Robert Showah
Opinion Editor
If you haven’t yet heard them, you will; radical Christians atop their soapbox at the Compass preaching their often offensive interpretation of the Bible. Or pastors in Florida originally planning to burn Qurans on the ninth anniversary of the September 11 attacks. It’s a time that inflicts damage on our American values and on our troops overseas, a time when all moderate theists bury their faces in shame, and one that encourages intolerance from some non-believers.
Despite practicing as a small minority in America, radical figures of various religions have the loudest, shrillest, and most explicit voices required to bait the mainstream media. Terry Jones, the pastor in Gainesville, Fla. is one of those voices. In response to the Islamic community center set to be built two blocks from Ground Zero in New York City, Jones stroke an artery when he announced “Burn a Quran Day” set for September 11.
This resulted in the expected public outcry in the U.S. and even Afghanistan where riots broke out in Kabul. Jones attempted to negotiate by canceling his event if Fiesal Abdul Rauf, the man behind the Ground Zero mosque, moved his center. This failed, and soon after, Jones canceled his event unequivocally and acknowledged that God had told him to stop.
Whether it was God, the media’s attention, the Afghan riots or President Barack Obama’s acknowledgment, it is a rare instance where someone like Jones desisted not to his initial, but his second thought of perhaps saving a handful of troops serving in Afghanistan. He deserves praise for seeing the light.
Because of Jones’ reaction, though, and the attention it has attracted, one can see this battle of intolerance has concentrated between Christians and Muslims. Leaving moderates of both religions shameful of the people who are associated with their religious values.
Had Mr. Jones gone through with his original plans he would have been setting a match to more than just the Quran, but the United States Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the four-hundred year legacy of settlers that navigated six months by sea to unknown territory to escape religious persecution.
Those that are opposed to the Islamic center at Ground Zero must understand that the First Amendment does not only apply in instances of which one only agrees.
In 1999, Charlton Heston, then-chairman of the National Rifle Association staged a gun rally in Littleton, Colo., days after that community was shaken by the Columbine High School massacre. Should he have done this? Probably not. Did he have the constitutional right to? Absolutely.
Today, we have the mosque. This man undoubtedly has the right to build this Islamic center here. One that includes a performing arts center, a culinary school, a daycare, swimming pool, bookstore, and even a September 11 memorial.
While opponents of the mosque have not articulated this because not everyone is a constitutional scholar, it seems that these people want an exception to the rule. And we have that for the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment. The Constitution does not protect specific obscenities, speech inciting imminent danger, and others.
There are no exceptions to the freedom of religion clause, and there should not be. Creating an exception would not do anything to protect us from the reasons some do not want a mosque built near Ground Zero.
Despite the fact that it was outrageous of him to compare the construction of an Islamic center to the burning of Qurans, even Representative John Boehner, R-OH, understood the basic rule: “Just because you have a right to do something in America does not mean it is the right thing to do.”
This religious extremism has created fear, violence, twisted interpretation of scripture and not to mention the input of cable news talking heads. Though whenever we experience these theistic clashes, intolerance from a different following is expressed with no hesitance: atheists.
VCU students often see these “soapbox radicals” in front of Shafer Court Dining Center attract enough of a crowd. The wiser students watch, others give in to confronting the radicals and their incendiary remarks about women and homosexuals. You can bet some are atheists; others are believers scolding these guys for tarnishing Christianity’s name.
But it should be no surprise that much, not all, of VCU’s often anti-conformist, leftist, hipster population aren’t fond of these soapbox radicals, and hold that religion is anywhere between a lost cause to a pile of garbage, or worse.
While we are on the topic of religious intolerance, what certainly does not extinguish the flames of this issue is an atheist’s condescendingly arrogant lecture on theism’s deep faults. There are atheists who do keep to themselves, will explain their beliefs if asked, but otherwise do not pick fights.
Then there are those who bask in the idea that they do garner the sympathies of many people, including the internet culture, numerous scientists, are never the butt of any joke and never have hate crimes committed against them despite how much violence organized religion allegedly manifests.
The truth is that belief in God is not required to be a radical of any set of religious creed. A belief in God is just that, a belief. It cannot be proven or disproven. But the beauty is that we can still share a common belief with other people and hopefully not have it result in disparaging others.
There are acceptable reasons and instances where people have simply come to discover that they do not belong to any religion. However, it is juvenile to adhere to any logic that one’s own beliefs ought to be dictated by radicals. The hardships religion may cause, or the ashamed feeling of guilt-by-association are no basis for jumping ship on religion. Other people’s religious intolerance should not alter one’s own tolerance.
Leave a Reply