Irshad Manji attempts to re-centre the raw, emotional polarised sentimentalism of Park51 here. The underlying point is that offence or sensitivity is not a basis for what can or cannot be built nor for criticising aspects of religion or religious customs.
The Park51 debate has now spilled over into the doomed territory of visceral offence taking. The opportunity to have this debate on issues such as the American Constitution’s provisions for freedom of religion and Islam’s obligation to universal principles in the USA may have been lost for good. Nevertheless Manji takes a crack at articulating a set of questions and demands expected of Imam Rauf should Park51 ever get built.
But for all the restless offense I feel, I step back and force myself to think. As I wrestle with the issues, I realize that an opportunity exists for something more constructive than anger.
Namely, accountability. If Park51 gets built, thanks to its provocative location the nation will scrutinize what takes place inside. Americans have the opportunity right now to be clear about the civic values expected from any Islam practiced at the site.
That means setting aside bombast and asking the imam questions born of the highest American ideals: individual dignity and pluralism of ideas.
• Will the swimming pool at Park51 be segregated between men and women at any time of the day or night?
• May women lead congregational prayers any day of the week?
• Will Jews and Christians, fellow People of the Book, be able to use the prayer sanctuary for their services just as Muslims share prayer space with Christians and Jews in the Pentagon? (Spare me the technocratic argument that the Pentagon is a governmental, not private, building. Park51 may be private in the legal sense but is a public symbol par excellence.)
• What will be taught about homosexuals? About agnostics? About atheists? About apostasy?
• Where does one sign up for advance tickets to Salman Rushdie’s lecture at Park51?
These questions aren’t gratuitous. I, for one, remain haunted by the 300 Muslims chanting “Death to Rushdie” on Sept. 10, 2001. They gathered outside a theater in Houston, Texas, to protest a visit by the novelist—the target of a 1989 death warrant from Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini. One Muslim told reporters, “The fatwa is valid even if the Iranian government no longer supports it.” Another warned, “We have not forgotten about him and his evil act.” That man affiliated himself with Houston’s Islamic Education Center. Education or indoctrination? The question deserves an honest response.
Through engagement that emphasizes questions like these, Americans of all faiths and no faith at all may very well make the colorful neighborhood around Ground Zero host to the most transparent, most democratic, most modern Islam—ever.
As a proud New Yorker as well as a reformist Muslim, I think, and not just feel, that this would be a fitting salute to the victims of 9/11. It would turn the tables on the freedom-hating culture of al Qaeda. And it would subvert the liberty-lashing culture of offense
6 Comments
If Irshad Manji has ever felt as offended by the Danish caricatures as she is by Park51′s proximity to the site of 9/11, then maybe I can assume what she said is not a product of her feeling commandeered by a hijacked heart.
Will Irshad Manji be as enthusiastic signing up for an advance ticket to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech on Holocaust as to Salman Rushdie’s lecture? I wonder how far she can go with her pluralism of ideas.
And if Irshad Manji will ask the same questions born of the highest American ideals to all the other religious groups, then I’ll say she’s not opinoinated.
Please. First of all, read Manji’s piece in full. She’s arguing *against* the stupidity of “offence taking”, and equates the anti-Park51 to the exaggerated offence taking of the MoToons.
You ‘re making an equivalence between Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech on Holocaust to a Salman Rushdie lecture? Explanation please.
The proximity of the mosque to GZ offends her, which begs the question: at what point is proximity not an issue? 5 blocks? 10 blocks? Can something be offensive at 9 blocks, and unoffensive at 10? It’s all very arbitrary, and silly. Furthermore, her insistence that mosques conform to her standards, and not the wants and needs of the community, confirms how woefully out of touch she is with most Muslims. Would Muslim women feel comfortable swimming in mixed pools? How many Muslim women actually want female imams?
There is ample scope for reform within the Muslim community, and this includes the usage of mosques. More female prayer space, for instance, is something I think most Muslims would agree with. Likewise, the need to educate female Muslim scholars would have broad support.
Manji’s desires, however, are unpopular amongst most within the community, and rightly received with skepticism.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to ask these questions – particularly the one about what is to be taught – but I don’t think Park51 should be submitted to more searching scrutiny than other comparable buildings. There are single sex sessions at many pools in the UK. Women don’t preside over Catholic services. And there’s quite a gap between wishing a fatwa on someone and wanting him to speak at your organisation.
Irshad Manji is a racist, a hypocrite and an ignoramus
http://www.ibishblog.com/blog/hibish/2009/09/30/moral_courage_queen_irshad_manji_racist_hypocrite_and_ignoramus
Don’t paint Muslim people as Nazis
by Tarek Fatah
http://www.muslimcanadiancongress.org/20031127.html
“Proximity”
Part of the landing gear of UAL Flight 175 – yeah, that one, the one that went into the South Tower in front of millions on TV – crashed down and broke through the roof of 45 Park Place. The roof still has the hole.
Close enough for you? Or too far away?