I struggled with the decision to write a response to Herman Cain's recent appearance on Fox News Sunday in which he declared that local communities across the U.S. have the right to ban the construction of mosques. His statements were so ludicrous, so bigoted and so fundamentally at odds with contemporary understandings and applications of the First Amendment that, on one level, they hardly merit a response. But I also recognize that Islamophobia is a growing problem in the U.S. and comments like Cain's do resonate with some Americans.
In the end, Cain's political Islamophobia cannot go unchallenged.
Responding to questions from Chris Wallace on Sunday concerning a planned Islamic Center in Murfreesboro, Tenn., the Republican presidential candidate and former CEO of Godfather's Pizza argued that local communities like Murfreesboro can and should ban the construction of Islamic houses of worship in light of their legitimate concerns about Islam. "Our Constitution guarantees the separation of church and state," noted Cain. "Islam combines church and state. They're using the church part of our First Amendment to infuse their morals in that community, and the people in the community [of Murfreesboro] do not like it."
Cain is not the first Republican politician to employ this type of argument in recent years as a means to gain popular support at the expense of Muslim Americans. He is not even the first to do so in light of the Murfreesboro controversy. In July of last year, Ron Ramsey, Tennessee's Lieutenant Governor and then gubernatorial candidate, opined whether "you could even argue that being a Muslim is actually a religion, or is it a nationality, a way of life or cult." A month before this, Lou Ann Zelenik, a Republican congressional candidate, stated that the proposed Islamic Center in Murfreesboro comprises "a political movement designed to fracture the moral and political foundation of Middle Tennessee." These statements concerning Islam resonate with those made by more high-profile Republican politicians, such as Newt Gingrich's characterization of Islam as a "cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization."
Cain's comments reflect a strategy among some Republican politicians to challenge Islam's place in the American religious landscape by calling into question whether it is even a legitimate religion. By casting doubts on Islam's status as a religion, these politicians can let like-minded supporters off the hook over any concerns about the Constitution and the First Amendment's guarantees for religious liberty. The First Amendment, after all, protects religious communities and not "foreign" political ideologies.
But on what grounds can a case be made that Islam is not a legitimate religion? For Cain, the case is rooted in the assumption that Muslims want to force their "intolerant" political and moral convictions on those who are are not Muslim. Never mind that Muslims are in no position in the U.S. to force anything on the larger population, even if that's what they wanted to do. According to the Pew Research Center, Muslims comprise less than 1 percent of the U.S. population. Never mind that many Muslim Americans pay taxes, abide by local laws (including zoning laws for proposed Islamic centers such as in Murfreesboro), serve local communities as doctors, teachers and lawyers, and share values and convictions that are in harmony with the U.S. Constitution. Never mind that if any religious community has forced or imposed its convictions on the rest of the population in American history, it has been Protestants.
From restrictions on the rights of Catholics, Jews and atheists to hold public office in some states well into the 19th century, to bans on polygamy and gay marriage to reflect an orthodox Christian view of marriage, to the prohibition of mail delivery on Sundays and the implementation of Sunday blue laws, the historical evidence all points to one religious tradition in the U.S. that has done what Cain claims that Islam is trying to do: Protestant Christianity.
Calls by Cain to restrict the freedom of Muslims to construct houses of worship are not really about whether Islam can be classified as a legitimate religion according to the laws of the land. No, these calls simply reflect the reality of Islamophobia in America and the fact that in some political circles, easy points can be scored by denigrating Islam and by linking Muslim Americans with violence, terrorism and political oppression.
It's possible that Cain did score points among some potential voters for his remarks on Sunday, though I would like to think that he turned off far more voters. Either way, until comments like his are challenged and rejected not simply by the media but by other high-profile politicians, including Republican presidential candidates, the only real "winner" in this ordeal will be religious bigotry.
Irshad Manji: The Quranic Solution To The 9/11 Abomination
Herman Cain assailed as 'bigoted' over Muslim remarks – CNN ...
Herman Cain's Muslim Problem | Mother Jones
Herman Cain Pressed on Muslim Loyalty Test in GOP Debate ...
Herman Cain: Americans Have The Right To Ban Mosques In Their ...
EXCLUSIVE: Herman Cain Tells ThinkProgress 'I Will Not' Appoint A ...
Islam is unique in that it is both a 'spiritual' AND a 'political' religion. This is why it is being 'singled-out' and people like Cain are treating it differently than other religions.
Now you can argue whether or not Islam is BOTH a religious AND socio-political organization and that's fine but the point is that is the difference Cain and many he represents are getting at.
The difference between the two is as follows , please try to keep up! Saudi Arabia has never claimed to be a democracy, Saudi Arabia has never invaded other countries citing freedom for all as an excuse, the right for all to worship their own faith is not in Saudi Arabias constitution etc etc etc.
Are you really that naive or do you put it on!
Cain is a hypocrite. This is not news to anyone that has heard his particular brand of conservative ideological blather.
Even given a pass as just 'moderates who said something controversial' all this time by the corporate media.
You shouldn't have to be that good a historian to see where *this* stuff goes.
Gods help us.
I happen to know, as do many people, that pizza is one of the most divisive topics in the United States. Thin crust or thick crust? Chicago or Sicillian? Oily sauce or non-oily sauce? Take a moment to look on Yelp or any such site and you'll find many comments such as "1/5 - I don't like thin crust, what kind of son of a b%^$ tries to defile my palette with this filth!!"
Simply put, as a pizzamaker I don't think Mr. Cain could possibly have the emotional maturity regarding differences of opinion that we would require out of our President.
Religion, when applied correctly, can be a powerful positive force, as we are seeing in the action and behavior of the family members of those who were mercilessly killed by a Texan man in revenge for 911, which they did not commit.
That man is scheduled to be executed tonight. Yet, the family of those he killed, together with a Bangladeshi store clerk who survived his attack and was blinded in one eye by his shot, are seeking mercy and forgiveness for him and have forgiven him.
It's a remarkable story of adoptation of core religious values of mercy, selflessness and forgiveness.
To me forgiving something like that would be a crime in itself.
Go over to Britain, where the have passively let Muslims take over their society. Muslims to not assimilate into their culture. They force their culture on the British.
If one has a problem with the Islam influenced cultures, one is free to opine about the same. However, prohibiting a place of worship due to the religion of the followers needs a higher threshold for any sort of governmental interference.
Thank you.
I bet you are in favor of stopping Catholic Churches being built but this is ludicris-
How can you explain if Christians can be stopped- Why is this wrong
Could it be that most Americans understand the separation of church and state, and know a strong country can not be governed by religious law?
I fear no Christians, and I know that there are some horrible Christians out there. But I also know that Christians are not flying planes into buildings.
The reality is radical Islamist pose a threat, and we have no way of knowing when or who that threat is. If you cant see that your blind.
;-)
They also call for a unification of church and state.