The Corner

The Right to Build the Mosque and the Right to Oppose

In her column today, Kathleen Parker argues that the Ground Zero mosque “should be built precisely because we don’t like the idea very much.” She contends that if we want Muslims to tolerate our right to free expression, we must tolerate theirs.

Parker’s argument is both unpersuasive and a flawed rendition of rights doctrine.

Merely because I have a right to do something doesn’t mean it should be done. Neither does it mean that my exercise of the right must be insulated from dissuasion or criticism.

My constitutionally protected right to bear arms permits me to keep firearms in my home. That doesn’t mean I must or should keep arms in my home; and it doesn’t mean that my friends can’t or shouldn’t persuade me not to store guns in my home or, at least, to move the guns to another location. And my friends surely shouldn’t be precluded from persuading me not to store my Glock in my upstairs bedroom ”precisely because they don’t like” that location.

Increasingly, over the last few decades, politicians and pundits have treated the exercise of certain rights as a zero-sum game: If “A” exercises some right, “B” must automatically shut up, nod his head and smile approvingly (I’m not suggesting this is Parker’s contention). As President Obama superfluously lectured last Friday, the backers of the Ground Zero mosque have the right to build it on that site. But “toleration” of that right doesn’t mean opponents must forfeit or holster their own First Amendment rights.

Peter Kirsanow — Peter N. Kirsanow is an attorney and a member of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Demagoguery Is Not Leadership

The government of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand has, with the support of the opposition, decided to enact fundamental changes in the nation’s firearms laws less than a week after the massacre at two Christchurch mosques. This is the opposite of leadership. It is also an example of why ... Read More
White House

The Media’s Disgrace

There will soon enough be an effort to memory-hole it, but the media coverage of the Russia investigation was abysmal and self-discrediting — obsessive and hysterical, often suggesting that the smoking gun was right around the corner, sometimes supporting its hoped-for result with erroneous, too-good-to-check ... Read More
Politics & Policy

What Was Trump So Annoyed About?

One of the stranger arguments that I heard throughout the Mueller saga -- and am hearing today, now that it's turned out to be a dud -- is that Donald Trump's irritation with the process was unreasonable and counterproductive. This tweet, from CNN's Chris Cilizza, is a nice illustration of the genre: Donald ... Read More
White House

Our Long National Hysteria 

Our long national hysteria may not be over, but at least it should — by rights — be diminished. Robert Mueller delivered his long-awaited report on Friday, and Attorney General William Barr just released his summary of the findings. They completely vindicate President Trump regarding the allegation that ... Read More