By Lucretia Hughes Klucken
ATLANTA — A reader recently gave me a straightforward assignment: Write about Islam and why Americans should worry.
I will take the question seriously, but I am not going to tell Americans to fear millions of people simply because they are Muslims. That is too easy, and more importantly, it is contrary to the principles of individual liberty Americans claim to defend.
The more difficult and important question is this: When should Americans be concerned when any religious or political ideology collides with the Constitution, individual liberty and the rule of law?
That is where my concern begins.
America guarantees Muslims the same religious freedom it guarantees Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists and everyone else. The First Amendment prohibits government from establishing a religion while protecting its free exercise, and Article VI prohibits religious tests for federal public office.
That means a Muslim has every right to build a mosque, pray, wear religious clothing, raise a family according to his or her faith, speak publicly about Islam and participate in American politics. I will defend those rights because defending the Constitution means defending rights even when the person exercising them believes differently than I do.
Religious liberty, however, is not unlimited governmental authority. No religion has the constitutional right to impose its doctrine upon Americans through government.
That principle applies to my Christianity just as surely as it applies to Islam.
The Constitution Is the Law of the Land
This is where Americans should draw a bright line.
The Constitution and laws made pursuant to it are the supreme law of the land. Not the Bible. Not the Quran. Not Jewish religious law. Not the teachings of a pastor, imam or rabbi.
My Christian faith guides how I live, how I understand the world and the values I hold. But my faith does not give me constitutional authority to force another American to become a Christian.
The same standard applies to Islam.
Muslims are free to follow Islamic religious principles voluntarily in their personal lives. If anyone, however, advocates replacing America’s constitutional system with a theocratic government or using state power to coerce religious obedience, Americans have every right to oppose that political objective.
That is not hatred of Muslims. It is defense of constitutional self-government.
The First Amendment establishes the balance. Government cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion, but neither can government establish a religion and compel Americans to follow it.
We Need an Honest Conversation About Sharia
“Sharia law” is one of those phrases frequently used in American political arguments without anyone stopping to define what they mean.
Sharia broadly refers to Islamic religious and moral principles covering matters that can include prayer, fasting, charity, family life, personal conduct and religious obligations. For many American Muslims, following Sharia means practicing their religion personally, not replacing the Constitution or overthrowing the American government.
That distinction matters.
A Muslim voluntarily observing religious dietary rules is not threatening my freedom. Neither is a Muslim praying five times a day or a Muslim woman choosing to wear a hijab.
The constitutional concern begins when anyone attempts to use governmental authority to impose religious rules that conflict with individual rights guaranteed under American law.
I would say exactly the same thing about Christians.
If Christians demanded that government force Americans into church, punish citizens for rejecting Christianity or give clergy authority over civil law, I would oppose that too.
America protects religious practice. America does not establish religious government.
Islam and Islamist Extremism Are Not the Same Thing
Americans also need to make another distinction without being intimidated into silence.
Islam is a religion followed by roughly 2 billion people around the world. Islamism generally refers to political movements seeking to organize government or society around particular interpretations of Islamic principles. Violent Islamist extremism goes further, using or advocating terrorism and violence to pursue ideological objectives.
Those categories should not be deliberately blurred.
Americans lived through the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. We have watched the rise of al-Qaida and ISIS and witnessed other terrorist attacks committed by extremists claiming Islamic justification.
Pretending violent Islamist extremism does not exist would be foolish.
Treating every Muslim as responsible for what violent extremists do would be equally foolish.
American law enforcement and intelligence agencies should aggressively investigate terrorist organizations, recruitment networks, foreign financing, material support for terrorism and credible threats of political violence. Those investigations should follow evidence and conduct, however, not assume guilt because of someone’s surname, ethnicity or religion.
That is how a constitutional republic is supposed to operate.
Assimilation Still Matters
My larger concern extends well beyond Islam.
America has become increasingly uncomfortable with the word “assimilation,” as though expecting immigrants to embrace fundamental American principles somehow requires them to erase their heritage.
It does not.
People coming to America should not be required to abandon their religion, language, food, clothing or family traditions. But anyone choosing to build a life here should understand the constitutional principles governing this country.
American constitutional law comes first.
Women possess equal rights under American law. People may convert from one religion to another or practice no religion at all. Americans may criticize Christianity, Islam, Judaism and every other religion. Religious offense does not create a right to silence another person’s protected speech.
No religious leader receives veto power over another citizen’s constitutional rights.
Those principles do not change depending upon which immigrant community becomes larger or more politically influential.
Assimilation also carries a reciprocal obligation. Muslim Americans who obey the law and participate peacefully in American society are entitled to the same constitutional protections as everyone else, including protection from religious discrimination and violence.
We cannot demand loyalty to the Constitution from people while refusing to extend its protections to them.
Foreign Influence Deserves Scrutiny
Americans also have legitimate reasons to ask questions about foreign influence in religious and political institutions.
Foreign governments and wealthy overseas organizations have funded mosques, universities, nonprofit organizations, lobbying operations and other institutions in Western countries. Americans should know when foreign governments are attempting to influence public policy, education or religious institutions here.
But again, the standard must be consistent.
If foreign money is influencing an Islamic organization, investigate it. If foreign money is influencing a Christian organization, university, corporation or political advocacy group, investigate that too.
Transparency is not Islamophobia.
Americans have a right to know who is attempting to influence their institutions and why.
What Should Americans Actually Worry About?
Americans should worry about extremism and terrorism. We should worry about foreign governments attempting to manipulate American institutions and about religious coercion from any faith.
We should worry when elected officials place ideology above their oath to the Constitution. We should also worry when fear of being called intolerant prevents journalists, politicians and ordinary citizens from asking legitimate questions about ideology, immigration, assimilation or national security.
But Americans should be equally concerned when politicians attempt to convince us that an entire religious population should be treated as inherently suspicious.
Once government receives the power to punish Americans merely because of their religion, nobody should assume that power will forever be directed at somebody else’s faith.
Today the target could be Muslims. Tomorrow it could be Christians.
The Constitution protects both.
America Doesn’t Need to Apologize for Being America
I am a Christian. I believe in God, and I believe Christianity profoundly influenced the development of American culture and history. I make no apology for those beliefs.
But the genius of the American experiment is not that government forces my faith upon my neighbor. It is that government cannot stop me from practicing it and cannot force my neighbor to practice it.
So when somebody asks me whether Americans should worry about Islam, my answer is more precise.
Do not fear your Muslim neighbor merely because he is Muslim. Pay attention to ideology, political movements, foreign influence, extremism and anyone who believes religious authority should supersede the Constitution.
Then apply that standard consistently.
We can defend America’s borders, demand assimilation, confront radicalism, investigate foreign influence and insist that American constitutional law remains supreme without declaring millions of peaceful people enemies because of how they worship.
In fact, doing both is the test.
Because the moment America begins deciding which citizens deserve constitutional liberty based upon which God they worship, we will have surrendered part of the very system we claim to be protecting.
God. Family. Country. And in this country, the Constitution remains the law of the land.
Follow Lucretia Hughes Klucken for more news, commentary and independent reporting. Follow Real News with Lucretia Hughes for daily coverage, News at Noon and Real News.
Original article
Comments