The Washington Times also reports that some Muslims of Somalia origin have taken over the state of Minnesota. Following up on the detail, it appears that some Somalia Muslim cabdrivers refuse to carry passengers who may be in noncompliance with Muslim law/culture. This includes passengers who be carrying or may have obviously used alcohol. Somalia Muslim cashiers at a major supermarket have refused to check out bacon. In one case, a large stash of Muslim approved hallucinogenic drug has been discovered.
I have tended to duck this issue of Muslims in the US until now, but these two above items have prompted me to investigate further. Our U.S. Constitution says that we should not discriminate against religion. The question seems to be whether Islam is a religion or a culture. If a religion, we should permit its use in the US. If a culture, and particularly if it is antagonistic or militaristic to the continued operations of the American government and American culture, it should be controlled by federal, state, and municipal law.
With respect to the Washington National Cathedral episode, I have checked the historical prayer services. The preponderance of prayer services at Washington National Cathedral have been Christian-based, meaning prayer services led by representatives of various Christian groups, such as Episcopalians, Methodists, Greek Orthodox, Catholic, etc.. The only prayer service leaders from other religious/cultural groups have been rabbis, representing the Jewish faith.
The obvious question to me was whether Islam religion/culture is similar enough in total content compared to Hebrew religion/culture, to allow representation at the Washington National Cathedral.
Through Internet research, it appears that Islam is more of a culture than that of an actual religion. Islam is a complete way of life. Many scholars agree that Islam impacts every part of life, from eating and sleeping to working and playing. It is not only a personal religion, but also a social one. However, we can also say the same thing about the Hebrew/Jewish culture.
The question then arises as to whether there is a significant difference between Islam culture and Hebrew culture, as to justify the inclusion of one culture's representative in Washington Cathedral prayer service and not the other.
For such consideration, we need to consider the content of the culture, as well as the degree of following. I will get to the content of the cultures shortly, but first touch on the degree of following, which is generally indicated by use of the word Orthodox. An Orthodox follower is a strict adherant to cultural rules. We have Orthodox following in various branches of religion/culture. In Christianity, we even have it in the name of Greek Orthodox. In Hebrew religion/culture, there are Orthodox Jews. In Islam, the closest definition would be jihadists or terrorists.
Consider now the content of Islam culture versus Hebrew culture. Scholars generally agree that the Muslim culture is not based on the Quran but rather on the example set by Mohammed. He was kind to his fellow Muslims, and he was often cruel to non-Muslims, especially if they criticized Islam or hindered its expansion. He was perhaps a typical seventh-century warlord — ordering assassinations of his enemies, torturing people for information, owning slaves, and killing enemies in mass executions — but his example is preserved in writing, and so is the Quranic encouragement to all devout, present-day Muslims to follow his example. In a simplified term, the terrorist activities of Muslims are Orthodox and completely consistent with Mohammed's teaching of the culture. As we look at the Orthodox practice of Hebrew culture, we see no similar militant aspects.
It is also said that the teachings in Islamic mosques and training centers in the US and subsequent external promotion and application to US culture is training in political action, advocating a foreign, fascist political system, preaching hatred toward other religions, and sending funds to foreign movements to support anti-American activities. Such practice would completely disqualify the organizations from religious tax exemption, on the basis that it is a political movement. An even more appropriate term might be that they should be considered organizations of sedititious political action.
The bottom line on all of this is that an unknown percentage of Muslims are Orthodox, with serious intention of seditious acts against the continued existence of present US culture and government law and order, with respect to the Constitution. Islam is definitely not a religion and should not be considered as qualified for protection of religious liberty under the U.S. Constitution. In fact, the continued existence of the United States as in entity of economic power and example of freedom for the world lies in the need to control Islam in the United States.
I call on the US Congress to present a law which would prohibit the immigration of Muslims to the US. For all Muslims entering the US illegally and captured by border control operations, they should be segmented into perceived Orthodox and Unorthodox groups. The Orthodox group should be jailed and the Unorthodox groups immediately deported to their home countries. For those Muslims already here, every impediment should be used by business people to disallow construction of Muslim mosques and training centers, without any interference by the Obama administration, who has previously shown a propensity to actually promote Islam within the US. Wherever possible, purveyors of illegal hallucinogenic drugs used by Muslims, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of US law. In short, we need to outlaw Islam in the US.
No comments:
Post a Comment