Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison, at the request of Bush W. and Obama administrations, has taken to the international stage to champion the commitment of the United States to religious diversity.
He has also talked about the recent Muslim center that is planned to go near Ground Zero. He explained why Democrats shouldn't fear the debate about whether to allow a moderate Muslim group to build their Islamic Center.
Ellison said that stopping the building of the Muslim center would threaten religious liberty in the U.S., and associate all Muslims with the 9/11 attacks.
"There's also a more important principle at work here. And that is that the transnational terrorists who committed this outrageous act on 9/11, they are arguing that America is at war with Islam. The way to undermine and counteract that false narrative is to stand on our sacredly held beliefs of religious liberty. That's how we demonstrate that, no, America is a country ... for everyone where people worship as they see fit. The problem with stopping this Islamic center is that it implies that the Muslim world is responsible for it, when it was al Qaeda that was responsible."
"The truth is that we're a party of principle. We believe in the idea of religious liberty."
Despite Republican's negative position on the Muslim center, Ellison said that Democrats can and should position themselves as the party that respects the whole Constitution -- including the part about "freedom of religion."
My Muslim Congressman is also for equal rights for gay people and has spoken on gay rights in mosques to Muslims.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 44
Featured inthe Triple Name Club.
"Those who feel like they can intimidate our fellow citizens to take out their anger don't represent the best of America, they represent the worst of humankind, and they should be ashamed of that kind of behavior."
G W Bush 17 Sept 2001
I've been thinking about this and I have to say that I don't really have feelings about it one way or another. One thing that I feel is lost is that there are two sides to this issue and both have roots in the Constitution. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion. I think that if someone looks at the issue objectively they will see both sides have valid issues/concerns. Again I just can't get myself too worked up about it. I think that there can be a solution that will work out for both sides.
And I don't think most of the opposition to the Mosque think that they can't legally build it there. They just think it's a bad idea to build it there.
And I didn't say there were two sides to religion, either, Charles.
What I did say was that there are not two sides to practicing the Freedom of Religion, a right granted in our Constitution. Where in the Constitution does it say that some do not have that right? I don't understand your comment "those two sides represents two parts of the constitution."
2. Freedom of Religion allows those who want the Mosque to build it where they want.
Both sides have the right to their freedoms and we can't tell the opponents to shut up because they have a right to build their Mosque. And we can't tell them they can't build the Mosque because the opponents don't want it there. That's why I said that if we're looking for the best solution then both sides are probably going to have to meet in the middle.
Here's the timeline as I see it: Airplanes fly into the WTC and Pentagon in a criminal act allegedly perpetrated by terrorists from Muslim countries who have decided to take on a suicide mission to protest / revenge some US policies. Americans overreact and remove half of their own liberties guaranteed by the Constitution (something terrorists never could have done). Americans support a president who exploits the 9/11 event to invade two countries, one of which had nothing to do with 9/11 and had virtually no terrorist presence. A substantial number of Americans become so painfully fear-driven that they delude themselves with paranoia that they're involved in a glorious battle between good and evil represented by the world's two major religions; and consequently echo the pattern of Nazi Germany in the 30's. What next?
There are also arguments out there that the Muslim religion as a whole is going through a Reformation-esque change itself which is also extermely painful. If that is true we would hope that we could throw our support behind the more tolerant and peaceful groups rather than feeding the fire that is burning in the hearts of the extremists.
I am glad that there are people out there like Mr. Ellison, who are tolerant, and thoughtful, but I am afraid that they are in the minority. It is either that or the ones who wear their ethnocentric feelings on their sleeves are just too loud for any one to be able to hear the rest of the world shaking their heads in dismay.
I'm glad he was willing to speak up. It's reasonable and in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution.
I would be much more worried about the radical Christians who plan on burning copies of the Koran on 9/11!
Congressman Ellison is absolutely correct!!