Yesterday’s Sunday New York Times, the nation’s premier source for putting contemporary controversies in the “proper perspective” had a big “context” piece on its front page yesterday. Here’s the opening chunk, just to give you a sense of the story:

Across Nation, Mosque Projects Meet Opposition
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
While a high-profile battle rages over a mosque near ground zero in Manhattan, heated confrontations have also broken out in communities across the country where mosques are proposed for far less hallowed locations.
In Murfreesboro, Tenn., Republican candidates have denounced plans for a large Muslim center proposed near a subdivision, and hundreds of protesters have turned out for a march and a county meeting.
In late June, in Temecula, Calif., members of a local Tea Party group took dogs and picket signs to Friday prayers at a mosque that is seeking to build a new worship center on a vacant lot nearby.
In Sheboygan, Wis., a few Christian ministers led a noisy fight against a Muslim group that sought permission to open a mosque in a former health food store bought by a Muslim doctor.
At one time, neighbors who did not want mosques in their backyards said their concerns were over traffic, parking and noise — the same reasons they might object to a church or a synagogue. But now the gloves are off.
In all of the recent conflicts, opponents have said their problem is Islam itself. They quote passages from the Koran and argue that even the most Americanized Muslim secretly wants to replace the Constitution with Islamic Shariah law.
These local skirmishes make clear that there is now widespread debate about whether the best way to uphold America’s democratic values is to allow Muslims the same religious freedom enjoyed by other Americans, or to pull away the welcome mat from a faith seen as a singular threat.
“What’s different is the heat, the volume, the level of hostility,” said Ihsan Bagby, associate professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky. “It’s one thing to oppose a mosque because traffic might increase, but it’s different when you say these mosques are going to be nurturing terrorist bombers, that Islam is invading, that civilization is being undermined by Muslims
.”Feeding the resistance is a growing cottage industry of authors and bloggers — some of them former Muslims — who are invited to speak at rallies, sell their books and testify in churches. Their message is that Islam is inherently violent and incompatible with America.
But they have not gone unanswered. In each community, interfaith groups led by Protestant ministers, Catholic priests, rabbis and clergy members of other faiths have defended the mosques. Often, they have been slower to organize than the mosque opponents, but their numbers have usually been larger.

And . . . so on.

I love this. I can guarantee you this is the sort of story that really helps a certain caste of liberal Manhattanites understand why they should support the Ground Zero Mosque. Because you see, the skirmish in lower Manhattan is really just one battle among many. These battles are raging in places with names like Sheboygan, Murfreesboro, and Temecula. The fight in the Financial District, so near such hot spots as Tribeca and SoHo, is really just a flash point in the populist uprising in the hinterlands, and Lord knows no right thinking person in New York City wants to be on the wrong side of that fight.

As we all know, lower Manhattan often serves this role. Some little known facts: The Scopes Trial was originally intended to be held in Greenwich Village until Clarence Darrow asked for a change of venue, and William Jennings Bryan worked out the kinks of his Cross of Gold speech at what was the original Limelight in New York City. That’s one of the reasons living in New York City is so invigorating, all of the culture war schisms play out there. Or at least that’s what I learned by watching Law & Order and reading the New York Times.