A Modern Brand of Bigotry

It is usually the case that when an issue rises to the level of prime-time contentious debate, there are at least some articulable rationales to support both sides of the debate. The concept of whether a Mosque can, or should, be built near Ground Zero in New York, however, seems to lack clearly reasoned, or, certainly, legal, justifications supporting those in opposition. It is precisely that lack of an articulable rationale that makes the entire controversy so compelling.

Our society in the United States has made great strides forward in chipping away at tolerance of racism and religious and cultural bigotry. If, today, a neighborhood tried to rally support to keep an African American family from moving in based on their belief that crime would increase, our mechanisms of law and societal non-acceptance would, thankfully, quash such a movement. Public outcry would label the neighbors racist and they would have great trouble finding any mainstream support for their “cause.”

Opposition to a Mosque being built at Ground Zero is no less than a modern-day reenactment of the above anecdote. People are projecting their prejudicial beliefs onto a group in an effort to keep them separate. If an incorrect belief that African Americans are directly related to crime is an unacceptable justification for trying to keep them out of one’s neighborhood, so too is an incorrect belief that Muslims are directly related to terrorism an unacceptable justification for trying to keep them away from Ground Zero. Even if the notion were stated another way–not that people believed these Muslims in this Mosque would actually cause terrorism, but rather that the idea of a Muslim Mosque near a place where terrorism occurred is somehow insulting or insensitive–the analogy stands. An argument that a great deal of crime was committed in a neighborhood by specifically African American persons would still be no better received to justify that African Americans moving in would be somehow insulting or insensitive.

Ultimately, the root of the argument that a Mosque should not be built at Ground Zero must begin with some belief that Muslims and terrorism are inextricably related. There is no route from point A (terrorists attacked the World Trade Center) to point B (a Mosque should not be built at Ground Zero) without some degree of that connection. It is a noteworthy indication that, despite great movements forward toward tolerance and against racial, cultural, and religious prejudice, ideas and actions that, at their core, involve negative, incorrect assumptions based on entire classifications of people can still gain broad public support. And it is a poignant reminder of why “majority rules” is necessarily subject to pragmatic law.