A lot has been made of the community center/mosque issue and the comments from my last post are indicative of that. A couple of things came out of that discussion that I want to address before this baby gets to bed. The first is that the term tolerance was thrown around and I think tolerance is an important topic to discuss by itself. The second was the notion that this issue was manufactured completely by the right.
Obviously, I have some pretty stern disagreements on some of these points, but I want to point out that the vast majority of comments I got were tolerant of my point of view. I did not get one comment from anyone stated that they agreed with me. A few actually did without realizing it, but that is usually how complex issues come down. What I have found is that this issue is entirely about tolerance. Over the years, tolerance has become one in the same with the progressive thought. Many of us preach tolerance of various religions, lifestyles, and viewpoints. However, I've noticed that with some (not all or most) that tolerance is not a two-way street.
If there is anything this country needs it is more dialogue on any number of issues. This just happens to be one of those issues. Tolerance has to be a two-way street, We open ourselves up to hypocrisy when we demand it from others, but don't practice it ourselves. I've learned a lot from the exchanges we had. That is the whole point of dialogue. Again, I was overwhelmed by the majority of the comments. The majority were tolerant in the fact that they were civil. I was expecting the worst.
This enters into our last point and the point of whether this issue is trumped up or not. I hinted at this in the actual post, but the last several days has cemented my point. Not everyone opposing the community center wants to bar its construction. I am a part of this group even if some commenters didn't catch that. Kathleen Parker's column in this morning echoed the same point. I admit it was more eloquently done, but she said the same thing a lot of people have been saying. You can't bar them from building it. We shouldn't bar them from building it. We'd like them to reconsider, but if they don't we're okay with it.
One of the great things about our country is that there are so many ways to approach any issue. What the right is guilty of is not necessarily in creating an issue that didn't exist, but in creating a black and white issue where there are definitely shades of gray. The expressed points of Barack Obama (after the Friday speech), Harry Reid, and Mayor Bloomberg represent the various shades of gray we see in every issue. Some people may disagree with those shades, but they cannot deny that they exist. The right tries to do this and eventually they will be called on it by the majority.
Eventually, even those in the mushy middle will begin to ask "why do they hate these people.?I don't hate these people. I just wanted them to build somewhere else. It's not important enough to alienate a whole segment of citizenry." As the Sarah Palins continue to thrust themselves away at the issue they will create this divide. Even though I said this was an issue I have always maintained it is not a political issue. It is a social issue and a human issue. Obama and Bloomberg have acknowledged what everyone else in their positions would do: they can't do anything about either way other than voice their opinion.
So, to be perfectly clear. I still don't think it should be built there, but it is not my call to make. It never was. It isn't Bloomberg's call or anyone else at any level of government. It is the decision of those that want to build the community center. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and it is healthy to voice those. Dialogue is always important on social and human issues. At the center of that dialogue is tolerance. Tolerance doesn't mean that we need to concede anything we believe, but it does mean that we need to treat each other with respect. I felt that for the most part this week and maintain that is why I love writing here. I can take a chance and voice an opinion I know will be unpopular. To our less frequent visitors I simply say I'll be watching more vigilantly to make sure that kind of tolerant attitude continues.
ROFL...Beware...It's Catchy
Thanks Alien
make that windorsolar...I'm starting to think this is your fault... :O)
Thank you very kindly, windsolar
Alien, I didn't want you embarrassed, just wanted you to know it was funny that I also have trouble with the spelling of that name. That name is not only a challenge to spell, but it's hard to pronounce.
I can't spell for the life of me. My grammar is awful and my punctuation isn't any better. Thank goodness there is a spell check on AOL.
Spelling doesn't count in my book, it's the truth and what is in your heart that does.
BTW - I am old enough to be senile..lol
God Bless Alien, hope the rest of your night will be better.
Interesting point but if the roles were reversed and I were a church I would strongly consider the feelings of the majority of the community. That's just me. It's hard to win hearts and minds when you get off on the wrong foot. My off blog persona is of someone that tries to build consensus and not someone of dogged determination. So, my feelings on the issue were seen through those eyes. Yet, I can see how over time, staying put could be beneficial. If it were my church, I'd ask about what our mission was. If it is to evangelize then staying makes more sense. If it is to provide services for an already established community then finding a more agreeable location makes more sense.
interesting...
I just don't understand why a peace loving Country like the United States would allow CHRISTIAN Churches to be built anywhere near the 9/11 site. My Gosh, people that identify themselves as Christians have killed people that identify themselves as Muslims probably at a rate of about 50 to 1 over the last one hundred years! This kind of violent extremism should not be tolerated. What's the matter with Christians?
Spelling, grammar, and punctuation only counts when you are in my class. After that you are on your own. Since my blog entries don't drive public policy (or else I would get a raise) I feel okay commenting on the trivial every now and then (probably more than that if you ask my regular readers).
To be serious for a moment, it is often in the trivial that we get the most clarity. It gives us an idea of what people value. Besides, most people connect politically on an emotional level. When you think about the times when the right has gained the most control it has been those times in our country where emotions were heightened for some reason. We can ridicule it, we can decry it, we can keep droning on with all the facts in the world. We best understand it and at least use it sometimes when we need to take advantage of it.
This is turning out to be a really bad day...I now know that I also have trouble spelling Misspelled and Embarrassing (but I looked that one up). Geesh, some days. Oh God, I'm too young to be senile.
I agree and that spelling thing is both frustrating and sometimes embarrassing.
I'll watch for it on the REAL Ghost Hunters...
Did I ever tell you my daughter's stepdad is a bonafide ghost hunter...they're trying to get a tv show...Oh brother...my poor daughter. Her father is an alien hunter and her stepdad is a ghost hunter, the future bodes not well for my baby.
p.s. I try not to pursue my avocation when she is in my company and I wish her stepdad would adhere to that same policy.
Poltergeist III here we go!!!
I just caught a clip on Fox news about an org gathering for a demonstration against building on a mosque on/near a cemetery...What makes more sense that putting a religious edifice on/near a cemetery?
Haha alien, I have trouble with spelling, that name also..Thanks for the laugh this morning.
I heard it was a mosque, then I heard it wasn't..Who knows?
We have to many other pressing issues that are more important.
They are using this for political reasons to get their names out there.
damn, I mispelled it again...Giuliani...I have the same problem with innocuous. I'll get it next time. :O)
I'm still confused...
Is it or is it not a mosque. To borrow a Fox news talking point, the lame stream media along with Rudy (I hate to admit it but I can't spell Guiliani without looking it up) insist on calling it a mosque. Mosque or NOT!
People in the United States oppose the construction of a mosque on private property. The geographical distance to the 9/11 site is totally irrelevant. People who make the distance an issue have their own agenda.
As a point of order, Mayor Bloomberg has not and did not change his position.
It was Governor Paterson who offered to help move the community center elsewhere. Mayor Bloomberg rejected that offer.
I agree, I would like to see it built else where, but it's not my call to make either.
Since this is a free Country I don't believe we have the right to tell people they can't worship in a certain area. This is 2 1/2 blocks away, it's not on the same block.
Some Politicians will want to use this issue politically.
I honestly think we have more important issues that our officials need to be concentrating on, for example the gulf and so on. We don't need another distraction to take us away from what is happening here.
a couple of the more interesting comments made this week:
1. the whole point of America is they should be allowed to build it - wish they wouldn't do it there, but the whole point of this country even existing is they have the right to.
2. who knows if this will even happen; there have been no funds raised yet, and it will take over $100 million as planned - the whole thing may be a non issue since there is no financing yet.
As long as you stay away from that Rosana Dana Dana thing on my nose....
"Never Mind!"