What Constitutes Sacred Space at Ground Zero?

If the issue here is the claim that Ground Zero is somehow "sacred ground" because it is the last "burial" place of many of the victims, then this position is a red herring as far as oppostion to the project goes.

Firstly, the proposed Islamic center is two blocks away from the perimeter of Ground Zero. And in Lower Manhattan, two blocks is a world apart.

Secondly, some claim that part of an airplane engine may have landed on the roof of the Burlington Coat building, thus making it somehow more a part of GZ. But if we are going to extend GZ to anywhere that fragments fell or dust (which included cremated human remains) settled, then GZ would encompass an incredibly large swath of Lower Manhattan.

Third, and perhaps most saliently, those who are opposed to the Islamic center based on the "sacredness" of GZ are being somewhat hypocritical. After all, while the proposed project is a full two blocks from the site (and will be largely invisible, since it will look like a 13-story office building), what is being built AT the site will include a commercial element, including McDonald's, Starbucks, Duane Reade and the like.

So which is more of a "desecration": a nearly invisible Islamic center two blocks away, or selling Big Macs and chai lattes right ON "sacred ground?"

Peace.

For a person, place or thing to be "sacred," God or a religious person has to declare the person, place or thing "holy."

I am reminded of the conservative "Christians" who think that burning the USA Flag is desecration of the flag. But, before something can be desecrated, it has to be consecrated, aka made sacred, first.

YHWH Elohim told Moses that the ground around the bush that was aflame but not literally burning was holy.

From what I have heard and read, if the area around where the World Trade Center was sacred, why are there so many businesses and even "adult" stores in the same area?

One of the 911 planes crashed into the Pentagon. What plans have been implemented to preserve the "sacredness" of that site?

Also FWIW, there is a strip club two blocks from ground zero. Yet people aren't protesting the strip club!

What constitutes sacred space? Is the nation sacred? Was WTC somehow sacred? Is capitalistic enterprise somehow sacred? If the answer to any or all of these questions is "Yes," then selling Big Macs or chai lattes can be an act of worship to the god of enterprise. Is the Pentagon on sacred space? Yes, if we worship Mars. Perhaps the best place for a sacred memorial would be the field in Pennsylvania where the fourth plane crashed. And if there are cattle grazing in the field around the site, their droppings would not desecrate that space.

"So which is more of a "desecration": a nearly invisible Islamic center two blocks away, or selling Big Macs and chai lattes right ON "sacred ground?"

I appreciate Becky's comment regarding the failure to provide memorial space (presently). My attitude has been that any number of things can become intrusions onto the "quiet" of a sacred memorial space. It might be a garbage transfer station, a church, .....anything.

Now reflecting on the towers and redevelopment on the site itself I have a very hard time arguing that this mosque is a greater distraction than the onsite plan.

I wonder if this memorial mentioned by Becky in Rawanda is the one where one can actually pick up the bones of the murdered people? I saw the bones on a video series about some motorcyclists going from Scotland to the tip of Africa. They were very "spooked" by the ability to see thousands of bones in a room of human remains.

I agree that what is happening at the site is far more odious than what's transpiring in a fairly run down area and seedy area of Lower Manhattan. Unfortunately, the Islamic center has become the straw that broke the camel's back. When Obama issued a statement that he supported the center on the same day that Congress shot down a bill that would have provided medical care for first responders, he sent a very strong signal to many in the 9/11 community where his priorities lay.

After close to nine years of having their loved ones' remains treated like garbage, seeing 9/11 first responders die from post 9/11 related illnesses, watching some religious leaders and others make a buck by promoting their "heroics" without helping them (e.g., telling a news reporter that it's time for any family whose loved one has been murdered that "it's time to forgive" without actually spending time with the family to help them process their grief and move forward is heartless at best), not having a proper memorial where they can go to rest and remember their loved ones, concerns over safety codes re: the construction of the Freedom Tower and memorial (questions have been raised but not answered regarding the number of lives that were lost because during construction in the '70s, the WTC center was able to bypass some code regulations and is the developer trying to do this again?), etc., etc., etc., they said enough is enough. This scenario represented a powder keg about to go off - and then some politicians lit the match by using this issue as fodder during a very tumultuous mid-term election season.

Alas, the line has now been crossed from using words that wound to actually attacking people physically. And I'm asking religious leaders to step back and just be with the 9/11 families - see how we can defuse this time bomb before it explodes anymore by actually listening to the 9/11 community for once and exploring how to "be" with those in pain. From this place, I pray we can then really start to rebuild from this disaster.

See http://www.whs.mil/memorial/

Yes. See http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?i...

Liberals are clueless. Most Americans are against the Mosque. Islam is a false religion, just like protestantism.

Mohammed along with the so called "reformers" are tools of Satan. While Christ prayed that all of his followers may be one, Luther, Calvin, and others caused division, hence the endless number of protestant "churches" who can't agree with each other. If the Bible alone is all one needs, why all the confusion and discord? The Catholic Church is the only true Church and Catholics are the only true Christians. The venomous attacks against Holy Mother Church are proof of this. Nobody cares what the lutheran or methodist "churches" say because they aren't a threat to the devil or his agenda, they are part of it.

Thanks for your judgment on this fine, Saturday morning.

We are all part of the body of Christ. So who are you to call one part of His beloved that it is despised? It is very sad that you can't recognize the richness of love in your brothers and sisters in Christ, all because they are in the "wrong" denomination.

Hopefully you are just messing with people, though.

Thank you for this!!! I agree. I was wondering where all the wondering where all the Christians were denouncing this hatred and violence. We can never move ahead if we have people spreading the doctrine of hate and violence.

I keep wondering why people are so "pro" hate now. Against the gay community and other religions. As far as I can tell, Jesus purposely spent time with all walks of life in communities he visited, to be an example. He said, "Love those that despise you" and "love they neighbor as thyself". Where has all those teaching gone????

I wonder if GrandInquisitor might not have his tongue in his cheek.

Unfortunately, the center, that includes a mosque, has become an excuse for anit-Muslim hatred. We always seem to need someone to hate (as the poster above who feels the need to attack Protestants and "liberals." Even G.W. Bush noted that we are not in a fight against the Muslim community. It's a shame that he has not defended them now. The community center, first of all, is a distance away from the supposed "sacred" site. The site, istelf, does not seem to be "sacred" to those who wish to build commercial enterprises there - unless we view such enterprises as "sacred." The families, who those who oppose the building, seem to hold in such high regard, have not even been asked - some are very much in favor of the center. Those who wish to build the center are not extremists, but of a branch of Islam which preaches peace (maybe that's what the right-wing doesn't like!). And it's really no business of anyone else's except the city of New York what is built there - it is their city, and they have seen fit to o.k. the project. It is, indeed, amazing that while some of the right wing have condemned having a religous site built two blocks away from the site, at the same time they would not give those who worked to save these people any help. That smacks, at the very least, of being two-faced. And those who find the Constitution so important are quick to deny its benefits to anyone with whom they disagree. The response to the center is merely another attempt to clothe bigotry in the clothing of righteousness.

I was hoping perhaps that was the case. Although, there was a much longer post that was here originally that said the same thing only in more detail. So, unless s/he comes back to clear things up, just as the question of how many licks it takes to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll brand Tootsie Pop, the world may never know.

"Even G.W. Bush noted that we are not in a fight against the Muslim community. It's a shame that he has not defended them now. "

Yes, I have been wondering where he has been lately. Of all the voices who should be speaking, seems it is his.

A better question to ask in relation to the GZM controversy is: "Why not let the market decide?"
That is, why should political action be taken on a transfer of property from one entity to another on voluntarily agreeable terms? Why should there be any kind of approval or disapproval from political agents?
Both sides of the issue have presupposed that political intervention in economic matters is legitimate. If the right wing free marketers would practice what they preach this would be the right conclusion. If the left wing civil liberties "keep the government out of our personal decisions" folks practiced what they preached we would get the same conclusion.
The controversy arises solely based on the presumption that political intervention in such matters is acceptable.
It is not.
Nathanael Snow
ndsnow@gmail.com

Better yet, let the Constitution decide.

Ummm...
I think the Constitution might say, "Let the market decide."
But I'm not particularly interested in defending the Constitution. It's not sacred writ as far as I'm concerned, though it is the best humans have come up with and implemented on a large scale so far.
To wit, humans did NOT come up with the market. The market is a spontaneously emerging phenomenon, and as such is prior to and acknowledged by the Constitution.

Are you saying there shouldn't be any zoning board determining the outcome?

@KansasMennonite,
I'm not sure whether there should be a zoning board. I was going to cite Houston, which does not have zoning laws, but apparently that's a mixed bag.
The question is, what role would a zoning board play? What elements would they take into consideration? How would they gather their information? Would that method provide better information and more efficiently than prices do within the market mechanism? Which mechanism is more likely to be vulnerable to bribes and other forms of corruption? Which is more likely to reflect impartiality with regard to measures upon which people frequently display discrimination?
I contend that if Glen Beck and Co. want to oppose a Muslim Community Center at Ground Zero they buy the land and do something with it themselves.
Indeed, we could even GIVE the property to Beck & Co. and then let them decide what to do with it! When faced with the opportunity cost of $100 million they might be willing to set aside their differences and find room in their hearts for their Muslim friends!

Squeaky: "Better yet, let the Constitution decide."

Jurisnaturalist: "I think the Constitution might say, "Let the market decide." But I'm not particularly interested in defending the Constitution. It's not sacred writ..."

Speaking of sacred writ... What would Jesus say? You put a lot of faith in the Market, but Jesus always seems to be saying that we shouldn't emphasize money so much. I think that sacret writ does NOT say "Let the market decide".