Ground Zero

Recent polls show that 70% of Americans oppose the building of a Muslim mosque two blocks from ground zero in New York City.
This is beyond disturbing, it is frightening.
I recently engaged in a heated Facebook debate with a man who forwarded the "sensitivity" and "caring" defense for disallowing the project to continue. The position states, that placing a mosque in such close proximity to ground zero would be  insensitive to the families of the victims of 9/11. I on the other hand pressed the need to defend our Constitution. He was un-moved and stated vehemently that it had nothing to do with rule of law or the constitution. I quit the debate.
When we as American citizens can so easily surrender our hard fought for freedoms based on "sensitivity and caring," we lose everything. If our rule of law is thus subjective, then it cannot stand on any point.
I have been waiting for our President to weigh in. He did so today and he did the nation proud.
I read many comments that followed some of the news stories this morning. If they are indicative of public opinion, then people feel that the Mosque would better be built in a Muslim country where Christianity is forbidden. The sentiment seems to be that if the Muslim world is insensitive to Christianity, then the Christian world should not allow Islam.
If this argument were to be realized, Christian values would bow to Islam. Islam would become the arbiter of truth and the world would simply respond in kind.
I do not question individual faith, I merely point out the pitfall of such a stance that a majority of my fellow Americans seem to be taking.
But this is not a question of religion, but rather a question of constitutional law; freedom of religion. Our President took the oath of office to defend the Constitution and this morning he has done just that.
I take exception with Mr. Obama on only one phrase, and it is an important point, that ground zero is somehow "Hallowed Ground." This dangerously places the argument back into the realm of religion. The ground where the towers once stood is in no way "hallowed." The synonym is "sanctified" which means, "to set apart for holy use." If the government has set this ground apart for holy use, thus hallowing it, then we are also in violation of our constitution. This is not the business of the US government, and for Mr. Obama to declare it such muddies the waters considerably.
It makes the position of constitutionality all the harder to implement when such terms are used to describe ground zero.
This is just ground, albeit ground where a terrible attack against the American people occurred. This in and of itself does not hallow the ground.
If we believe ground zero to be hallowed, it is a simple step to use it as a symbol of religious division and thus grant credence to the emotional appeal to suspend Constitutional rights.
The building of the Muslim mosque some two blocks from ground zero and the terrorist attacks of Sept 11 are mutually exclusive, and must remain so.
I find it interesting that the religious right of this country is using frothy emotionalism to press its point in this debate. Isn't this method traditionally an accusation leveled against the left?
I guess all's fair in love and war, and religious intolerance.