The Corner

A Very Special Mosque

Here’s the beginning of my column today:

New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg is some sort of bigot. In a speech about the Ground Zero mosque and religious freedom, Bloomberg stipulated that “it is fair to ask the organizers of the mosque to show some special sensitivity to the situation.”

Why do they, of all the sects represented in New York, have to show “special sensitivity”? Does the mayor demand “special sensitivity” of St. Paul’s Church, the Episcopal parish a few blocks from Ground Zero? And who appointed him arbiter of “special sensitivity”? Where in the First Amendment does it give mayors the power to enjoin builders of churches, synagogues, or mosques to show sensitivity, special or otherwise?

It must be that the mayor harbors a subtle animus toward Muslims that impels him to impinge on their constitutional rights in violation of all that this country holds dear. Or so one would conclude if Mayor Bloomberg’s obtuse hostility to opponents of the Ground Zero mosque were turned against him.

I think this is a key vulnerability of the supporters of the mosque. Mayor Bloomberg apparently thinks it’s necessary that the mosque project build an “inter-faith community” and welcome Jews and Christians. How can he be sure that it will? And what is he going to do if it doesn’t? Interfere with workings of a place of worship? Christopher Hitchens, in a typically bracing piece in favor of the project (or, more accurately, against the critics of it), runs into the same problem. He writes, “We need not automatically assume the good faith of those who have borrowed this noble name [Cordoba] for a project in lower Manhattan. One would want assurances, also, about the transparency of its funding and the content of its educational programs.” So how is he going to ensure this transparency and oversight of its educational content? This is an extraordinary level of government interference in a religious institution, is it not? What Bloomberg and Hitchens implicitly acknowledge is that there is something different about a mosque so close to Ground Zero, and in recognition of that fact, propose a level of scrutiny and oversight that they wouldn’t propose for any other place of worship. And a level of scrutiny and oversight that, we should note, is wholly impractical. At the end of the day, no one is going to enforce these strictures on the mosque. That’s yet another reason to move it elsewhere, where even Bloomberg and Hitchens won’t feel the impulse to meddle in its operations.

Rich Lowry — Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review. He can be reached via email: 

Most Popular


The Inquisitor Has No Clothes

This is a column about impeachment, but first, a confession: I think I might be guilty of insider trading. At this point, I would like to assure my dear friends at the SEC that I do not mean this in any actionable legal sense, but only in principle. Some time ago, I was considering making an investment in a ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Shaming Women Who Vote Right

Some progressives have decided that rather than convincing women that their candidates and policy proposals are better than those of conservatives, they will shame women who fail to vote for the Left by defining them all as racist and self-loathing tools of the patriarchy. Think I’m exaggerating? See this ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Way Forward from the Midterms

With the 2018 midterm elections now in the rearview mirror, Republicans have been awakened to a simple fact: The laws of political gravity apply to President Trump. Democrats won sweeping victories in the House, kept their Senate losses to a near-minimum despite a brutal map, and took down-ballot races with ... Read More