Only one respectable talking point remains for opponents of Cordoba's planned Muslim-American community center, and it depends on a single phrase -- it's insensitive. This last-ditch argument actually bolsters the case for the development of Park51, at least when we look closely at the meaning of sensitivity and its absence (insensitivity), as well as at the proposed center itself.While we often associate sensitivity with the experience of being offended or having our feelings hurt, Oxford's first definition of the word sensitive is being "accutely affected by external stimuli or mental impressions; having sensibility [the capability to feel]." Further definitions of the word follow, of course, but this idea of having the capability to feel captures nicely what we mean when using sensitive with positive connotations. Conversely, the word insensitive comes with this description: "unfeeling; boorish; crass." This idea is the one being applied to the Muslim community in New York City, a community that lost some of its own members and loved ones in the Sept. 11 attacks.
Now consider Park51's stated vision and answer to the "why now" question: "In the spirit of tolerance and service, the Muslim community of New York envisions a world-class facility and an unprecedented community center as a gesture of our dedication to the city. At a time of economic hardship, Park51 will constitute an investment of over $100 million of infrastructure in lower Manhattan, creating over 150 full-time jobs and over 500 part-time jobs, and providing much-needed space, open to all, for community activities, health and wellness, arts and culture and personal and professional development."
Which words most befit these goals? Ambitious, certainly. Bold. Even courageous, considering the discrimination Muslim Americans continue to face in this country. But insensitive? Nah.
If words are not enough, consider the development plan itself. The complex is intended to include not only a space for prayer but also sports facilities, a library, art studios, a restaurant, a culinary school and "a September 11th memorial and quiet contemplation space, open to all." And the Wall Street Journal reports that the board overseeing the center will include members from other religions in order to, in the words of project partner Daisy Khan, "protect the interests of the center and to ensure the center has the highest standards of transparency." Minarets, by the way, aren't part of the plan.
Cordoba has gone about this whole thing quite sensitively indeed. Their efforts and plans and reactions have in fact demonstrated a solid capacity to feel and sense and consider and adapt, as well as a solid capacity to stand up to fear and deep distortion. I'm glad they're sticking to their (clearly nonviolent) guns, and I wish them the very best in their genuine efforts to foster understanding and peace. I believe folks like those behind Park51 are doing much more constructive things in this world than those who continue to use the horror of Sept. 11 in ways that keep us viewing the world and its dwellers in simplistic, war-mongering ways.
10 comments:
I think the problem isn't the center or even the plans for it, but very simply, the location, which is so very close to a site where so many people were killed by radicals from the same broad group.
I think when people mention it's "insensitive", they're talking location, or more precisely, proximity. Which does raise a question--if this group seemingly cares so much about sensitivity on other terms, why this location?
Of course, this isn't a legal issue. It's good that it's legal for any religious organization to put a site of worship wherever they want to--but still, that doesn't necessarily mean each spot is as sensitive as the next.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Mischief+Manhattan/3370303/story.html#ixzz0wcZNOGAS
When we talk about insensitivity, it's probably good, in addition to exploring the definitions and details, to keep in mind that we are talking about a thing that is not only nebulous, but entirely subjective. The practical definition of "insensitive" as it is being marched around by talking heads means something like, "not concerned enough about the feelings of those who fairly or unfairly associate the 9/11 attacks with Islam in general."
While we could have a long conversation about whether or not these associations, which exist in the minds of many, between Islam and the 9/11 terror attacks should be given any value, I imagine that it would be fruitless. If the truckload of empirical evidence that testifies to the enormous chasm between mainstream Islam and the radical terrorists who selectively use Islamic scripture to support their criminal and evil acts has not already convinced them, then it is unlikely any more fervent arguing will.
The fact is, Islam has long been a minority religion in the US, and in spite of all that it shares in doctrine, origin, and history with Christianity (the far-and-away most dominant religious cultural influence in the US for centuries), it is widely perceived as foreign and exotic. It is the "other" in the eyes of many. The fact that many well-intentioned people want to pat themselves on the back for the benign fact that they have Muslim friends testifies to this.
As long as Islam remains foreign and “other” to most Americans, it is unlikely that many people will be willing or even able to perceive the various nuances or wild differences between various groups who claim it as their religion or justification. Since we are inescapably members of a Christianized culture, it is unlikely we will ever he ability to differentiate these groups from one another as naturally as we can various “flavors” of Christianity (Mormon, Roman Catholic, Southern Baptist, & United Church of Christ, just to name a few who would likely denounce one another as heretics) from one another or from those who are just crazy bastards with a church-like building (see also: Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church).
The point I mean to make here is that it is almost inescapable for the building of a mosque in lower Manhattan to be considered insensitive. It probably is insensitive, but I don’t think that’s a valid reason to not build the mosque. In fact, this insensitivity is to feelings based in ignorance, which the building of this mosque and community center should help dispel. The fact that building a mosque and Islamic community center in lower Manhattan is considered insensitive is ITSELF a testament to the need for such a place. That is, the more people are offended by it, the more they need it.
I am not a defender of Islam as a religious practice, though I think it’s no more a productive or wasteful use of time than Christianity. I defend it on the grounds of civil and human rights, but I think that there is a strategic, though far less compelling in my mind, reason to defend Islam and the building of a mosque and community center in Lower Manhattan. There is far too much ignorance about Islam in the US, and when our ignorance leads us to mistakenly call all of Islam our enemy, then we’ve picked a far bigger and far less winnable, not to mention wholly unjustifiable, fight.
Thanks, Ashby. Your last two paragraphs especially put it in perspective.
I was in the middle of typing my own comment in response to anonymous:
If the only thing to consider is proximity/location, then I guess we better knock down the other mosques within blocks of the site, too.
It's not next to Ground Zero. It's a solid couple blocks away, and you won't be able to see it from Ground Zero.
New York is about more than 9/11. "Why this location," you ask? Perhaps because the area is one of the most thriving cultural and commercial centers in the world.
I fail to see how Muslim Americans in NYC are in the "same broad group" as Al Qaeda. These folks are hated by the terrorists.
I'm sick of this argument.
/opens door, tosses grenade:
If this summer has taught us anything ("anchor babies," Dr. Laura, New Black Panther Party, Muslim community centers, draconian laws aimed at Latinos), the only constituency in America that has any right to be offended by anything is white conservatives.
And isn't it insensitive of us to keep a permanent base in the parking lot we call Iraq?
/closes door
Thanks for being the adult, Ashby.
"I fail to see how Muslim Americans in NYC are in the "same broad group" as Al Qaeda. These folks are hated by the terrorists."
Until this imam denounces terrorism, which he hasn't, then he is condoning their attacks. He has stated that the US was culpable for the attacks.
Much of the money for this is coming from Saudi Arabia. The most religious intolerant country on earth. There is not one Christian church in Saudi, but they want to build a mosque close to the site where their terrorists killed so many Americans?
Have you researched the name "Cordoba"? Interesting background there.
NY is most definitely about more than 9/11. But 9/11 is not just about NY. The radical Islamic terrorists attacked the United States, not just NY.
I think this is the last time I'll respond to anonymous comments--it's important to me to have some sense of who I'm speaking with, especially on issues like this.
That said, a couple clarifications are in order:
1) There are no funds for this project yet, so obviously "the money" is not from Saudi. And the planners have said they plan to be careful who they accept funds from as they begin to raise money for the non-profit venture.
2)Lots of good people and good Americans acknowledge that our foreign policies contributed to what happened on Sept. 11. Including me.
I will not respond further to anonymous comments that do not include a signature of some kind. It's only fair when I've openly identified myself and shared what I think with you.
In other news, a sizable clump of New Corp. is also owned by Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia is also funding my four man mercenary squad - Mercury Force Beta. Our hook is that we don't use live ammunition, just loud sound effects. Mostly we're hired to evict renters who haven't paid out in six months or more.
Post a Comment