Religious Intolerance and Guantanamo Bay

Guantanamo Bay’s torture allegations have controversially filled headlines for years now, as garnering information has become a new face of warfare marred by deception and inhumane activities. Recent reports show the United States did engage in tortuous activities in order to learn information from suspected war criminals. It is clear that a new brand of warfare is among us, and dealing with the morality of acquiring information about the enemy flirts with decisions difficult for most to make. However, reports of religious intolerance by Carol Rosenberg of the Miami Herald show a brand of torture that is contradictory to the basic ideas of religious freedom in America.

There are clear religious overtones to the interrogations of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. They range in severity; from disallowing and withholding religious texts, to removing the pants of prisoners so they cannot pray. Rosenberg reports that in a legal brief issued in defense of the Army interrogation unit Lt. Col. Diane E Beaver, said “"Forced grooming and removal of clothing are not illegal, so long as it is not done to punish or cause harm, as there is a legitimate governmental objective to obtain information, maintain health standards in the camp and protect both the detainees and the guards." That is easy enough to understand, and certainly falls into a category of acceptability when considering some of the other things that have been reported from Guantanamo Bay. However, reports have shown the Army actually cares less about obtaining information when removing the pants. It is a violation of Muslim faith to pray unclothed, so when one prisoner’s pants were removed he asked if he could have them back just during prayer time. He was denied. If the Army was using them for the information they claimed, without religious intent, the prisoner should have been able to use his pants for prayer. This is a direct violation of religious freedom and tolerance. Even detainees should have the freedom to practice religion. It is just unusually cruel to punish a detainee in that way, as there are arguably little informative incentives to restrict them from such activities.

I understand that these are not American citizens and thus do not have First Amendment rights. However, America has a history of priding itself as setting standards for morality. Such blatant religious intolerance shows a weak acceptance of minority religions and viewpoints, and does not reflect the diversity of religion and tolerance that America has. There are right ways and wrong ways to interrogate detainees, but restricting them of religious practice to the point of shaving beards and stripping clothes cannot be tolerated if America wishes to keep its credibility as a tolerant nation. If America wishes to keep its moral voice credible, restricting detainees’ ability to practice religion cannot be a part of their interrogation techniques.