Rumage: Resisting the West: The Clinton Administration's Promotion of Abo CALIFORNIA WESTERN INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL VOLUME 27 FALL 1996 NUMBER 1 RESISTING THE WEST: THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S PROMOTION OF ABORTION AT THE 1994 CAIRO CONFERENCE AND THE STRENGTH OF THE ISLAMIC RESPONSE SARAH A. RUMAGE" "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean-neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master-that's all."' "Whoever hath an absolute authority to interpret any written or spoken laws, it is he who is truly the lawgiver, to all intents and purposes, and not the person who first spoke or wrote them. "2 INTRODUCTION Who makes the law, and who decides what the law means? For modem lawyers, the true riddle is not in the actors' identification, but whether these are different questions involving different actors, or instead the same question involving the same actors. For theologians, however, the question may even signify the dividing point between God and man. And until quite recently, * B.A., University of Miami (Florida) in anthropology, 1976; J.D., New York Law School, 1982; M.A. in history, 1993; LL.M. Temple University School of Law, 1996; Ph.D. candidate at John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. I wish to thank Professor Fouad Ajami for his helpful comments and encouragement, Professor Imad-Ad-Dean Ahmad for his great patience and critical eye, Professor Robert Gurland for opening the world of philosophical ethics to me, and especially my students at Temple University School of Law, who never failed to make me think. 1. LEwiS CARROLL, THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS (1871), reprinted in COMPLETE WORKS OF LEwIs CARROLL 196 (1936). 2. WILLIAM B. LOCKHART ET AL., CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CASES, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS 1 (6th ed. 1986) (quoting Bishop Hoadly's sermon preached before the King, March 31, 1717). Published by CWSL Scholarly Commons, 1996 1 2 CCaAliLfoIFrnOiaR NWIeAs teWrnE SInTtEeRrnNa tIioNnTaElR LNaAwT JIOouNrAnLa l, VLoAlW. 2 7J,O NUoR. N1A [1L996], A[Vrto. l2. 27 in most of the world (regardless of culture), the jurist wrestling with the issue would have also been a theologian, or at least a moralist.3 In the seventeenth century Western world, law and God were not yet divorced, and although the marriage was not entirely happy, it was considered stable. Indeed, secular society's rise and revitalization in the West falls hard upon the jurist's own recent tumble from divine grace. The Eastern concept of law as the perfect expression of the will of God has been under siege for many centuries, and its defeat in modern Western eyes seemed certain and complete. The infamous crusades, a prolonged continental war of Christiani- ty, two world wars, and a bloody, stalemated Asian conflict point to an intercine Western struggle that necessarily held (as a pivotal precept) that victors made law as men, and divined law's meaning as well. The victors' unchallenged power to usurp God's authority and reap these and other spoils made the point obvious, and religion's role in defining law and its meaning was gradually diminished accordingly. In place of the religious empire or state arose a Godless leviathan that rules the West today, tolerant only of those faiths that eagerly accommodate themselves to the state's political authority, tolerant only of religion as an airy, ideological exercise, and physically manifested in forms as obscure (and yet inexplicably controversial) as a pledge of allegiance or a prayer to open parliament.' This view is inherently flawed. Religion has always been and continues to be, everywhere, more of a force than these pale acknowledgements. Although some in the United States propose that the legally-mandated practice of tolerance, democracy's lauded trademark, transcends its ordinary political value and rises to the level of a state religion, this is not the way of much of the world.' The Western world view that relegates religion solely 3. In western Europe, for example, scholars such as Hugo de Groot (better known as Grotius) and Gentilli are considered the fathers of modem-day international law. But in their own time, their fame rested largely on their work as moralistic theologians. Ironically, Thomas Moore, a famous and well- respected lawyer in his day, is now perceived mostly as a religious moralist (most famously for his fatal advice to Henry VIII regarding his ability to divorce Catherine of Aragon and marry Anne Bolyn). Yet even in societies labeled as primitive or animistic, shamans and elders perform similar roles involving a blend of justice determination and interpretation of divine will. 4. In clarification, I do not mean to say that the United States is the "Godless leviathan," although it is the predominant Western power in the world today. The role of religion in U.S. society has always fluctuated and is often under siege, but remains very real to the citizens who practice their faiths. What I am referring to here is a more abstract zeitgeist that rejects the governing role of religion in citizens' daily life, relegating it to the hodge-podged realm of "privacy," where it keeps curious company with the issues of family, sex, birth control, and abortion-all of which are undeniably aspects of daily life. While such privacy "laws" protect the rights of Muslims to practice their faith in the West, the idea that Muslims would be ruled by shari'a in their daily lives is unacceptable to the United States and other secular powers. In this light, it is not so much that the United States is a "Godless" leviathan as it is a "lawless" one. Of course, to Muslims, there is no difference; where would one be left without God or His laws? Hence, the Ayatollah Khomeini's appellation of the United States as the "Great Satan" is an unflattering but not imperfect metaphor. Perhaps "Animal Farm" is a better appellation, more befitting the dictum of Seyyed Hossein Nasr that "[m]an is in absolute need of religion without which he is only accidentally human." SEYYED HOSSEIN NASR, IDEALS AND REALITIES OF ISLAM 24 (1967). 5. For the view that tolerance is the overriding moral value in the United States, see David A.J. Richards, Sexual Autonomy and the ConstitutionalR ight to Privacy: A Case Study in Human Rights and the Unwritten Constitution, 30 HASTINGS L.J. 957 (1979) (address by David A.J. Richards at New York University School of Law's 1992 Jurisprudence Colloquium); David A.J. Richards, UnnaturalA cts and the ConstitutionalR ight to Privacy:A Moral Theory, 45 FORDHAM L. REV. 1281 (1977). One writer goes https://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cwilj/vol27/iss1/2 2 Rumage: Resisting the West: The Clinton Administration's Promotion of Abo 1996] ABORTION AND THE 1994 CAIRO CONFERENCE to the realm of the personal is a product of centuries of Western paganism (what Edward Luttwak calls "Enlightenment prejudice")6-that harsh mixture of "classicism, impiety, and science" washed down with a heavy dose of the belief that "free will" equals intelligence and religious belief indicates stupidity and superstition.7 The West, incurably ethnocentric, ignores at its peril the revitalization of religion in the rest of the world. States inevitably last a long time, and civilizations even longer, but religion endures. Although all states have basic things in common (such as a defined area, population, and the capacity to engage in political relations with other states), the Islamic states are distinctive actors; they are both living fossils-curiosities of a time long past-and the shape of things to come, for they are religious states-more theocracies than democracies, despite the factor of popular elections-where the word of God has retained its vitality.' Within the borders of these states, Muslims may live their lives faithfully, as Islam embraces every aspect of their daily being. It is this aspect of Islam-its all-pervasiveness-that purportedly alarms the West. Yet even most secular states recognize religion in some way as a guiding force in the lives of all men.9 Religion is a force which secularism seeks to perpetually weaken, to bend to political compromise and accommo- dation. Judaism has been forced to make such compromises with ruling so far as to proclaim that the U.S. Constitution actually "forbids state action that has no purpose other than moral standard-setting." Peggy Cooper Davis, Changing Images of the State: Contested Images of Family Values: The Role of the State, 107 HARV. L. REV. 1348 (1994). Other scholars expand this claim to include international politics, and assert that democratic governments are the only legitimate forms of governance, and that a democracy cannot be a "true" democracy without declaring its obeisance to tolerance of all kinds of behavior. See, e.g., Gregory H. Fox & Georg Nolte, IntolerantD emocracies, 36 HARV. INT'L L.J. 1 (1995). But on a world-wide basis, this position is waning, even in the United States. In fact, groups that promote tolerance as the superior moral value feel more than threatened by the rise of religion and "family values" in the United States; they consider themselves under siege. See, e.g., DAVID CANTOR, THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT: THE ASSAULT ON TOLERANCE & PLURALISM IN AMERICA (1994). Cantor's work is a good example of the kind of ironies that arise among religious groups in the United States whose purpose is not religious at all, but political. Subsidized by the Jewish Anti- Defamation League (ADL), Cantor is critical of the U.S. grass-roots campaign to return prayer to public schools, subsidize private religious education, and promote "pro-family Christians' control" of the Republican Party. Id. 6. Edward Luttwak, The MissingDimension, in RELIGION, THE MISSING DIMENSION OF STATECRAFT 8 (Douglas Johnston & Cynthia Sampson eds., 1994). 7. PETER GAY, 1 THE ENLIGHTENMENT: AN INTERPRETATION; THE RISE OF MODERN PAGANISM 8 (1966). 8. See generally RELIGION IN THE MIDDLE EAST: THREE RELIGIONS IN CONCORD AND CONFLICT (A.J. Arberry ed. 1969). 9. The West is marked by periods of alternately openly brutal and subterfuged conflict between church and state. Pronounced points of this struggle were the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, which seemed to result in the state's total victory over faith by way of erecting an altar supposedly for the worship of that human commodity scarcer even than faith-reason-and ushered in secularism's latest interregnum. Ironically, the subsequent complementary rises of both communism and fascism involved the supposed "defeat" of religion, for which adherents substituted the worship of the state in lieu of a Marxist Utopia or Nazi Nibelungenied. This practice, however, belied the fact that the replacement secular ideology imposed by the state in religion's stead "must be imposed continually" and does not satisfactorily substitute religion's "opiate" social function. See Barry Rubin, Religion and International Affairs, in RELIGION, THE MISSING DIMENSION OF STATECRAFT, supra note 6, at 20-34. If religion is indeed an opiate, however, then it is also addictive, and people cannot help but desire it in some form or another. "Thus," observes Rubin, "Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini provided a better aphorism than Marx when he commented, 'The masses are naturally drawn to religion.'" Id. at 21. Published by CWSL Scholarly Commons, 1996 3 4 CaClAifoLrInFOiaR WNeIAst eWrnE ISnTteErRnNat ioINnTaEl RLaNwA TJIoOuNrnAaLl , VLoAl.W 27 ,J ONUoR. 1N [A1L996], A[rVt. o2l. 27 elites for millennia. The advent of Reform Judaism has made such compromises fairly painless for states' citizens, although the inevitable result is that faith is weakened. This has not been the case with observant Jews, however, who refuse to assimilate. Observant Jews are not simply part of a distinct kinship group or ethnically "Jewish." They are Jews who observe the Laws of Moses in their daily lives. However, in their own eyes, they do not live in a truly Jewish state. Observant Jews live their religion piously but privately, even in their own state of Israel.'0 The secular world is largely shut off from the vibrant religious life of the Jewish home, private rabbinical study, and synagogue as traditional Judaism becomes more and more privatized. The conscientious Western Christians seem less isolated in their daily lives, perhaps because there are simply more of them around. Nevertheless, they too have reached an accommodation with secular society, although their choice is more schizophrenic because Christian communities are more open and less isolated than Jewish ones. While observant Jews actively build communities apart from other faiths, Christians have fewer laws to obey and so feel more free to adapt themselves to the secular world, although the compromise is always imperfect. Christians see themselves as "citizens of two kingdoms," one secular and profane, and one otherworldly and holy." But with one foot in each world, Christian "dual" citizens are stuck in a perverse situation; absent vows of poverty, the burdens of ordinary Western living require them to spend six days a week in the first world. Most Christians ideally want to have their cake and eat it, too-to stay an active part of each distinct world-but the distinct laws of the secular and religious world are often in conflict. How, then, to free themselves from the responsibilities of the first world to live fully in the latter? This is particular- ly true in democracies, where every election requires Christians to choose a ruler who is necessarily very much at home in the first world and reticent about his life in the second. Christians must acknowledge God's laws, but are compelled by a democratic religiousless system to obey secular laws that may force them to go against their religious beliefs.'" At the same time, a 10. See J.J. Petuchowski, Judaism Today, in 1 RELIGION IN THE MIDDLE EAST: THREE RELIGIONS IN CONCORD AND CONFLICT, supra note 8, at 3-58; Norman Bentwich, Judaism in Israel, id. at 59-118. 11. Kenneth S. Kantzer, A Creedf or Christian Citizens (Editorial),3 9 CHRISTiANITY TODAY, Sept. 11, 1995, at 15. 12. Hence, it was typical, but not at all surprising, that Geraldine Ferraro ran afoul of the Vatican during her historic but unsuccessful candidacy for Vice President of the United States. See generally Kurt Anderson, For God and Country; An Emotional Issue Arises: Where is the Wall Between Religion and Politics?, TIME, Sept. 10, 1984, at 8; Catholic Bishops Link Policy, Morality, FACTS ON FILE WORLD NEWS DIGEST, Aug. 17, 1984, at 605-Cl. Specifically, Ferraro not only claimed that the Catholic Church's teaching on abortion was "divided," but that she could be an observant Roman Catholic and still uphold a woman's "right" to abortion: "I don't believe in abortion, but I can't impose my belief on others. Jane Perlez, Mrs. FerraroforV ice President, N.Y. TIMES, Dec. 23, 1983, at A14. New York's Roman Catholic Cardinal O'Connor (then archbishop) did not hesitate to point out that Ferraro had misrepresented Roman Catholic views on abortion: "Pope John Paul II has said the task of the Church is [to] reaffirm that abortion is death." O'Connor Criticalo f FerraroV iews, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 9, 1984, at Al. O'Connor also pointed out that Ferraro's dichotomy was religiously impossible, especially for Catholic politicians-and that abortion remained a grave sin that no Catholic could condone despite its https://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cwilj/vol27/iss1/2 4 19R9u6m] age: ResisAtiBnOgR thTeIO WNe sAt:N TDh eT CHlEin t1o9n9 A4 dCmAinIRisOtr aCtOioNnF'sE PRrEoNmCoEtion of Abo faithful Christian could not doubt that "God will hold us accountable for all the bad [man-made] laws we fail to speak out against." 3 At the same time, the failure to raise that religious voice against "bad" laws is very much a part of negotiating successful strategies for living in the secular world. Those religious individuals who do speak out against laws they believe are wrongful find their views often cursorily dismissed as tainted by superstition or lacking intellectual rigor on the basis of their religious quality. Indeed, the moral and political compromises made by Judaism and Christianity as the price of religious survival in a secularist society are simply not possible for true Islam, which Muslims see as an inherently coherent, rational, and self- contained wholistic system of utmost moral integrity. It cannot come as a surprise that they view Western attempts to disembowel Islamic fundamental- ism as not only utterly incomprehensible, but a matter of life and death for the Muslim community. If Nazi Germany proved anything, it is that a state is only as morally good as the moral average of the citizens within its borders. While religion secular legality: "I don't see how a Catholic in good conscience can vote for a candidate who explicitly supports abortion." George Lardner, Jr., Cuomo Urges Wider PoliticalDebateo fR eligion, WASH. POST, at A5. See also Sam Roberts, Cuomo to Challenge Archbishop Over Criticism of Abortion, N.Y. TIMES, Aug. 3, 1994, at Al. Indeed, the Catholic Church considers such a view grounds for excommunication. Bishop James Malone of Youngstown, Ohio, president of the U.S. Catholic Conference and head of the United States' Roman Catholic bishops, concurred: "The implied dichotomy-between personal morality and public policy-is simply not logically tenable." David E. Anderson, UPI, WASH. NEWS, Aug. 9, 1984. By the middle of August 1994, Ferraro tried to squelch the growing furor by clamming up about how she would square her religious beliefs with her politics, which included support of abortion: "Again, I'm not going to discuss that [my position on abortion] with you. My religion is very, very private." Excerpts from Interview with Ferraro on Campaign Plane, N.Y. TIMES, Aug. 14, 1984, at A21. Other Democratic politicians claiming to be Catholic scrambled to her defense. Mario Cuomo vouched: "I don't think it's good that society aborts its young, but for a public official, the question is where you draw the line between the beliefs you hold personally and those you pursue in public policy." Kenneth L. Woodward, Politics and Abortion; "Family Issues" Play in the Race for the White House, NEWSWEEK, Aug. 20, 1984, at 66. The New York Times editorialized that religion in the modem age was simply irrelevant- "What matters in Presidents are human values, moral values, not religious affiliation or baptism." Enough of "Holier Than Thou" (Editorial),N .Y. TIMES, Aug. 2, 1984, at A22. The Catholic Church held firm. Archbishop Law of Boston responded pointedly: "I certainly don't think the separation of church and state is meant to inhibit the practice of religion." Fox Butterfield, Archbishop of Boston Cites Abortion as "Critical"I ssue, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 6, 1984, at B 13. "The alarming fact is that during the past 11 years over 15 million human beings have been aggressively and willfully put to death in our nation with the sanction of the law. To evade this issue of abortion under the pretext that it is a matter pertaining exclusively to private morality is obviously illogical." Id. Nor was Law above using his considerable influence to derail candidates who supported abortion: "I don't want to be a political boss," Law declared, "but I hope our statement will influence everyone who hears it." Id. In response to the Democrats' claims that the Catholic Church was inflating the abortion issue at the expense of other pressing matters such as nuclear arms, the New England Bishops issued a blunt statement: "While nuclear holocaust is a future possibility, the holocaust of abortion is a present reality." Id. The person who most clearly defined the real parameters of the controversy, however, was neither the church nor the state, but the everyman in the street, in a letter to the editor of the New York Times at the height of the controversy: "Opposition to abortion is not a religious belief. It is one of many moral issues which the Catholic Church has taken a stand on-as have other faiths and other groups with no Catholic connection." Alfred G. Boylan, Of Ferraro, Cuomo, and Moral Issues Confused with Dogma (Letter to the Editor), N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 9, 1984, at D24. "[I]f one honestly believes in the moral rectitude of a cause, one should not cravenly use religion as an excuse for inaction." Id. The Republicans raised other issues impugning Ferraro's honesty and moral dichotomy. See, e.g., MacNeil/LehrerN ewshour: FerraroD isclosure (PBS television broadcast, Aug. 20, 1984). Following her defeat at the polls, her son John Zacarro, Jr., who had been active in her political campaign, was arrested and found guilty of being a small-time cocaine dealer. 13. MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour: FerraroD isclosure (PBS television broadcast, Aug. 20, 1984). Published by CWSL Scholarly Commons, 1996 5 6 CaClAifoLrInFOiaR WNeIAst eWrnE ISnTteErRnNat ioINnTaEl RLaNwA TJIoOuNrnAaLl , VLoAl.W 27 ,J ONUoR. 1N [A1L996], A[rVt.o 2l. 27 in the West is sometimes seen no differently than a matter of personal taste-say, a preference for Chinese food over Italian, or "You say potato, I say 'potahto, "'-morality and ethics require more than simple tolerance. Tolerance of what? It is one thing to tolerate beliefs never put into practice-one is never confronted with behavior that might be offensive, destructive, or indecent; one is only aware of some form of abstract reasoning. But tolerating a belief (or the individual's right to believe in the belief) is not the same as recognizing the belief itself as a moral or ethical value-that's a different thing. And societies do have such values, at least, successful ones do-those that don't become anarchies and collapse. Nor is pluralism a bar to such values; but pluralism requires a baseline, since some things should neither be tolerated nor done, such as torture or genocide, regardless of cultural relativism. Morality and ethics, essential to the social survival kit, require standards-a baseline-which are achievable and determined; in order to work, the expected standard must be known and communicated to all, and it must not be impossibly high to maintain. Morality and ethics also require social trust, whether from culture or religion, or both, and it is this trust that provides the basis for civil society. The failure of the United States to recognize and understand the pervasive role of religion in everyday life causes crises of trust both within and without its borders, and this breakdown will cause U.S. foreign policy to fail in ways that will destabilize communal identity both at home and abroad,14 encour- age international political instability,5 and create national security dilem- mas. 16 U.S. failure to recognize the rights of the pious faithful to actively live their religion on a daily basis can only result in the destruction of those individual liberties the secularists themselves prize so highly. 7 14. The United States' failure to grasp the theology and history of various religious groups in Lebanon is a case in point. See Rubin, supra note 9, at 24-26. See also Yoakim Moubarac, The Lebanese Experience and Muslim-ChristianR elations, in THE VATICAN, ISLAM, AND THE MIDDLE EAST 219-42 (Kail C. Ellis ed., 1987). 15. The Iranian revolution is a classic example of an intrastate change arising out of modernism's conflict with religion, with enormous consequences for both its own region and the energy-dependent world as a whole. See Rubin, supra note 9, at 26-28. 16. While the Pan Am Lockerbie incident was shocking and did involve the deaths of U.S. citizens, no part of the crime took place on U.S. soil. Moreover, while the United States and Britain have blamed diverse Muslim groups (Iranians, Iraquis, Syrians, and Libyans) at various times for the air bombing, and brought a complaint against Libya to the U.N. Security Council which secured a demand for the surrender of the alleged Libyan citizens, the United States has failed so far to produce any hard evidence of Muslim involvement-even for the families of the dead passengers. However, the bombing of the World Trade Center is a case in point. See John Aloysius Farrell, Bombing Shakes U.S. Sense of Security; Fear of Terrorism Resurfaces, ARIZ. REPUBLIC, Feb. 28, 1993, at A1; Blast Rocks Trade Center; TerroristsM ay be to Blame, WASH. TIMES, Feb. 27, 1993, at Al. Id. See also infra note 17 and accompanying text. The World Trade Center bombers were allegedly Muslims led by a blind religious Muslim cleric from a Jersey City mosque-a far cry from the kind of sophisticated, areligious terrorism the United States is familiar with (although usually not first-hand), such as the Red Brigades, Bader Meinhoff, or even the FALN. Other violent incidents in the United States such as the Attack on the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco, Texas, led by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms have religious elements that scholars in the United States have consistently failed to address. 17. For example, the U.S. Omnibus Counterterrorism Act of 1995 establishes a system of fines and prison terms for anyone "supporting" any organization named by the acting U.S. President as "terrorist." See Jane Hunter, Anti-Terrorism Order Worries Muslims; U.S. Presidentiala nd CongressionalP olicies, 31 NAT'L CATH. REP., Mar. 31, 1995, at 5. Reminiscent of the Old English Court of Star Chamber, the https://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cwilj/vol27/iss1/2 6 1R9u9m6]age: ResistAinBgO tRhTeI WONe stA: TNhDe TCHlinE to1n9 9A4d mCiAnIiRstOra tCioOnN'sF PErRoEmNoCtEion of Abo This Article examines the Clinton Administration's policies toward Islamic states' development in light of the 1994 Cairo conference on global population issues. It is my opinion that the Clinton Administration promotes abortion and sterilization (which includes both permanent and temporary methods of birth control) to third world women as an allegedly necessary price for accumulating wealth and national stability and, quite ridiculously, bettering their individual "health."'" Although the real reasons for the Clinton Administration's agenda remain obscure, the agenda's promotion of abortion reflects a well-established program promulgated by established radical feminist groups in the West, and fuels popular fears that failure to recognize abortion as an international human right will lead to increased sexual oppression 9 and even to genocide,20 starvation,2 military security Act also provides for a special court to order the deportation of aliens without letting them see the classified evidence against them. Id. While drafted in response to public insecurity over American .weakness" in the face of several terrorist incidents, the Act would allow the FBI to conduct otherwise- prohibited investigations of political activity. Id. The very presence of the word "omnibus" should raise democratic eyebrows. The Act is susceptible to a broad interpretation that can only spell trouble for the religious faithful. Muslims are naturally concerned that the Act will be used against them on the basis of their Islamic beliefs, which may sometimes be necessarily "political." See, e.g., The Omnibus CounterterrorismA ct of 1995 and the Comprehensive Terrorism PreventionA ct of 1995: Hearingso n S. 390 and S. 735 Before the Subcomm. On Terrorism, Technology and Government Information of the Senate Judiciary Comm. (May 4, 1995) (statement of Robert S. Rifkind, President of the American Jewish Committee); Equally in point is the kind of knee-jerk racism so evident in self-proclaimed "terrorism expert" Steven Emerson's televised pronouncement on the night of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing (before the bombers had been identified as white militia U.S. citizens): "This was done with the intent to inflict as many casualties as possible. That is a Mideastern trait." See Robert I. Friedman, One Man's Jihad;B ombing in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 260 THE NATION 656 (1995). Emerson's earlier statement that "terrorists pose a substantial threat to the values and enduring interests of the United States, and civilized society in general" may or may not be true. However, if one combines it with Emerson's claim on CNN's Crossfire news show that "[t]he F.B.I. considers radical Islamic extremists on American soil to be the number-one domestic national security threat, period," then one has the recipe for enormous tragedy and civil strife. Id. Terrorism in the United States: The Nature and Extent of the Threat and PossibleL egislative Responses: HearingsB efore the Senate Judiciary Comm. (Apr. 27, 1995) (statement of Steven Emerson). Indeed, despite eye-witness-based sketches of two men who hardly looked as though they were of Middle-East extraction, special interest groups moved quickly to incorporate the Oklahoma City bombing into their middle eastern pantheon. One can only conclude that the United States is simply not willing to deal fairly with Muslims, either within the United sates or without. See Robert J. White, Are Islamists America's Enemies? Saying Yes is Both Easy and Wrong, STAR TRIB., Feb. 19, 1995, at A27; Daniel Pipes, The ParanoidS tyle in Mideast Politics; From the Gulf War to Somalia, Fear of a Sinister Uncle Sam, WASH. POST, Nov. 6, 1994, at C1; James Phillips, The Changing Face of Middle Eastern Terrorism, HERITAGE FOUND. REP. (Oct. 6, 1994). Abortion advocates claim that anti-abortion dissenters are "terrorists," and that the Act should be used to fine and imprison people whose only crime is to be devoutly religious and convinced that abortion is wrong. Counter-Terrorism Legislation: Hearings Before the House Judiciary (June 12, 1995) (statement of Gregory T. Nojeim), Legislative Counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union). The Act potentially defines "terrorism" as any forcible blocking of an abortion clinic, and could implicate churches and religious groups as aiders and abettors of "terrorism." Id. See also Rad Sullee, Oklahoma City Tragedy; Anti-Terrorism ProposalS purs Fears of Attacks on Civil Liberties, Hous. CHRON., Apr. 26, 1995, at All. 18. The difference between permitting abortion to actually save the mother's life and allegedly improving her general "health" was recently debated in the U.S. Senate, see Helen Dewar, Senate Votes to Ban Rare Proceduref or Late-Term Abortions; Broad Exemption to Protect Woman's Life, Health Rejected, WASH. POST, Dec. 8, 1995, at Al. 19. See Global View: Interview with Joseph Speidel, President of PopulationA ction International, (CNN television broadcast, Aug. 27, 1994) [hereinafter Interview with Joseph Speidel]. 20. See Robert Kaplan, The Coming Anarchy; How Scarcity, Crime, Overpopulation, Tribalism, and Disease are Rapidly Destroying the Social Fabrico f Our Planet, ATLANTIC MONTHLY, Feb. 1994, at 44. For a comparative overview, see Charles C. Mann, Many is Too Many? Population Growth, ATLANTIC MONTHLY, Feb. 1993, at 47. Published by CWSL Scholarly Commons, 1996 7 8 CCaAlifLoIrFnOiaR WNIeAs teWrnE SInTtEeRrnNa tiIoNnTaElR LNawAT JIoOuNrAnaLl , VLoAl.W 27 J, ONUoR. 1N A[1L996], A[Vrt.o 2l. 27 problems,' and threats to democracy and global prosperity '-in short, the end of the world as we in the West understand that world to be. I. THE DECLINE IN THE WEST OF THE WORD OF GOD In the religious world of the three great monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam' that dominate much of the world today, unrestricted abortion could never amount to an international human right. To assert such a thing implies a universalism of abortion as a necessary good that does not, and has never, existed, other than in the feminist imagination. One might seek to explain it as the triumph of man's laws over God's laws. For the religious, such laws certainly represent a surrender to the material, secular world. However, obvious answers to the question of the Western decline of law as God's will are deceptively simple, because the three great monotheistic religions still regard law as being given by God and received by man through chosen intermediaries such as angelic messengers and prophets, and that all would be well enough if man would only follow without question the ten or so rules that God insists upon as a precondition to man's worship of Him.5 Here, semantics apply in the strongest sense, since God's legislation need not (and usually does not) reflect the popular "will" of his people, regardless of whatever physical or political state in which they live their earthly lives.' The few rules for keeping the world at peace and leading a Godly life 21. Stephen Budiansky, lOBillionforDinner,P lease, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REP., Sept. 12, 1994, at 57. 22. State Dep't Regular Briefing (Jan. 11, 1994) (remarks of Tim Wirth) available through FED. NEWS Svc. [hereinafter Tim Wirth Remarks]. 23. See Warren Christopher, Address at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, (Jan. 20, 1995), FED. NEWS SERV. [hereinafter Warren Christopher Address]. But see Virginia Abernathy, Optimism and Overpopulation; Population Control in Developing Countries, ATLANTIC MONTHLY, Dec. 1994, at 84. 24. Although all three are technically religions of the East, where they find their complementary origins, their spread has been to the West. The Western tradition defines itself as "Judeo-Christian" rather than Islamic, although the numbers of pious western Muslims grow daily. Although Islam was geographically confined from the West through warfare and strict prohibitions, Islam has recently made significant inroads into the West's religious and cultural landscape. See DANIEL PIPES, IN THE PATH OF GOD: ISLAM AND POLITICAL POWER 203-80 (1983). Part of this is due to the Western "liberal" Kantian vision of an increasingly interrelated world, and part of it is also due to the increased Muslim self- confidence encouraged by the great oil boom of the 1970s. Id. at 281-330. 25. See HAMILTON A.R. GIBB, STUDIES ON THE CIVILIZATION OF ISLAM 4-6 (1962); James A. Bill and J.A. Williams, Shi'i Islam and Roman Catholicism: An Ecclesiastical and PoliticalA nalysis, in THE VATICAN, ISLAM, AND THE MIDDLE EAST, supra note 14, at 69-105. 26. Hence, it is no accident that in communist states such as the former U.S.S.R. and the former German Democratic Republic, abortion was freely available without restriction and paid for by the state as a "health care" right. Abortion, which had never been legal in Germany before its division (except for a brief period under Hitler when the fetuses of Jewish women were forcibly aborted) became a significant issue during its recent reunification. Cuba, a last Marxist bastion, uses abortion liberally as a form of birth control. https://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cwilj/vol27/iss1/2 8 19R9u6m] age: ResisAtiBngO RthTeIO WNe sAt:N TDh eT CHlEin to19n9 A4d mCAinIRisOtr aCtiOonN'Fs EPRroEmNCoEti on of Abo 9 (or in Islam, walking the straight path),27 regardless of any other political 27. Prayers for guidance to the "straight way" and the "right path" appear early in the Qur'an. Sura 1.6 implores God: "Show us the straight way." God reveals the straight way to man through both high and low means-enlightenment, prayer, and even childish parables. See THE HOLY QUR'AN: ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE MEANINGS & COMMENTARY (Abdullah Yusuf Ali trans. & comment., 1993) [hereinafter THE HOLY QUR'AN]. Sura II.26 and 27 explain: 26. Allah disdains not to use The similitude of things, Even of a gnat as well as Anything above it Those who believe know That it is truth from their Lord; But those who reject Faith say: "What means Allah by this similitude?" By it He causes many to stray, And many He leads into the right path, But He causes not to stray, Except those who forsake (the path) ..... 27. Those who break Allah's Covenant After it is ratified, And who sunder what Allah Has ordered to be joined, And do mischief on earth: These cause losses (only) to themselves. Id. at Sura 1.26, 27. As both verses indicate together, although God is the ultimate cause of all things, man's straying from the "right path" can only occur from man's own choice to forsake God's plan for him. The reference to "Allah's Covenant" is profoundly significant, and will be discussed at length infra. Notes Ali: The mention of the Covenant [in verse 27] has a particular and general signification. The particular one has reference to the Jewish tradition that a Covenant was entered into with "Father Abraham" that in return for Allah's favours the seed of Abraham would serve Allah faithfully. But as a matter of fact a great part of Abraham's progeny were in constant spiritual rebellion against Allah .... The general significance is that a similar Covenant is metaphorically entered into by every creature of Allah: for Allah's loving care, we at least owe him the fullest gratitude and willing obedience. The Sinner, before he darkens his own conscience, knows this, and yet he not only "forsakes the path" but resists the Grace of Allah which comes to save him. That is why his case becomes hopeless. But the loss is his own. He cannot spoil Allah's design. The good man is glad to retrace his steps from any lapses of which he may have been guilty, and in his case Allah's Message reclaims him with complete understanding. Id. at 13 n.45. Christianity and Judaism also recognize the importance of walking on God's path. For example, the Bible's Book of Isaiah describes the signs of the coming of the Messiah as not just simply incidents of the miraculous, but the revelation to man of the right road: Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped; then the lame shall leap like a deer, and the tongue of the speechless sing for joy. For waters shall break forth in the wilderness, and streams in the desert; the burning sand shall become a pool, and the thirsty ground springs of water; the haunt of jackals shall become a swamp, the grass shall become reeds and rushes. A highway shall be there, and it shall be called the Holy Way; the unclean shall not travel on it, but it shall be for God's people; no traveler, not even fools, shall go astray. No lion shall be there, nor shall any ravenous beast come up on it; they shall not be found there, but the redeemed shall walk there. And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with singing; everlasting joy shall be upon their heads; they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away. THE BIBLE, Isaiah 35:5-10. Published by CWSL Scholarly Commons, 1996 9 10 CaClAifoLrInFOiaR WNeIAst eWrnE ISnTteErRnNa tiIoNnTaEl RLNawA TJIoOuNrnAaLl , VLoAl.W 27 ,J ONUo.R 1N [A1L9 96], A[rVt. o2l. 27 premises or institutions, are common to all three faiths and are in fact not really rules at all, capable of being bent or broken, but Commandments; they must be obeyed.' Commandments are pronouncements directly from God Himself, and are not the product of any rabbinical or priestly tradition, nor are they subject to human revision or interpretation in and of themselves.29 My purpose of making comparisons between the Qur'an and the Bible is not to imply that there is no fundamental difference between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam-that would be untrue! Although monotheistic, each faith is unique. My purpose is to simply point out the complementary sources of authority for religious belief in law as setting the standard for, and ultimately controlling, moral behavior. 28. See THE BIBLE, Deuteronomy IV: 1-2 (emphasis added), which explains that God communicated His Commandments first to Moses, who then delivered them to his followers in the wilderness of Transjordan, saying: Now, Israel, listen to the statutes and laws which I am teaching you, and obey them; then you will live, and go in to occupy the land which the Lord the God of your fathers is giving you. You must not add anything to my charge, nor take anything away from it. You must carry out all the commandments of the Lord your God which I lay upon you. (emphasis added). 29. See supra note 28. In fact, both the Old and New Testaments and the Qur'an contain dire warnings against any alteration by man of God's will. Sura 1.159 and 174-76 interpret such alteration as a rejection of faith and, implicitly, also a rejection of Islam's higher morality, which God will not let pass unpunished: 159. Those who conceal The clear (Signs) We have Sent down, and the Guidance After We have made it Clear for the people In the Book,-on them Shall be Allah's curse. And the curse of those Entitled to curse,- 174. Those who conceal Allah's revelations in the Book And purchase for them A miserable profit,- They swallow fire into themselves Naught but Fire; Allah will not address them On the Day of Resurrection, Nor purify them; Grievous will be Their Chastisement. 175. They are the ones Who buy Error In place of Guidance And Torment in place Of Forgiveness. Ah! what boldness (They show) for the Fire! 176. (Their doom is) because Allah sent down the Book In truth but those who seek Causes of dispute in the Book Are in a schism Far (from the purpose). THE HOLY QUR'AN, supra note 27, at Sura 11.159, 174-76; See also THE BIBLE, Deuteronomy XXVIII 15-68. https://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cwilj/vol27/iss1/2 10