Sufism vs. New York

There are some issues that are not real controversies at all, but cultural flashpoints of conflict, where even discussing them does nothing but feed the drama-spiral.

I try to avoid these non-issues as much as possible…remember the hilarious flap and political capital burned over the ultimately private family issue of poor Terry Schiavo?

I’ve said time after time that one of the weaknesses of the political True Believer is the inability to pick their battles. In the interests of being bipartisan, this also includes a few big bugaboos of the left, too: for instance, the attempts to jail Auguste Pinochet when he was well into his eighties. There’s a certain point where so much energy has been invested that something becomes less about justice and more about petty, private emotional satisfaction.

Obviously the “mosque built near ground zero” is another example of a flashpoint emotional issue for culture warriors. The reason I’m saying anything at all is because the conflict is reported in a way that activates the rage-gland and several facts need to be taken into account. Yeah, I know, I’m feeding the drama fire and maybe that makes me a hypocrite…but nonetheless the entire conversation is disingenuous.

While I am a firm believer that every religion has to acknowledge and take responsibility for their extremists, the people building the Mosque/Community Center are Sufis, not any of the Sunni Wahabists responsible for the September 11th attacks! There have been entire articles in the press that fail to mention the denominational affiliation of the community center, which is laziness shocking for even reporters. The fact that the people building the community center are totally different than the attackers on September 11th has not been mentioned, and it is a crucial factor that should be a part of the discussion! Sufis are a totally different sect with distinct teachings and different practices…including the very famous and colorful “Whirling Dervishes.”

The conversation on whether it is appropriate for Muslims should build a “mosque” near the trade center remains totally misses the point…because the Sufis were not responsible for September 11th! This is an occasion where the question itself requires swallowing an outrageously untrue premise, like “do you still beat your wife?” In Edward Said’s crucial book Orientalism, he argued that the identity of “the Orient” and “the Middle East” is a totally artificial one imposed by Europeans on a diverse stew of cultures that don’t have a lot in common.

This reminds me a little of one of the most frightening moments in recent political memory…a moment that can be pointed to as the very moment that things went wrong in Iraq: according to Bob Woodward’s book “Plan of Attack,” it had to be explained to George W. Bush that there is more than one kind of Muslim.

Also, some perspective is called for on the location. The mental image is of the empty lot/nuclear impact crater from the September 11th Attacks, when the area is not what it was even in 2004, a developed area with plans. Indeed, the place is but is instead 3-4 blocks away, and in New York a “block,” even an uptown-downtown block, is much more than say, in Tarpon Springs, FL.

Finally, I’m alarmed at the obvious emotional manipulativeness of the issue and its shameless and totally transparent purpose of base-galvanization. It is virtually impossible to argue that this isn’t a manufactured controversy to sway far-right voters in the upcoming election. Here’s the thing about being manipulated: people that are dead sure they can’t be manipulated are the ideal mark for manipulators because they don't think all that closely about how such a thing could happen. For instance, the permits and permissions to build the mosque and community center were filed over a year ago. The fact that this is only an issue NOW is a question of timing…especially for the upcoming midterm elections. This is a political prop. If I were a Republican, I would not be comfortable or okay with gonzo issue handlers and their attempts to amp up my rage-glands to vote their way.

If you want to know what palpable evil looks like, check this out

This guy believes that Uganda's anti-homosexuality laws are both Christian and "more American than America."

Note that nowhere does he go into what it is the law actually says. According to the Uganda anti-homosexual law:

• Any free speech or anyone that rallies in defense of homosexuality is punished with 5-7 years in prison;
• Anyone that knows anyone that is homosexual and does not report it within 24 hours receives up to 3 years in prison, including friends and family;
• A conviction of homosexuality receives a life sentence in prison;
• It redefines homosexuality to include "any touching with homosexual intent;"
• Provides the death penalty for any homosexual that engages in relationships with anyone under 18 or the disabled;
• Creates an extradition provision, meaning that any Ugandan convicted of homosexuality living abroad can be returned to Uganda to face trial. This includes non-citizens, so an American that speaks out on gay rights can be extradited to face trial in Uganda.

Whatever a person's feelings on homosexuality, it is obvious the law is monstrously inhuman. To defend it - in the sanctimonious name of Americanism, Christianity and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is a perversion of the American spirit and the Christian ethos of compassion.

The great evil of this video is made possible by the belief that morality is determined by authority instead of by reason and examination. Why is homosexuality wrong? Because the Founding Fathers and the Bible don't like it. Nowhere is the natural follow-up question asked...why is it that the Founding Fathers and the Bible didn't like the gay?

What's more, the culty veneration surrounding the Founding Fathers has gone entirely too far. Sure, George Washington didn't like gay sex, but he also didn't believe in women voting and owned slaves. He was a man of his time who believed in many just and unjust things alike. Central to an understanding of history is a sense of moral progress: the notion that as a civilization moves forward our moral understanding increases and immoral practices fall by the wayside (prohibition of mixed-race marriages, slavery, colonialism, child labor, etc.).

Also, I am particularly ticked off by various distorted and untrue things mentioned in his video. For example, his mention of King Mwanga made me very curious about the history of Uganda, and so I decided to look him up. Turns out he had seventeen wives, and the 22 Catholic Martyrs died....not for refusing his gay advances but for their religious beliefs (Mwana was anti-Catholic and the martyrs refused to renounce their faith on pain of death).

His mention of how liberals believe in multiculturalism offends me at a personal level, because there are many occasions where those on the left have spoken against attitudes that should be changed in other cultures. Feminists are always the first to speak out against machismo and anti-female sentiment in Latino, Middle Eastern and Asian cultures, for example, and against the horrific practice of female genital mutilation. Just because a culture believes something is moral does not mean it is or that it is worthy of being defended, or that it is immune to attack.

Finally, his mention of Pastor Rick Warren brings up the role that American evangelicals (even so called moderate evangelicals) played as enablers of this horrific and savage law, and the subsequent cowardice and desire to distance themselves from the savage history their influence helped create. Rick Warren's book, the "Purpose-Driven Life" is read widely in Uganda; according to one Ugandan, almost every Pastor in the country had a copy inside the book. Rick Warren, in Uganda gave many anti-homosexual comments. In other words, he had a great influence.

Here's another example: non-licensed "therapist" Richard Cohen's book, which claims homosexuality can be cured (something no true psychologist believes), is widely quoted by Ugandans. He was brought to task by Rachel Maddow here for producing junk science that Ugandans take seriously.

A traditional tactic of the Right is to enable and empower crazies and then run away from the Frankenstein they created. The textbook example would be the McCain campaign, who featured staffers and used innuendoes that Obama was a stealth Muslim plant with the middle name "Hussein." It was a perfect strategy: McCain stays classy and blameless...it's just staffers on the campaign that McCain hired that bring up the Muslim and birth certificate rumors. It's a real crying shame that McCain, towards the end, got desperate and fought dirty.