GROVEPORT, Ohio — President Barack Obama has now taken a position on the proposed construction of a mosque to be built close to Ground Zero — site of the 9/11 terrorist attack in New York — saying it is within the legal right of the mosque’s developers to proceed with their plans in peace. Islam and the integration of Islamic believers into American life will now be an issue in the upcoming elections. Voter opinions will be formed by their stand on whether or not the building of a mosque is justifiable, so close to where so many innocent Americans were killed by Islamic terrorists. No matter where voters stand regarding the mosque building, all can agree that religion has always had a role in American history and American politics. Our nation was formed by Puritans, a Protestant religious minority which was fleeing persecution by other Protestants, all of whom were in opposition to the Catholic Church and the pope. All through American history, religion has been a main source of individual ethical convictions and public policies. This long American history of a relationship between politics and religion is not going to go away. But, were not Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers in agreement about the separation of church and state? Doesn’t the constitutionally established Separation Doctrine solve today’s mosque issue? Are not religions in the U.S. free to conduct their own affairs as long as they do not try to push their beliefs into the political realm? Doesn’t the separation of church and state doctrine settle today’s issue? The answer is no. Just ask persons belonging to any church community and you will get strong expressions of opinions, all influenced by their religious beliefs. Most of the more conservative Christian and Jewish believers will oppose permitting the mosque to be built. The majority of those who favor building it will be liberal believers, joined with more secular believers. Arguments on both sides will have a distinctly religious content. Muslims are not the first religious group to need to prove themselves worthy of the freedom to build places of worship where they like. The Catholic immigrants who arrived in the U.S. in the 19th century met with widespread discrimination and prejudice. Even in the area of work, signs were common which read Catholics Need Not Apply. The religion taught in public schools was Protestantism. Catholic students did not receive public transportation to schools. Catholics were considered a danger to the American government because of their affiliation with a foreign government, the Vatican. Catholics were perceived as a threat, not much different from the way Muslims are perceived today. They too met with opposition at many of their preferred sites for churches. The prejudicial attitudes and practices against Catholics lasted for many generations. When John Kennedy ran for president in 1960, he had to respond to “Questions for a Catholic Candidate” posed by a powerful political organization, Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Except for the most prejudiced Protestants, Kennedy’s presidency removed fears that Catholics were a danger to America. This change however took hard work and a long time. Besides a Catholic president, and the dedication and loyalty of generations of American Catholics to their country, the Catholic Church itself took steps to remove doubts and concerns about Catholicism. The Second Vatican Council reversed a long-standing church teaching that Catholicism alone had the right to public respect and government support, i.e. the “Error has no right” idea. This official church teaching was set aside by a firm and clear Declaration of Religious Freedom, passed overwhelmingly by bishops at the council. This took place in 1965. What is the relevance of this Catholic history in the U.S. for the present controversy about a mosque near Ground Zero in N.Y., the 9/11 site? The relevance is that trust and respect for a religion has to be earned, and this takes time. American freedom of religion can certainly be argued politically and philosophically, but much more is required. Changing the feelings and convictions of a whole population of Americans who are influenced by almost daily images of tribally dressed Muslims threatening “death to America” will not be easy. It will be, in fact, an enormous challenge for today’s Muslim Americans. Non-Muslim Americans need to be aware of the influence on their own feelings and opinions of the daily images in the media and the ongoing war in Muslim countries. Americans have to work on themselves to achieve the best that America stands for. Muslim Americans need to be aware of the enormous challenge which respect for diversity demands. Muslim Americans need to take responsibility for the public images of their Muslim faith. They have to work hard to repress Muslim terrorism. Members of every mosque have to be vigilant and make sure that terroristic violence against Christians and Jews is neither taught nor practiced. The Muslim community which planned to build an Islamic center — near the location that became a sacred place for other believers after 9/11 — is a peaceful minority group within Islam. Members are considered heretical by Sunni and Shiite Muslims. It would not be a surprise if these Muslims intervened to calm the storm which their project is now causing. Their more open and peaceful form of Islam could lead them to look for another place for their center and its mosque. That would be an example of learning from history and working to achieve deserved respect. Drane is Russell B. Roth Professor of Bioethics at Edinboro University of Pennsylvania.