TweetThe whole idea of this mosque disgusts me. It is obviously a blatant stab of mockery in an attempt to declare a victorious attack on western civilization. However, even though most people will vehemently disagree with my opinion here, I still feel obliged to voice it.
I do not believe any government action should be taken to prevent the mosque from being built. My stance is strictly on the grounds of liberty and in accordance with the Constitution. Yet, it must be evident that the money is not being funneled from a terrorist organization, and that the mosque does not purport to enforce Sharia Law (this is where grounds for preventing it come in to play, and rightfully so). Otherwise there is nothing in the constitution that prevents a citizen from building a religious building on private property. I am not certain how the man purchased the land, but I can only imagine that anyone else would have been free to do so as well, including the government. If the government was supposedly wanting to build a monument in the area then why did they not buy the land first? Or is this mosque site not as close to ground zero as the monument was going to be? At any rate, none of this is relevant. What is relevant is the fact that anyone who owns land has a right to build on that land. In addition, our Constitution does not allow discrimination of religion, therefore the mosque is perfectly legal to build. But once again I will admit that the whole idea of it disgusts me. This man is a disgrace to society and by his actions he is worsening the reputation of the Muslim religion.
What may indeed happen though is that nobody will want to build the mosque. This may not happen too, but I can only imagine that anyone willing to work on the building is putting themselves at risk due to the amount of criticism and the sentimental value of the area. Also, the mosque will be a likely target for vandalism, again due to the overwhelming resent of the project among locals.
What Americans should consider is that we are so great a nation that we allow liberties to trump unpopular decisions by pathetic individuals such as the man wanting to build the mosque. But turn the situation around and think of what it would be like if someone wanted to build a Catholic church or some other Christian building in a predominantly Muslim area. I would like to believe that they would be free to do so as well.
Defending freedom is a difficult task sometimes because everyone has their biases for the most part. It is too easy to demand that a law be created to prevent that which we do not want. But when this is done everyone loses the equal amount of freedom which that law retracts. By not allowing freedom to prevail is to permit tyranny to come to our land.
It must also be realized that the threat to freedom comes from collectivism, which makes its biggest enemy individualism. In that respect, politics comes down to two classes, collectivism and individualism. Those who believe in freedom align themselves with individualism, and those who detest freedom align themselves with collectivism. G. Edward Griffin summed up how to spot a collectivist very simply, by alleging that whenever someone says "there ought to be a law!" you can conclude they support collectivism, possibly not aware of this fact but nonetheless it is true. Believing the government should create laws to satisfy some while punishing others is a fundamental role of collectivism. Freedom isn't perfect but it's much better than the alternative. We have to be willing to accept that some things in life will upset us, but then we have the first amendment to express our opinions on such matters.
If there is something I am missing here please let me know. I have not been following the mosque story much at all because on face value it seems perfectly legal. Add to it that it disgusts me, I feel better to ignore the story. This is how I deal with issues that I don't agree with but understand there is nothing unconstitutional about them. I'll end with one of my favorite quotes from one of the greatest defenders of freedom, Thomas Jefferson.
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson