There has been a lot of uproar courtesy of Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich about a planned mosque in South Manhattan. This shouldn't be too much of a concern to most people, except that it is very close to "Ground Zero", thus earning the nickname The Ground Zero Mosque.
Jean Mirabella of the Baltimore Sun jumped onto the bandwagon supporting the mosque and shaming the critics. Her critique states that within the distance of the planned mosque and the actual ground zero, there is a nail salon and a gentleman's club, but they should not be considered The Ground Zero Nail Salon nor The Ground Zero Gentleman's Club.
But what Mirabella is ignoring (not realizing?) is that New York City and the World Trade Centers were not attacked by a nail salon. Three thousand people were not killed by a gentleman's club.
I know it's already been 9 years, so liberals like to forget the facts, but these events were caused by terrorists who were Muslims. And putting a Muslim place of worship near a hollowed ground, hallowed ground which was the direct result of Muslim terrorism, is offensive to a lot of people.
I'm not endorsing either side of the argument, but I think it's clear to say that Jean Mirabella is defending the argument based on invalid opinions.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This sounds eerily reminiscent of the uproar caused by the Vietname War Memorial and Maya Lin.
Post a Comment