WASHINGTON, D.C. — If Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf managed to purchase the entire 16-acre superblock on which the World Trade Center once stood, there is no doubting his legal right to build whatever he desires in that location.

It follows naturally that Rauf should have the same right to build a 13-story mosque and community center two blocks away from ground zero, on land he legally purchased. Yes, of course he has that right.

But even if he is acting within his rights, there is no guarantee the appropriate action will be taken.

The mere right to build the proposed Cordoba House does not ensure that Americans will lock arms at Rauf’s side while he constructs a monument to Islam a mere two blocks away from the most cowardly, most tragic, most atrocious attack our nation has ever endured — an attack carried out in the name of radical Islam.

Common sense, decency and sensitivity are desperately lacking in the plans to build such a mosque. It is beyond frustrating, and approaching discouragement, to consider that ground zero may sport a mosque before receiving a proper memorial. Imagine being informed of this possibility on Sept. 12, 2001.

While the 19 hijackers who murdered nearly 3,000 Americans certainly comprise a minority of Islam, similar offshoots continue to exist and operate across the globe. Islamic extremists pose a constant threat to life and freedom. To deny this is to put your head in the sand.

To construct a shrine to Islam in such proximity to Islamic extremism’s greatest success — even if those extremists do not represent the religion as a whole — is to disgrace the Sept. 11 victims and their families.

Supporters of the mosque seem unable to come to grips with the possibility that one could oppose the ground zero mosque and still manage to respect the religion of Islam. Opposition and respect are not mutually exclusive, and automatically treating them as such is mindless.

President George W. Bush often reminded us that those 19 hijackers also hijacked a religion. He referred to Islam as ‘a religion of peace.’ Both of these are true, but neither provides justification for a mosque at ground zero.

Rauf’s group claims to be interested in promoting healing and understanding. But, surely, they can understand why their proposed Islamic center will not allow grieving New Yorkers to heal. A mosque in that location will do more harm than good, opening up old wounds rather than building bridges to a progressive future.

Putting forth their best efforts to defend the mosque, liberal activists have concocted a straw man argument. They claim that opposing the mosque’s construction is at odds with the First Amendment, that doing so would trample over religious freedom ensured by the Constitution.

Nonsense. No reasonable American denies the constitutional right to build the mosque, but plenty of reasonable Americans would like to see Rauf and the developers voluntarily decide on a different location.

A recent Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll clearly spells this out. While 61 percent of respondents agree the Muslim group has the right to build the Cordoba House, 64 percent also feel that such a mosque would be wrong and inappropriate.

President Barack Obama weighed in on the debate, displaying an uncanny ability to both confuse and to pander. He spent one evening professing his support for the mosque during a Ramadan dinner hosted at the White House, before correcting those remarks within 24 hours. The next afternoon, Obama completely backtracked, claiming he was merely standing up for religious freedom in general rather than endorsing the construction of this mosque in particular. While Obama’s position was incomprehensible, the left-wing talking points have been crystal clear.

It has been implied — in some cases, not so subtly — that Islamophobia is the root cause of the mosque opposition. A textbook tactic from the left, as anyone in disagreement with liberal ideology is charged with bigotry or racism.

It has even been said that another religion could have easily motivated an attack not dissimilar from that of Sept. 11. While I am skeptical of the premise, especially in the year 2010, let’s accept it for the sake of argument.

Say a bunch of Christians got a wild hair to fly jumbo jets into America’s proudest symbol of capitalism, or 19 crazed Jews perverted their religion in such a way that murdered 3,000 innocent civilians.

Less than a decade later, how would Americans feel about the prospects of a similar religious structure two blocks away from that ground zero?

Rest assured, the backlash would be identical. We would vehemently oppose the construction of that church or that synagogue.

Not there. Build it anywhere but there.

Jimmy Paul is a senior political science major. He is currently in Washington, D.C., taking part in the Maxwell in Washington semester. His column appears occasionally, and he can be reached at jdpaul01@syr.edu.

Published on September 8, 2010 at 12:00 pm