sides. The fact that so much attention has been given the mosque debate raises the question of just why and driven by whom?

    In my opinion it has come from the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia and are compelled to constantly justify it.




    Think he may be on to something?
    Jim Cornelius, Editor

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jim,

    Ron Paul has a totally right on assessment of this BS controversy.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As a veteran of the ongoing war in Iraq - regardless of what the Oval Office offers otherwise this evening - I say let them build the Park 51 mosque.

    Then, as is legally allowed, let all of the appropriate federal, state, and local law enforcment and Intelligence agencies tap, photograph, monitor, surveille, follow, investigate, arrest, prosecute (both in the civil and criminal court systems) all the prospective criminals, terroists, and other "bad guys" who will - in some way - be drawn to it.

    Given the ties that will most likely be - if not already have been established - the owners/operators of such a mosque will end up in a SuperMax prison, deported, or otherwise interdicted.

    And the mosque will end up being shut down or, better yet, become a vacant property again.

    And those follow on leads and the Intelligence/Law Enforcement/Military operations that will then take place thanks to the Park 51 "project" will Identify and Interdict additional individuals and networks on a global scope.

    From an old Green Beret with a bit more insight on the nature and Intent of our Enemy than most -

    "If you build it ... we will come."

    De Oppresso Liber -

    ReplyDelete
  9. Andrew Gorayeb's column is here:

    http://www.nuggetnews.com/main.asp?SectionID=10&SubSectionID=10&ArticleID=17637&TM=61449.16

    ReplyDelete
  10. Constitution, first amendment rights, racism, bigotry, wow ... It's simple, they may have the right to buy (Constitution or otherwise) the land and build the building, but I think the real question everyone is asking is, is that the morally and ethically right thing to do ? There are over 100 mosque's in the greater city area and one currently four blocks away from ground zero. The Muslim community has a chance here to "do the right thing" for the greater good. It doesn't look promising.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think it is a good idea to build a Catholic church and as the priests show up we can:

    " Then, as is legally allowed, let all of the appropriate federal, state, and local law enforcment and Intelligence agencies tap, photograph, monitor, surveille, follow, investigate, arrest, prosecute (both in the civil and criminal court systems) all the prospective pedofiles, and other "bad guys" who will - in some way - be drawn to it.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If there are over 100 mosques and 1 that is 4 blocks from ground zero, then what is the the big dealabout building 1 more.

    Maybe it is offensive to the patrons of the sacred fast food shops that are there. No I I've got it! It is offensive to the patrons of the sacred porno shops that are also 2 blocks from the hallowed ground zero. That must it!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Regarding the post reference to building a Catholic Church...

    Please note the caveat at the beginning of my thought - "...as is legally allowed...", emphasis on "legally allowed".

    Legally allowed is explicit in being rooted in Constitutional Law, meaning as the Constitution has been interpreted and re-intepreted by our highest courts since this document was drawn up and institutionalized at the core of our legal system.

    Constitutional law directly affects and directs all law at the federal, state, and local levels and is a living document and influence.

    So please, rather than SEND and post a perhaps pithy quip...read carefully and thoughtfully...and perhaps give thought that over the years we have indeed done all that I noted, legally, with respect to civil and criminal investigations involving the vast multitude of religious institutions, sects, branches, denominations, and so on.

    In some cases, that's how disreputable clergy, for example, representing the Catholic Church have been investigated, arrested, and successfully prosecuted for child abuse over the years.

    And how disreputable clergy and other actors representing Islam have been and will continue to be likewise addressed legally and in the pursuit of justice.

    De Oppresso Liber -

    ReplyDelete
  14. I read what Easycure said. Suggesting Easycure is "hating" is a non-sequitur. I was taught by my progressive preceptors that assumption, prejudice, steroetyping and intolerance are the antithesis of the progressive philosophy and the fallacy of the conservative movement. So why is it that Easycure is so assumptively and prejudicially evaluated and gracelessly thrown onto the dung heap of right-wing racist and bigot? It must be that those who assume Easycure is hating are conservatives.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jim, this is the flaw in your argument:

    "But an Islamic community center near (not at) the site is only an affront if you believe that Islam itself perpetrated the criminal acts of war that occurred there and at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001." (Italics are mine)

    You have created a straw-man argument here. Surely you don't really believe that everyone who finds this community center to be a bad idea, or to offend their values, or to find it simply offensive, or an affront, as you put it, really believes that "Islam", perpetrated 9/11, and not the 19 men who really did. Hence, if anyone believes that the 19 men committed the acts, and not "Islam", then by you're argument they can't or don't find this community center an affront.

    Well, read any editorial page lately and you'll find your argument rendered invalid. Plenty of reasonable and highly intelligent people know who committed 9/11 and still think this community center is a bad idea, or even an affront. Also, qualifying your argument with data stating it's not at ground zero and it's not a mosque is largely irrelevant, as the media always inserts a title with less than literally or factually proper accuracy ("Ground Zero Mosque" for this one) to events and stories such as these. It's a headline. Come on. We all know what is really meant. Splitting hairs like that is irrelevant and severely weakens your argument. Perhaps I should point out that there was also an event in Western PA on 9/11 that was part of that act of war, but everyone knows what you meant, so beating you up for leaving that out would be absurd.

    Frankly, I view the "Ground Zero Mosque" as Evelyn Beatrice Hall (not Voltaire) would, and as I believe our US Constitution does. I vehemently defend the right for this community center to be built, even though I think it's incredibly foolish to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  16. To Anonymous who was taught by preceptors rather than teachers:

    It is a phony argument of many conservatives that fighting bigotry and prejudice is itself a form of bigoty and prejudice against the bigoted and prejudiced.

    This argument is, of course, rhetorical nonsense. Easycure has proposed that the PArk51 project be stopped because he does not like the religion of the people who are sponsoring it. It is not assumptive prejudiced or intolerant to point that out.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Right out of Websters dictionary:

    Definition of PRECEPTOR
    1
    a : teacher, tutor b : the headmaster or principal of a school
    2
    : the head of a preceptory of Knights Templars

    So I used "preceptor" instead of what it also means, which is, according to Webster, a teacher. And this bothers you enough to point it out even though I was correct. And you still are addressing Easycure's comment (not mine) and classifying him as a racist and bigot with zero evidence to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "Easycure has proposed that the PArk51 project be stopped because he does not like the religion of the people who are sponsoring it. It is not assumptive prejudiced or intolerant to point that out."

    Really? He has? I don't see that proposal anywhere in Easycure's comments. Nice try.

    ReplyDelete
  19. To Anonymous who was taught by preceptors rather than teachers (<- Hint:I am making fun of your pretentious use of language):

    ... So I missed the part in Easycure's post that said if it were some nice Muslims who were proposing to build a Community center at Part51, that would be ok. All of his objections were centered on the following features of the proposed site:

    -It is a Mosque
    -there is an Imam
    -evil Muslims are running the project.

    Religion is the issue. (pretentious use of language follows-->) it is sophistry to think other wise.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This mosque thing is very troubling to me...

    I think I will spend some quality time at the Farmer's Market on the Park Block here in Portland this Saturday - worrying about the pros and cons of this important issue.

    All while drinking dripped coffee and snacking on a homemade breakfast scone and listening to some nice live music from the steps of the PSU library.

    Thank goodness we all live in Oregon, yes?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Again, you are attributing even more actions, beliefs and feelings to Easycure that are not things he has actually said, so you don't know these things to be true about him. Stop making my point. I am making a case that one cannot fairly, or easily or even at all attribute bigotry and racism as attributes of Easycure's nature based on what he wrote. You are calling me (and him) names. I am moving forward.

    ReplyDelete