Plans for construction of a mosque at Ground Zero have riled both supporters and protesters. According to the New York Times, politicians and social advocacy groups alike have come out on one side of the issue--New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg defended the project on the grounds of religious freedom, while former House Speaker Newt Gingrich called the plan "an aggressive act that is offensive."The mosque in question, if approved by the city Landmarks and Preservation Commission tomorrow, will be built two blocks from Ground Zero. "Park51," as the facility is to be called, is expected to include a prayer space fit for 2,000, a gym, a pool, a theater and a gallery space. Building partner Daisy Khan, who is also married to the cleric leading the effort, said classrooms and lecture halls will provide space for "a robust debate on the critical issues of radicalization, extremism and terrorism." Khan told the Wall Street Journal that the board running the center will include members of other religions "to protect the interests of the center and to ensure the center has the highest standards of transparency."
The more I read about this issue, the more I question opposition to the facility. The argument that angers me most is the "Don't do this to the families of the victims" bent. First off, let's not forget that Muslims also died on Sept. 11. And secondly, what exactly is this mosque doing to the families of victims? Facilitating dialogues between groups? Exposing the city to an oft-feared and more often stereotyped faith, with a rich history and culture? Trying to blast through the "Islam=jihad" stigma that runs through our veins, perhaps most fervently through those who believe "Islam killed my father/mother/brother/sister/wife/husband, etc."? The motives for Park51 seem pure and good, while the motives to oppose the plan seem bigoted and ethnocentric.
As the New York Times reports, the Anti-Defamation League came out against the mosque last Friday, citing opposition by the victims' families as pivotal in the League's decisions. When asked why the victims' families were so crucial to the decision, national director Abraham H. Foxman replied:
"Survivors of the Holocaust are entitled to feelings that are irrational. [The families'] anguish entitles them to positions that others would categorize as irrational or bigoted."
Pardon? So do black people get to be bigots in exchange for years of slavery? Do Chinese people get rally against white people in exchange for their exploitation during the Gold Rush and the railroad boom? How about Mexican immigrants who went through hell to come to the U.S. legally? Do they get a blank check to spit on Capitol Hill and rail against the largely white male legislature that makes it increasingly difficult for them to bring their families here legally? What, Mr. Foxman, is the statute of limitations on "survivor bigotry?"
And today, on the eve of the decision to greenlight Park51 or not, Islam shatters another stereotype: That women are oppressed and shuttered by the men who "keep them." Just look at the previously-mentioned Daisy Khan. She, and not her husband and business partner, spoke to the Wall Street Journal about the project. She addressed criticisms and offered solutions to ensure extremism was kept at bay. Described by the Journal as "steadfast," Ms. Khan spoke in macro terms of the "Americanization of a religion" and the importance of facilities like Park51 to ensure the intersection of the Islamic community and the community that surrounds it. Khan is far from the cloistered, meek version of Islamic women so often shown in the media and lodged in our perceptions, proving yet again the utility of places like Park51 in combating said stereotypes.
The opposition may think they are protecting us and safeguarding the memory of those killed in 9/11, but in reality they are only preventing us from learning, understanding and letting go of our fears.
Photo Credit: WyBlog
