Michael Arcuri.

“They have a constitutional right to build this, but with rights come responsibilities… Building a mosque near Ground Zero is insensitive, an affront to the victims of 9/11, and it lacks respect for the general public’s feelings… I think another location should be chosen.”

Arcuri saw the obvious distinction—contrary to progressive innuendo, encouraging the choice of another location does not entail a violation of first amendment rights or freedom of religion. And after him, a deluge of Democratic representatives from New York followed suit.

statement. A highlight:

“This is not the first time that the construction of a house of worship at a sensitive site has been questioned and opposed… Muslim Americans deserve the right to practice their faith – as we all do. I believe a new location is the right compromise so that Muslim Americans can worship … while the families of 9/11 victims obtain the peace of mind they deserve.”

And Steve Israel:

“While they have a constitutional right to build the mosque, it would be better if they had demonstrated more sensitivity to the families of 9/11 victims. I urge them to do so before proceeding further.”

And Tim Bishop:

New York Post ably replied, “Huh?” But as long as Weiner believes