| So, much to the surprise of many First Amendment advocates, Howard Dean came out as saying he thinks the controversial Islamic Center shouldn't be built.
Why?
My argument is simple. This Center may be intended as a bridge or a healing gesture but it will not be perceived that way unless a dialogue with a real attempt to understand each other happens. That means the builders have to be willing to go beyond what is their right and be willing to talk about feelings whether the feelings are 'justified' or not....
Hm.
There's definitely a weird and widespread xenophobia that's infected the country since 9/11. And certainly the malaise won't just go away if the Islamic Center is built, as is the right of the builders. Private property, First Amendment, etc & co. Building the center isn't the solution to the problem. In fact, if it's built, many will feel it's been shoved down the throats of Americans, many of whom agree with the mosque opponents. In this I agree.
But, then. There are problems with the presumption that stopping construction would necessarily lead to a better outcome. First, "dialog"? What planet is Dean living on? How do you have a "dialog" with the likes of Pam Geller? And then there's the little ugly fact that the halt of construction would give mosque opponents a kind of public relations "victory," and would give the illusion to the media and public that they were in the right. In short, it would be a very bad precedent, possibly heralding a new era of religious intolerance.
IMHO, the best case scenario is that construction hangs in limbo for weeks or months. Reasonable viewpoints don't thrive so well in the pell-mell modern-day news cycle. But make the issue simmer on the burner for a few weeks, and cooler heads will probably prevail... |
