Does Congress Have the Right to Investigate a Religion?

Last week an investigating committee of the U.S. Congress began hearings on the Muslim faith in America, questioning the loyalty of Americans who belong to that religion. There have been a handful of Americans over the last decade who were Muslim adherents and got involved in terrorism. This became the pretext for probing an entire religious community. Strangely enough the chairman of the committee who instigated the investigation (Rep. Peter King) has been a supporter of a terrorist organization in the past, the Irish Republican Army. Perhaps this his only claim to any expertise, although it seems that he may have been a political opportunist then and now.

Does not the freedom of religion guaranteed in the Bill of Rights prohibit such an escapade in political intimidation and prejudice? My guess is that it does, but unless the Congress actually produces a law on the topic, the Supreme Court has no way to get at the situation and enforce the Bill of Rights. This is another example of how politicians play games with the system. These hearings will not actually accomplish anything other than posturing and the distribution of propaganda.

Why has it become so popular for some Americans to express anger and prejudice against their Muslim neighbors? These are almost all people who came to the United States because they wanted to live in a country with the kind of freedoms that exist here. Despite the handful of extremists who promote such issues as Sharia Law, clearly more than nine out of ten Muslim Americans do not care to live in a country where church and state are allies in enforcing religious beliefs and practices. Are those non-Muslim Americans who popularize this anti-Muslim propaganda equally loyal to the basic values of America? Or, is this another way for them to espouse the cause of a "Christian America" that would do away with the Bill of Rights guarantee of religious liberty?

To me, Congressman King and his allies are suspect. This whole exercise smells of a hidden agenda. The people most likely to destroy the Bill of Rights in America are not the small minority of Muslims. They are those in power with such extreme notions of nationalism and twisted ideas about the Christian faith. They remind me of the "German Christians" movement in Europe in the 1930s. It is possible for a movement that starts out Christian to become so involved in nationalistic political goals that they are no longer real followers of Jesus. He taught is followers to "turn the other cheek," to be humble and caring, to "love your enemies." Jesus never approved of the Crusades. They were sin in His eyes. I am sure that God's heart has been broken by the long, bloody history of conflict between those who claim these faiths. He does not approve of investigating Muslims in America today, so far as I can see. Nor, as a practical matter, will these hearings actually accomplish any prevention of future terrorism.

Comments

[chris]

I am surprised that you would fall victim to the unrelenting campaign to portray this hearing as an attack on Islam. I find no evidence to give credibility to this assertion.

The real goal of the hearings was to understand this growing concern and how to combat a spate of homegrown terrorism.

King, the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee is just carrying out his responsibilities after foiled plots over Detroit, Times Square, and the Ft. Hood massacre to name a few troubling incidences.

Here are the major points I learned from these hearings:
• Yes, it is clear that al-Qaida has shifted strategy in attacking the US.
• The witnesses include family members of young men who were inspired by others to go into terrorism, with deadly consequences.
• National Intelligence Director James Clapper said 2010 saw more plots involving homegrown Sunni extremists — those ideologically aligned with al-Qaida — than in the previous year.
• We also learned that our prisons are a incubator for radicalization.

Please share from the record how these hearings labeled Muslims as terrorists and restrict or violated their treasured religious liberty?

[Monte]

Chris, if it is going to be a hearing on terrorism, then it should have included reports on more than one religion. To focus on one religion as the sole source of terrorism is not factual, because there is much evidence of Christians and others involved in terrorism of various kinds. And it creates the illusion that the terrorism incidents are somehow related to the nature of the Muslim faith itself. The chairman of this committee knows that terrorism is a much wider problem than any one religion because he has been involved with Irish terrorists. It is the focus on the Muslim religion instead of a focus on terrorism that I find concerning.

One other point: Are congressional hearings of any use in combatting terrorism? Isn't terrorism, by its very nature, best acted on secretly by the FBI, CIA, etc.?

[chris]

Monte here is my dilemma. The subject of the House committee's inquiry isn't novel, precedent setting, or unique to Peter King. Several other hearings preceded this one.
• In September 2006, the Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterterrorism Division of the FBI gave testimony about Islamic radicalization before the House Homeland Security Committee Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment.
• In 2007, New York City Police Department issued a 90-page report on the topic.
• Most recently, LA Police and other law enforcement agencies held a two-day "radicalization conference.
In prior times hearings have been held on the KKK and the mafia, which have Christian affiliations.
The affiliation of the moment seem to warrant the inquiry.