The Big Question: Should state money be used to find a new site for N.Y. Muslim center?

Frank Askin, professor of law at Rutgers University,
said:

Absolutely not. this sounds like it may violate both sides of the religion clause of the First Amendment,. (1) it would be an Establishment of religion to provide state property for a religious institution and (2) it would violate Free Exercise if the Governor is trying to prevent the developer from exercising their religious freedom.

Justin Raimondo, editorial director of Antiwar.com, said:

If Gov. Paterson thinks he is eliminating the controversy, he had better think again. Capitulating to the knuckle-dragging bigots who are campaigning against the Muslim community center only encourages them — and, in this case, gives them added impetus to carry their campaign to its logical conclusion, which is scapegoating a religious minority. Government money cannot and should not be used to subsidize religion, any religion, period. And so the controversy would simply take another form, one that would redound to the benefit of the new American  Know-Nothings.

John Feehery, Pundits Blog contributor, said:

There needs to be compromise here, and if state funds help find a compromise, so be it.

Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director, said:

Absolutely not. Giving state funds or government land to any religious group is a clear violation of the First Amendment’s separation of church and state, not to mention the strict no-aid-to-religion provisions in the New York State Constitution. Muslims have a right to build a mosque in New York City and in other communities (provided they comply with applicable land-use laws), but they must pay for those structures using their own money. In this country, the government does not erect houses of worship. Gov. Patterson’s proposal is patently unconstitutional and invites litigation. There is no point in even discussing it any further. It should be rejected out of hand.