"Right To Do" vs. "Right To Do"

Yes, I know that within two blocks of Ground Zero:

• There are "gentlemen's clubs".
• There is a McDonalds, Burger King, a BBQ restaurant, and a Dunkin Donuts. (While I haven't seen a photo of it, there's gotta be a Starbucks somewhere around there...)
• There is an Off-Track Betting center.
• There is a Vitamin Shoppe.
• There is an Irish themed restaurant and pub.
• There are countless street vendors selling t-shirts and other, too numerous souvenirs of the city. Probably replete with cheezy apples and replicas of Lady Liberty.
• There are so many other enterprises, businesses and centers of commerce in that area that to save you from clicking elsewhere due to boredom, I'll end the list here.

And when 19 strippers, fast food cooks, baristas, pharmacists, thoroughbred horses, or irish pub goers take up box knives (or doughnuts, bottles of vitamins or cheezy souvenirs) and kill 3000 people in the single largest terrorist act on American soil, then I'll conceed that you may have a point.

19 men, who had a twisted, distorted view of Islam, killed themselves in the name of their god. The people involved in this sick, perversion of a religion have engaged us from the shadows in what has already become our longest war.

Coupled with that, the fact that throughout history, mosques have been built right on top of churches, synagogues, and other sites holy to other religions once conquered by those in the name of Islam. Conincidence could be plausible if it only happened once or twice. Not when the world's largest cathedral and orthodox patriarchial bascilica, St. Sophia, (located in Constantinople, Turkey) is replaced with the principal mosque of Istanbul. (It is now under the conservatorship of the Turkish government as a treasure of architectural history -- it is the first example of a round dome being placed atop a square building.) We can also look to Jerusalem, where one of the holiest sites in Judaism, the Temple Mount, now is the site of the Al Aqsa mosque. We can also look to Cordoba, Spain, where after that area was under Muslim control, a mosque was built immediately atop the existing churches. (It should be noted that the developer's original name for this project was "Cordoba House.") Other examples reside in the Far East, where Hindu temples have fallen to the same fate. (h/t to Polipundit.com for this post with more examples.)

Do we, as Americans, have a right to build houses of worship without government interference? Absolutely. Do these "Park 51 / Cordoba House" developers have this same right? Absolutely. But where did we lose the ability to say that while they may have the right to do a thing, that it may not be the right thing to do, and to comment and criticize accordingly? Wouldn't calling me (and all those opposed to this project) racists, Islamophobes, and all the uneducated epitaphs imaginable have a chilling effect on my right to free speech? You mean it's acceptable to argue and debate, as long as I agree with you? Just as freedom of religion is not an incremental right, neither is freedom of speech. Calling me names is just an fancy way of saying that I win in the arena of ideas.

Do they have this right?  Yes.  Is it right?  No.

Comments of all flavors are welcome. As always, be respectful, or be deleted.

Oops, almost forgot. When we talk of "property rights," are we ignoring Kelo v. New London? Or Tourkaris v. Arnold? Just wondering...

Greg