Muslims

On today’s “700 Club,” Pat Robertson warns that Muslims becoming involved in politics, such as Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota), want to “take over” and “institute Sharia.”

“If the Christians don’t get involved—We’ve been harassed by People for the American Way, we have been harassed by Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, we have been harassed by the federal court system, but if the Christians won’t stand up and not worry about the IRS, not worry about whether you’re going to lose your tax exemption, not worry about whatever because you’re going to lose your country if Christians don’t mobilize and vote,” warned Robertson. He added that “The curse of God is to bring in people who don’t share your point of view and then ultimately destroy your civilization.  Well, that’s what we’re facing for our children and grandchildren.” 

Robertson’s comments echoed statements denouncing Rep. Ellison as a threat by right-wing commentators such as Roy Moore and Dennis Prager, by Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia), and by Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the Robertson-founded American Center for Law and Justice.

Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia) returned from the holidays to revive his comments decrying the decision by an incoming Muslim congressman to pose for a photo op holding the Koran after the new Congress is sworn in. Goode published an opinion column in yesterday’s USA Today reiterating his letter to constituents, in which he linked the election of Minneapolis Democrat Keith Ellison, an African American, to a supposed need for a crackdown on immigration, both legal and illegal. (“If American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Quran,” he wrote.)

Now, Goode is expanding his web of connections to cite 9/11. Noting that some people are emigrating to the U.S. from the Middle East, Goode wrote yesterday:

Let us remember that we were not attacked by a nation on 9/11; we were attacked by extremists who acted in the name of the Islamic religion. I believe that if we do not stop illegal immigration totally, reduce legal immigration and end diversity visas, we are leaving ourselves vulnerable to infiltration by those who want to mold the United States into the image of their religion, rather than working within the Judeo-Christian principles that have made us a beacon for freedom-loving persons around the world.

Rep. Virgil Goode, Jr. (R-Virginia), in a letter to constituents obtained by a Charlottesville newspaper, joined a right-wing attack on an incoming Muslim congressman, and linked the presence of the Koran in Congress to a supposed need for draconian immigration laws to stop the influx of Muslim congressmen streaming across the border. "[I]f American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran," wrote Goode.

When right-wing columnist and radio host Dennis Prager lashed out against incoming Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) for “announc[ing] that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran,” he created a small firestorm. Wrote Prager late last month:

He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

He added, “If you are incapable of taking an oath on [the Christian Bible], don't serve in Congress."

Not least among the criticisms were (1) that the Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test for office, and (2) that members of Congress do not take their oaths of office on the Bible at all. Instead, they raise their right hands as a group, and then pose for pictures after the fact.

However, Prager stood by his ridiculous attack, and a few right-wing figures came out of the woodwork to support him. WorldNetDaily wove a complicated conspiracy attempting to link Ellison to international terrorists, and Roy Moore – the former Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court who was removed from office for refusing to relinquish a two-ton Ten Commandments monument from his court – argued that Islam “rejects our God” and is “simply incompatible with our law.” William Donohue of the Catholic League and Don Feder, under the auspices of his obscure group “Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation,” issued a joint statement calling critics of Prager “scurrilous” and repeating the false factual claim that all congressmen historically swear an oath on the Christian Bible. Feder went further, writing, “It’s no coincidence that most terrorists on four continents are Muslims. Nor is it a coincidence that those who are killing U.S. servicemen in Iraq do so in the name of the bible of Islam. And it isn't by chance that Osama bin Laden, Hamas, Hezbollah and Imanutjob in Iran all cite the Koran as the source of their lunacy.” Feder added that he would rather Ellison swear on “The Pop-Up Kama Sutra.”

Now, at least one fellow congressman is joining this quixotic right-wing campaign against Ellison and the U.S. Constitution. Goode, a Republican representing the southside of Virginia, wrote his letter in response to constituents complaining about Ellison. One accidental recipient forwarded it to an alternative newspaper in Charlottesville. In it, he connects the anti-Islam message of the Right to the anti-immigrant positions that he has made his political hallmark:

Dear Mr. Cruickshank:

Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.

The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.” Thank you again for your email and thoughts.

Sincerely yours,
Virgil H. Goode, Jr.
70 East Court Street
Suite 215
Rocky Mount, Virginia 24151

UPDATE 12/21:

Tell Goode to apologize!  A spokesman for Goode says that the congressman “stands by the letter” and refuses to apologize for the letter he wrote to constituents despite universal condemnation from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Virginia Muslim PAC, James Zogby of the Arab American Institute, the ACLU, and at least one Democratic congressman. A spokesman for incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) called the remarks “offensive.”

Goode has made illegal immigration a primary target of his congressional career – introducing a bill to build a fence along the US-Mexico border and pushing to make English the official language of the US. 

Representative Ellison has the right idea about what it means to be an American - telling Rep Goode that he has “nothing to fear” because “the fact that there are many different faiths, many different colors and many different cultures in America is a great strength.” 

You can call Goode’s office at (202) 225-4711 and ask that he apologize for his intolerant and divisive comments about Muslims and immigrants. (Let us know how your call went here.)

Fresh off of announcing the formation of his exploratory committee as he considers running for president, Sen. Sam Brownback spent a night at the Louisiana State Penitentiary in order highlight what the Right sees as the success of religious-based prison fellowship ministries at reducing violence and recidivism:

Sen. Sam Brownback took his budding presidential campaign to prison this weekend, spent a restless night among inmates and pressed his message that faith can work even to improve the lives of hardened criminals.

... His mission at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, rather, was to promote religious-based prison efforts to curtail violence and provide inmates with an alternative to crime once -- or if -- they got out.

…

Burl Cain, the prison's warden since 1995, attributed a drop in violence at the prison to Angola's commitment to ''moral rehabilitation'' programs. The prison has six interfaith chapels, nightly prayer services, four part-time chaplains and a ''Bible college'' that has trained dozens of inmates to be ministers.

Brownback, 50, said programs such as Angola's can ''break the cycle'' that sends two-thirds of inmates back to prison after they are released.

''We don't want to build more prisons in the country,'' he said. ''We don't want to lock people up. We want people to be good, productive citizens.''

As luck would have it, at the same time as Brownback was engaged in this stunt, the New York Times was taking a look at these sorts of programs and noting that more than a dozen have been ruled unconstitutional since 2000:

The round-up of the formally named “Washington Briefing” put on by the Family Research Council’s C4 entity, Focus on the Family Action, described an “impressive A-list of conservative leaders and public officials [who] packed the schedule from early morning till late in the evening”  who spoke to the 1700 attendees about “pressing family issues” as they sought “energy and encouragement.”  And in keeping with the gathering’s goal of energizing its religious right base with strategic messaging, a new emphasis on terrorism was on display beginning with Dobson opening the two-day conference calling it a “family issue.”

Dobson shared his view of the War on Islamo-fascism by looking at the big-picture numbers. He made clear he does not believe all Muslims are terrorists, but a small percentage obviously are. With an estimated 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, Dobson said, a small percentage adds up to a lot of trouble.

He said the estimates are that 10 to 15 percent do buy into the notion that jihad calls for the killing of infidels.

"Let's say that's grossly overstated, and it may be," Dobson said. "What if it's 4 percent worldwide? What if 4 percent want to take us down and are willing to give their lives for it? When the point of negotiation is that the other person wants to kill you, there's not a whole lot to talk about. So, what if it's 4 percent? That's 48 million people in this world who want to kill us. What if it's one tenth of 1 percent? It's 12 million people that want to kill us.

"We're in a war and it's time that we recognized it."

Dobson said he sees the effort to stop terrorists as having a place among family issues.

"Because if we don't have security for ourselves, our children, for future generations," he said, "there is no future for the family."

No doubt Dobson has read the same exit polls as we have showing that 86% of voters in 2004 who thought that terrorism was the most important issue were Bush voters, and 73% of voters who thought the Iraq war was the most important were Kerry voters.   Religious right voters can now expect to hear their leaders joining Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Tony Snow and others in the right-wing echo chamber putting a pro-Bush, “pro-family” spin on the war on terror by adding it to their growing roster of dubious “pressing“ family issues.  

The GOP has a time-tested electoral strategy: when making remarks for public consumption, sound moderate; but when addressing the right-wing base, let your inner right winger loose.

As if Rep. Katherine Harris’ futile bid for the Senate didn’t have enough problems, she has now gone and violated the GOP’s most basic rule

Rep. Katherine Harris sought Saturday to smother a campaign brushfire stoked by an earlier claim that failure to elect Christians to public office would allow lawmakers to "legislate sin."

Harris, appearing at a gun show in Orlando, said she did not mean to offend non-Christians in her comments to the Florida Baptist Witness last week. She explained that she referred exclusively - and repeatedly - to Christians because she was being interviewed by the weekly journal of the Florida Baptist State Convention.

…

Harris' campaign also released a statement Saturday. It described her strong support of Israel and said when Harris called the separation of church and state a "lie" she was addressing "a common misperception that people of faith should not be actively involved in government."

"My rallying cry," she said, "has always been people of all faiths should be involved."

Harris ignited a furor with her Witness interview. She sounded a fervent evangelical tone, saying that God "chooses our rulers," that voters needed to send Christians to political office and that God did not intend for the United States to be a "nation of secular laws."

Speaking to Witness editors, Harris said:

"If you are not electing Christians, tried and true, under public scrutiny and pressure, if you're not electing Christians, then in essence you are going to legislate sin."

"If we are the ones not actively involved in electing those godly men and women," then "we're going to have a nation of secular laws. That's not what our founding fathers intended and that's (sic) certainly isn't what God intended."

On Friday, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Democrats and Republicans blasted the comments, saying Harris was suggesting non-Christians were less suited to govern or should be excluded altogether.

To her credit, Harris at least recognized her error – not the error of what she said, mind you, simply the error of allowing her remarks to reach an audience beyond her intended target

"My comments were specifically directed toward a Christian group," said Harris.

Note to Harris: You are running for office from Florida, not Las Vegas.  

There is just so much to say about this recent Kathleen Parker column that it is difficult to know exactly where to start.  

Parker begins by dismissing concerns regarding the influence wielded by “Christianists” such as Jerry Falwell and John Hagee because … well … they aren’t as bad as Islamic terrorists

Although both groups may be "true believers," those who try to connect the dots of Christian belief, specifically evangelical Christianity, to Islamism seem willing to overlook the fact that Islamists praise Allah and fly airplanes into buildings while Christianists praise Jesus and pass the mustard.

 And though both groups of people may use scripture to shape their approach to the public square, Islamist interpretation of doctrine permits religious expression through suicide-murder, beheadings, public stonings (preferably of women) and Jew-hating, while Christianist doctrine deals in such wimpy notions as forgiveness, tolerance, redemption and cheek-turning.

Parker is confusing her terms.  Forgiveness and cheek-turning are Christian teachings – but Christianists refers not to all Christians, just to those who are part of a political movement that seeks to use government power to impose their religious beliefs.  Similarly, not all Muslims are Islamists -- those who want to use government power to impose their religious beliefs.  And not all Islamists resort to terrorism.

Parker’s setting up a straw man here – nobody is really equating Falwell with terrorist leaders.  And just because Christianist leaders aren’t recruiting suicide bombers doesn’t mean they’re harmless, or their political goals aren’t dangerous.

Parker goes on to note that Hagee is a vocal proponent of a joint US-Israel strike on Iran in order to bring about Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ.   But Parker doesn’t see this as much a problem because nobody takes him seriously - least of all the White House