A dangerous attack on the American Bill of Rights has begun to show up on right wing blogs. Some posts go so far as to advocate denying First Amendment protection to the Muslim faith. Others go further and assert, "In America we must start by banning Islam and outlawing Muslim schools and the Quran. Then we must deport or imprison those who teach and/or practice Islam." These attitudes are intolerable.
No one has the right to decide whether another American's belief system is a legitimate religion. The words of the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," precludes our government from discriminating against any religions. What could be a worse discrimination against a specific belief system than to legislate that it doesn't "qualify" as a religion at all.
We have a responsibility to judge individuals by their actions, not by the books they read. For example, when the United States decided to outlaw polygamy, Mormons were simply forbidden to follow the (then current) dictates of their book. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints certainly wasn't disqualified as an American religion. When the United States decided that the government's responsibility toward the health of it's children trumped the religious beliefs of their parents, and instituted court-ordered blood transfusions, but Jehovah's Witnesses weren't disqualified to be a religion.
Whatever any of us believe about the tenets of the Muslim faith, it isn't anyone's place to judge their neighbor's religious beliefs, and American citizens who are Muslim are entitled to the same constitutional protections as any other American — including the practice of their religion, and obviously, not being deported.
This paranoia reminds me of America's imprisoning 70,000 United States citizens of Japanese descent during World War II — among a total of 117,000 of various other ancestries who were imprisoned in so-called "relocation centers." Haven't we grown up since then?
This opinion piece isn't only a comment about Islam. If we were to discriminate against Muslims, who's next, Scientologists? Jehovah's Witnesses? Mormons? Japanese? I'm saddened when fundamentalists of any faith advocate wrath and vengeance, but I support everyone's right to their books, their beliefs, and all their rights as United States citizens. This is a plea for all to put aside fear and prejudice, and to respect our American Bill of Rights and our American way of life.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Danny Haszard
Jehovahs Witnesses and freedom of speech.
They will extol and preach *God's Kingdom* and this sounds attractive,what they hide from you is their Watchtower society version that Jesus has already had his second coming in 1914 and is working *invisibly* through them.
They have won 37 of their 46 Supreme court cases assuring us all of freedom of speech and assembly and equal protection under the law.
The sad irony is that the Watchtower Society *daily* abuses the human rights of thousands of its members. It denies current members the right of free speech by forbidding them to speak to former members, even close family members.
And it denies former members their right of freedom of worship by refusing to allow them to leave the religion with dignity, should they come to disagree with Watchtower's practices or doctrines.
The religion of Jehovah's Witnesses is an oppressive cult that controls every aspect of its members' lives.
Are they knocking on your door?
----
Danny Haszard
2 - Jordan Richardson
The sad irony is that people join these cults and allow themselves to have their rights abused, Danny.
Nothing actively or violently forces members to join the JW cult. Members are indeed "forbidden" to speak to ex-members and so forth, but the "punishment" is that they are ostracized from the cult. Were they tossed in the gulag or shot, you'd have a case for human rights violation. But when members actively submit their rights to the leadership of categorically insane men and women, there's no much you can do.
3 - Jane
Jordan not so fast there...many are BORN into these cults FLDS,Jehovah Witness,Children of God, and have a difficult time exiting.
It is like being born into the Taliban.
We didn't join by free will,and when we try to leave we are shunned by our familiies.
4 - Jordan Richardson
The point isn't to suggest that there are no victims in cults, Jane. There are countless victims.
My point should be taken in the context of this article, that is to say that we are dealing with the impact of brainwashing on families here, not a clear violation of human rights.
Were we to invoke the notion that cults violate human rights, where could we draw and end such an idea? Human rights are basic ideas to which all humans are entitled, such as life, liberty, freedom of expression, and so forth. It could be argued that a cult imposes a violation of these rights on its members, but again the members are free to leave at any time. That's not say that there aren't harsh emotional consequences upon leaving, of course, but I'm not sure those consequences constitute anything criminal. They are undoubtedly evil.
But being shunned by one's family isn't the same as losing the right to food or education. You can, as a JW or ex-JW, still access those rights if you choose to.
One could argue that bad parenting could serve as a violation of human rights, I suppose. But again, where do you start to draw the lines?
These cults shouldn't exist, plain and simple. But they are private societies, with or without innocent victims, that operate within their own doctrine. Shunning one's family isn't against the law, however unethical and appalling it may be.
5 - Jonathan Lockwood Huie
Calling anyone's religion a "cult" is usually just an offensive way of saying that you don't agree with it's principles.
Jim Jones' People's Temple (of the Jonestown mass suicide) was a cult. Islam and Jehovah's Witnesses don't even come close to meeting the definition.
I apologize for opening up yet another group of Americans to attack. I hope I am being clear in supporting everyone's right to practice their religion.
6 - Lawrence
The definition of a destructive religious cult is like alcoholism-if booze controls you instead of the other way around you are an alcoholic.
Religion can be benign then their are hard core Fundy groups that want to rule & control you like hard core alcoholism.
The Watchtower society as an example is not benevolent and won't let you leave their organization in peace.
If they try to ruin your reputation and break up your family for trying to get out then they are a cult!
7 - roger nowosielski
Very good point, Mr, Huie, about "cults," and a subtle or not so subtle way of saying they're off-the-wall because they're not mainstream
You might want to look at a great book by Howard Bloom (a renown literary critic), The American Religion, where he covers all the cults and sects (in addition to mainstream religions).
8 - Jonathan Lockwood Huie
A factual clarification about the WW II internment of those of Japanese ancestry: The 117,000 to whom I refer were all of Japanese ancestry. 70,000 of these were United States citizens. The others were legal residents but not citizens. This got confused in the usually impeccable BC editing process.
9 - Cindy
No one has the right to decide whether another American's belief system is a legitimate religion.
NY state decided that Universal Life Church is not a religion and forbids ministers from performing marriages in NY. Here is their credo:
The Universal Life Church | ULC is the only denomination in the world that opens its doors to all, and welcomes all who ask to Become an Ordained Minister. We are non-denominational. We support a full spectrum interfaith ministry. Over 20 million ministers have been ordained online throughout the world. We make no religious hurdles, no hoops to jump through, no tests of loyalty, no rings to kiss and no fees to pay. The Universal Life Church represents freedom, and to have freedom you can not make demands upon individuals. In the Universal Life Church Monastery everyone is equal - the same level of greatness is enjoyed by all. We will be your personal minister/consulate and advisor, with your consent at no charge to you. We ordain all who ask and welcome you to the Universal Life Church Monastery Ministries.
I think other states also make such decisions about who's religion is a real religion. They have requirements in some cases that in order to be a minister one must prove one has a following of a certain size.
Nothing is sacred when the government gets involved. They don't want all these ministers getting tax breaks, you see.
10 - roger nowosielski
It's still the case that the easiest way to disparage the competitor is to call it a sect or a cult. The whole thing is a racket, everybody jockeying for position and doing their best to eliminate the competition.
11 - Jonathan Lockwood Huie
Good Books Don't Always Inspire Good Behavior
Judging from its messages of compassion, Buddhism should be the world's most peaceful major religion. The world's 350 million Buddhists are generally among the least aggressive, but not always. The recent violent rioting in Bangkok shows that religious messages of peace do not always override human nature. Thailand is 95% Buddhist.
What's the point of this post? Simply that people will always be people. Whether they read books with messages of peace or books that endorse wrath and vengeance, most people are usually peaceful, but circumstances sometimes push people to violence, and a few people will always be obsessively addicted to violence.
Personally, I am inspired by Jesus' message of love and by the Buddha's call for universal compassion. I am saddened by how many have chosen words of wrath and vengeance as the basis of their religions. Nonetheless, I stand committed to judge individuals by their actions rather than by the books they read.
Hate is never conquered by hate,
Hate is only conquered by love.
- The Buddha
12 - Cindy
I do see differences between religions and cults. And I'd like to ask some questions of those of you who do not.
What if I decide to create a 'religion' in a very intentional way with a personal motive. I would be doing this for my own power and financial gain, say. I would employ brainwashing and coercive techniques, especially designed to manipulate people who are in a vulnerable state of mind or who are still forming their views. I would create campus groups of followers to recruit students at colleges. I would implement other tactics of ostracism, ridicule and other effective punishments (including solitary confinement) to insure I get the most compliance and the highest membership numbers.
Is this okay with everyone?
13 - roger nowosielski
Usually, cults and or sects tend to be more esoteric and sooner or later they "blow up," at which time some of the abhorrent practices and rites come to light. Organized religions are those which usually survive the passage of time, which isn't to say that their hierarchies aren't manipulative.
14 - Cindy
The Unification Cult is 55 years old. The Cult of Scientology 56 years old.
Are you sure you want that idea that they 'blow up' as part of your definition?
15 - roger nowosielski
Some do. I would equate Scientology (don't know about the other) with New Age thinking. One possible reason for its popularity is the secularization of the society and open resistance to all religions.
16 - roger nowosielski
Cult from Wiki.
"Outside the mainstream" is another element of the definition. Once it becomes mainstream, it ceases to be regarded as a cult.
17 - roger nowosielski
Sect.
A splinter from the mainstream religion, practice, body of beliefs.
18 - Dr Dreadful
Jonathan, it reads as though you're OK with the US government forbidding Mormons to practice polygamy and forcing JWs to receive blood transfusions. I'm not. Both are clear violations of the First Amendment - albeit the second instance is ethically trickier.
19 - roger nowosielski
Interesting point, especially as regards the practice of polygamy. Are you viewing it on analogy with "same sex" marriage?
20 - Clavos
They don't want all these ministers getting tax breaks, you see.
Nor do I.
ALL tax breaks for religious organizations should be eliminated.
IMO, a case can be made that, by making these types of distinctions, the gummint is, in fact, "mak[ing] law respecting an establishment of religion."
21 - Dr Dreadful
The ULC sounds like either a scam or a sociological experiment anyway. If I read their mission statement right, they have no creed, no qualification requirements for ministers and no membership restrictions. A bit like, oh, let's see now, anything that isn't a church.
Quite correctly, NY wasn't buying it.
22 - Dr Dreadful
Roger @ #19:
Absolutely. If multiple marriages are consensual, why shouldn't they be legal?
23 - Cindy
I agree with that, Clav, with these qualifications:
1) I'm against taxes in general.
2) If there are going to be taxes to paid, big churches should not be given special preference over individual ministers.
24 - roger nowosielski
ULC.
25 - Cindy
"I would equate Scientology (don't know about the other) with New Age thinking. One possible reason for its popularity is the secularization of the society and open resistance to all religions."
Way off here Roger. I don't think you would say these things if you understood Scientology, its history, and what it does.