Dear Mr. Cain:
Recently, during an interview with Fox News, you indicated that it would be permissible for a community to block the building of a mosque. The statement alarmed me, confused me and frightened me. I cannot imagine how you square your comments with any part of the United States Constitution and the religious land act that is now a law. I fear that your divisive position on this issue at best misunderstands the First Amendment and, at worst, is a blatant attempt to spread Islamophobia for political gain. Because I regularly speak and write on the subject of religion and electoral politics, and because I find great assurance regarding the protection of the integrity of religion in the First Amendment, I do not want to misjudge your words and sentiments.
As I said in my recent letter to you and other candidates for the presidency (both Democrats and Republicans) following the first Republican presidential debate, religion -- or religion bashing -- should never be a political tool. I am grateful to God that our nation was built upon freedom for all people of all faiths or no faith and committed to equal rights for all with no religion valued over another religion or religion valued over non-religion. The continued demonization of Islam and disenfranchisement of the American Muslim community is not only uncalled for, it is dangerous and must end.
I found your characterization of Islam as well as that of, what you call, the "other traditional religions," deeply troubling. Your assertion that "Islam is both a religion and a set of laws" and that this is what differentiates Islam from other religions "where it's just about religious purposes" is not only nationally and religiously divisive, factually, it is just plain wrong. Yes, it is true that Islam is a religion with a set of laws called sharia. But Judaism has a legal code called halacha, and Christianity reverences both the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount as principles greater than any law. Your comments suggest a serious lack of understanding not only of Islam but of religion writ large and of the meaning of our First Amendment.
Once again, I must emphasize the irrational fear being spread by you and others across the country that sharia is somehow taking over our courts (or that it could somehow do so) runs counter to the judgments of reputable constitutional lawyers across the ideological spectrum in our nation. Are you deliberately choosing to ignore the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which most legal experts consider more than sufficient to keep sharia or any other religious law from influencing our courts inappropriately? If so, what is your motivation? I sincerely hope it is not due to your strategy to win an election. However, I would like to hear an explanation from you.
Please, for the sake of our democracy and for the integrity of religion, I urge you to temper your rhetoric and to cease your attacks on Islam. Though it surely is not your intention, such sweeping attacks and gross as well as erroneous generalizations threaten all American Muslims, including those you recognize as "a peaceful group," and demean the historically documentable fairness of the American people. I wholeheartedly agree that we must be concerned about terrorism. But you and I both know that we will not make ourselves any safer by demonizing innocent Americans and by giving neighbors reasons to fear each other because of their differing religions. Winning an election is not worth compromising our nation's historic commitment to religious freedom.
Respectfully,
Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy
President
Interfaith Alliance
P.S. Should you have any interest in a conversation about these issues, and I hope you do, I would welcome an opportunity to visit with you. I am eager to see an election cycle free of the manipulation of religion, respectful of people of all religions and no religion, and helpful in advancing the constitutional vision of separation between the institutions of religion and the institutions of government, appreciation for our democracy and a recovery of political advocacy characterized by civility. I pray that this election cycle will leave the American people better informed and more active as concerned citizens. You will play a significant role in whether or not that is the case.
Chris Weigant: 2012 Republican Presidential Field Update
Herman Cain backs mosque bans | The Ticket - Yahoo! News
Herman Cain: Mosque Could Lead to Sharia Law, Christian News
Herman Cain's 'perplexing' mosque ban proposal - The Week
Herman Cain: Americans Have The Right To Ban Mosques In Their ...
http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/10/herman-cains-muslim-comments-are-misguided/
Why are so many of the current GOP Presidential contender field so genuinely frightening?
What is happening within Islam societies today is a global version of the Salem witch trials, and its galling to see it defended.
I consider a human being to pontific, that is, a bridge between Heaven and earth, and not Promethean.
As such, it reflects the Divine qualities.
In the Islamic tradition, as in other traditions, it is stated that God's love and mercy encompass every situation.
Therefore, I firmly believe, it is our duty to find goodness, love and mercy in the current situation vis-a-vis Islam's position in the West and its relationship to the West.
Many scholars and non-scholar individuals are working very hard to build bridges by developing better understanding of each other and to see "others" as "us".
Their efforts are being damaged by the efforts of those who are looking for confrontation.
But I honestly believe that badness and evil can best be dealt with goodness -- that is, good words and good actions -- for evil is an illusion and darkness, which disappears when there is Light.
Thanks,
The ISLAMAPHOBES who fear islam and muslims almost instinctively, based in large part on media knowledge, but with little studied knowledge about the islamic political and social and religious systems that brought about the carnage. They must take care not to harm innocent individual muslims who may want to be free of islamic chains.
The ISLAMAPPEASERS are those who also lack adequate studied knowledge of islam but who believe themselves to be on a higher moral and ethical plane than the islamaphobes. They welcome diversity and multi-culturalism as enlightened principles along with freedom and equality and justice. They will allow, even welcome, islamization of one small
Those of us in the third group recognize that there are many peaceful and peace loving Muslims who have made the transition from medieval barbarism to and enlightened 21st century view of life - just as many Jews and Christians have made the transition. These 21st century Muslims have no desire for world domination, and no interest in condemning women, homosexuals. religious minorities and free thinkers. They want to live and let live in a secular, pluralistic and democratic society, along with the rest of us.
In the third group, we also recognize that there are vast numbers of Muslims who are still thinking in a barbaric way, and are acting on those thoughts where they have state support to do so. These particular Muslims are indeed a cancer, and they do have stated intentions of implementing world-wide religious hegemony.
If you read the comments on the religious blogs, you will find many progressives in that third group.
I notice a third segment of Muslim opinion. In addition to the Islamists, whom you characterize as barbaric, and the peaceful Muslim who has transitioned to a more modern view of human rights, there are reformers.
Islamists, those who believe all Muslims must eventually live in a political entity whose highest law is Sharia, are extremely varied. They range from the Afghans who murdered NGO employees after the Koran burning incident to smooth academics like Yusuf Qaradawi and Tariq Ramadan who are anything but barbaric.
The Muslim majority is still understandably cowed by the punitive rules of Sharia that Islamists efficiently use to keep the masses from straying.
The reformers are not unified, underfunded and mostly despised by the mainstream. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a mosque where the congregation identifies as Reform Muslims--yet.
Dear Herman & Friends: Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform and go play in traffic. Love, America
Shame that his words have no meaning in our current political discourse.
The lofty words will go over Mr.Cain's head. He's down there groveling with the snails and other species of bottom feeders.
One of the most exciting things about the growing muslim population in America is that they can openly and freely read the Bible and become introduced to Jesus without fear of violence or punishment. Conversions here can lead to so many missionary opportunities overseas that we could not even dream about them until now. May the truth set them free on these shores, a land where Christ is proclaimed from sea to shining sea! Amen.
...what an interesting read, thanks JPaul. Your excitement may extend to the possibility of opening a branch of your faith in Saudi Arabia, armed with former muslims, now christian soldiers. You may be removing some of the scars from the hands and feet of Jesus.
"What is good, true and right will always come to the light." ..quote of the month for sure.
============
Lack of understanding concerning Islam seems to be rampant.
There was a time when Christian leaders quoted Biblical verse to urge the Christian soldiers onward against the godless foe. Christianity the religion was used as a motivational tool for political ends.
Most Christian leaders now think that is not such a good thing for the religion.
Some Muslim leaders have not yet reached that level of evolution.
Recently Muslims started publishing Islamic theology in English. One of the more popular publications has been "Reliance of the Traveller, A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law"--a compilation of Sharia law first written in the 14th century and updated to modern Islamic standards in 1991. In it is this definition of jihad:
" o9.0 JIHAD
" (O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and it is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad. As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self (nafs), which is why the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said as he was returning from jihad..."
[...]
----
This is incorrect.
The word "Jihad" is not derived from "Mujahida". Almost all of Qur`anic Arabic words are derived from three-letter roots.
The word "Jihad" is derived from "J-H-D", whose primary meaning is to strive or to exert oneself.
Its translation into holy war combined with the erroneous notion of Islam prevalent in the West as the 'religion of the sword' has helped to eclipse its inner and spiritual significance and to distort its connotation.
A striving can be positive or negative. So by itself the word Jihad conveys an incomplete meaning and needs to be qualified.
For more information, read the following article:
http://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/jihad-nasr.htm
And watch this scholarly discourse:
http://www.islamtune.com/play-video-2389.html
I, like 'tolerant', also suggest you take another look at that. Arabic and Hebrew are very similar (they share many words, writing direction, lack of most vowels in the common written form, certain consonant sounds) and the three-letter root (called a shoresh in Hebrew) he references has the ring of objective truth to it. "Mujahada" appears to have a prefix and suffix added to it, and along with it a more specific meaning. I can't give you Arabic examples but I can give you Hebrew ones.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuh_Ha_Mim_Keller
Others have complained about his translation of the passage in Reliance concerning female circumcision.
I am not competent to judge.
The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus (def: b7) is such Koranic verses as:
(1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);
(2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);
(3) “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);
[...]
"I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god by Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them." [...]
http://www.shafiifiqh.com/maktabah/relianceoftraveller.pdf
You condemn Mr. Cain's position without reservation or exception. I think you are wrong, and here's why.
A mosque is proposed for your community, the Osama bin Laden mosque, dedicated to the brave jihadists who were martyred on 9/11, 2001, and paid for by the bin Laden family. In the announcement, the above definition of jihad is given as the guiding principle of the Muslims behind this mosque.
Would you still condemn Mr. Cain's position?
But here, you are criticizing the religion of Islam and are painting a very negative picture of it by presenting bits and pieces of the teachings of Islam in a very distorted manner.
Islam corrects the erroneous interpretations of the Mosaic Law and in this regard provides reformed injunctions pertaining to warfare.
To this end, its concept of "Just War" is very limited to similar concepts present in other religions.
For example, fighting is only allowed in self-defence and under many restrictions, such as one cannot harm a non-combatant, women, children, infirmed, the elderly, the priests.
Similarly, under the Islamic Law, one cannot destroy crops, poison wells and harm the farmers.
Under Islamic Law, it is also prohibited to kill someone using fire. Consequently, using nuclear weapon and ramming planes into building is strictly prohibited.
Jan Allen, you also present bits and pieces of Islamic teachings and interpretations of Muslim scholars as if the Muslims are monolithic and that no differences exist amongst them.
I also don't understand your classification of "Osama bin Laden mosque".
Jan Allen, I think you are mistaken in many ways, and I can certainly engage in a long discussion with you on the teachings of Islam.
However, I think it would be pointless.
Suffice it to suggest that you broaden your knowledge of the teachings of Islam by reading other scholars whose knowledge of Islam is more positive.
Thanks,
===========
Tolerant, your poise and calm in the face of criticism of your religion is impressive. You are not mistaken about my position.
Killing for Allah is for political gain, not spiritual enhancement. Declaring war is the function of the state, not of any religion. The 7th century wars in Arabia should be treated as history, not as commandments for modern Muslims to follow in spreading the religion today.
Bin Laden is about Islamism, not Islam.
I would not want such a mosque near me--would you?
Herman Cain worked up the ranks of the food industry (from a purely business side) and ended up being CEO of a moderately sized pizza company, in other words he never created anything.
I would like to officially announce my friend's candidacy for president, just don't tell him that.