Islam, Muslims and Islamophobia: a Catholic Response

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

MAY LECTURE SERIES Islam, Muslims and Islamophobia: A Catholic Response In 1965, the Second Vatican Council proclaimed the Church’s “esteem” for Muslims, urging local and global cooperation for the common good between Catholics and Muslims. Over fifty years later, Pope Francis said I do not think it is right to identify Islam with violence. This is not right and it is not true. Yet a recent Georgetown University study reveals that U.S. Catholics who read Catholic publications on Islam harbor more anti-Muslim bias than those who do not. This course will give participants an opportunity to identify the structures of systemic anti-Muslim bigotry, with a specific focus on the U.S. context, and to consider how Christians and others can stand against hatred and divisiveness by resisting and transforming these structures in solidarity with their Muslim sisters and brothers. TUESDAYS @ 7:00 PM / APRIL 24 – MAY 22, 2018 LOCATION SCHEDULE Catholic Theological Union April 24 5416 South Cornell Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60615 Islam and Muslims Beyond Media Sound Bites DETAILS ■ $15 per lecture / $60 entire series May 1 ■ Lectures conclude around 8:00 pm and are open to the public Confrontation and Dialogue: ■ Suggested reading: Muslims and the Making of America a Brief History of (author: Amir Hussain; publisher: Baylor University Press, 2016) Muslim-Christian Relations ■ Complimentary parking in the CTU garage May 8 REGISTRATION Islam 2.0: The Messengers of God ■ Register online at ctu.edu/events or email us at [email protected]. and the muslim in Us All Pre-registration is encouraged. For questions about registration, please call 773.371.5453. May 15 Anti-Catholicism, Islamophobia, and Systemic Racism in U.S. History PRESENTER May 22 Scott C. Alexander, PhD, is an associate professor of Islamic Studies and Christian-Muslim Relations, and is the founding Ramadan Experience: director of the Catholic-Muslim Studies Program. Muslims Share Personal Stories in Prayer and Dialogue.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Islamophobia and Religious Intolerance: Threats to Global Peace and Harmonious Co-Existence
Qudus International Journal of Islamic Studies (QIJIS) Volume 8, Number 2, 2020 DOI : 10.21043/qijis.v8i2.6811 ISLAMOPHOBIA AND RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE: THREATS TO GLOBAL PEACE AND HARMONIOUS CO-EXISTENCE Kazeem Oluwaseun DAUDA National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN), Jabi-Abuja, Nigeria Consultant, FARKAZ Technologies & Education Consulting Int’l, Ijebu-Ode [email protected] Abstract Recent events show that there are heightened fear, hostilities, prejudices and discriminations associated with religion in virtually every part of the world. It becomes almost impossible to watch news daily without scenes of religious intolerance and violence with dire consequences for societal peace. This paper examines the trends, causes and implications of Islamophobia and religious intolerance for global peace and harmonious co-existence. It relies on content analysis of secondary sources of data. It notes that fear and hatred associated with Islām and persecution of Muslims is the fallout of religious intolerance as reflected in most melee and growingverbal attacks, trends anti-Muslim of far-right hatred,or right-wing racism, extremists xenophobia,. It revealsanti-Sharī’ah that Islamophobia policies, high-profile and religious terrorist intolerance attacks, have and loss of lives, wanton destruction of property, violation led to proliferation of attacks on Muslims, incessant of Muslims’ fundamental rights and freedom, rising fear of insecurity, and distrust between Muslims and QIJIS, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2020 257 Kazeem Oluwaseun DAUDA The paper concludes that escalating Islamophobic attacks and religious intolerance globally hadnon-Muslims. constituted a serious threat to world peace and harmonious co-existence. Relevant resolutions in curbing rising trends of Islamophobia and religious intolerance are suggested.
[Show full text]
Anti-Muslim Hatred and Discrimination Submission from Dia Kayyali Associate Director of Advocacy at Mnemonic, Independent Consul
Anti-Muslim Hatred and Discrimination Submission from Dia Kayyali Associate Director of Advocacy at Mnemonic, independent consultant on technology and human rights, and co-chair of the Christchurch Call Advisory Network1 [email protected] Summary: This submission focuses on the online aspect of anti-Muslim hatred and discrimination (Islamophobia). Content that incites violence against Muslims is too often left up on major social media platforms, while important content produced by Muslims is often removed. This leads to diminishing opportunities for justice in conflict zones such as Syria, while facilitating increased violence against Muslim communities around the world. Furthermore, online content is never solely online. Rather, it is intimately linked to violence and discrimination against Muslims in a harmful feedback loop. How the online feeds into the offline and back again, creating a vicious cycle The online component of Islamophobia has deadly consequences for Muslims around the world. At the same time, predominantly Muslim communities see content they post online regularly removed by major social media companies. Islamophobia, like other social ills, is stuck in a dangerous feedback loop. Offline discrimination and violence lead to online hate speech and dangerous speech. This content then worsens discrimination, and sometimes directly incites offline violence and other negative consequences. The cycle is self-perpetuating, and it is deadly. Muslim lives have already been lost as a result, and Islamophobia threatens other essential human rights including freedoms of expression and religion. Who is Muslim? Islamophobia doesn’t just impact Muslims. As outlined in this submission, it also impacts people who are secular or practice other religions but are in Muslim majority countries or communities.
[Show full text]
Australia Muslim Advocacy Network
1. The Australian Muslim Advocacy Network (AMAN) welcomes the opportunity to input to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Freedom of Religion or Belief as he prepares this report on the Impact of Islamophobia/anti-Muslim hatred and discrimination on the right to freedom of thought, conscience religion or belief. 2. We also welcome the opportunity to participate in your Asia-Pacific Consultation and hear from the experiences of a variety of other Muslims organisations. 3. AMAN is a national body that works through law, policy, research and media, to secure the physical and psychological welfare of Australian Muslims. 4. Our objective to create conditions for the safe exercise of our faith and preservation of faith- based identity, both of which are under persistent pressure from vilification, discrimination and disinformation. 5. We are engaged in policy development across hate crime & vilification laws, online safety, disinformation and democracy. Through using a combination of media, law, research, and direct engagement with decision making parties such as government and digital platforms, we are in a constant process of generating and testing constructive proposals. We also test existing civil and criminal laws to push back against the mainstreaming of hate, and examine whether those laws are fit for purpose. Most recently, we are finalising significant research into how anti-Muslim dehumanising discourse operates on Facebook and Twitter, and the assessment framework that could be used to competently and consistently assess hate actors. A. Definitions What is your working definition of anti-Muslim hatred and/or Islamophobia? What are the advantages and potential pitfalls of such definitions? 6.
[Show full text]
Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities
Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities A Practical Guide Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities A Practical Guide Published by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Ul. Miodowa 10 00-251 Warsaw Poland www.osce.org/odihr © OSCE/ODIHR 2020 All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may be freely used and copied for educational and other non-commercial purposes, provided that any such reproduction is accompanied by an acknowledgement of the OSCE/ ODIHR as the source. ISBN 978-83-66089-93-8 Designed by Homework Printed in Poland by Centrum Poligrafii Contents Foreword v Executive Summary vii Introduction 1 PART ONE: Understanding the challenge 7 I. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: context 8 II. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: key features 12 III. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: impact 21 PART TWO: International standards on intolerance against Muslims 29 I. Commitments and other international obligations 30 II. Key principles 37 1. Rights based 37 2. Victim focused 38 3. Non-discriminatory 41 4. Participatory 41 5. Shared 42 6. Collaborative 43 7. Empathetic 43 8. Gender sensitive 43 9. Transparent 44 10. Holistic 45 PART THREE: Responding to anti-Muslim hate crimes and the security challenges of Muslim communities 47 Practical steps 48 1. Acknowledging the problem 48 2. Raising awareness 51 3. Recognizing and recording the anti-Muslim bias motivation of hate crimes 53 4. Providing evidence of the security needs of Muslim communities by working with them to collect hate crime data 58 5.
[Show full text]
The Battle for China's Spirit
A Freedom House Special Report February 2017 The Battle for China’s Spirit Religious Revival, Repression, and Resistance under Xi Jinping CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 Overview 3 Evolving Mechanisms of Religious 12 Control and Persecution Chart: Key Religious Controls 18 Map: Religious Persecution by Province 19 I. Chinese Buddhism and Taoism 20 II. Christianity 22 III. Islam 24 IV. Tibetan Buddhism 26 V. Falun Gong 28 Recommendations 30 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Sarah Cook, senior research analyst for East Asia at Freedom House, served as project director and author of this report. She directs the China Media Bulletin, a monthly digest in English and Chinese providing news and analysis on media freedom developments related to China. She is also the author of two previous Freedom House special reports: The Politburo’s Predicament: Confronting the Limitations of Chinese Communist Party Repression (2015) and The Long Shadow of Chinese Censorship: How the Communist Party’s Media Restrictions Affect News Outlets Around the World (2013). RESEARCH, EDITORIAL, AND ADVISORY TEAM ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Five experts on religious communities in China (three This report was made possible by the generous support of doctoral candidates, an independent researcher, and a the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation. Special thanks to journalist) provided research support for the report’s five Arch Puddington, Daniel Calingaert, and Robert Ruby for chapters, but wished to remain anonymous. Tyler Roylance their comments and feedback. Gerry Fey served as graphic (staff editor), Annie Boyajian (advocacy manager), and in- designer. terns Bochen Han and Cathy Zhang provided editorial and research assistance. Three China scholars who wished to ON THE COVER remain anonymous served as academic advisers.
[Show full text]
Jailhouse Islamophobia: Anti-Muslim Discrimination in American Prisons
Race Soc Probl (2009) 1:36–44 DOI 10.1007/s12552-009-9003-5 Jailhouse Islamophobia: Anti-Muslim Discrimination in American Prisons Kenneth L. Marcus Published online: 31 March 2009 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009 Abstract The post 9/11 surge in America’s Muslim Keywords Islamophobia Á Muslims Á Prisoners’ rights Á prison population has stirred deep-seated fears, including Religious freedom Á Religious discrimination Á the specter that American prisons will become a breeding Religious Land Use and Incarcerated Persons Act system for ‘‘radicalized Islam.’’ With these fears have come restraints on Muslim religious expression. Mistreat- ment of Muslim prisoners violates the Religious Land Use Introduction and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), which Congress passed in part to protect prisoners from Muslims constitute nearly a tenth of the American federal religious discrimination. Despite RLUIPA, prisoners still prison population and their numbers are rapidly rising.1 face the same challenge that preceded the legislation. The post 9/11 surge in Muslim prison population has stir- Ironically, while Congress directed courts to apply strict red deep-seated fears and resentments, including the scrutiny to these cases, the courts continue to reject most specter that the American prison system will become a claims. One reason is that many courts are applying a breeding system for ‘‘radicalized Islam.’’2 With these fears diluted form of the legal standard. Indeed, the ‘‘war on have come restraints on Muslim religious expression, with terror’’ has justiﬁed increasing deference to prison admin- prison ofﬁcials citing a need to maintain orderly prison istration to the detriment of incarcerated Muslims and administration and ensure homeland security.3 religious freedom.
[Show full text]
Religion and Violence
Religion and Violence Edited by John L. Esposito Printed Edition of the Special Issue Published in Religions www.mdpi.com/journal/religions John L. Esposito (Ed.) Religion and Violence This book is a reprint of the special issue that appeared in the online open access journal Religions (ISSN 2077-1444) in 2015 (available at: http://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions/special_issues/ReligionViolence). Guest Editor John L. Esposito Georgetown University Washington Editorial Office MDPI AG Klybeckstrasse 64 Basel, Switzerland Publisher Shu-Kun Lin Assistant Editor Jie Gu 1. Edition 2016 MDPI • Basel • Beijing • Wuhan ISBN 978-3-03842-143-6 (Hbk) ISBN 978-3-03842-144-3 (PDF) © 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. All articles in this volume are Open Access distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC-BY), which allows users to download, copy and build upon published articles even for commercial purposes, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. However, the dissemination and distribution of physical copies of this book as a whole is restricted to MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. III Table of Contents List of Contributors ............................................................................................................... V Preface ............................................................................................................................... VII Jocelyne Cesari Religion and Politics: What Does God Have To Do with It? Reprinted from: Religions 2015, 6(4), 1330-1344 http://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/6/4/1330 ............................................................................ 1 Mark LeVine When Art Is the Weapon: Culture and Resistance Confronting Violence in the Post-Uprisings Arab World Reprinted from: Religions 2015, 6(4), 1277-1313 http://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/6/4/1277 .........................................................................
[Show full text]
The Myth of Love Jihad- the Fruit of Patriarchy, Partition and the Pronounced Silence of the Constitution Mrinalini Kumar
I S S N : 2 5 8 2 - 2 942 L E X F O R T I L e g a l J o u r n a l Vol-II Issue- I October, 2020 I S S N : 2 5 8 2 - 2 942 DISCLAIMER No part of this publication may be reproduced or copied in any form by any means without prior written permission of Editor-in-chief of LexForti Legal Journal. The Editorial Team of LexForti Legal Journal holds the copyright to all articles contributed to this publication. The views expressed in this publication are purely personal opinions of the authors and do not reflect the views of the Editorial Team of LexForti. Though all efforts are made to ensure the accuracy and correctness of the information published, LexForti shall not be responsible for any errors caused due to oversight otherwise. I S S N : 2 5 8 2 - 2 942 EDITORIAL BOARD Editor in Chief Rohit Pradhan Advocate Prime Dispute [email protected] Editor in Chief Sridhruti Chitrapu Member | CiArb [email protected] Editor Nageshwar Rao Professor (Banking Law) 47+ years of scholarly experience Editor Dr Rajanikanth M Assistant Professor | Management Symbiosis International University Editor Nilima Panda B.SC LLB., LLM (NLSIU) (Specialization Business Law) I S S N : 2 5 8 2 - 2 942 EDITORIAL BOARD Editor Nandita Reddy Advocate Prime Dispute Editor Srishti Sneha Student Editor Editor Shubhangi Nangunoori Student Editor I S S N : 2 5 8 2 - 2 942 ABOUT US LexForti Legal News and Journal offer access to a wide array of legal knowledge through the Daily Legal News segment of our Website.
[Show full text]
Islamaphobia and Anti-Muslim Hate in Sri Lanka Note
Islamaphobia and anti-Muslim hate in Sri Lanka Note: The structure of this submission follows the guiding questions raised in the concept note for the online consultation. It provides a synopsis of concepts and a snap shot of issues and includes a number of references to more detailed information and analysis. Definitions Islamaphobia is used in Sri Lanka mainly by Muslim commentators, scholars, a few Islamic scholars and a handful of non-Muslim intellectuals to describe the hatred and fear of Islam by non-Muslims and/or as one of the root causes of anti-Muslim hatred. It is often used in online platforms though not limited to it. Anti- Muslim hate is used to refer to hate campaigns and messaging by non-Muslims targeting Muslims. There is more usage of the term anti-Muslim hate than Islamaphobia and the latter is at times used to describe the former. Historical/political context affecting usage of terms: There are number of factors that influence and affect the usage of these terms. They include: a) Muslim’s historical ethnic claims – pre-independence Muslim political representatives fearing they would be a ‘minority within a minority’ fought hard to establish their own ethnic identity. The British enabled this through a problematic and weak classification titled ‘Moor’ (Ceylon and Coastal). There were also other Muslim ethnic groups such as the Malays. Based on weak ethnic markers (Arab origin, distinct culture) and as they were conversant in both local languages (Tamil and Sinhalese), Muslims became less ethnically distinctive and more commonly identified as a religious group, or as ‘Muslims.’ Nevertheless, claiming an identity distinct from the two larger ethnic groups and seeking recognition as a separate group remains critically important to community representatives and leaders.1 Consequentially, both from outside and inside the community hate, attacks and violence are framed as against ‘Muslims’ rather than ‘Islam’ and renders to the more frequent reference of ‘anti-Muslim’ violence/hate/attacks over Islamaphobia.
[Show full text]
A Comparative Analysis of European Islamophobia: France, UK, Germany, Netherlands and Sweden
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF EUROPEAN ISLAMOPHOBIA: FRANCE, UK, GERMANY, NETHERLANDS AND SWEDEN Engy Abdelkader, JD, LL.M. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. WHAT DO EUROPEANS THINK OF ISLAM AND MUSLIMS? .......................................31 A. France ...................................................................................................31 B. United Kingdom ....................................................................................33 C. Germany ...............................................................................................36 D. Netherlands ...........................................................................................37 A. Sweden ..................................................................................................39 II. THE ROLE OF RELIGION AND PROTECTIONS EXTENDED TO FREEDOM OF RELIGION .40 B. United Kingdom ....................................................................................42 C. Germany ...............................................................................................43 D. Netherlands ...........................................................................................43 E. Sweden ..................................................................................................44 III. RELIGION, LAW AND SOCIETY ............................................................................45 A. France ...................................................................................................45 1. Hate Crimes ..........................................................................................45
[Show full text]
Islamophobia and the Treatment of Muslims in the State of Connecticut
Sweet Land of Liberty: Islamophobia and the Treatment of Muslims in the State of Connecticut CHERYL A. SHARP I. INTRODUCTION The United States celebrates over 220 years of religious freedom, yet after the tragic events of September 11, 2001, the battle cries against Muslims based on their religion resonate throughout the United States, and Connecticut is not insulated from the controversy. This Article will examine the treatment of Muslims in Connecticut through the lens of the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities ("CHRO"), the oldest governmental, civil rights agency in the nation, which was established in 1943. Over a decade has passed since the terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, on September 11, 2001, which claimed the lives of more than 3,000 Americans.' However the backlash from the actions of a few extremist attackers lingers on and blankets the nation and its view of Muslims in America. Most alarming, Anti-Muslim sentiment threatens to suffocate the spirit of a nation that was founded on religious freedom. When our nation faces external threats, fear often obscures the common ground that people of diverse backgrounds share. 2 Such is the case as it relates to Muslims, or those who are perceived to be Muslim, who prior to 9/11 arguably shared the same freedoms and equal protection under the law as other Americans, but now find that their Muslim identity is viewed by some as a valid proxy for terrorist association. In Connecticut, although we have very progressive laws prohibiting J.D., University of Connecticut School of Law , 1993, M.S.
[Show full text]
Islamophobia in Three Asian Contexts: India, Myanmar and China. Justice for All Analysis for OHCHR
Islamophobia in Three Asian Contexts: India, Myanmar and China. Justice for All Analysis for OHCHR INTRODUCTION What is Islamophobia? Serving as conceptual framework for divisive and reactionary politics, the Islamophobic narrative asserts that Islam and Muslims constitute an essential and existential threat both to national security and to national purity. Some scholars1 have understood this prejudice as arising from an Orientalist power structure, but some of the harshest impacts of Islamophobia exist in Asian nations. Social disruption occurs as each nation struggles with the economic and cultural challenges of adapting to globalization. As Faisal Devji (March 2020)2 observes, “Increasingly associated with violence in the west... Islamophobia’s brutality is most readily seen in Asia, a continent awaiting its recognition as capitalism’s new home.” As a human rights advocacy organization, Justice for All3 advocates for persecuted Muslim minorities with a special focus on the plight of the Rohingya, the Uighur and the Muslim minorities in India and Kashmir. In each case, a nation’s dramatic opening to new markets has increased opportunities for exploitation. Serving to divide, weaken and exploit a diverse population, those that promote an Islamophobic narrative frequently link it to a securitization framework. Amplifying fears of real and imagined threats, an authoritarian and even paranoid mindset manifests itself both in military force and mob violence. Therefore, though contributing social and economic factors exist for exclusionary and even genocidal policies in these areas, Islamophobia drives popular support for extreme and destructive social policies, magnified by grassroots social media as well as incendiary speeches by leadership. Thus, Burman Buddhist Supremacist ideology, Han Chauvinism, and the Hindutva movement all serve as tools for elites to manage diverse populations through fear and mutual mistrust.
[Show full text]