The Threat to Homeland Security

Introduction 

The Islam religion is one of the largest communities across the globe, and in America, constitutes a large percentage of the ethnic groups within the country. Their religion, however, is faced with many controversies, especially with the links to terror groups such as the AL Qaeda and the Alshabab, among others. The uncertainty, therefore, has led to debates on whether the United States should give the Islam religion constitutional protection or not. The supporters argue that the individuals within the United States who subscribe to the Islam community understand the state regulations and can abide with the rules, but contradictory opinions are expressed such that the Islam religion is more of a political system, and this can lead to threats in the country. The purpose of this paper is to disseminate research into the debatable question on whether the United States Constitution should offer Islam religion protection while in the Nation.

Problem Statement 

With the increasing number of Islam communities in the United States and growing concerns over terror attacks by the Alshabab and the Al-Qaeda, among others, the problem faced by the nation is that they are in a dilemma on whether or not to offer the religion constitutional protection. It is a mandate of the state’s constitution that it should offer support and refuge to all persons within the country, but it is also arguable that the Islam Religion is more of a political system, and their links to terror groups further increase their risk scores (Gidengil, & Karakoç, 2016). The problem has caused massive debates to occur within the country on whether the state constitution should offer the protection or deny the same with the claim that Islam is not a true religion.

Literature Review 

Arguments have prevailed that Islam is not a religion, but a political system that has a deity aimed at ensuring they conquer the globe on a political basis. According to a research conducted by NYTimes (2019), most of the security personnel in the United States claim that Islam hides behind the notion of being a religion, but their primary aim is based on political ideologies. The United States government and by extension the counties have previously challenged, in a legal manner, the approval to build mosques for Islam. The challenge was that, because arguments claim that religion is not valid, it should not benefit from federal laws that can help to protect the people. The religion’s close connection to other nations that appear to engage in terror attacks further instigates the negative perception that shows their need to divide the United States on the political aspect. This presents a challenge in trusting the community and hence the prejudice and stereotype against the religion.

The decision, however, was made that the mosque should be allowed within the country. This is in line with the constitutional requirements to have equal rights among the people. Furthermore, since there lacks substantial evidence that can show the Islam is a political movement, they are still legal citizens of the United States and should be allowed all privileges (Beller, 2017). The people in the United States are treated equally, and this means that Islam should be given similar treatment unless there is proof to show that they are indeed a political movement rather than a religion. Majority of the evidence presented is based on opinion against Islam either because of their culture, language, and possible connection to terror groups. However, according to Lowe, (2017), it is common to find that the majority of the Islam persons in the United States are loyal and abide by state regulations just like their counterpart ethnic groups. As a result, their discrimination based on personal opinions should be limited. The United States should consider offering the religion constitutional protection against any harm that may be propagated from their hometown and other parties. Moreover, the Islam should be given equal treatment and allowed to participate in all activities occurring within the country since they are legal citizens and have not violated any state regulations (Von Glahn, and Taulbee, 2017). Furthermore, Islam has not caused any terror attacks or attempts to the United States, and this is reason enough to offer them with constitutional protection. 

Conclusion 

The purpose of this research was to examine whether or not the United States should offer constitutional protection to the Islam considering the claims that have been presented against them not being a religious group but rather a political organization. Stereotypes have developed against the religion and the people with the perception-shifting towards them being a political group aiming to take over America and other countries. However, the religion abides with the constitution and hence cannot be regarded as terrorists or having any intentions to cause any harm to the people of America. Therefore, the constitution should offer them the necessary protection in their life during the time they are in the United States

References

Beller, E. T., (2017). The headscarf affair: the Conseil d’Etat on the role of religion and culture in French society. In  Global Minority Rights  (pp. 141-183). Routledge.

Gidengil, E., & Karakoç, E., (2016). Which matters more in the electoral success of Islamist (successor) parties–religion or performance? The Turkish case.  Party Politics ,  22 (3), 325-338.

Lowe, D., (2017). Prevent strategies: The problems associated with defining extremism: The case of the United Kingdom.  Studies in Conflict & Terrorism ,  40 (11), 917-933.

NYTimes, (2019). Opinion | The Latest Attack on Islam: It is Not a Religion. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/opinion/islamophobia-muslim-religion-politics.html 

Von Glahn, G., & Taulbee, J. L. (2017).  Law among nations: an introduction to public international law . Routledge.