House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, called for an investigation of those opposing the Mosque at Ground Zero. Come again?
This from a woman who opposes asking a suspected illegal alien for documentation of citizenship? She demands to know who is “funding” it. Does she live in the same country that was attacked September 11, 2001, the Great Satan, the good old US of A? Does she not understand that the American people are not the enemy?
Just as she missed the mark last year by calling the Tea Party movement “Astroturf”, Ms. Pelosi finds it hard to believe that Americans are capable of spontaneous outbursts of righteous rage and indignation. Somehow she does not get that New Yorkers who saw their friends and loved ones unjustly slaughtered on 9-11, can actually feel offended and hurt by this apparent reminder that “we gotcha” from the Islamic world.
If the Mosque is a gesture of peace, friendship and rapprochement to New York, the message is not getting through. They need to make it clear to us how this will make things better. On the other hand, if this project is, as the name “Cordoba” implies, an allusion to Islamic victory and conquest on American soil, they are asking for trouble.
And trouble they will get. I’m not threatening or saying that it is right. I’m just sayin’. New Yorkers are tough people and they won’t stand for having humiliation and insult rubbed in their faces. Perhaps this is what their Boston-bred mayor fails to get, as well.
As a libertarian, I support the private property rights of the developers to build as they please on their own land. Likewise, I oppose government intervention to block this project without due cause such as knowledge that builders will use the site to further jihad in the U.S. Libertarians are fearful of giving government license to persecute unpopular individuals or movements. After all, we cannot be far down the list.
On the other hand, I have no issue with private, free market efforts to block the mosque such as blacklisting or boycotting any person or company that contributes to the construction or maintenance of the Mosque. The threat that “you’ll never work in this town again” is pretty potent when that town is New York. The rest of America should back Gotham up on this.
Still, the question lingers, “what is the Left’s fascination and patronage of Islam all about?” Liberals will rush to crucify any American who makes a public display of their Judeo-Christian faith. Just try praying on the field after a high school football game or putting up a Christmas tree in front of town hall and see what happens.
Surely Liberals must know that Islamic nations are among the world’s least liberal.
In the Islamic world women are truly second class citizens and homosexuals might be better off dead. Freedom of religion is non-existent; in fact one religion is compulsory. This might be tough for the humanist-atheists to handle. And freedom of speech is a no-no. Say goodbye to Hollywood.
The only thing that I could figure that the Left finds attractive in Islam is that it is restrictive system that represses individual freedom for the supposed greater good of the community. That sounds a lot like the Obama-Pelosi-Reid legislative agenda.
3 comments:
As a Libertarian I value religious freedom and private property rights. I find it abhorrent to blame billions of Muslims for the actions of a few.
LP Blog article on this issue
Ron Paul has released an article on this subject. He takes the libertarian viewpoint that our freedoms are more important. See article here.
He takes conservatives to task for not supporting freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and property rights.
He points out that we need instead to ask ourselves why a small subset of Muslims want to do us harm and blames our interventionist policies. We are after all building ground zeroes around their mosques in Iraq and now Afghanistan, are we not?
I love this quote:
"The justification to ban the mosque is no more rational than banning a soccer field in the same place because all the suicide bombers loved to play soccer."
Post a Comment