Catholic University Faces Complaint of Human Rights Violation by Muslim Students

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

I am not religious. I do respect the right of all peaceful religions to worship as their theocratic theological (religious) dogma would have them. How they worship, or the symbols of their religion do not affect me. Unless they are engaged in trying to force change in places they have no moral or legal right to do so.

Which is precisely why the following article reporting on Muslims attempting to force change on Catholic University {a private institution} because of alleged human rights violations should tick everyone of rational mind off greatly.

The Washington, D.C. Office of Human Rights confirmed that it is investigating allegations that Catholic University violated the human rights of Muslim students by not allowing them to form a Muslim student group and by not providing them rooms without Christian symbols for their daily prayers.

The investigation alleges that Muslim students “must perform their prayers surrounded by symbols of Catholicism – e.g., a wooden crucifix, paintings of Jesus, pictures of priests and theologians which many Muslim students find inappropriate.”

A spokesperson for the Office of Human Rights told Fox News they had received a 60-page complaint against the private university. The investigation, they said, could take as long a six months.

The complaint was filed by John Banzhaf, an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School. Banzhaf has been involved in previous litigation against the school involving the same-sex residence halls. He also alleged in his complaint involving Muslim students that women at the university were being discriminated against. You can read more on those allegations by clicking here.

Banzhaf said some Muslim students were particularly offended because they had to meditate in the school’s chapels “and at the cathedral that looms over the entire campus – the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.”

“It shouldn’t be too difficult somewhere on the campus for the university to set aside a small room where Muslims can pray without having to stare up and be looked down upon by a cross of Jesus,” he told Fox News.


Banzhaf said that it is technically not illegal for Catholic University to refuse to provide rooms devoid of religious icons.

“It may not be illegal, but it suggests they are acting improperly and probably with malice,” he said. “They do have to pray five times a day, they have to look around for empty classrooms and to be sitting there trying to do Muslim prayers with a big cross looking down or a picture of Jesus or a picture of the Pope is not very conductive to their religion.”


Garvey {the University President}, in his 2010 interview with NPR, addressed that issue.

“It’s just not something that we view as an activity that we want to sponsor because we’re a Catholic institution rather than Muslim,” he said.

Patrick Reilly, the president of the Cardinal Newman Society, an organization that promotes Catholic identity among Catholic schools, seemed stunned by the complaint.

“I don’t know what the attorney wants them to do – if he wants them to actually move the Basilica or if the Muslim students can find someplace where they don’t have to look at it,” he told Fox News.

Catholic University, he said, is a Catholic institution.

“One wouldn’t expect a Jewish institution to be responsible for providing liturgical opportunities for other faiths and I wouldn’t expect a Catholic institution to do that,” he said.

“This attorney is really turning civil rights on its head,” he said. “He’s using the law for his own discrimination against the Catholic institution and essentially saying Catholic University cannot operate according to Catholic principles.”

Read coverage from Catholic University’s student newspaper by clicking here.

the facts are:

A) Catholic University is a private institution of higher learning.
B) Students make the decision to attend Catholic University by their own free choice, even the Muslims who matriculate at CU.
C) Before entering the university all students, and their parents visit the campus and learn about the institution.
E) Given the above, all students {including the Muslim students} are fully aware of the conditions into which they are entering.

So, what's the problem? What moral or legal right do the Muslim students believe supports their {and their representative} position? What do they not understand about the choice they made, and how it would impact their lives while attending CU? Do they really believe their human rights have been violated, even given they made a free choice to attend CU?

What is even more disturbing is there are many who will side with the irrationality of their complaint. Truly disturbing. What once was largely a given in America, that one accepted the consequences of their free and independent decisions is rapidly vanishing. We can thank political correctness, accompanied by increasing thin skinned people for the change.

More @ The Conservative Guild

Via: Memeorandum


  1. The Muslim students are trying to interfere with University's right to exercise Catholicism freely. It's an affront to freedom of religion and freedom of assembly.

    Even if the students don't win the case, the University will loose money and time trying to defend itself. Either way, the punks win.

  2. I see this Banzhaf character has quite a history:


  3. Maybe it's time to put some pressure on George Washington University.

  4. "I do respect the right of all peaceful religions to worship as their theocratic dogma would have them.".

    Worship and theocracy have nothing to do with one another.

  5. In this case they do chuck.But I understand though you've failed understand this.


  6. If you understood half of what you thought you did you'd be almost as learned as me. There is only one religion on earth that has "theocratic dogma", and it's not a peaceful religion. Your statement is an example of both bigotry and ignorance.

  7. Chuck,

    In the freedom people like me have supplied you with through military service, and because I fully believe in Free Speech, I shall simply say that you are an idiotic douchebag looking to start a verbal confrontation with Les, a man who is your superior in every way.

    I read your inane comments here at LCR and elsewhere and I simply shake my head, wondering if you choose to be so jerkish on purpose or has it been caused by outside influences, like, say, drug usage.

    It was your statement, sir, that was rife with ignorance. It was not Les's.

  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

  9. This whole thing is a phony issue.

    Nobody is mentioning - or seems to be aware - Muslims are free under the Koran to worship at any "Holy Place", including Christian Churches and Chapels or Jewish Synagogs. We have family friends who routinely take Grandma to one of the California Missions during it's off hours to pray and worship. As they've explained to me, this is common all over the world.

  10. Chuck - Good catch - as the use of the word theocratic was intended as reference to theology and theological dogma it was an incorrect use of the word. My bad. Thank you for catching this error and pointing it out.

  11. Nick - I was not sniping at religion. I merely made the point I am not religious. I stated that I respect the right of all peaceful religions to worship as they chose. Therefore I obviously respect the right of each individual to worship as they so choose.

    What these students and their rep. are doing is attempting to force their will on a private Christian university.

    That I do not respect. Anymore than I would respect it if the roles were reversed and christian students from the US did the same at a Muslim University in a Arab nation.

  12. Chuck,

    After posting my mean-spirited comment to you this morning, I had the rest of the day to consider what I said. I was in a pissy mood this morning, I read what you said to Les, and I reacted irrationally and in bad form.

    I apologize, Chuck, in full view of everyone, and admit I was in error with the manner in which I spoke to you.

    No one should come here to LCR and need to see my childish vitriol towards you, which was no fault of yours, but totally mine. Again, I apologize. I've no wish nor desire to be rude to you.

  13. I'm humbled by your grace. I was pointing out something that bugged me. It was a minor thing that I really just commented on as a point of trivia more than anything else. I never meant it as a slight. I'm kind of a stickler for accuracy when it comes to throwing labels around. Nothing wrong with labels, but if we're going to use them let us do so accurately. That way they mean something.

    I like this site. I like most everyone who posts here except that anonymous leftist. I wish no one ill will. I could be nicer I suppose. You all certainly deserve the best I can offer; but pandering is chief among insults in my book. If a person is wrong, it's not respectful to allow them to persist in such a state. I pray you all would correct me if I was wrong about something. I'd rebuked than wrong.

    This is a great blog. Hell, I even dig the passion about Romney. (I can't get passionate about the guy, but good on ya' if you can :)

    In your debt,

  14. I'd rather be rebuked than wrong. Sorry.

  15. BTW: Why would a mooslim object to praying in a room that had Jesus symbols? Don't they claim Jesus as one of their minor prophets?

    Just goes to show that Islam is political/cultural first, and religious second...if at all.

    Does Catholic University get any government money? That's the lynchpin, y'know.

  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

  17. I hate that the subject of this article got sidetracked by some redneck nitpicker. hehe

    The article is a great jumping off point into a discussion of the "why" behind things like this. It's easy to blame policy, but what about timidity? What about cultural cowardice?

    Our culture tells certain people to stand up and others to stand down. It's a steady drumbeat too.

    I blame the left. This sort of cultural rot is their raison de etre. Then again, "real" libertarians call me a conservative, but all my friends think I'm a libertarian. hehe

  18. Well Chuck labels are confusing.

    Take me for example. My foundation is classical liberalism, my right pillar is fiscal conservatism and personal responsibility, and my left pillar is social libertarianism.

    All wrapped up in the Constitution.

  19. That's the thing, Les. Very little of my life is "wrapped up in the constitution". I can't imagine how it could be.

    What is fiscal conservatism other than a pin on a lapel? Same goes for every other hackneyed category of "high thinker".

    Reality does not require our participation.

  20. Chuck - Rhetorical my remark was.

    Right, reality does not require our participation.

    We choose to participate or not.

    One can chose to participate from the lynchpin of reason or a lack thereof. Or not at all.

    Principles matter. Philosophy matters. Concepts matter. Humans are cognitive beings. They can chose to view reality as it exists {A is A, therefor A cannot be B} or they can evade reality to any degree they chose, including a total evasion if they wish.

    Irrespective of whether one chooses to participate in reality or not, reality will exist as it is even if one does not perceive it.


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.