Could Trump's Muslim ban threaten everyone's religious freedom? [CNA]

#1 D.C., Jan 14, 2016 / 03:25 am (CNA).- A prominent proposal by GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump would ban Muslim immigrants from entering the U.S. and would monitor mosques in the country.

The idea has garnered no shortage of publicity – or controversy. But religious freedom advocates say such measures could endanger the religious freedom of all faiths.

“Our nation was founded by religious dissenters who fled statist persecution in Europe and ratified a First Amendment that guarantees the free exercise and free speech rights of all persons of faith – including Muslims,” Matthew Kacsmaryk, deputy general counsel at the Liberty Institute, told CNA.

“An indiscriminate ban on all Muslims violates the very ‘first freedom’ principles that inspired dissident Puritans, Quakers, Baptists, Presbyterians, and Roman Catholics to seek refuge in the new world,” he said.

“Having once felt the sting of religious persecution in the United States, American Catholics understand that the majority can do great violence to the constitutional rights of an insular religious minority. Consequently, faithful Catholics should stand athwart any government policy that indiscriminately targets Muslims because they are Muslim.”

Trump’s proposal comes after a string of terrorist attacks, including the Dec. 2, 2015 shooting in San Bernardino, California that left 14 dead and 22 more seriously injured.

The San Bernardino shooters – Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik – opened fire at a holiday party at the Inland Regional Center. They were later killed by police. The married couple pledged allegiance to the Islamic State on social media shortly before the attack.

Farook, a U.S. citizen, and Malik, a Pakistan national, began plotting a terror attack before they were engaged and before Malik moved to the U.S. last year from Saudi Arabia on a K-1 fiancee visa, according to authorities.

According to a 2012 U.S. Religion Census, Islam is the fastest growing religion in America, with numbers of Muslims in the U.S. more than doubling from 2000 to 2010. The Pew Research Center has estimated that the population of U.S. Muslims will more than double again over the next two decades, reaching 6.2 million in 2030.

The U.S. House of Representatives recently approved funding to issue nearly 300,000 visas to immigrants from Muslim countries in 2016.

In light of the terrorist attacks – both abroad and on U.S. soil – Trump suggested banning non-citizen Muslims from entering the United States.

However, the proposal has drawn intense backlash, both from those concerned about its humanitarian effects on those trying to flee violent countries and those concerned with its effects on religious liberty.

Full article…


My understanding, based on what he actually said, is that he would have such a ban until this country achieves the ability to adequately vet Muslim immigrants due to the high incidence of terrorists among them. He said nothing about harassing Muslims in the U.S. in any manner.

Of course, Obama refuses to grant refugee status to Middle Eastern Christians, while granting it, willy-nilly to Middle Eastern Muslims about whom we know nothing.

At this point, it appears to me the only religion in the U.S. that’s being persecuted by the government is Catholicism. Well, the administration did go after the Lutheran Church, but got slapped down by the Supreme Court. Nobody is forcing Muslims to act against their faith like this government is trying to force Catholics to do. Nor is anyone forcing Muslims to accept a government judgment of who is or is not a Muslim cleric, like the government tried to impose on the Lutheran Church.

And if Trump or Obama wants to put spies in the Mass in my parish to see if the priest is inciting the congregation to terrorism, they’re welcome to do it.


people keep forgetting to use the word TEMPORARY before the word ban. it is a temporary ban to PROTECT our country and our citizens from the threat of terrorism coming to America like it has come to Europe and other areas around the globe.


A ban based solely on religion is simply a no-go in America.
It is a promise that no president would be able to keep.


Forgetting to quote the word TEMPORARY in order to discredit Trump. It is a very prudent suggestion to make under the conditions of Islamic terrorists sliding out from everywhere.


Banning literally every Muslim is not okay, end of story. If they can’t be vetted, that’s another story.


People that aren’t US citizens don’t get to use our rights, first off. Second, we have NO OBLIGATION to accept these people, whom we know nothing about, when
A) The Islamic State has infiltrated the group, and
B) the countries that have accepted these “refujees” willy nilly have a huge crisis of them raping their women.

Also, the word “temporary” is VERY important, as well as the fact that this doesn’t effect those already in the US.

I still don’t like Trump.


I find it unlikely, but think the possibility would always be there. The danger is allowing a man with a pragmatic utilitarianism philosophy the power over any other human beings. The more power, the greater the danger. This is how we end up with Manzanar. This is why we have abortion. This is why we have war. Utilitarianism is opposed to Catholic moral theology.


What is most contemptible about Trump is that he has made the issue so black and white and simplistic with his hyperbolic excess that what in effect becomes impossible is a path to proper vetting.

ISIS is at war with America, and with everyone who is not a part of them really. Just as no country with any sanity would have allowed open access to a stream of humanity from Japan and Nazi Germany during that active war, there is an active state of war going on now between Islamists and the world.
Discernment is absolutely necessary to fight this war and limit the access of ISIS to the world. This is a highly complex vetting process when guarding against a fighting force that recognizes no national boundaries. Instead, Trump offers simplistic, inflammatory diatribe as his solution.

He is half right in that he correctly identifies stifling political correctness as the reason that such a vetting process is not already in place, as the years since 2001 stretch into decades.

At this point, we need to expect more than being half right from our political leaders.


I realize this is CNA News. but I would ask if this story carries to other outlets that the media is NOW concerned about religious liberty?

If that happens, the double standard is reflected yet again. :rolleyes:


A law like this would only be a threat to religious groups with a proven history of violent acts, so unless anyone knows of Quaker suicide bombers or Mennonites taking hostages, I see nothing to worry about.


You mean like Christians and the crusades?


I believe the Crusades were very necessary, but even so, they’re hardly recent American History. It’s basically the same old argument I heard back in the 90’s when people in some communities were trying to get 7-11’s, White Hens to stop selling pornography. The come back from those opposed was, you find pornography offensive, well some people find your Bible offensive. Making all things equal is just a modernist concept.


The problem is, do we really want the government to be deciding which religions are violent and extremist?


I think we already know which ones include many violent adherents within there ranks.


Like I said, do you really trust a politician to determine which religions are allegedly violent and which ones are peaceful? Didn’t Bush claim that Islam was a religion of peace?


Donald Trump isn’t getting people to blindly follow whatever he suggests, he’s popular because he’s suggesting taking actions they already support. And if you noticed, nearly all the Republican candidates have toughened there stance on refugees since Paris and San Bernardino.


It’s embarrassing that anybody who claims to be a Catholic would try to equate the Crusades with modern Islamic terrorism.


What kills me is that most of the candidates are saying almost the same thing, except for bush. First of all, there is absolutely nothing wrong with what trump said . He said no Muslims should be allowed in the country until the vetting problem is fixed. It’s not working and we know it. However not two weeks later it was announced that Canada was taking some mass quantity of Muslim refuges and like two hours later, multiple politicians said, well maybe we should hold off on taking more refugees in until we fix the vetting process. Idiots. In fact trump doesn’t go far enough under the current circumstances. No one should allowed in, or back in, until the vetting process is fixed. Period.

Why don’t we take a look at the bigger picture. Obama has allowed thousands of Muslim refugees into the US and will bring thousands more. Isis has said they are hidden in that group, and have proven to be, including women and children. Obama’s answer is to bring more in without vetting them. But not Christian refugees. In the meantime, the Islamic countries won’t let the Christians out but are pushing out the Muslims with all their good will. Does anyone even think this is a little strange or suspicious?

There are 22 radical slamic training compounds in the US allowed to operate. Because the have the right to “peacefully assemble”. Even though it’s to train how to kill. In full combat gear. They after all have the right as long as they haven’t hurt anyone yet.

Next Obama declares executive actions meant to stir up the masses and divide everyone (as he always does). He calls for gun control actions that already exist and mixes in New stuff hoping they will get lost in the shuffle while people argue ad nauseam over the small stuff. For example, unless you’re in the parking lot selling weapons under the table, at gun shows you still have to have a background check before you buy a gun. That’s a law already. You can’t buy a gun online already. You still have to pass a background check and it gets shipped near you, not to you, to a Marshall and you pick it up. Anything else is breaking the laws that already exist!!!

Then Obama snuck in is this mental health thing which has the potential to disarm thousands of veterans and civilians because there have been no detailed parameters. No one wants mentally ill people to own guns, however not there varying degrees of PTSD, depression, etc. People should not have their guns taken for being on Lexapro, xanax or adderall. Think about how many people will be disarmed with this part of the action. You know, victims of violence and rape suffer varying degrees of ptsd, depression, anxiety as well. That doesnt mean they aren’t perfectly capable of safely handling a gun!!! Thankfully, for one notable example, the VA showed up at a veterans home and said they were there to confiscate his firearms, his neighbors and the sheriff showed up to help and sent the VA away. How many veterans are there that maybe didn’t have that kind of support that we don’t know about?

Next Obama has been releasing truly dangerous criminals from gitmo. And he keeps sending weapons and engaging in prisoner swaps. Continues to do this over and over. Over and over and over. Why is he not in jail people!!! ! Everything is even done publicly, in full view, no secrets.

Not only do I not understand why he and Clinton are not in jail, but I honestly have no earthly clue why the rest of us US citizens have not put it all together. And why we haven’t done anything about it as a group. If y’all can make all that noise in Chicago over the black lives matter issue and demand New leadership, then I can only assume y’all don’t comprehend that it’s gotten much worse on an international level.

I could go on, but not only is making this entry on my kindle proving to be annoying but I think I made my point.

No, trump is not making it bad for Christians. Our current leadership, and our citizens, are doing that - and tremendously well too.



DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit