I WAS talking with someone the other day, and the way he was presenting his point of view regarding the mosque controversy at Ground Zero, I felt uncomfortable expressing my point of view. I felt that if I shared that I did not support it, and explained why, I would have been branded a bigot or a racist, or accused of not supporting the hallowed First Amendment.
I dont think that is fair.
And this cuts across the spectrum, including anti-Semitism.
For instance, currently there is a controversy in upstate New York between the chasidic community and Village of KJ (Kiryas Yoel) and its municipality of Orange County.
I dont know the details of the case, but apparently some suburban neighbors of the more cloistered village oppose the construction of two big water towers that KJ is interested in building.
The opposing neighbors are being branded anti-Semites for opposing the water project.
Now, maybe this is a case of true anti-Semitism. I dont know. But maybe it truly is just some neighbors who simply want to preserve the suburban character of their neighborhood and are not happy with the construction of huge water towers near where they live. Maybe they are not against Jews, but dont care to live near a more cloistered ghetto type of community.
Of course, sadly, I understand the reaction of Jews often feeling that any resistance stems from anti-Semitic motives. To put it mildly, once burned, twice shy. And the burn of anti-Semitism is more than a burn, and is a collective experience and memory for our people, inside us all.
BACK to my original point. I am wondering, can we still disagree, I mean really disagree with a given belief, without it being considered bigotry?
We should all feel like we can speak our mind, courteously of course, but strongly, heartily and spiritedly. Being respectful of others should not equal smothered, stifled, inhibited or feebled dialogue all in the name of being politically correct and tolerant.
Surely, one can disagree with a decision without having dark motivations or baseless prejudice.
I know. Anti-Semitism is on the rise.
Indeed, it is frightening. But what of those times, even if rare, when an oppositional viewpoint is not anti-Semitism?
Should mischaracterizing it as anti-Semitism be a price to pay for all those other times when it is?
Or is there more integrity?
In my particular conversation, when I am not anti-mosques at all, and yet hold a different point of view in this specific case, should I feel I need to hold back because of the current climate of tiptoeing around the Muslim community? To me, aside from being untruthful, this is condescending.
There is a difference between a discussion, even a heated one reaching a feverish pitch, and a personal attack. This is what makes the land of America great.
When many New Yorkers disagreed with the building of the mosque, the constituencies voices were expressed and heard.
The powers that be, be they the mayor or the governor, can say what they will, but the voice of the people does matter and can make a difference.
But sometimes it feels like doing that is getting harder.
It is not for nothing that there is the famous, old-fashioned saying of leaving at the doorstep the topics of religion and politics before joining the dinner party.
Copyright © 2010 by the Intermountain Jewish News
