Silenced Cal

"If you have a particular faith (Christian), you are to be discriminated against and silenced. Your sacred symbols---from crosses on a desert mountain to Nativity displays in public places ---are banned. You are increasingly forbidden to pray publicly 'in Jesus' name,' but Muslims can speak of Allah and Mohammed everywhere they like..."
Cal Thomas in op-ed "Diversity is a one-way street"
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, November 12, 2009, page 13A

Ignore the whining tone of these statements for a moment, and consider their meaning. Unless you have been comatose for the past seventy years or so, you know that the first and third sentences are false, while the second one is no more than the legitimate consequence of the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Let's start with the position of Christianity in American public life. Although about 80% of Americans identify themselves as Christians (1), one hundred percent of the presidents and vice-presidents of this country have been professed Christians. Eighty-seven percent of the US Senate is Christian, and so is about 94% of the House of Representatives. Christians hold seven out of nine seats on the US Supreme Court, the vast majority of cabinet positions, and nearly all high-ranking military offices.

As a result, Christmas is a federal holiday, and most federal (as well as state) offices are closed on Sunday, the Christian Sabbath. In contrast, Jewish government employees must seek permission to miss work on the Sabbath or Jewish holidays, and may be required to use vacation time. (Islam does not prohibit work on any day.) The Supreme Court has ruled that Jewish soldiers may not wear a yarmulke (or other hat) while working in an Air Force office.(2) Troops have been subjected to Christian proselytizing at some bases.

But what of our popular culture? Between now and December 25 we will be inundateded with Christmas music and messages on television and radio. (Some commercial radio stations play nothing else for weeks before the holiday. ) Christmas trees will be erected and lit at government expense at the White House and on public grounds in nearly every city and village in the country. (OK, there will also be some Chanuka menorahs on public property, thanks to the Lubavitcher chasidim.) Christmas carols will be taught in the public schools, and those who decline to sing them will be conspicuous by their silence. Although in recent years some public officials have paid attention to Jewish and Muslim holidays, the pervasive impact of Christmas vastly overwhelms any recognition of minority holidays. Likewise, Easter and Good Friday receive copious attention from the mainstream media.

And yet Cal Thomas contends that the religion of 80% of the American people is "discriminated against!" If so, Charlie Sykes was right when he named his book "A Nation of Victims." Not only are Christians not silenced, but their collective voice on the public airwaves nearly drowns out opposing views! Like all other Americans, Christians are free to pray and preach as much as they want, provided that they do not use public funds or facilities to do so , and that government does not provide a captive audience. (3)

But for some, even this is not enough: they want governmental endorsement of Christianity, such as displays of crosses and creches on public property. The City of Wauwatosa has even included a cross on the official city emblem. Does Mr Thomas consider that proper? I sure don't!

In the recent past Christianity was even more dominant in the public square than it is today. Until the Supreme Court stopped it in 1962, some states authorized official prayers in the public schools; Dallas even taught the New Testament at one time. Obviously, Cal Thomas resents the decline in the status of Christianity in America to that of just another religion, like Judaism, Islam and others. But that is all it is, and all it should be.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) About 15% are non-believers, and the balance are Jews, Muslims and others.

(2) Goldman vs Weinberger, 1986 (US 84-1097) . Congress subsequently reversed the ban on yarmulkes via an amendment to a Defense appropriation bill.

(3) For example, those attending public high school events (such as football games and graduations) have been subjected to listening to Christian prayers and sermons.

The Major Who Ran Amok

Why would Army psychiatrist Major Nidal Hassan shoot more than forty fellow soldiers at Fort Hood? Two explanations have surfaced in the media since the crime:
(a) He went "amok" (1) (aka "went postal") in response to orders to serve in Afghanistan.
(b) He committed an act of jihad (holy war).

Americans have become accustomed to incidents in which a man (usually described as a deranged loner) would suddenly shoot as many people as possible before being shot himself. The scene may be a college campus, a suburban high school, a church, a school, or even a commuter train. Except for calls for tougher gun control, these incidents have little political impact. In a few days, they tend to fade from public consciousness. If Major Hassan ever recovers from his wounds sufficiently to stand trial, he may say why he acted as he did. Meanwhile, theory (a) is most appealing to those who want to ignore the Islamic aspect of the case and those who seek to exonerate the Army from blame for failure to act on several signs that Hassan might become dangerous.

The case for theory (b) includes the following:
1. Before shooting, he shouted "Allahu Akhbar!" (Arabic for "Allah is the greatest!")
2. Although born in Virginia, both of Nidal Hassan's parents were Palestinians.
3. Hassan attended a mosque in 2001 led by Imam Anwar al-Aulaqi, who supported Al Qaeda. (2)
4. Hassan said that suicide bombers were like soldiers who threw themselves on grenades to save the lives of others.
5. He was reported to have made many statements to colleagues that they considered "anti-American propaganda" (3)

By many accounts, Nidal Hassan was increasingly unhappy about serving in the US Army for several years, and had sought a discharge, but was refused. Although both Presidents Bush and Obama have insisted that the United States was never at war with Islam, the only enemies our forces have faced on the battlefield in two wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) and numerous terrorist attacks since 2000 have been Muslims. In a remarkably similar incident, a Muslim American Army sergeant threw grenades into a military tent in Kuwait in 2003, killing one officer and wounding 15 others. In 1996 Osama bin Laden issued a fatwa (Islamic "psak" or religious ruling) that declared all Americans enemies of Islam, whom all Muslims should attack. A significant portion of the world's Muslims accept his viewpoint, including many in Europe and even some in the United States. In this clash between America and radical Islam, some Muslim soldiers in the US military find themselves conflicted between their uniform and their religious affiliation.

Apparently, Nidal Hassan was among those emotionally and religiously drawn to jihadist cause. As long as he was stationed in the United States, he could paper-over the conflict between his military service and his beliefs, but the order to serve in Afghanistan made the tension between the two intolerable. If so, his choice to strike out against his fellow soldiers (with the reasonable expectation that he would be killed quickly) is not attributable to mental illness, any more than Japanese kamikaze pilots or Palestinian suicide/homicide bombers were all "deranged."

With 20/20 hindsight, it is easy to conclude that Nidal Hassan should have been discharged from the Army years ago. No military organization can function if every unhappy soldier can quit at any time, all of our armed forces have ways of discharging people who are useless, or worse. (4) One of these ways should have been found to get rid of Hassan. But how can the services guard against future "Hassans" without violating our laws against religious discrimination? Israel openly practices "ethnic profiling" in choosing who shall serve in the I D F (5), but the US is prohibited by the Constitution from following its example.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) A Maylaysian term for sudden, deadly violence.

(2) Washington Post, November 8, 2009.

(3) Associated Press, November 8, 2009.

(4) Had Hassan been (or falsely claimed to be) homosexual, he would have been discharged long ago.

(5) Israeli Arabs are exempt from the draft, but Druze Arabs are accepted as volunteers. Some other Arabs have also been accepted to serve in non-combatant roles.