My wonderful friend Joe wrote an interesting piece on Bill O'Reilly's appearance on The View. Yup, the one where Joy and Whoopi upped and left. I'm sharing it with his approval.
I've been thinking about Bill O'Reilly's appearance on the view that caused Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar to walk out midway through the show and had a thought crystallize in my head that there is one simple reason why the Cordoba House should be built. While the various freedoms Americans are supposed to enjoy (although those who are suing to stop this apparently don't recognize those rights) are important, there is a legitimate argument to be made that while someone may be allowed to do something and can do it, that doesn't necessarily mean they should. But there is one far more important, yet simple, reason and for anyone who is a friend of mine who still thinks that the Cordoba House shouldn't go through, here it is: Muslims didn't attack America on 9/11.
I'm sure there are many who would be perplexed at that statement after reading it, but rest assured, I'm not crazy. I'm not suggesting that there never were any planes, or hijackers, or that the hijackers were CIA agents, aliens or Marilyn Monroe clones. I'm also not suggesting that this wasn't an attack on America itself, nor that the hijackers claimed to be Muslim. I stipulate all those facts and have no reason to doubt a single one of them. But nonetheless, Muslims didn't attack America because fanatical extremist idealists attacked America who claimed to be Muslim.
This comment might confuse some and it might seem a tremendous quibble to others, but it is absolutely crucial to understanding everything: 9/11 itself, terrorism in general, al-Qaida specifically and the state of politics and religion today. The reason is that people are failing to see necessary boundaries between classes of people and failing to recognize how significant those boundaries are. Instead, they are simply looking at a person who shoots someone to stop them from killing his children as the same as the person who would kill the children in the first place. They are both killers, so why make any further distinction at all?
It is this same reason why Bill O'Reilly's comment today, that Muslims attacked America, was so offensive. I'm sure that almost no one who opposes the Cordoba House really saw much of anything wrong with it and thinks that those who do are being overly politically correct. The problem is, however, not that people are being overly sensitive, but that such statements tacitly make sweeping condemnations of anyone in that class of people for some issue that has nothing to do with the basic properties of that class of people. There is, after all, nothing in Islam that suggests that they must hate America, that they must condemn it or attack it, or in way oppose it. There are many loyal Muslim Americans who would, and have given their lives to defend this country, even at times against others who also claim to be Muslim.
For those who still doubt what I'm saying, let me use that exact same argument structure to put forward a couple of other statements: Jews killed Jesus or Christians killed the Jews. Both of those statements were used in the past and are used to this day to vilify an entire class of people who did nothing more than belong to a religion that had nothing to do either with killing Jesus or with killing Jews. In this same way, we clearly recognize that those who kill abortion doctors out of a supposed devotion to Christianity are criminals that are not exemplars of Christianity, as we recognize that Israeli assassins killing someone in another country are not exemplars of Judaism. Instead, we recognize that a few people with extreme ideologies commit crimes and use their extremist beliefs to back them up, but that these beliefs while connected to a creed are not of that creed itself.
And it's that same standard of behavior that is missing in the dialogue about the Cordoba House and Islam in this country in general. We would never dare suggest that it's inappropriate for a synagogue to be within a few blocks of a church, yet many do the same with the Cordoba House. We also would never dare to suggest that we screen any Jews, Christians, Hindus or Buddhists to be screened for potential ties to terrorists simply for belonging to their faith, despite the fact that they, like all other major faiths throughout the world, have been called on as rationales for horrendous atrocities--not long ago, or far away, but as close as Oklahoma City or Atlanta, both of which had notable terrorist crimes that were attributed to "Christian" reasons.
So, I'll say it again, Muslims didn't attack America, nor did Islam attack Christianity. A terrorist organization that claims to be Islamic yet has no problem disregarding any part of Islam that presents an obstacle to them organized and orchestrated a cold-blooded monstrosity against a mixture of Americans of all faiths, including Muslims. They did so not because they are Muslim, or we are Christian, but because they have become embittered and angry over various historical and personal events and have failed to recognize boundaries between classes of people, and condemned all who belong to a class as guilty of perceived crimes by other members of that class.
Sound familiar?
I'm sure there are many who would be perplexed at that statement after reading it, but rest assured, I'm not crazy. I'm not suggesting that there never were any planes, or hijackers, or that the hijackers were CIA agents, aliens or Marilyn Monroe clones. I'm also not suggesting that this wasn't an attack on America itself, nor that the hijackers claimed to be Muslim. I stipulate all those facts and have no reason to doubt a single one of them. But nonetheless, Muslims didn't attack America because fanatical extremist idealists attacked America who claimed to be Muslim.
This comment might confuse some and it might seem a tremendous quibble to others, but it is absolutely crucial to understanding everything: 9/11 itself, terrorism in general, al-Qaida specifically and the state of politics and religion today. The reason is that people are failing to see necessary boundaries between classes of people and failing to recognize how significant those boundaries are. Instead, they are simply looking at a person who shoots someone to stop them from killing his children as the same as the person who would kill the children in the first place. They are both killers, so why make any further distinction at all?
It is this same reason why Bill O'Reilly's comment today, that Muslims attacked America, was so offensive. I'm sure that almost no one who opposes the Cordoba House really saw much of anything wrong with it and thinks that those who do are being overly politically correct. The problem is, however, not that people are being overly sensitive, but that such statements tacitly make sweeping condemnations of anyone in that class of people for some issue that has nothing to do with the basic properties of that class of people. There is, after all, nothing in Islam that suggests that they must hate America, that they must condemn it or attack it, or in way oppose it. There are many loyal Muslim Americans who would, and have given their lives to defend this country, even at times against others who also claim to be Muslim.
For those who still doubt what I'm saying, let me use that exact same argument structure to put forward a couple of other statements: Jews killed Jesus or Christians killed the Jews. Both of those statements were used in the past and are used to this day to vilify an entire class of people who did nothing more than belong to a religion that had nothing to do either with killing Jesus or with killing Jews. In this same way, we clearly recognize that those who kill abortion doctors out of a supposed devotion to Christianity are criminals that are not exemplars of Christianity, as we recognize that Israeli assassins killing someone in another country are not exemplars of Judaism. Instead, we recognize that a few people with extreme ideologies commit crimes and use their extremist beliefs to back them up, but that these beliefs while connected to a creed are not of that creed itself.
And it's that same standard of behavior that is missing in the dialogue about the Cordoba House and Islam in this country in general. We would never dare suggest that it's inappropriate for a synagogue to be within a few blocks of a church, yet many do the same with the Cordoba House. We also would never dare to suggest that we screen any Jews, Christians, Hindus or Buddhists to be screened for potential ties to terrorists simply for belonging to their faith, despite the fact that they, like all other major faiths throughout the world, have been called on as rationales for horrendous atrocities--not long ago, or far away, but as close as Oklahoma City or Atlanta, both of which had notable terrorist crimes that were attributed to "Christian" reasons.
So, I'll say it again, Muslims didn't attack America, nor did Islam attack Christianity. A terrorist organization that claims to be Islamic yet has no problem disregarding any part of Islam that presents an obstacle to them organized and orchestrated a cold-blooded monstrosity against a mixture of Americans of all faiths, including Muslims. They did so not because they are Muslim, or we are Christian, but because they have become embittered and angry over various historical and personal events and have failed to recognize boundaries between classes of people, and condemned all who belong to a class as guilty of perceived crimes by other members of that class.
Sound familiar?
