Hamtramck, Michigan OK to public broadcast of Muslim prayer prompts outrage...

Post-9/11 Era Forum

Hamtramck prayer OK prompts outrage

April 28, 2004

BY CECIL ANGEL
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

They plan to fight.

The Hamtramck City Council's unanimous approval Tuesday night of a plan to allow the Muslim call to prayer to be broadcast on loudspeakers five times a day in Arabic has outraged many of the city's Polish Catholic residents.

They said they'll start a petition drive to bring the issue to a vote. Others have said they'll file lawsuits in federal court. Some plan to move.

"I'd hate to see it go this route, but unfortunately, it's going to go this route," said resident Robert Zwolak.

Two police officers tried to keep the peace Tuesday night as hundreds of people packed City Hall and officials decided an issue that has divided the changing city.

"This ordinance is reasonable and responsible," Councilman Scott Klein said. "Give us a chance to work with the mosques and community to make this work."

The ordinance becomes law on May 26.

Abdul Algazali said Muslims in Hamtramck aren't out to create a religious or ethnic rift. Rather, he said, "We're in this city to build bridges."

Algazali, president of the Hamtramck-based American Yemeni Council, encouraged the City Council to approve the noise ordinance that will allow the call to prayer.

"It means a lot to me," he said. "It will show that everyone is treated equitably in the city."

Leaders in the suburb bordered by Highland Park and Detroit, which increasingly is becoming more Islamic in flavor, unanimously gave preapproval to allow the call to prayer last week.

The city's Polish Catholic residents say the call to prayer, which will be heard five times between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., violates their rights and challenges the nation's largely Christian identity. It also has drawn national attention.

"Where are my rights? Where are the rights of all the people who have lived in this community all of their lives?" asked Mary Urbanski, a lifelong resident. "I do not have a choice as to whether I hear this or not."

Muslims say the call to prayer is less intrusive than the Catholic church bells that ring daily.

"We hear the bells every day, every hour. We don't say nothing," Algazali said last week.

Maria Radtke, a Polish immigrant who fled a Europe devastated by World War II, said Tuesday that it irks her that Muslims don't seem to be trying to fit into American culture the way she did when she first came to the United States.

"When you come to this country . . . adjust to the customs and beliefs of this country. I respect their religion. I respect their faith. But you cannot wear this on your sleeve.

"Fifty-two years ago when I came to this country, every nationality lived in their own community, and really, it was peaceful. And now politicians made a melting pot where you can live anywhere you want. That made a disaster."

But for Beatrice Woods, who said she was born in Hamtramck, the issue is not about what kind of prayer, but that it's prayer.

"We need to pray. The way the world is today, how can anyone be against prayer?"

SOURCE: http://www.freep.com/news/religion/pray28_20040428.htm

*** UPDATE 05/24/04 *** *** UPDATE 05/24/04 ***

Tonight, petitions could stall Muslim prayer call

May 25, 2004

BY CECIL ANGEL
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

On the roof of the Al-Islah Islamic Center in Hamtramck, a tall post with three loudspeakers stands ready to broadcast the Muslim call to prayer.

The installation is simple, but the issues surrounding it have grown far more complex than anyone expected.

They have thrust a city known for its Polish Catholic heritage into a nasty war of words over religious rights and the standing of Islam in America.

The controversy mushroomed from a local squabble over a mosque's simple desire to broadcast the call to prayer to one that has captured headlines around the world. Newspapers in the Middle East, Europe and Asia have run reports. Hamtramck City Council members have been pelted with e-mails from across the United States and abroad.

People from all over metro Detroit -- from pastors and imams to lawyers and white supremacists -- also have joined the fray. A noise ordinance amendment allowing the broadcasts passed unanimously last month, but the furor over the issue could come to a head again tonight.

That's when opponents will have their last chance to persuade the City Council to rescind the amendment. But the council isn't likely to reconsider its earlier vote, and so the debate -- for the moment -- may be moot.

The ordinance was to take effect Wednesday, but a petition drive may have stopped it. Acting City Clerk Genevieve Bukoski said she will notify the council today that the petitions have been certified.

Under the city charter, if the council declines to rescind the amendment after receiving the petitions, the ordinance is automatically put on hold and becomes a ballot initiative. Voters will decide at a special election or in August, the next scheduled election.

"I haven't seen any indication from anyone on the council that they're changing," City Council President Karen Majewski said Monday.

The Al-Islah Islamic Center was on track to be the first mosque in the 2.1-square-mile city of 23,000 to begin broadcasting the call to prayer several times a day. It had planned to start broadcasts on Friday.

Opponents have called the plan to broadcast the call to prayer noise pollution, an offense to Christians and a violation of their religious rights.

The arguments, like those expressed Monday by Hamtramck resident Caroline Zarski, 81, often seem paradoxical.

"I'm a Christian Catholic. I practice my own religion," Zarski said. "I don't want to listen to them."

Zarski said she lives near two of the city's three mosques and is likely to be within earshot of the calls to prayer.

"This is a melting pot. We all become Americans," she said, adding, "What they're trying to do is make us assimilate into their culture."

About 90 percent of the letters Hamtramck City Council members have received oppose the broadcasts, Majewski said. The letters range from reasoned opposition to "racist and personally offensive name-calling using vulgar language," she said.

Many express bitter feelings about the rising profile of Islam in the United States at a time when U.S. troops are fighting in Iraq.

Some opponents included the Rev. James Marquis, pastor of the New Covenant Worship Center, who traveled from Wellston, Ohio, last month. He told the City Council: "We feel like they're setting a precedent and they're forcing us to hear a prayer we don't want to hear. They are reciting a prayer to a God we don't believe in."

To some in Hamtramck, the issue has spun out of local control.

A Plymouth-based white supremacist group, the National Alliance, distributed racist letters in the city urging "White Americans to understand these attacks on our civilization will continue unless we organize in self-defense."

Robert Zwolak, who organized the petition campaign aimed at putting the ordinance to a citywide vote, said people outside of Hamtramck have been sending him information and offering to volunteer or help. Some are bigots, he said.

"It's a challenge for me to be moderate and not to feed into people's prejudices," he said.

Masud Khan, secretary of the Al-Islah mosque, said the mosque leadership will wait to see what the City Council advises tonight, before deciding when to begin. But even when the mosque starts broadcasting, Khan said, it won't issue early morning and late night calls to prayer.

So far, Al-Islah is the only one of the three mosques in the city, which is about one-third Muslim, that plans external broadcasts.

Tonight's Hamtramck City Council meeting begins at 7 p.m. at City Hall, 3401 Evaline.

Contact CECIL ANGEL at 313-223-4531 or angel@freepress.com. Staff writer David Crumm contributed to this report.

SOURCE: http://www.freep.com/

Welcome to America.... Hmmmm, America??

What's the difference between hearing the Muslim call to prayer and hearing Catholic church bells that chime every hour? I don't see anything wrong with either one.

The community in that area will decide. It's their right too.

heh, the difference between Catholic church bells and a Muslim prayer is that one is just keeping time, one is a prayer.

But still... I seem to recall this thing called the bill of rights... yeah... something about freedom of religion

I'll agree with USA1 on this one... it's a community decision

can the call be heard at schools? if it can then it shouldn't be allowed. it's unfair. non-muslims shouldn't be forced to listen to the prayer call because it's an unfair promotion of the muslim religion. if liberals are going to go ballistic at the slightest hint of anything remotely Christian within 100 yards of public schools, then this should be no different.

I see it this way: if you are a religious muslim, who wants to listen to prayer, wear head scarfs, etc., go back to your friggin country and enjoy your life there! Why do you come to USA, if you have no respect towards it's religion, way of life, people living there already?

Why should anybody in the USA listen to muslim prayer? Is USA a muslim country? No. Is everyone allowed to practice their own religion? Yes. But why make the whole town listen to your prayer if they are not muslim?

Americans are mostly catholic, right? It's disrespectfull towards americans, americans' main religion, and people who live there and who DO NOT WANT IT.

HELL NO Americans aren't mostly Catholic. If that's your attitude, Catholics can go back to their country too.

Ok, is this prayer call thing a prayer said over a loudspeaker, or just a notice that it's time to pray?

If these paryers are gpong to be in Arabic then what does it matter as nobody but those who understand arabic will be able to understand it. Anyway it is not prayers it is a call to paryers which is adiffrent thing.

Wow - this it the future, Mulslims and Catholics arguing about bells and calls to prayers

Fun-times ahead

haha. indeed.

Actually its not a prayer its a call to prayer, Pretty much the same as the bells. Still want to tell me Americans aren't ignorant and prejudiced towards muslims ?

Yea whatever, kangaroo.

He's right though MR J, even you thought that these people were going to hear prayers when in factc all they will hers ia a man speakinf in Arabic telloing Muslims to come and pray.

The bottom line, people living there have their own voice. It's supposed to be decided to favor the majority of the population, like in any democracy. Political correctness does not have to play a role here.

This is about relgious divide I still do not understand why people find this offensive, some old muslim man calling others to come and pray the whole thing lasts about 10 minutes and nobody will understnd what he is saying. That is what I do not understan about the US your country is at war, you seem to be falling out with other countries left right and centre, you are a daily target for terrorists and your economy is in a bit of trouble yet a 70 - 80 year old muslim calling ( in Arabic) on other muslims to pray that bothers and upsets you.

Sounds to me like the ACLU should jump all over this.

For one Americans have the right to not hear it. Therefore they will infringe on the rights of those who choose not to be Muslim and don't want to here the Call To Prayer.

Likewise if Muslims do not want to here church bells on Sunday morning then Christian Church's should be forced not to ring their bells.

There is a second issue here and that is that it could be in violation of a noise ordinance but that may not be the case.

But now lets step in with another issue, Freedom of Religion.

Does ones Freedom of Religion extend so far that it should force the issue to allow the Call To Prayer? And does this step on other non Muslim's Freedom of Religion. And what about Atheist and Agnostics?

My thing is this, we are in a technology age. Why not use the phone, pager, Public Access TV or Public Access Radio. Why does it have to go out on loud speakers except to annoy those who choose not to be Muslim?

Also can't Muslims wear a watch?

I reread the articles, not 100% sure of the exact nature of the calls, but I think they are being broadcast from mosques.

So unless they are violating noise ordinances; freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc.

I really see no problem with this, its actually beautiful to hear the call.

Is there not also the slightest chance that these noisy muslims may have been born in the States therfroe making them as American as people like Ron, Logic etc therefore they should have the right to follow there relgion without fear of persecution this call to prayer is as important to them as mass is to catholics.

Ron brought up a point about the catholic curch bells but I think we all know there would be outcry if Muslims tried to ban church bells.

Like I said live and let live it only lasts for a few minutes.

Our rights extend to non Americans as well. If you live in America then you have rights. However your rights can not interfere with the rights of others. So although Muslims have the right to broadcast their Call to Prayer, they do not have the right to force it on someone else. Others have the right to not hear the Call to Prayer. So therefore they need to seek an alternative means or get the community to vote on it. If the community votes and says it's ok then it's ok. However if the community votes and says NADA then it's NADA.

I still think this goes a lot deeper than rights if you get my drift. Just that if it was me I would not be bothred by it I have heard Catholic bells and I have heard the call to pray and I have never been bothred with it. What does bother me is when somebody somewhere tries to silence or demean a relgion and you end up with full blown bigotry in your country because of it.

We've had bigotry in this country since it's beginning. Of course that doesn't make it right.

I don't think it is trying to silence or demean a religion. It's all about respect. We must respect their right to practice their religion and they must respect our right to practice ours. In the US about the only time you hear bells on the Catholic church is at the beginning of Mass and weddings and funerals. And they no longer ring their bells in most cities during the week. Only on Saturday night and Sunday morning. Although ringing bells vs someone shouting on loudspeakers is a bit different.

Question?

How long does the Call to Prayer last and what do they say?

it IS about trying to silence a religion. It said in the article the Polish Catholic citizens were upset because they were trying to change the country's Christian character.

of course a Catholic has absolutely no business saying that in this country.

The call to pray only lasts a few minutes and because they speak in Arabic I have no idea what they say.

As far as repect for religion goes I agree with you but the muslims are not disrespecting the catholic church, also if you want to let tyhem parctice thier religion then they should be allowed the call to pray as it is a big part of thier religion.

OK So you are saying that people from every religion who live in the USA - and are 100% free to practice their religion in their mosques/churches/etc. - should be allowed to call for prayer, 5 times a day every day like in islam because it's 'big part of their religion'? My background is muslim, but i myself am an atheist. Even though i dont want to hear calls to prayer, whatever religion it is, islam, buddism, and so on. But since people living here before me are mostly christian or catholic, they have the right to ring bells or call for prayer - because it's their country. Muslims, new immigrants or born here, have to respect natives' religion and way of life - and by natives i understand people who live here for centuries and who built this country.

Listening to muslim call to prayers every day? No way. This is America and not Saudi Arabia or wherever else these people are from.

only white protestants should be allowed to practice their religion.

Whoa that sounds a bit racist.

Yeah, Dekka.

It's only atheists that should be allowed.

(Well - they're going to hell aren't they? to burn for eternity ... may as well let them have a few years' fun... - no?)

The call to prayer isn't exactly music to the ears. Sometimes it sounds as though someone is being murdered. Personaly, I find that sound offensive. I also find cars will large speakers offensive when they drive past my house. I have a right to complain when it is an invasion of my privacy. The community has a right to petition this to have it stopped as do the Muslims to stop the bells.

I was brought up Catholic and never recall the bells used to tell time and only rang before service and does the call to prayer.

Let the community decide.

Don''t get you panties in a twist longbone.
Some laws are local and some are federal. Federal over rules local government.
Laws regarding noise polution are governed by local government. This isn't a federal case.

USA,

In most cases the Local law or ordinance will over rule the Federal law.

So explain to me how thi infringes on other rights to practice thier religion because I cant see it.

Never. Federal law rules.

nope.. local law. Federal can enforce itself through coercion (for example if a state legalizes marijuana they lose federal highway funding) but the state still has the right to make its own laws.

s'long as they don't violate the Constitution.

For instance, You have the right under Federal Law to carry a handgun. However local ordnances in most cities state that you may not carry a handgun without a permit. Local law over riding Federal Law.

Also Federal Law states that you have the right to free speech and can stand on the corner with a bull horn and make as much noise as you like. Local ordnances however state that if you do that then you may in violation of a noise ordnance or disturbing the peace.

Again you have the right to assemble per Federal Law, However if that assembly gets rowdy then you can be arrested for rioting.

Checks and Balances

They cannot legalize. They can reduce the penalty but not leagalize. It's a federal law.
If the federal government saws the whole country must obey 55 MPH speed limit. It stands.

omg read up on US history and government.

If the Feds say "if you don't we will take away subsidies" then you have a choice and it's not mandated.

Gay marriage is not legal in the US. They still do it but it's not recognised by the country and no federal rights are guarranteed.

You don't know much about the law do you?

I'm not a lawyer if that's what you mean.
So what I said is wrong?
How can the state override the fedral government?

I can't put all of the article on here but I'll put some of it.

Man I thought the law system in the UK was confusing but you guys seem to have a lot more confusion in your laws.

We have Federal Laws, State Laws, County Laws, City Laws, municipality laws and District Laws etc.

A great majority of the laws overlap. In other words they are the same whether it's Federal State, County, City or Municipality. However some are in conflict or contradict others. Most tend to be more strict.ie

City > more strict than County
County > more strict than State
State > more strict than Federal

The problem comes into play with a they become less strict then their governing body and thus the challenge to the higher court.

The Highest court of course being the US Supreme Court. Followed by State Supreme.

Some State Supreme courts in making their decisions make historic decision which fly in the face of the Federal Court. They sometimes go unchallenged for many years.

Cheers Ron that sort of cleared it up for me a bit it is sort of like UK law in some respect's like the US supreme courts are sort of like the House of Lords. Our laws dont overlap they just f**k everybody up one way or the other mainly because you get Scottish law, English law, Welsh law and the UK law which just gets everyybody confused. Lockerbie trail was a good example of that.

Yep

I'm glad I'm not a lawyer.

Well lawyers make good money....

Yeah they are also liars and arrogant. Intresting point Tony Blair is a lawyer which explains a lot.

It's their job, lodgebo. Besides, outside their offices, lawyers are ordinary people - i can tell because i happen to know a few lawyers. Maybe it's because they are young and didnt become lawyers in full understanding of this word... Who knows.

Regarding Tony Blair: whether he was a lawyer, a businessman, or a social worker, he is a politician now, and politics are much more dirty than all of the above.

Yeah but Blai is still a liar and an arrogant wee s**t.

Until you prove that he lied, proof that would be enough to sue him in court, you can say all you want - doesnt change a tada.

lawyer, liar, lawyer, liar

see how they kind of sound the same??

Actually the lie was the Iraq can launch WMD's in 45 mins claim that was untrue.
and he did say it.

Actually thats true in fact if I remember correctly there was a report that was full of lies and a dossier that MI6 wanted to change because some of the facts could not be backed up.