By S.R. Brown

Guest columnist

Is a worship center by any other name, in the same location, still the same?

I would think so, but recent events tell me that a great many people feel otherwise.

I was compelled to write this column during a routine Friday night dinner at a local eatery. The dining room’s TV was tuned to CNN, which was of little interest to my party until the president’s comments regarding the “mosque-near-the-Ground Zero-site” flap came on-screen. One of my dinner companions, upon seeing that Obama defends the right to build the worship center, exclaimed loudly, “What? That’ll get him shot!”

Whoa. I got whiplash (only a slight exaggeration) when I turned away from the TV toward the speaker, as I’m a bit wary of any – especially public – mention of the president in combination with firearm usage, and because I truly believe that this subject has not been accorded an “educated” perspective, in the media or otherwise, therefore causing an unnecessary “tempest in a tassa” throughout the country (and during my suppertime!).

Please hear me out.

Like virtually all Americans, I felt like I’d been sucker-punched in the gut by the cataclysm of 9/11. To this day, I find the whole chain of events surreal; I still can’t wrap my mind around the notion of four planes being hijacked and used as guided missiles to annihilate the unsuspecting (and unarmed) going about their day-to-day, all in the name of Allah.

As such, I do understand taking an emotional stance relative to the “sanctity” of Ground Zero; arguably, some people just don’t get the concept of respect for the fallen. When visiting the area in 2002, I was offended by the specter of several tourists mugging for the camera in front of the site, just as they would with Mickey Mouse at Disney World! That just seemed incredibly crass and insensitive to me at the time.

As the years have passed and we’ve learned more about the executioners (as I think of them), my concerns, however, have shifted from mourning our loss to a palpable loss of perspective relative to Islam, a religion that millions practice peacefully, versus some fanatical practitioners thereof who translate the message of the Koran into jihad. Our fruitless search for Osama bin Laden has created active pursuit of a scapegoat for this heinous crime, often resulting in the virtual indictment of innocent Muslims who also abhorred what happened that day.

Accordingly, it seems that any action on the part of Muslims that smacks of a desire to encroach on “The American Way” (or any such relic or representative) results in a great hue and cry, such as we’re seeing now with this proposed Cordoba Initiative worship and 9/11 remembrance center two blocks from the Ground Zero site.

The way I see it, what started out as a local real estate transaction has become a national kerfuffle, due to some misperceptions and hazy notions about what is actually happening in this scenario. The facts? Challenges?

• Mosques are not a new addition to this neighborhood: Muslim worship services have been held in various buildings a handful of blocks from the site since before 9/11. According to the Associated Press article “Fact Check: Islam already lives near ground zero”:

“The center would be established at 45-51 Park Place, just over two blocks from the northern edge of the sprawling, 16-acre World Trade Center site…The center’s location, in a former Burlington Coat Factory store, is already used by the cleric for worship, drawing a spillover from the imam’s former main place for prayers, the al-Farah mosque. That mosque, at 245 West Broadway, is about a dozen blocks north of the World Trade Center grounds. Another, the Manhattan Mosque, stands five blocks from the northeast corner of the World Trade Center site.”

So, two things: 1) Muslim worshippers have already been onsite for some time, and 2) the reference to a “mosque” in this case is more to formalize the building type to expand a worship center that already exists!

• Speaking of which: The word “mosque” conjures a muddled-yet-distinctly-uncomfortable feeling from many Americans (at least the ones I polled informally): Not one person I asked could describe one clearly, only stating that it was “foreign-looking”.

However, Merriam-Webster.com merely defines a mosque as “A building used for public worship by Muslims”. Period. Further, if you google “The Cordoba Initiative,” you will see that the site is located in a building that blends well with the other structures in the area. Plans call for zero minarets and no call to prayer, two of the most “visible” elements of Islam that strike fear (or discomfort, at least) in the hearts of many a Westerner.

To this point, we have worshippers meeting in non-descript buildings and with no incidents to date. OK so far?

• Another challenge: The view that the site is “hallowed ground”; a somewhat conflicted notion, as, according to Barbara O’Brien at the Mahablog:

“… I have documented that within a three-block radius of the area called Ground Zero there are at least two strip clubs plus a number of bars … through googling I found a lingerie and porn video shop about two blocks south of Ground Zero that a reviewer calls “grimy” and “sleazy.” Those establishments have existed in close proximity to Ground Zero lo these many years, and no one seemed to care.”

The area, then, is currently “sullied” by businesses of a decidedly unorthodox nature, which dilutes the “sanctity” argument somewhat.

• A final challenge, tied to the “sanctity” point: Islam is the religion of the 9/11 killers, so therefore this worship center so near the site may be a potential incubator for radicalism, and/or is disrespectful and designed to mock our loss that day.

It seems that Islam may be viewed by many as a homogenous religion, uniformly (and scarily) anti-American. But there are shades of differences amongst the forms, as illustrated in a New York Times article, “Muslims in the Middle” by William Dalrymple:

“Feisal Abdul Rauf of the Cordoba Initiative is one of America’s leading thinkers of Sufism, the mystical form of Islam, which in terms of goals and outlook couldn’t be farther from the violent Wahhabism of the jihadists. His videos and sermons preach love, the remembrance of God (or ‘zikr’) and reconciliation. His slightly New Agey rhetoric makes him sound, for better or worse, like a Muslim Deepak Chopra. But in the eyes of Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, he is an infidel-loving, grave-worshiping apostate; they no doubt regard him as a legitimate target for assassination.”

After reading the above, and considering all the strains of Christianity available (and we do have some scary elements there, in my view), how can we not consider that Islam may be the same in terms of peaceful vs. fanatical practitioners? If we extend this point, does the fact that Timothy McVeigh was brought up Catholic mean that a Catholic church shouldn’t be built anywhere near the Murrah Building site in Oklahoma City – because it’s offensive, or someone might go nuts in the name of God?

Generally speaking, most people I’ve talked to are offended by “what it stands for,” or are concerned about security. But if you break down the argument, strip away the emotion and review the facts, the only thing that I can come up with is that these worshippers should be allowed to continue to meet in their expanded, code-conforming center, and that this particular congregation is reaching out to try to create understanding and heal wounds created on 9/11– not develop a Ground Zero intifada!

All expected references to Constitutional freedom of religion aside, let’s get real: We already know that this mosque will be under the microscope, scrutinized for any misstep from a security standpoint. With that in mind: what’s the harm of grasping an extended hand and working toward some peace and closure?

S.R. Brown lives in Pflugerville and is a marketing consultant.