New York's mayor, Michael Bloomberg, expressed similar sentiments in an interview with the New York Post , saying: "Democracy is stronger than this. You know the ability to practice your religion was one of the real reasons America was founded. Critics have pointed out that when surveyed, most Americans oppose the mosque, although one poll suggested that more people in Manhattan itself supported it than opposed it.
Many of the critics of the plan have insisted they do not oppose the building of new mosques in New York per se, emphasising that it is only the siting of this project near Ground Zero that is "tasteless".
Some have even said the choice of the name Cordoba House could be significant, alluding to the Great Mosque of Cordoba, built on the site of a Spanish church, and turned into a cathedral after the Christian Reconquista. One of the clerics behind the project, Imam Feisal Rauf, says he hopes the Islamic cultural centre will be a force for good.
When we say it here, we will be heard. There is currently a makeshift mosque on the site. Published 15 July OUR PROGRAMS Through a variety of ongoing programs and activities aimed at serving the community, Cordoba House honors the plurality of beliefs in America, encourages learning and discovery, and celebrates the sacred and cherished traditions of all faiths. Cordoba House Sunday School Fostering spiritual development, a connection with God, and teaching students how to be authentically Islamic in America.
Learn More. Muslim Leadership Training Program Providing practical skills and the knowledge required for individuals to confidently guide and lead their communities. They liked to speak about how Catholicism and Judaism had become American religions by bursting out of their bubbles, learning from and working with other communities, and building institutions that served the common good of their adopted homeland instead of just the concerns of their own parochial groups.
Muslims, they insisted, ought to do the same. We could maintain our distinctive identities while contributing to the civic life of our nation. In fact, becoming a valued part of a diverse nation was a deeply Islamic thing to do. Perhaps the most high profile opponent of Cordoba House was the former speaker of the House of Representatives and soon-to-be presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich.
While this conjures up images of Taliban brutality, much of what is covered in Shariah are straightforward matters regarding prayer and communal life. Furthermore, like the law of any religious tradition or nation, it is by no means fixed but requires interpretation and adaptation for various times and places.
Gingrich said little about such nuances, content instead for his statements to provide an aerial attack for what was already an aggressive anti-Shariah ground game. Even before the Cordoba House controversy, a small group of anti-Muslim activists were encouraging state legislatures to pass anti-Shariah legislation, measures that would proactively forbid American judges from consulting Shariah law. Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan official, was one of the leaders in the anti-Sharia movement.
More precisely, contrary to the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, and in a way absolutely incompatible with it, Sharia asserts that God did not create freewill but tied it to the will of Allah — the condition of human beings is submission to Allah and not freedom. The statement contains or suggests many of the most common tropes of the anti-Muslim movement: Islam is best understood not as a religion but as a political system bent on domination.
While in Judeo-Christian America we cherish freedom, Islam requires submission. Could your Muslim neighbors be the next jihadist?
Better stop them now. Other leaders, ranging from Sarah Palin to President Obama, while granting that Muslims had a constitutional right to build Cordoba House, questioned the wisdom and sensitivity of the decision.
In contrast, Bloomberg passionately supported the project in its original plan and location. Not only was Cordoba House private property, in which the state may not interfere except under exceptional circumstances, but the government is bound by the first amendment of the constitution to protect religious expression. Moreover, not only does the government have a duty of non-interference with religious practice, it has an obligation to exhibit fairness to all religious traditions and communities.
This combination of freedom and diversity poses challenges, Bloomberg conceded. It means that your neighbor has the right within limits to express things you may not like, believe things you think are wrong and act in ways that you view as sinful.
0コメント