Head to Head: Mosque acts as outlet for grieving

 "Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our liberty depends upon the chaos and cacophony of the unfettered speech the First Amendment protects," Judge Stewart Dalzell once said.

It appears that this concept has escaped some of us in America who seem to think that certain "unalienable rights" apply only to some. We draw arbitrary lines and claim only certain faiths or certain walks of life are acceptable.

This past week we remember the horrific catastrophe that took place in New York City and Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001. However, I fear that the memory of this event, for some, has been twisted to represent a polarizing event, giving our country the right to discriminate. In the past few months, much has been made of a Muslim mosque that is to be built two city blocks from ground zero.

There have been hecklers throughout the country demanding that the mosque not be built. This anti-Islamic movement is so passionate it has provoked burnings of the Qur'an - the Muslim holy book. Central to this feud is the question, who has the right to do what? Do Muslims have the right to build a mosque at ground zero? Do Americans have the right to burn a holy book of Islam? Legally speaking, the answer to both of these questions is yes. However, I view one as more distasteful than the other. Certainly building a mosque at such a sensitive sight was bound to be controversial, but I perceive the intent behind it is to unite our cultures and to clear up social misunderstandings.

The perceived religious undercurrent of the events of 9/11 is a misrepresentation of the Islamic faith. The tragedy was politically driven and not an attack of one religion against another. Just as the Qur'an burnings are not an extension of the Christian faith, so too were the events of 9/11 not an accepted display of Islamic beliefs. Intolerance breeds intolerance. We must be careful not to accelerate contention or augment hatred.

Yes, building a mosque near ground zero is an incredibly sensitive issue, but let me ask you this - if we prevent it from being built, what do we gain? Sure, we would like to be able to skirt this issue of religious fanaticism and its costs, but at what expense? How will we as a society face the issue at hand if we continue to ignore it? It is almost as if we revel in hiding from tough questions and our deep-seeded hurt. I submit to you that the problem with our current situation is that we as Americans were hurt by a group that were Islamic. We need someone to blame. But we have allocated the fault to an entire religion and not to the perpetrators responsible.

If we want our wounds to heal, we must remove the Islamic faith as the scapegoat religion and embrace the truth. As the prominent 19th century political theorist Alexis De Tocqueville once said, "America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great." We would be wise to live up to his words and do the noble act of forgiving those who have faulted us and learning the overarching lesson - intolerance and strife only fester and build as long as we allow them to do so.

I cannot help but be struck by the similarities between this situation and the school shooting in the Pennsylvanian Amish community in 2006. We should take a page from the Amish's response to the mass-murder suicide. They forgave the shooter and his family, immediately rallying around the outsiders to show their support and kindness. They knew that the deed was done and that the family bore no blame for the atrocious act. In a similar way, the Muslim community, as a whole, bears no blame for 9/11, and it is high time we accepted that fact.

There is nothing more American than the building of a mosque near ground zero. It represents everything we believe in. This is our First Amendment manifested. The sooner we embrace the inevitable creation of this mosque, the sooner our national healing can begin. If you really want to prove that you are better than the terrorists, meet their intolerance with tolerance.