Sunday, August 22, 2010

No more mosques, period

by Bryan Fischer, August 10, 2010, American Family Association

Permits should not be granted to build even one more mosque in the United States of America, let alone the monstrosity planned for Ground Zero. This is for one simple reason: each Islamic mosque is dedicated to the overthrow of the American government.

Each one is a potential jihadist recruitment and training center, and determined to implement the “Grand Jihad” ....(link)


Wow! I am a "big-tent" kind of Republican. I ignore the crazies of the religious right and the crazies of the libertarian-anarchist right and think that if we agree on 8 out of ten things we are on the same team. I generally prefer to focus on the things that unit us rather than those things that divide us. However, like they used to say in the old west, "This town ain't big enough for the both of us." If the view expressed above by Fisher ever gains dominance in the Republican Party, I will have to find a new home.

Fischer is the American Family Association's director of Issue Analysis for Government and Public Policy. The view he publicly empresses is very common in Republican circles. I hear it expressed in small group meetings and in private conversations all the time. I don't think most Republicans share this view, but in the interest of party unity they keep quite.

Least anyone think that the opposition to the lower Manhattan Mosque is due to the proximity to the World Trade Center site, the same people locally that I hear wanting to ban the construction of the "Ground Zero" mosque also want to ban the construction of a mosque in Murfressboro which is about 780 miles from ground zero.

I have nothing in common with those Republicans who want the Saudi Arabian standards of religious freedom, the standards that the US applies. Since criticizing a Tennessee Republican candidate for Congress who advocated prohibiting the building of the mosque in Murfressboro and criticizing a candidate for governor who wondered aloud if the First Amendment applies to Muslims, I have been accused of being a RINO, wrapping myself in the First Amendment, and political correctness. Guilty, guilty, guilty!

If believing the Constitution should be taken seriously, believing in private property rights, and believing in decentralized local decision making as long as it is consistent with constitutional rights makes me any less a conservative or a Republican then we have different definition of what is a Republican and a conservative. If political correctness is believing the first amendment is as important as the second or the tenth amendment then I advocate political correctness.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

1 comment:

  1. I think you've outlined exactly how this point of view is coming to prominence in the Republican party. They latch onto this idea for two reasons.

    One, I believe they genuinely feel that there should be no more Mosques built in the United States. They're bigoted toward Islam, and they choose to hide it by latching on to the 9/11 Ground Zero angle. You yourself say that the same people who vehemently oppose the Mosque two blocks from Ground Zero also oppose a Mosque built far away. The 9/11 'sensitivity' angle is simply a cover for their bigotry. They do indeed wish to abolish freedom of religion in this country, in favor of a Christian state. Some even suggest that the framers never intended for separation of church and state. These are the same people who routinely mention our nation's 'Christian roots' and the need to get back to them.

    There is no question in my mind that they seek to impose the Christian version of Sharia law in the US. They want to legislate their Christian morality.

    The second reason Republicans and Fox News glom on to the issue is simply to make hay for the November elections. They can't fight Democrats on most of the other issues. Republicans can't fight on the economy because if they do they admit that the economy is actually heading in the wrong direction, not the right one. No one in power or seeking power wants to admit this. Second, if they do, they'd have to fix it. Something they cannot do.

    They also cannot fight on healthcare. They've already torpedoed any possibility of successful legislation by Democrats. They claimed to want meaningful reform, but fought tooth and nail to oppose it in any form the entire time.

    They can't fight on war, because the wars are woefully unpopular in this country. They can't say that Obama isn't doing enough to get us out fast. If they do, they undermine their war-hawk base and their own image of being 'tough on terror.' Similarly, they cannot take the war-hawk side to say that Obama is too weak on terror. Doing so would be an endorsement for the further stretching of our military and continued occupation abroad. This is not what the American public wants. The wars are both extremely unpopular among real people. Endorsing the expansion of the wars is political suicide.

    So, Republicans are forced to pick the fight on the Mosque issue. It's almost perfect. They can hide their bigotry behind 9/11 and they can drum up support from war-hawks by appealing to this 'tough on terror' group by emphasizing the fight on terror, the link to Islam, and the attacks of 9/11.

    My reference to Republicans, throughout, is not meant to blanket all Republican politicians. Although, I do believe the religious-right has a significant strong-hold over the party.