Who Wins When the U.S. Restricts Religious Freedom?

So if I hear you right, when black persons (say for instance my mother-in-law) have issues with my whiteness arising out or their life experience and understanding--I basically ignore it saying, "Well, it doesn't really matter because some white folks suffered too."

Is that your conclusion??

Perhaps racism is more pervasive in some states where slavery existed at one time. But I would say that racism runs across the board, in most ideologies and religions.

Historically, however (and I'm speaking about America), there's no indication of such. I live in what many call a racist city, parts of it being havens for the Underground Railroad. And it is also true that the modern conservative movement benefited from the backlash against the civil-rights movement, and a whole lot of that action took place outside the South; Ronald Reagan, for example, was no fan of MLK Jr.

As to other issues, it's true that, in the early 20th Century, many evangelicals of that day were into "social justice"; however, they also took a lot of heat from other "evangelicals" -- what we might call the "fundamentalists" -- for preaching what was called the "social gospel" and that led to a major split that still has yet to be healed.

Were Martin Luther King alive today, he would certainly be branded an evangelical due to his solidly pro-life stance. There is certainly nothing inherent in evangelical theology which is racist. If there is, please let me know. Sojourners itself defines itself as evangelical. I don't see any apparent racism here.

It's true that evangelical theology isn't inherently racist; that's not what I'm arguing. Rather, wherever evangelicalism allied itself with the status quo it almost always became racist because it was more interested in preserving its own cultural authority than in preaching the Gospel. As for MLK Jr. being branded an evangelical because of his "pro-life" stance, I beg to differ because much of his theology was actually quite liberal (and he received a ton of criticism from the "fundies" back in the day for that reason). Besides, Ron Sider always has opposed legal abortion; yet he gets little love from the evangelical establishment because he's a "liberal" on other issues.

Muslims follow Christ. But I'll read the article if you post a link to it.

Just click on God's politics at the top of this page and you should see all of the blog articles.

Thank you. I posted to the thread.

So if I hear you right, when black persons (say for instance my mother-in-law) have issues with my whiteness arising out or their life experience and understanding--I basically ignore it saying, "Well, it doesn't really matter because some white folks suffered too."

Is that your conclusion??

Ankaboot.

Its good to see that you have a sense of humour. But your sarcasm doesn't seem to suit you. Keep working on it :-)

Also, with all your talk about Muslim students walking around with hundreds of dollars in their pockets to hand out, and rich sheiks writing 10 million dollar checks, you are shattering the "conventional wisdom" left wing mythology that Muslims hate the west because they are poor.

While, obviously, I disagree with almost every point you make, I do find your posts very interesting. Maybe someday we can sit down with some good gahwa or shay and talk seriously about this "New World Order" to which you refer.

JOHN 14:6 IS PRETTY DARN CLEAR ON THE SUBJECT OF WHO GOD IS.

Perhaps, but even Christian Reconstructionists don't intend to use deception, violence and the intentional killing of innocents (as happened in Kampala a few weeks ago) to do that. That is a huge mega difference that must be considered.

Assuming you mean Ground Zero, your hypothetical question is problematic in any event.
First, there is already a large memorial park at Ground Zero along with a museum. This represents the memorial to the victims.
Second, if the hypothetical Peace Center (let's call it the Xavier/Merton Center in keeping with peaceful co-existence theme) were two or three blocks away from Peace Park, Americans might think there was a lot of fuss over nothing. Or they might point out that the Xavier/Merton Center was being specifically placed near (but not in) Peace Park as a way of acknowledging America's responsibility for the tragedy of Hiroshima.
Third, if the Xavier/Merton Center was being denounced as an American imperial plot to pollute the sacred blood of Japan by known anti-American groups, you can see (I hope) why that might raise some defensive hackles.

Are you familiar with the sociopolitical system of the kingdom of God and its' radical implications for society? Are you a believer in the power of good to overcome the violence of the oppressor? Are you a Christian?

in many countries muslims are killed if they become christian and christians are killed if they evangelize. If they come to our country we can freely share and they can be saved without fear. So i say welcome them. Meanwhile the mosque is two blocks away from ground zero -the placement is entirely coincidental. And two blocks as a long way in new york with such high population density

Oh right. I'm so terrified and intimidated. (Yes I'm being sarcastic). And no, I'm not a Jew, let alone one who practices hasbara, if that is what you are implying. Although I do love Jews, and I love Muslims...even ones who disagree with me.

And while I would welcome the opportunity for this issue to go to court so that all of this information can be officially put into the public arena, my Christian beliefs compell me to be charitable. So I must warn you that its already been tried. CAIR has challenged it and lost. So you can tell your friend Feisal Rauf to save his money. But if he insists, tell him to "go ahead, make my day".

Along with the Muslim American Society, the book "Muslim Mafia", (authored by two investigators who infiltrated the CAIR and uncovered scores of incriminating documentation) also lists 46 other Muslim organizations in the USA which are "front organizations" for the Muslim Brotherhood. As I said, CAIR already tried to sue the authors and lost. There simply was too much documentation to prove the allegations.

Incidentally, do you, as a human being (forget religious controversy) really believe that spending over 100 million dollars on an edifice (especially one that is going to be a lightening rod of division) is a good use of resources? Couldn't that money be put to much better use? Like helping to feed starving people and victims in Darfur? or bringing health care to the needy?

And please tell us where Mr Rauf is getting this more than 100,000,000 dollars? Its not exactly pocket change.

Salaam

Patricia. I'm not equating all American Muslims to the Third Reich. I'm equating the Muslim Brotherhood which is behind the Cordoba Initiative to the Third Reich. Do you see some logical difference between the Muslim Brotherhood's sponsoring of genocide in Sudan to what the Nazis did in the holocaust? I don't. The lives of innocent Sudanese who are victims are just as precious as the those killed by the Nazis. Why would we treat the perpetrators of these crimes differently?

And Jesus said more than "love one another". Consider his words of condemnation to the Pharisees (who would today be the ayatollahs, imams and other clerics who send children over land mine fields with plastic keys so they can "enter paradise", who stone women who have been raped and brought so-called "dishonour"; who are quick to incite riots of burning and killing when someone draws a cartoon or names a teddy bear Muhammed, but respond to mass terrorist killings with carefully worded sophistry and doublespeak).

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside, but on the inside are full of dead men's bones....you are full of wickenness and hypocrisy...you snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned...
(Matt 23:23-33)

Yes, we are to love one another....and that includes the dying woman and child in Darfur. And love demands justice. And justice demands calling evil what it is, and speaking out for the poor and oppressed. The most loving thing we can do for our Muslim brothers and sisters is to bring them deliverance from the oppression of radical Islam.

I didn't watch Fox news last night. But, mjmiddelton does have a great point. Your argument shows that you have a profound misunderstanding of Islam and it relations with non-believers. Look up taqiyya and kitman. Does the Cordoba Initiative have a right to build where they are building? Most assuredly they do. But does that necessarily mean that we should trust explicitly what they put on the homepage of their website as an explanation for their actions?

Blue Deacon.

Yes, the Puritans -- centuries ago! And while there may be some qualitative similarities, quantitatively, the Puritans never matched, even in their "finest hour", the extent of radical Islamic brutality we are witnessing today.

So why would we be cheer-leaders for those who practice such religious intolerance and oppression rewarding them with the world-wide credibility and respect that will certainly result from the construction of such a symbolically powerful edifice?

It boils down to you think the muslims involved in this community center are radical, hate mongering muslims and some of us believe that most muslims aren't of this type. Is that right?

BlueDeacon.

I agree that we need to seek reform and righteousness within our own congregations. We're on the same page there.

But does not the command to "do justice" extend to protecting the innocent? Consider how, if the churches in Germany in 1933 had woken up to the reality of fascist ideology, by reading Mein Kamph (sp?) and watching Mussolini invade Ethiopia. Imagine if they had united to ascertain the facts and analysed the impact of Hitler's anti-semetic views, and embarked upon an educational program in their churches and in the German media to inform people of the dangers? Perhaps the holocaust and tragedy of WW2 could have been prevented. Think of how many innocent lives could have been spared if those with the truth had acted before the devastation and destruction occurred.

When God's people ignore injustice; lay down the sword of truth, and fall asleep under the haystack, terrible things happen. "All it takes of evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing".

Of course a few good men did speak out against the Nazis....those of the "Confessing Church", like Dietrich Bonhoeffer. But, like those trying expose the dangers of radical Islam today, they were maligned and ostracized by their ecclesiastical peers.

We face an analogous situation today. There is little difference between radical Islam and fascism. And rather than learn from the tragic experience of Nazi Germany, history appears to be repeating itself.

I'm not doubting that there are many racist Republicans and racist evangelicals, particularly in some states. But would we be right in judging all Democrats by the fact that Senator Byrd was a KKK member at one time? And Ronald Reagan, though supported by many for his Conservatism, can hardly be classified theologically as an Evangelical.

Well, in this case you have to look at the broader picture. My point is that, whenever you have a church that seeks power and authority in its own right -- and, unfortunately, that's prevalent in American evangelicalism -- you will have racism in it. It's no accident, for example, that few evangelical churches are racially mixed and most of those are the independent mega-churches that go pretty light on theology.

The focus upon "radical Islam" by some American Christians is a case in point. The way they react you wonder if they really believe in the transforming work of the Gospel of Jesus Christ; many of those campaigns say "We must defeat this or fight against that ... " It's very difficult, if not impossible, to minister to those you consider enemies.

BlueDeacon. Unfortunately, with radical Islam, and thanks to trillions of misguided petrodollars from a myopic west, those tactics are not getting old, they are escalating at a frightening level. Its high time we reverse this support we are providing to radical Islam, both in terms of resourcs and unwitting moral encouragement . And while Al Qaeda may or may not be out of Iraq, I can assure you their ilk are alive and well and flourishing. I lost some good friends in the bombings in Kampala a few weeks ago, and have lost others in similar Muslim Brotherhood sponsored and affiliated terrorist attacks elsewhere.

If you think radical Islam is going to die out any time soon, I'd say you need some very strong coffee. :-)

I'm not doubting that there are many racist Republicans and racist evangelicals, particularly in some states. But would we be right in judging all Democrats by the fact that Senator Byrd was a KKK member at one time? And Ronald Reagan, though supported by many for his Conservatism, can hardly be classified theologically as an Evangelical.

Well, in this case you have to look at the broader picture. My point is that, whenever you have a church that seeks power and authority in its own right -- and, unfortunately, that's prevalent in American evangelicalism -- you will have racism in it. It's no accident, for example, that few evangelical churches are racially mixed and most of those are the independent mega-churches that go pretty light on theology.

The focus upon "radical Islam" by some American Christians is a case in point. The way they react you wonder if they really believe in the transforming work of the Gospel of Jesus Christ; many of those campaigns say "We must defeat this or fight against that ... " It's very difficult, if not impossible, to minister to those you consider enemies.

You told wavetossed that it was besides the point that muslims died in the terrorist act. I told you it wasn't beside the point and now you're trying to say that it was? You're getting me all confused and trying to put words in my mouth.

That's right -- centuries ago, which is why the movement was played out by the mid-1800s (although there are still some isolated pockets of Reformed culture that still subscribes to that). Those kind of tactics do eventually get old; al-Qaeda was run out of Iraq by people who got tired of the bloodshed. And I note that, in a book of his published speeches, Nelson Mandela praised every religious group in South Africa except the Reformed. (Keep in mind that I myself come from a Reformed persuasion.)

BlueDeacon.

I'm not doubting that there are many racist Republicans and racist evangelicals, particularly in some states. But would we be right in judging all Democrats by the fact that Senator Byrd was a KKK member at one time? And Ronald Reagan, though supported by many for his Conservatism, can hardly be classified theologically as an Evangelical.

I'm a great fan of Ron Sider. And yes, he has gotten a lot of flack from evangelicals, but not so much for his view on race. More, I think, on his view of the abuse of wealth and riches.

But I will defer to your greater understanding of American evangelicalism. I have no doubt that there is much amiss there.

I think its important when we talk about any religion or faith, to define it by what it teaches, not by the conduct of any of its proclaimed adherents. Anyone can claim to be an evangelical. And anyone can claim to be a Muslim or Mennonite, or any other group. But their actions do not necessarily define what those religions are about. The messages and teachings of their founders and the codified writing that articulate their distinctives, are more important.

Letjusticerolldown said: "Apples and oranges. You have the right to visit the cemetery where my parents are buried and walk over their grave. And it is not an insult or injustice to you if I ask you out of respect not to do so. In fact, not asking you because you might be offended would be the height of patronization."

No, it's not "apples and oranges" at all. It's very much the same thing. Again, you seem to be missing the point here. The real problem is not that some are ASKING them not to build it, it's that they are trying to PREVENT them from building it and that is a SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE. All the maneuvering to stop the project is more political than anything else and it is rather appalling how willing some people seem to be to infringe upon another's religious freedom. Yes, you can ask not to respectfully, but to try to force them not to do it is just plain wrong.

Legally & constitutionally, the founders of the mosque project can likely move ahead with it.
However, a basic understanding of Islam confirms that it is a social/political system as well as a religious one. Some of its societal practices, particularly sympathy to Sharia law, are completely incompatible with American democracy. When Islam has spread by advancing its political agenda in other countries, it does not have a history of upholding the basic rights we have here.
I would like to see a defense, not just in words, but in deeds, that the planned mosque will not be used to advance political Islam.