I bet this will be an unpopular opinion

I have been thinking about this some today, and because every other post on FB is about this topic, I cannot stop myself from popping off about it.

I am talking about this business of the mosque and Islamic cultural center planned near Ground Zero.

On FB, there is another one of those "post this on your wall if you agree" things about how wrong it is that this may happen--it says "If you think, that putting up a mosque, 600 ft. from ground zero & having the inauguration, on the anniversary of 9/11/11 is immoral, inhumane & a complete lack of respect for the memories of all that perished there, on that day & their survivors. That politicians are doing a grave injustice to the fallen heroes, their families & all

the people of New York City, THEN COPY AND PASTE THIS TO YOUR WALL.

What do you think about this?

I will tell you what I think. Of course I will, I mostly always do. I am ashamed and disgusted by people that call this "immoral and inhumane". I agree that it is in poor taste, but I think that about a lot of things. But I do not think I am so important that what I think matters so much that it should trump what other people think.

First of all, who are we to say what a private organization can do with its money, as long as it is within the bounds of the law? Isn't the very idea that the plan should not be allowed to go forward simply echoing the problem that allowed the Twin Towers to fall in the first place? By that I mean, why should any one group (and I include, Americans as "one group") have the right to dominate other groups just because they do not like them? Isnt that why the whole thing started in the first place?

What ever happened to freedom of religion, and freedom of speech and the freedom to assemble? Why do so many people think those rights only matter when everyone agrees on how those things are expressed? The whole point of ensuring those freedoms is to protect the less popular among us--the rest of us do not need it. Why can people not see past themselves?

This article was in the Washington Post this morning.

"President Obama's remarks Friday and Saturday on a proposed mosque and Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero sparked heated exchanges on the Sunday morning news shows.

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) said on CNN's "State of the Union" that the issue is not that there is a legal right to build the mosque but that those involved should listen to public opinion, which he said is strongly opposed to the project. I Totally agree with this. But there is a difference between SHOULD and FORCING the builders to abdicate to public opinion. Also, we are not a homogenous public--we are a mix of people with different opinions and beliefs. Sure, if the US government was going to do this, it would be a different story--but this is a private interest acting.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), whose district includes Ground Zero, countered that there is a "fundamental mistake" behind the thinking of those opposed to the project.

"The fallacy is that al-Qaeda attacked us. Islam did not attack us," Nadler said. To this I say: RIGHT ON! HALLELUJAH--someone gets it.

On "Fox News Sunday," Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) said troops in Afghanistan are being asked to find common ground with Muslims. "If we can't do that here in the United States, we're going to have a very difficult time over there," Reed said. He makes a good point--being the self-annointed police of the world comes with it the responsibility of practicing what we preach--that is not happening in this situation.

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Tex.) responded that "it's unwise to build a mosque in the site where 3,000 Americans lost their lives as the result of a terrorist attack." Unwise?--maybe. But they are free to, just like you and I would be free to do what we want with out property

On "Face the Nation," Republican strategist Ed Rollins said the mosque is "going to be a big, big issue for Democrats across this country" at the ballot box". I think it should be but for a different reason than I bet he thinks---Obama supports the development as a manifestation of the right to build. He clearly said he did not speak to the wisdom of it--just the right to do it. Why do people forget that his role is not to carry out the wishes of the majority blindly, but to do what is constitutionally required (at least as far as he has anything to do with this). Why would people turn on him simply because he stood up for the rights of everyone, and not just yours?

I do not understand how people can be so obtuse about things like this---something is not wrong just because you do not like it. I do not like seafood, but I do not think it should be banned country wide. Why is this any different? People have to be able to separate their emotions from their brains, and it seems to me like a whole pile of Americans cannot do that. That makes me sad, because it does not offer much encouragement that we are any different than those who flew into the towers in the first place. Is that really who you want to be?