Emily
MikePresident Obama did the right thing at first by essentially saying that he supported (or at least was not opposed) to the building of a mosque a few blocks away from “Ground Zero.” But then, unfortunately, he attempted to distance himself from his remarks by saying that he had only meant to voice his support for freedom of religion and was not taking any stance on whether building a mosque there was the right thing to do. This led CNN to publish an article titled “Critics say Obama’s message becoming ‘incoherent’.” And, then, Senator Harry Reid took the political stance of saying that he does not think a mosque should be built there, thereby starting a probable trend of other Democrats distancing themselves from Obama’s first remarks. (Can anyone imagine a time when politicians do what they think is right rather than do what they think will get them reelected?)
All of the people who are against the mosque are doing so without adequate facts to back them up. The following facts paint a different story than the sound bites voiced by opponents of the mosque. First, the mosque is blocks away from Ground Zero. Second, there is an existing mosque that is about the same distance away. Third, the proposed mosque is more than a mosque; it is planned to include a fitness center, swimming pool, basketball court, bookstore, performing arts center and food court. And, according to Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, most importantly, the mosque’s organizers have “made clear that the whole point of the project is to provide a high-profile platform for mainstream, moderate Islam — and to stridently reject the warped, radical, jihadist worldview that produced the atrocities of Sept. 11, 2001.” Daisy Khan, one of the organizers, has said that “[the mosque] will have a real community feel, to celebrate the pluralism in the United States, as well as in the Islamic religion. It will also serve as a major platform for amplifying the silent voice of the majority of Muslims who have nothing to do with extremist ideologies. It will counter the extremist momentum.”
So, the real fallacy of the opponents’ argument is that they equate the 9/11 terrorists with ALL Muslims. They think that anything related to Islam (as opposed to the tiny subset of Muslims who happened to be terrorists) should be nowhere close to Ground Zero.
Many are quoting a CNN poll that showed 68% are opposed to the mosque. But this is how the poll question was worded:
As you may know, a group of Muslims in the U.S. plan to build a mosque two blocks from the site in New York City where the World Trade Center used to stand. Do you favor or oppose this plan?
68% said they were opposed and 29% said they were in favor. But, as Eugene Robinson said in his column today, imagine how different the poll results might have been if the question was something along the lines of whether “a group of Americans” should be allowed to build “a center promoting moderate, peaceful Islam.” It seems to me that the CNN poll is showing the same bias as the opponents of the mosque, that is, equating all terrorism carried out by a tiny number of Muslims with the entire (multi-billion) Muslim population.
Filed under: International, Politics, Religion, Stereotyping Tagged: | Barack Obama, Ground Zero, Mosque
CNN is so biased in favor of Obama, it’s disgusting. In addition, they unfairly moderate their online postings, delete postings which disagree with their pro-Obama ideology, and close their posts before any opposing views can be added.
You make a vaild point about this poll and polls in general. However, no evidence suggests that most Americans equate all Muslims with the 9/11 terrorists. More likely, they are concerned that their Intelligence Community did not protect them before 9/11, and so, they seek reassurances that the success of the attack will not promote more of the same. Eugene Robinson’s article provides only self-interested, anecdotal comments by some organizers of the mosque, and it does not provide any evidence to refute suspicions that Hamas or other terrorist organizations could be involved in the funding. So, the polling question he proposes is much more biased than CNN’s question because it presupposes, without evidence, that the mosque will be used solely for benign or beneficial purposes. If the promoters of this mosque really wish to build bridges, why have they refused to reveal who is funding the project? If those funding the mosque are really Americans who wish to distinguish themselves from terrorists, wouldn’t they want to identify themselves as such?
David,
Thanks for the comment. I didn’t say that “most Americans equate all Muslims with the 9/11 terrorists.” What I did say was that “[a]ll of the people who are against the mosque are doing so without adequate facts to back them up.” I agree that my choice of words was wrong. It was an exaggeration since I’m sure there are people who have adequate facts and are still against the mosque. Without facts to back me, I probably should have used “many” instead of “all,” but, realistically, “most” could probably apply to the most vociferous politicians.
As for the funding, if there is a legal requirement that anyone applying to build such a facility in New York must disclose where the funding comes from, then the group must certainly do that. But, until and if the City identifies such a requirement, I see no reason for disclosure.
As to your statement about Eugene Robinson’s alternate polling question being “biased,” I see your point. There is an assumption built in there (“a center promoting moderate, peaceful Islam”). But, even if your statement is correct that the percentage of Americans who equate ALL Muslims with the 9/11 terrorists is less than “most,” I think that CNN’s question could still be said to be “shade” the answers. Maybe the better question would be: “As you may know, a group of Americans in the U.S. plan to build a community center that includes a mosque two blocks from the site in New York City where the World Trade Center used to stand. Do you favor or oppose this plan?” Would that be better? Would “mosque” still lead to “biased” results? Would it likely have different results than the CNN question? My point was that the wording of poll questions (and this one in particular) can lead to major differences in the results.