In the early hours of June 12, 2016, whilst the celebration of LGBT pride, Latin heritage, and the diversity of humanity took place at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida; 49 beautiful lives were stolen from us by a shooter wielding an assault rifle and a powerful agenda. Such numbers seem too massive to fathom in regards to live taken - but as time presses on - we've begun to see specifically who we've really lost. An entire list was posted by the city of Orlando naming each of the victims and their ages. Among them were Edward Sotomayor, a 34-year-old travel planner; Stanley Almodovar, a 23-year-old pharmacy technician; and Akyra Murray, an 18-year-old high school graduate and star basketball player.
The outrage surrounding the attack (which is being penned the most massive shooting in American history) has been gigantic, both from the press and from social media. Many who had never expressed interest in LGBT rights have now been exposed to why they are essential, and many who once expressed hatred against the LGBT community discovered new-found compassion in the tragedy. As a whole, the United States has been expressing its grief in a multitude of ways. However, not all means of grief are as productive in terms of civil rights as others.
When information surfaced that the shooter, Omar Mateen, had pledged his allegiance to ISIS, I immediately knew that the blame would be misplaced. One of the first posts I saw on Facebook regarding the event was a middle-aged acquaintance who declared that the United States borders should be closed to Muslims, to which a mob of others fervently agreed. A close friend and member of the LGBT community claimed that Islam was a cult of evil, and many others went on to say that Muslims should be deported from our nation. I found this response to be quite ironic, in actuality. The world recently lost arguably the most beloved and popular Muslim, Muhammad Ali, who's platform (and interfaith public funeral) was one of togetherness and peace. The crime that Omar Mateen committed was, no doubt, a hate crime: a crime against a specific group. Yet the outcome of this attack seemed to be the promotion of a different hate crime, this time against Muslims.
The exploitation of agendas has been a reoccurring theme throughout the past few days. Some say that if the people in the club had guns of their own, the attacker could be easily stopped. Some say that guns were the root of the problem. Some say that this attack is grounds to close off the country to outsiders, and some believed that the root of the problem was not homophobia, but rather, Islam. This was first evident in Donald Trump's speech on the issue. This can be summed up by a Twitter post he made on June 13, 2016:
“In my speech on protecting America I spoke about a
temporary ban, which includes suspending immigration
from nations tied to Islamic terror. ”
Of course, Trump was not the only politician to take advantage of the attack. Hillary Clinton posted on Twitter the same day:
“Weapons of war like those used in Orlando and San
Bernardino have no place on our streets. ”
At this point, it was evident that this was no longer about the victims. When a political agenda can be emphasized, it's only logical to take advantage of the opportunity. However, is it moral to do so?
While so many commented on how supposedly "happy" the Muslim community was in regards to the shooting, I personally watched the community experience the same grief as everyone else effected by the shooting. In fact, there have been countless Muslims that, even during this fasting time of Ramadan, graciously donated their blood to save the victims of the shooting. After all, while Ramadan involves fasting, it is truly about love, and these Muslims knew just how to express that.
This was not a crime committed by the Muslim community, nor was it a crime committed by the common gun owner. This was a crime committed by a heinous individual, of which no one claims to support, with the exception of groups like the Westboro Baptist Church, a registered hate group with no relation to the Baptist division of Christianity.
So, that raises the question: how can we expect to end hate using hate? No different than fighting fire with fire, the end result is an uncontrolled blaze that will be nearly impossible to put out. Instead of feeding this flame, shouldn't we fight against it? Shouldn't we grieve together, hand-in-hand, as we long for a future in which all people may live without fear? No, Islam is not a religion of hate. It is also not a religion of peace. It is a massive religion containing a multitude of different - and often contrasting - mentalities and dispositions, just like every other religion. It is generalizing that breeds hate, and it was generalizing that caused the shooting in the first place.
In the end, it may be easy to misplace the blame. It is an extremely uncomfortable scenario, and we simply want answers. However, these answers are not found in hate crime; hate crime is the foundation on which this crime was committed. If we want to see change in the form of peace, we must perpetuate peace. Instead of enforcing our own personal agendas and partaking in the “I-told-you-so” game, we must band together as a single species, devoid of our superiority complexes. We must recognize that, in the end, Hate plus hate does not equal peace.
