New York Gov. David Paterson’s proposal to offer public property to relocate the so-called “Ground Zero mosque” raises serious constitutional issues and could spark litigation, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

“I understand that some people are not happy with the prospect of an Islamic center opening in Manhattan, but relocating it to public property raises significant legal issues,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Whether the governor is talking about a gift of public land or a sweetheart deal that gives one religious group a special right to purchase government property, it’s wrong.

“In America,” continued Lynn, “government does not subsidize religion or give religious groups preferential treatment.”

Controversy has flared recently over plans by a Muslim group to build an Islamic center two blocks from the site of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Paterson proposed resolving the matter by offering public land elsewhere for construction of the Islamic facility.

But Paterson’s proposal is legally flawed, AU says.

Lynn pointed out that the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that government may not subsidize religious facilities. Any attempt to use public resources to relocate the Islamic center would undoubtedly lead to a legal challenge.

In addition to the U.S. Constitution, Lynn noted that New York’s constitution contains strong language barring any diversion of public resources for religious purposes. Article XI, for example, bans public support of institutions “wholly or in part under the control or direction of any religious denomination….”

Lynn urged Paterson to drop the proposal. The solution, Lynn said, is to respect the Muslim group’s right to build its center on private property using private funds.

“Local authorities in Manhattan have cleared the way for construction of the Islamic center,” Lynn said. “It’s up to the Islamic group to decide whether they want to proceed. I’m sorry that this situation has become so politicized.”

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

###

Sharif El-Gamal is the developer behind the plan to erect an Islamic community center and mosque two blocks from the World Trade Center site.

Calls are mounting for him and the other backers to find a new home for their center, further away from the site of the September 11th terrorist attacks, but El-Gamal isn’t budging.

He is sticking with his plans to erect Park51, a 13-story center and prayer space in Lower Manhattan. He likens the project to a YMCA or Jewish Community Center, with programs open to all residents of all faiths.

“A landmark, an iconic building that will have people come and visit it from around the world,” said El-Gamal as to what he imagines. “This looks like it is going to be the most famous community center in the world.”

Some might argue that the center would be the most famous mosque in the world, but El-Gamal emphasized throughout the interview that he is building a community center, that is expected to house a swimming pool, a gymnasium, a restaurant and an auditorium.

The developer takes issue with the fact that so much has been made of the location of the project, saying it is “nowhere near the World Trade Center site.”

“Park51 is a community center. It is two blocks north of the World Trade Center site,” said El-Gamal. “In New York City, two blocks is a great distance. There are some buildings in New York that have their own zip codes. There is such a scarcity of space in New York, especially in Lower Manhattan. Keep in mind this is a small island, so we are nowhere near the World Trade Center site.”

I asked El-Gamal if he’s been surprised by the backlash against the project and the national attention it’s garnered. He chose his words carefully.

“I am surprised at the way that politics is being played in 2010. There are issues that are affecting our country, which are real issues: unemployment, poverty, the economy,” he said. “And it’s a really sad day for America when our politicians choose to look at a constitutional right and use that as basis for their elections.”

El-Gamal views the fight over the center currently raging on television and in newspapers in sweeping, historic terms.

“This is a defining moment for you and I and the First Amendment, and I see us passing this test as Americans,” he said.

Of course, the project got a boost from the White House last weekend when President Barack Obama spoke strongly in support of the developer’s right to build the center. El-Gamal says he heard the president’s remarks while he was on his way to East Hampton. He says he was blown away.

There was also word on Tuesday that Governor David Paterson is planning to meet with mosque developers to discuss moving the project. El-Gamal says that while there is no such meeting scheduled yet, he is open to talking to the governor.

He insists, however, that he is not open to moving the center.

“This is not a debate. This is not a debate. This is us as Muslim Americans giving back to our community,” said El-Gamal.

NY1 Radio interview

###

Related notes from Glen Greenwald:  

(1) Park 51 opponents have made much of the fact that polls show majority support for their view, as though public opinion should dictate where religious minorities can congregate.  A new poll today reveals that 62% of Americans -- a record high -- now oppose the war in Afghanistan.  By the reasoning of project opponents, shouldn't that mean that public opinion should be honored with a withdrawal from that country?  After all, religious freedoms are not supposed to be dependent upon the approval of majorities; the whole point of such liberties is to protect minorities from majoritarian frenzies.  By contrast, wars are actually supposed to be fought only with the support of the citizenry.  If majority sentiment should prevail, a far more compelling case can be made that it should do so with regard to Afghanistan than with the religious liberties of a minority group.

(2) The interview with El-Gamal highlights how often these "national debates" are conducted with very little inclusion of any actual Muslims.  Just as is true of the people in the countries we invade and occupy, American media outlets spend a great deal of time talking about Muslims, but very little time hearing from them -- including, perhaps especially, American Muslims.

Submitted by Aletho News on Thu, 2010-08-19 02:21

• Aletho News's blog
• Login or register to post comments
• 210 reads
•