Supporters are calling a proposed mosque near Ground Zero in New York a victory for American democracy and religious tolerance.
That begs the question: To whom are we obligated to prove either our political or our religious tolerance?
And when is someone going to show tolerance toward us?
We'll put this country's religious tolerance up against anyone's, particularly those in the Arab and Muslim worlds. In Saudi Arabia, the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice makes sure Christianity isn't practiced publicly, and Bibles and other non-Muslim religious articles are banned. Non-Muslims can't even enter the cities of Mecca or Medina.
When you build a church or synagogue in Mecca, then come over here and preach to us about tolerance.
Moreover, you can bet the erection of a Muslim worship center just two blocks from where the Twin Towers once stood won't be seen as a gracious gesture of tolerance. It will be viewed by our enemy, radical Muslims, as a glorious shrine to the mass murderers of 9-11.
New York's approval of the mosque this week isn't tolerant; it's the height of intolerance toward Americans and all others whose relatives and friends were killed in the 2001 attacks.
It's an insult. The imam building it knows that, and is undeterred.
Of course, this same imam refuses to denounce Hamas as a terrorist organization, and regarding Islamic terrorism he can only manage that it's a "very complex question."
Not from where we sit. Choosing not to kill innocent civilians is a pretty simple matter. Call us sometime. We'll explain it in 25 words or less.
And while he finds the question of terrorism hopelessly nuanced, he's clear about this country -- whose policies, he said, "were an accessory to the crime that happened."
He speaks of 9-11 as if it were a burglary, and the "burglars" as if they had their reasons -- and the victims as if they participated in it.
The imam also, reports National Review , has associations with arms of the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood.
Calling the mosque "an indecent proposal and an intentional provocation," the magazine writes, "We have thousands of mosques in the United States, and who knows how many Islamic cultural centers in New York City. We do not need this one, in this place, built by these people. We're all stocked up on Hamas apologists, thanks very much."
When asked if the president would intervene, spokesman Robert Gibbs said it was a "local matter" that the president wouldn't involve himself in. Local matter? Ground zero? Since when? And, oh by the way, as one commentator noted this week, being a local matter didn't stop the president from getting waist-deep in the controversy over the arrest of Henry Louis Gates by Cambridge police.
It's too bad a U.S. president named Barack Hussein Obama can't be more of an ambassador to the Muslim world -- one that would press our interests and concerns.
Tell them to build the mosque somewhere else, Mr. President.
If you're looking for a monument to religious tolerance, we already have one.
It's called the Constitution.
We'll put that up against anyone else's, too.