The plan to build a mosque at Ground Zero is cynical but Constitutionally protected. How far should that argument go?
Each morning I wake up with progressive liberal blood pumping through my body. I question whether it’s worth the effort sometimes.
There are churches — and by churches I mean Christian places of worship — in Syria and Palestine. How’d they get there? The Crusades. I’m not sure how 12th Century Syrians felt about the erection of churches on their homeland, but I imagine they weren’t thrilled.
Did all marauding Christian Crusaders represent the whole of Christianity, just as the argument goes radical fundamentalists don’t represent the whole of Islam? And we should be mindful that these Crusaders were promised a place in heaven by Pope Urban II, not unlike their 21st-century Muslim counterparts.
I wonder how evangelicals like Mike Huckabee, who has posited that a Palestinian technically can’t exist, reconcile their chosen religion’s brutal past and its outstanding comparability with radical fundamentalist Islam. I thought we all knew how Christianity ended up in Arkansas in the first place, but perhaps we don’t.
As someone who went through 17 whopping years of Christian education, eight of which were jesuitic, I can tell you that the Crusades are glossed over. I learned more about the Crusades from the video game “Dante’s Inferno” than I did in school.
In America, we love historical comparison, so naturally The Crusades ought to be as popular as the economist Maynard James Keenan John Maynard Keynes was at the height of the recession. Essentially what we’re seeing is this: A coalition of radical Saudi and Pakistani Islamic fundamentalists burned the World Trade Center to the ground nine years ago. A mosque is being erected in the same location. With a failing war effort in Afghanistan against the same enemy who destroyed the World Trade Center, the whole thing reeks of defeat.
So why is it tough to be a liberal under such unique circumstances? Because the president doesn’t make it easy for us. For starters, when you issue an ill-timed statement on a wave of enthusiasm created by the mayor of New York City, who doesn’t have to worry about Afghanistan, then backtrack, then have an aide go on television and say, “the president was not backtracking,” it is still backtracking. Jesus, I thought Bush was president again.
Whether or not putting a mosque at Ground Zero is a good idea — look, if you’re a liberal you’re going to be having this conversation till Christmas. You’re going to be arguing away any Yuletide joy in the name of the Constitution (which we should all have on our iPads by now). And your Republican relatives are going to make you lose your appetite, although you’re a vegetarian anyway so it doesn’t matter. You can guess which people at Thanksgiving dinner believe a mosque should be erected at Ground Zero — they’ll only have mashed potatoes and string beans on their plate.
What I will argue is this: The idea that Obama’s tacit approval of the mosque construction wouldn’t be turned into a GOP campaign narrative is ludicrous. If I were Obama and a journalist asked me about the issue, I would have said, “Man, I haven’t heard anything about it.”
Our political culture is degrading into an ease-of-use tabloid by the minute. Truthfully, Sarah Palin is making it easier to be a conservative than surprisingly gaffe-prone Obama is making it easy for us to be liberals.
August 19, 2010 at 6:34 am, Guest said:
I am sorry, but you really should brush-up on your history. Are you not aware that Christianity in the Middle East predates Islam? How do you think Christian Syrians felt about Mosques built on top of their demolished Churches?
At the risk of tripping you into an anti-Semitic rant, how do you think Jews feel about a Mosque constructed on the top of the demolished Temple?
August 19, 2010 at 11:00 pm, joan said:
Actually, the byzantine culture was a roman one in Syria, this was a foreign culture to the Syrians at the time, and they were under what one would call an “occupation”. In fact to resist the islamic advance by khaled ibn al waleed the famous general of early islam, the byzantines had to bring in troops from the far north. The conquest of syria by the muslims was caused by islamic diplomats in byzantine being slaughtered, after this the muslims of medina sought to avenge this and sent a small garrison of 3000 troops only to be shocked when the byzantines attacked the muslim troops with 200,000 men. this was the greatest failure in historical warfare by the romans who lost that battle, and where the muslims numbering 3000 held off the romans for 7 days, and had a tactical retreat.
Most syrians feel good about having Islam. and the muslims of the time never did demolish churches. The demolished temple in palestine was done by the romans not the muslims.. you need to read history.
Afterall Islam is an abrahamic faith, and seeks to correct the misguidance of the christian pagans, and the stubborness of the jews into believing in jesus the messenger of peace and amity.
August 20, 2010 at 1:42 am, Guest said:
Oh my goodness, do they not teach history anymore? Or do liberals actively avoid the topic?
1. Christianity predates Byzantine Empire
2. The culture that Rome (not Byzantium) displaced in Syria was Greek.
3. The culture that Islam displaced was, in fact, Christian. Churches were demolished, unbelievers converted at a point of a sword.
Your last paragraph is amazing! Why is “Islam” the only religion that deserves capitalization? Why is Islam an Abrahamic faith (note the capitalization), while Christianity is “pagan” and Jews are “stubborn”?
BTW, since Muslims do not accept the Bible (either Jewish or Christian), including the 10 commandments, why do they bother calling themselves an “Abrahamic” religion?
August 20, 2010 at 2:30 am, joan said:
Im not going to argue with you, as clearly you dont think Byzantine is roman.. Byzantine was part and parcel roman empire.
Of course christianity predates byzantine empire.. The Byzantines (aka romans) were occupiers of Syria, the christian arabs of syria were not amicable to this. When The muslims came from the south, it was less of a battle by the Christian arabs of syria AND more of a battle between the muslims and the Byzantine occupiers.
Muslims never conquered by the sword, that is the factual basis written in history.
To say anything otherwise shows your lack of historical knowledge or an aberration of recorded human history or purposeful deceitfulness on your part.
The only time muslims tried to convert people by the sword was in India, by the converted mongols and that went horribly horribly wrong. .
Did the muslims of iraq convert the mongols by the sword????
No.. the mongols destroyed Iraq, and later converted to islam.
August 20, 2010 at 3:37 am, Guest said:
Where do you get your information? The population of Syria at the time of Muslim conquest was not Arab – it was Canaanite, Phoenician and Aramean with significant Jewish minority.
Your statement that the Muslim conquest was peaceful is an outright lie.
You also do not know much about Mongols. The single largest denomination under the Mongol rule were Buddhist. While the conquered people were permitted to retain their religions, among the Mongols you could find followers of all religions. After the Empire broke up, the Muslim dominated areas did end the religious freedom that Mongols introduced.
August 19, 2010 at 7:21 am, Chuckles1954 said:
So you are more worried that conservatives will have a campaign issue than the enemy of America dancing on the graves of 3000 Americans? Your priorities seem to be a little askew. If you take long enough to get past the progressive propaganda, you may find that Republicans are more right than Dems on many issues. Oh, and for the moment, Palin seems to be much more popular than Obama with the majority of Americans. Are we all wrong or are you fooling yourself? Oh and one more thing, Huckabee is more popular than Obama also, along with Newt, ……..
August 19, 2010 at 9:22 am, Mit said:
Wow– the historical falsehoods and the blindness of enforced moral equivalancy runs wild!! (Although your comments on who the vegitarians are has some entertainment value). Please take a moment to read this. First briefly, I think the WTC mosque brohaha is overblown. It won't be the greatest problem if its built there, but it certainly would be a sign of sensitivity, ruffle a lot less feathers of the victim's families and sooth the city's still open wounds, if the developers move it elsewhere. I am not sure why you are trying to make Christian history a reason for the Mosque being built.
You say that todays Islamo terrorist is equivalent to the crusader of yesteryear. So let me see if I get this right. In the late 11th century, by open warfare, the last Christian governments were driven out of Asia minor and their Church's seized. Many of their adherents, both in what is now modern Turkey and Jerusalem were sold into slavery. The reponse of Christianity was to openly fight back in the manner of war of the day-which involved many outrageous atrocities on both sides. I simply miss how this is equivalent (excuse me– in your words it is a case of “outstanding comparability with radical fundamentalist Islam”) to the flying of a plane into a civilian tower with no possible military goal a 1000 years later. Obama Bin Laden has stated that the date of the event– Sept 11th was a reference and response to the defeat of attacking Islamic armies at the gates of Vienna Austria in 1683. They see this as a continuance of their military conquest of the West. This in near unanimous conformity to the military manner in which Islam spread in its first 500 years. This is in contrast to the spread of Christianity through its first 250 years where it had no armies or ability to conquer. Can we make no moral distinction between religions or there history? And can we take no account for the progress in moral reasoning that has occurred in Judaism since the days when they slaughtered everyone in the city Ai upon entering Israel or in Christianity over the last thousand years? Can we not at least say that Islam is behind on the curve here, and expect even demand they start to self-enforce some restraint and sensitivity? ….or do we just paint with a broad brush.
The
And how can you say the Crusades established Christianity in Syria? Urban II's own letters talk of defending the Churches of the east–to say that the Churches in the 12th century were established by the crusades is nuts.
The church, both now and in its history, has much to be ashamed for and much to be proud of. The best reading of history leaves a lot for the Church to answer for in the conquering of South and Central America– and at the same time offers many cases of the Church's heroism in defending the native residents. In almost every case major voices in the Church were rasied against those who looked to abuse. I could go on but lets stay to the point, I don't think the crusades were moral, and Urban's promise of 'remission of sins' for participation is regretable. However, there are no orignal documents that say he promised heaven. The significant number of original documents we do have don't mention that. The only references to that are in second hand accounts of one speech given close to ten years later– likely enhanced to gin up the recruitment numbers. This can't be the same as promising immediate entry into heavan for suicide bombers who target innocents or those who murdered Daniel Pearl.
Our hope lies in activating those Islamic voices that have til now been way to silent. Christianity has learned to critique itself over the centuries (but lets do so with a tad bit more thought than your reflexive diatribe). Lets hope that Islam can likewise progress.
And last, as a current Masters student of Theology at a Jesuit University, who can match you in years served at their institutions; your status hardly qualifies you as an objective analyst. The Jesuits have been in open dissent from the Church for decades. Your historical ignorance, inability to make moral distinctions, ridiculous comparisons and reflexive “blame Christianity first” attitude is exactly what I would expect out of today's Jesuit educated student.
August 19, 2010 at 11:36 am, Robert H. said:
Mr. Blackwell needs to learn his history. Christians lived (in varying degrees of peace/persecution) all over Asia Minor for many, many years prior to the Crusades. Many early sects adapted to the influence of Islam on them.
It wasn't until the persecution of the Christian Church in general began that the European church raised up to protect its own.
August 19, 2010 at 11:37 am, BrianC said:
Stephen -
I cannot believe what you wrote. Many of the people of the Middle East and North Africa were Christians before they converted to Islam, often at the point of the sword. You really need to take a class in world history or do some serious reading because your ignorance is frightening.
I graduated from a Jesuit university. I do everything in my power to keep my children away from the Jesuits because I don't want them ending up like you.
August 19, 2010 at 11:53 am, Joe from Brooklyn Yards said:
Is this some form of hypersatire?
I can not conceptualize how you could write something like this without at least doing a wikipedia search on what you are writing about.
Do yourself a favor and yank this column before it goes viral and you become the new posterboy for inanity of the hipsterdouchebag set.
August 19, 2010 at 6:58 pm, Alida said:
Last I heard, Maynard James Keenan was a winemaker (owner of Caduceus Cellars and Merkin Vineyards in Arizona) and the singer of TOOL, A Perfect Circle, and Puscifer. With all of those projects going on, I don't think he has time to be an economist.
August 20, 2010 at 2:15 am, anna said:
I started reading this article and stopped at ” I’m not sure how 12th Century Syrians felt about the erection of churches on their homeland”.
I am a Christian from Syria and I am not sure if the writer is aware that Syria was Christian before the Muslim invaded her from the Saudia Arabia. For God sake, Jesus was from there, as well as Paul, Thomas, and all the others.
So I know “how 12th Century Syrians felt about the erection of churches on their homeland” LIBERETED!!
August 23, 2010 at 11:11 am, In Defense of Sarah Palin’s Twitter | Death and Taxes said:
[...] Usually, this defense is relaunched following Tweets like this one, in reference to the controversy over building a mosque near Ground Zero: [...]
September 07, 2010 at 12:26 pm, Dove World Outreach Center: General Petraeus and Everyone Else Speaks Out Against Quran Burning | Death and Taxes said:
[...] one, protests are occurring Afghanistan’s major cities. A protest in Jakarta was staged in front of the U.S. embassy, and a protest in Kabul produced this video of [...]