No, as Mayor Bloomberg pointed out the islamic community center is being built on private property according to the wishes of the owner of the land.
Sekulow is asking the government to prohibit a private landowner from building what he wants on his own land.
His justification is that the criminal act which destroyed the previous structure was a “historic event” and that this gives the government the right to prohibit the landowner from rebuilding whatever he chooses on his own land.
Sekulow is the one making a nonsensical statist argument.
Let’s straighten out your analogy first.
The fire was more than arson, it was an act of war. And the building of the mosque is a continuation of that war.
Government interference is necessary, in fact constitutionally mandated, in wartime. I understand how a marxist or an anarchist would support the building of the mosque. But a constitutionalist has no excuse.