News Flash: Islam is a Religion
May 24, 2011 by Diana Verm
A judge in Tennessee recently dismissed claims against a mosque in Murfreesboro, recognizing it as a house of worship for purposes of the local zoning code. Not an especially noteworthy case, except for one fact: in reaching his decision the judge had to decide that Islam is a religion. Why? A group of residents had sued to halt construction of the Islamic center, claiming that it could not enjoy religious liberty protections because Islam is “not a religion.” They argued that Islam is instead a purely political system bent on destroying the American Constitution. The judge rightly ruled that Islam is indeed a religion, and that the Plaintiffs presented no evidence that the mosque posed any kind of danger to American society.
This case is a classic example of why no man’s religious liberty is an island. Had the mosque lost, any number of other religions could have been subjected to the same argument that they are too “political.” For years, anti-Catholics argued that Catholics were loyal to a foreign power with its own city-state: the Vatican. Many claim that Jews are “too political” about Israel. And Evangelical Protestants are frequently criticized in the press for being too involved in the political life of the country. A ruling that politics excludes religion would have negatively affected all of these groups. But on a deeper level even that equivalence should not matter. Islam is a religion because it partakes of the transcendent–its believers feel that they are connecting to something outside and higher than themselves when they practice their faith. The drafters of our Constitution understood that religious liberty must exist for all religions for the practical reasons of social wellbeing as well as the philosophical reason that all people have a right to follow their consciences. If only one preferred group has religious freedom, that is no freedom at all, but a religion defined by the State: liberty for me but not for thee.
It’s true that religion can’t be used as a cover to break the law. If evidence turns up that any group of people is using “religion” as a false front to plot the overthrow of the United States, the law will step in to stop it. But that has not happened in this case. Here, an impartial judicial system has done its work and taken steps to keep a vocal majority from bullying a minority out of town.
