March 23, 2011 12:19 PM

Dem Senator to lead hearing on Muslim civil rights

By
Stephanie Condon
Topics
Congress
(Credit: CBS)

Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.) announced Tuesday that he will hold Congress' first-ever hearing on the civil rights of American Muslims next week. The hearing comes a little more than two weeks after a Republican in Congress made headlines by holding a controversial hearing on the radicalization of Muslim Americans.

The release announcing the hearing said it is in response to the "pike in anti-Muslim bigotry in the last year including Quran burnings, restrictions on mosque construction, hate crimes, hate speech, and other forms of discrimination."

"Our Constitution protects the free exercise of religion for all Americans," Durbin said. "During the course of our history, many religions have faced intolerance. It is important for our generation to renew our founding charter's commitment to religious diversity and to protect the liberties guaranteed by our Bill of Rights."

The panel of witnesses scheduled to testify at the hearing include Muslim civil rights leader Farhana Khera; Catholic Cardinal Theodore McCarrick; Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez, the Obama Administration's top civil rights official; and former Assistant Attorney General Alex Acosta, the Bush Administration's top civil rights official.

Durbin will lead the hearing next Tuesday in the subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights, which is part of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Earlier this month, Republican Rep. Peter King (N.Y.) received an onslaught of criticism for leading a hearing in the House Homeland Security Committee on the radicalization of American Muslims. Critics said he was unfairly targeting Muslims, even though non-Muslims have committed acts of terrorism in the U.S. as well.

Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison, one of two Muslims in Congress, accused King of "ascribing the evil acts of a few individuals to an entire community" and said the hearings could make the country less safe.

King said that he believes "the overwhelming majority of Muslim Americans are outstanding Americans and make enormous contributions to our country" - but added that "there are realities we cannot ignore" about the threat of radicalization.


Add a Comment
by sandyhansen March 25, 2011 8:32 PM EDT
Is this what we want, look what they advise us; Try Sharia Law in Arizona to clean your state from drug dealers and criminals. Implement Sharia in Arizona against Latin Drug dealers apply stoning to dead and against Illegal migrant just lashing and thieves cut their hands and show it on TV....
http://www.sharia4america.com/story.php?sid=36
Reply to this comment
by sandyhansen March 25, 2011 8:29 PM EDT
Is this what we want, look what they advise us; Try Sharia Law in Arizona to clean your state from drug dealers and criminals. Implement Sharia in Arizona against Latin Drug dealers apply stoning to dead and against Illegal migrant just lashing and thieves cut their hands and show it on TV....
http://www.sharia4america.com/story.php?sid=36
Reply to this comment
by MarkJulianSmith March 24, 2011 8:25 PM EDT
"The person they represent me to be not only does not exist but could not possibly exist." (Bernard Shaw)

Such I believe to be the nature of the representation of Gods in their various incarnations and associated interconnected human entities deemed to be their respective representatives on earth.

Religious text continues to infect the human mind with imaginings and resultant actions which continue to spread terror and suppression amongst adherents as well as non-adherents in the rest of humanity.

Whatever good Religions purport to deliver are swamped by their vilification of other. It would be of great convenience for humanity if such vilification, as Plato rightly recommended , were removed from Religious text and informing the nature of new citizens. For such text informs evil actions.

Particularly since the cost of adherence and devotion to various Deities can be quite high for diligent adherents who wish to maximize the return on their investment of time and in the case of women humiliation and subjugation relative to men. Which is why women can be the most ferocious in their demand for the heads of non-adherents as their sacrifice are clearly much more than males within the same religious entity.

In fact the nature of women's place within religions would lead one to surmise religions were in fact created by Man to subjugate women. Not being able to justify such a state rationally Man derives the irrational notion of God to achieve the required result. It is rather a sad absurdity women at times become the most vocal defenders of such a state.

Shaw chastens our 'morals with ridicule' and laughter results, with religion it is done with fear and demonizing other for grievous harm either on this earth or beyond or more than likely alas both given the purposeful actions of adherents.

Why was it Plato thousands of years advised, No, more insisted, "..a superintendence over the authors of fables" (related to Gods and associated Heroes(associated human entities))? It was because Plato realized as do psychologists and educationalists today such fables repeated by "nurses and mothers (teachers, guardians,..)..to their children,.. may thus mold their minds with the fables even more than they shape their bodies with the hand.". In other words such text are not benign but opens "youth" imbued with such diabolical notions to an "imitation" deemed as "doing nothing extraordinary if he commits the foulest of crimes," a real possibility.

We see today the foulest of crimes committed by Muslims and attempts to do so even in Australia, yet we refuse to confront the actual reason the "fables", religious text which informs these actions of terror against humanity. Such as text contained in the Quran foundation chapter "THE COW" which vilifies non-adherents so venomously. We abuse those proffering such obvious linkages for what has been known to be true for thousands of years with bigot, racist, etc.

Usually such abusive statements are accompanied with the insipid statement which denies the reality of the terror and repeated crimes against other "Even though different cultures have different values and customs, in the end we are all people, with more in common than not.".

The facts are our commonality of being human are overridden by the different values and customs where they support vilification and 'grievous harm' derived from the cultures foundation texts informing actions against other. Not to accept this in the face of the continuing application of and attempts of terror in regards Muslims against other defies rational thought.

Where if not from the Islamic texts themselves are these imitations of evil textual constructions coming from. To not point out these sources of terror and suppression is contrived convenience and a callous disregard for the welfare of humanity.

Are Coptic's in Egypt to continue to console themselves with such notions "more in common than not" or the Shiite in Malaysia who are considered deviant and are not allowed to be spread because Sunni Islam is the official religion, are relatives of those blown to pieces on a regular basis, etc..?

The answer is clear delete the evil text or the terror against other continues.
Reply to this comment
by gekkobear March 24, 2011 1:56 PM EDT
Finally, Muslims see almost 10% of the hate crimes we see against say the Jewish Community. Clearly we need to focus on this.

Sure there are some groups that get more hate crimes, Blacks, Hispanics, Caucasians, Christians, Jews, I think maybe even Wiccans at this point.

But we must cater specifically to the Muslim minority even without a real problem of hate crimes against them.

If they weren't blowing sh*t up this wouldn't be worth mentioning and Congress wouldn't get involved... so I guess the lesson is "If you want attention from Congress, kill lots of civilians in big explosions".

Good to see we're encouraging behavior we want more of.
Reply to this comment
by JonnyChepe March 24, 2011 3:01 AM EDT
Radical extremest that impose their religious philosophizes on others are not welcome in this country, regardless of their religion. Is Durbin up for reelection or something?
Reply to this comment
by pasha128 March 24, 2011 9:32 AM EDT
Does that include the Christian RIGHT - that is seeking to expel most non-christians?
by pasha128 March 24, 2011 9:33 AM EDT
Or impose their views on abortion on everyone?
by pasha128 March 23, 2011 3:22 PM EDT
Sloughfoot -- As you state "Our Constitution protects the free exercise of religion for all Americans,". I prefer the positive position that that includes christian and non-christian rights, Catholic and Protestant rights, Jewish and Muslim rights, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, Jehovah Witness's, Buddists and many, many more group's religious rights including atheists, agnostics and pagans.
Reply to this comment
by trimrider March 23, 2011 2:00 PM EDT
Why is there any proof that they are being violated? If so then why haven't the people doing it been arrested? Liberal Democrats are all about the show and never about the truth. The idiot in the house doing the opposite is just as much a freak.
Reply to this comment
by Sloughfoot March 23, 2011 12:47 PM EDT
There are no "Muslim civil rights", that is correct "Our Constitution protects the free exercise of religion for all Americans,". That is the issue. Americans have not declare an endless war upon any peoples because of their religious idealogy but hopefully we will fight to the end those who have chosen to embark upon such a campaign against those Americans whose Judeo/Christian heritage founded this Nation, have died for this Nation and will die for this Nation.
Reply to this comment
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...