Why? I was asking for your opinion, not someone else's. How would you go about enacting this? More specifically, how would you go about doing this without violating freedom of religion in a constitutional sense? If you have an answer, you might have a winning idea here.
Point of fact, I do not need to read up on this. I have done my share of work in this field and am well aware of the rise and fall of the Klan's influence. I was merely pointing out how the Klan was legally (and sometimes illegally) combatted by the federal government. They did so without violating the first amendment. Your proposed solution seems to violate the first amendment on a fundamental level, which is why I find it strange you used the KKK as an example to help your case.
Point of fact, I defined the two the same way you did. Only I did so with less bloviating. Principles are OBJECTIVE. Personal values, by definition, are SUBJECTIVE.
In this particular case, if your principles dictate freedom of religion, then declaring war on Islam in any sense fundamentally undercuts your principle. It doesn't matter if you value Islam less than Joe-Schmoe, your principles should be your guiding force in this topic. Now, if you have a way to sort the wheat from the chaffe when it comes to building a law suit in such a way that does not violate that principle, I'm listening as it's a novel approach to the problem.