A Matter Of Right & Wrong

Notwithstanding the likelihood that the majority of people living in Japan in 1941 were good and god-fearing people, the flag of that country would never be flown atop a monument at Pearl Harbor. The Americans who perished in the name of that flag, would not have been disrespected as such. Not all southerners in 1863 were dedicated to the despicable practice of chattel slavery, yet it would be inconceivable to dedicate a portion of Gettysburg to that misbegotten Confederacy. Although a Confederate shrine or a monument dedicated to Imperial Japan would be protected under the first amendment, they would, nonetheless, be considered morally repugnant by the majority of American citizens.

Two blocks away from Ground Zero, at 51 Park Place, lies a plot of land that will likely house a 13 story, $100 million, Islamic mosque and cultural center. In the name of “tolerance”, President Obama, New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg and New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo have publically endorsed this project. The latest polls show that nearly 70% of Americans are opposed to the idea of a “super-mosque” standing at the edge of Ground Zero. This national distaste for the Islamic center is not a product of institutional bigotry, nor does it imply an American loathing for all things related to Islam. Rather, it is a matter of national pride, a sincere desire that this hallowed ground remains free from intrigue and controversy.

It is in the name of patriotism that Americans are presently requesting that this mosque be built elsewhere in the city. Governor David Patterson has generously offered state owned land to foster this relocation. However, the planners of the Ground Zero mosque have declined to accept the Governor’s offering. The American people understand that there is nothing illegal about building a mosque in such close proximity to Ground Zero. Yet, we can’t help but view this endeavor as an affront to our national pride, an insult to the memories of our dead. Although Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf claims that he is erecting this mosque in the hope of “bridging the gap” between the Muslim and non-Muslim communities, the opposite result appears more likely. Inflaming the passions and challenging the sensibilities of American citizens will result in a bridge to nowhere. It would serve to trivialize a gruesome attack on American soil in which thousands of our brethren perished.

Imam Feisal, President Obama, Mike Bloomberg and Andrew Cuomo claim that American opposition to the building of this mosque is a symptom of mass intolerance. I respectively disagree. The perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, and their terrorist cohorts at large, have hijacked the Islamic religion. This is an unfortunate fact that I believe most Americans are aware of. However, these attacks and countless others were, in fact, committed in the name of that religion and, in some respects, the two cannot be arbitrarily separated. Whether or not to build a mosque so near to the site of such a raw American tragedy is not a question of legality. It is a matter of right and wrong. In my opinion, proponents of this plan are revealing an extraordinary irreverence for the feelings of the American public. In Mr. Obama’s defense, it is not within his presidential powers to effectively resolve this issue. This same pardon, however, cannot be granted to Mayor Bloomberg and Attorney General Cuomo. Each of these officials have a duty to insure that the money being raised for this “cultural center” is devoid of connections to terrorism. We Americans take great pride in our country; we are a tolerant and forgiving people but, some things are simply improper. Legal proprieties aside, building a mosque so near to Ground Zero is a morally offensive act.

The American Gospel & Obama-Care

Call me a jingoist, but I believe that America is the greatest nation ever to inhabit the earth. The United States has created more wealth, spread more freedom and improved the human condition more than any other country in history. Notwithstanding the fact that these accomplishments are of near biblical proportion, they are not the result of divine intervention. They are the natural byproduct of a national faith that is rooted in individual liberty. American exceptionalism is directly attributable to the ideals of our nation’s founding documents. The Declaration of Independence is the American Gospel, the definitive moral blueprint of our nation. Man’s natural rights to freedom and liberty, to a government beholden to its people, and to the pursuit of commercial success, represent the founding tenets of our faith. The U.S. Constitution is the ultimate book of laws, created to guarantee these rights to our people.

In the summer of 1787, America’s Founding Fathers took great care to insure the ideals of the American Gospel in the U.S. Constitution. Their greatest concern was an inherent distrust of man’s tyrannical nature. Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution, was created to allay these fears. This crucial section clearly defines the limited powers of Congress. For 220 years, this central theme of the U.S Constitution has served the American people by confirming their rights as citizens.

Obama-Care, with regard to the Constitution, is a complete and abject failure. The individual mandate provision of this massive entitlement program clearly exceeds the limits of congressional authority. This mandate grants the federal government the power to coerce American citizens into purchasing a product (health insurance) or to impose a fine on those who do not. The Obama White House claims that this mandate is a necessary provision because it funds a greater good – that of national healthcare. It further claims that this act is justified under the commerce clause of article 1, section 8 of the Constitution.

The commerce clause reads as follows: “The Congress shall have power to… regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.” Hitherto, the interstate commerce clause has mainly been utilized to justify federal regulations on shipping and on trade, but never to force an individual into a commercial transaction. Commerce, by definition, is a transaction (sale or purchase) that has the objective of supplying a commodity (good or service). It is a wild stretch to interpret this clause as a justification of Congressional power to compel Americans into purchasing an arbitrary good or service. In fact, this interpretation of the commerce clause would effectively give the federal government limitless power under the Constitution. Freedom of commerce, the nucleus of American prosperity, would cease to be a precept of our faith. The Supreme Court will ultimately judge whether or not this misbegotten mandate is permissible under Constitutional law.

Human nature dictates that those who control the money, by default, control the people. Commercial activity, in the hands of the people, has enabled America to prosper. The people’s rights to commerce, religion and speech are inherent in the American Gospel. The limited power of our federal government is a core component of our faith. By implementing Obama-Care and its individual mandate, President Obama and Congress are attempting to violate the basic tenets of Americanism. If we allow our government unlimited power in the guise of national healthcare, America will lose it soul. We will need to abandon our national faith, and pray for divine intervention. Because a Supreme Court decision on this macabre issue will likely be several years in the making, the American people must fight for their faith, and elect representatives who will act to repeal this blasphemy. To borrow the words of another great faith, “Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” Election Day is coming. All that is necessary for tyranny to thrive is for people of good conscience to remain silent.