To me, there’s an easy way to dissect this. Sure, they have a right ro build a mosque, but considering the context of their request, the significance of the events that took place, it would be extremely offensive, not only to the friends and families of the victims or 9/11, but to the sanctity, dignity of our nation, our values. If I use the word n*gger at work...naturally I’d be censured or potentially fired. It’s a known taboo, something that is extremly offensive and distasteful in the civilized world. I have a right to say it, but there will most likely be severe consequences. Therefore, most people refrain from doing so...at least in public. So how would the murder of near 3000 Americans at the hands of Islamic zealots be any less offensive than a mosque at ground zero...something that is 1000 times greater in scope and consequence.
Post WW II, when the Japanese asked for a plot of land to build a Peace Garden, celebrating the friendship of the Japanese and American people, they did NOT ask to build it at Pearl Harbor.
Instead, they built it in Fredericksburg, TX -- the home town of Adm. Chester Nimitz.
There is a question of taste and propriety involved, as well. The Japanese understood that...perfectly. The Islamists don't...at all.
Sure, they have a right ro build a mosque
///////////////
No they don’t ....no more than the Mormons had in 1840s and David Koresh and the Branch Dividians.
Islam is against individual freedom, it stands against freedom of Religion and freedom of Speech. It thus does not recieve protection from the Constitution because its essense is to destroy the Constitution.