Religious Freedom and a Mosque

By Bill Warner

August 30, 2010, posted in FrontPage Magazine

One of the most common arguments of the supporters of the Ground Zero mosque includes religious freedom as guaranteed by the First Amendment. Religion is seen as the framework to support building a mosque and community center near the site of the former World Trade Towers. Is this really about religion? Step back and look at the controversy. Do you feel like you are taking part in a religious exercise or a political fracas?

There is a vast confusion about what a religion is and is not. Currently the operative rule is that anything associated with Islam is a religious affair where all of the freedom of religion is applied to the action or event. Islam’s actions are religious and if you oppose it, you are an un-American bigot.

It is time to stop and take a look at what we mean by a religion. There are about as many Buddhists in America today as there are Muslims. When was the last time you remember a Buddhist demand of any kind? Do Buddhists set up councils to shape the textbooks and demand Buddhist finance? Does the government make a big announcement when Buddhists are appointed to high posts? Are there even any Buddhists in any White House appointments? Do Buddhists complain? Never, for these are political actions, and Buddhism has almost no political outreach. Buddhism in America is purely religious, not political at all.

Yet the media and the Internet are consumed by talk and argument about Islam. The discussion is never about how many rounds of prayer to do or whether a certain food is halal (religiously proper). No, the focus is always on something that non-Muslims are to do to accommodate an Islamic religious practice.

There is a practical working definition of religion as compared to politics. Religious practices are done by those who follow that religion and are motivated for achieving paradise and avoiding hell. Outsiders are not involved in those religious acts. If it is about going to heaven and avoiding hell, then it is religious. However, if the religion makes a demand on those outside of its own group, then that demand is political.

Most people think that the Koran is a religious text. Instead, 64% of the text (by word count) is about non-Muslims, who are called Kafirs. The Koran is fixated on Kafirs and makes many demands on them. Not the least is that Kafirs submit to the rule of Islamic Sharia law. Ultimately Sharia law is the pure expression of Islamic politics and it completely contradicts our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Under Sharia there is no freedom of speech, wives may be beaten and apostates murdered.

Mohammed had little success with Islam until he transformed it into a political system. He preached the religion of Islam in Mecca for 13 years and made about 150 converts. He left Mecca and moved to Medina. In Medina he turned to politics and jihad. In the last 9 years of his life, Mohammed was involved in an event of violence on the average of every 6 weeks. The political method persuaded every Arab to convert to Islam. The religion did not succeed; it was politics that made Islam powerful.

Bill Warner,
Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Copyright © 2010 CBSX, LLC Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.

6 Responses

  1. Howard

    To: JP

    The whole issue of building the mosque is that they cannot use the false claim of “religious freedom” as the basis for their build a mosque in any localtion, even “ground zero.”

    Therefore, zoning laws alone should settle the issue, not religious freedom. Their argument is a facade. Their claim to build such is a civil matter, not a relgious one. Civil authorities have far more flexibility to condemn or to prohibit such projects and are not bound by the Constitution under the guise of religious freedom.


  2. JP

    You still did not address the main purpose of why the mosque should be prohibited from being built there. You merely stated that islam is a political philosophy, not a religion.

    This is debatable, but in my opinion you are at least partially correct. so for the purposes of argument I’ll concede the whole point.

    Assuming it is a purely political movement, there are still no grounds on which to prohibit its construction. Suppose the group wanting to construct it were instead a communist organization, with their own plans to create a socialist workers paradise through the a proletarian revolution. They have a zeal that borders on culthood.

    It still cannot be banned. There are many such organizations in this country, directly opposed to the constitution and willing to do anything non-violent to take down the current political order. There is nothing we can do to stop them, nor anything we SHOULD do, other than to fight them with words. They feed on the ignorance of others. To forcefully prevent them from building something concedes that you fear them, and thus that your position is wrongheaded and weak.

    It makes them stronger, by convincing more people that they are right. Hearts are not what you want to win, but rather minds. Hearts are easily swayed by the emotion of the moment, but a mind, once convinced of the logical rightness of its position, cannot be budged.

  3. Mike

    God has decided to end christianity because it failed his providence.It has made Jesus look like a celtic fag.It has failed to stop Athiest from spreading.Islam was founded by God from Abrahams seed.The west has slapped God in the face.and has made jesus look like an evil weak man,Satan has invaded little by little Christianity as he did with the Jews,Gods once chosen people.

  4. John J Johnson

    As yourself and search your soul as a good christian.

    1) Would I burn the name of Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him).

    2) Would I turn away from any teaching that would; praises Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him).

    3) Would I go against the teaching of Love (turn the other cheek) and be Merciful as Jesus (PBUH)?

    There is more mention of Jesus (PBUH) in Holy Quran than Mohammad (PBUH).

    So ask yourself; what would a peace loving prophet (Jesus PBUH) would have supported an violent action against his teaching to burn a Holy Book like Quran that Praises him?

    Ask yourself!


    The name “Dove World Outreach Center”, would make one think it is about peace and love as Jesus (Peace be upon him) would teach; but no.

    Voice your opinion against the hateful blogs in the following link (if possible).


    So from a muslim, US citizen, Holy Quran Reading person to all :

    Peace and Mercy Be Upon All of Us!

    Peace and Mercy Be Upon All of Us!

  5. Charles

    Thanks for the article, Bill.
    Islam is not a religion-even according to Muslims. It is a “deen”, which translates to “way of life” (and also “way of death”). Check this site and others for more details:

    Since it is not a religion the issue of building an Islamic Center has nothing to do with religion nor basic American freedoms.

    As well, it is not a racial issue because Islam in not a race, it is a political ideology like Bill Warner explained. Also, saying that confronting Islam is racist assumes that Muslims, especially politically radical ones, have a strong racial identity even though they say they do not. So, calling Islamophobia racist effectively assigns erroneous values to a minority Muslim population. And how politically INcorrect is that?

  6. Jane

    The Myth of Al-Andalus. Jihad against Spain (and Portugal)

Leave a Reply

We require registration to prevent excessive automated spam commenting.