There is one thing the opponents of the Cordoba Initiative (that plans to build an Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero) have in common with the Cordoba Initiative’s leadership: their clear condemnation and denunciation of terrorism. They are united in this belief because every time a terrorist tries to claim the mantle of Islam and commits an act of violence, everyone loses. (For Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s statement about the mission of the Cordoba Initiative and condemnation of terrorism, you can go to the front page of their website.)
If everyone seems to be united on this crucial issue, where is the controversy? If the planners and opponents of this initiative all agree that terrorism must be defeated and that Muslim leaders have a special responsibility to ensure that their communities of worship in no way support terrorism and actively work as a force against it, where is the problem? I believe there are a few key questions that get to the heart of the issue. The way we answer them says a lot about ourselves, our own faith, and the collective character of our country.
The first question is this: Does our initial judgment of our neighbors come from their religious labels or the content of their character? I do not advocate a religious pluralism that blurs the distinctions and significant differences between religions, but I do believe that my religious tradition calls me to be a peacemaker and to love my neighbors, especially when I do not agree with them. It is a good thing when you get along with a neighbor with whom you have much in common, but it speaks highly of your character when you build peace between yourself and a neighbor with whom you have differences.
To read the rest of the article : http://blog.sojo.net/2010/08/05/who-wins-when-the-u-s-restricts-religious-freedom/