Posted on 12/18/2015 2:01:08 PM PST by EveningStar
So, let me get this straight. She was sworn in on a book that allows her to lie to and punish infidels?
And how it comes to power is different, or at least its primary leader's rise to power, is different:
"Daniel 8: His power shall be mighty, but not by his own power;..."
The success is attributable to the hand of some other entity.
Ephesians 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.
So the beast must have both spiritual attributes (albeit dark ones), and governmental attributes (ruthless and dominating). Nothing comes close to meeting both these requirements as does Islam.
Imagine a world where there is no "state":
Daniel 2:44 "In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever."
This is what is coming, once this age ends.
We read the same book and have the same belief and outlook.
Unfortunately, I am afraid that many if the other ones beyond what you point out, may be more dangerous and sinister.
Good advice for maintenance of the firearms and visual and hand eye coordination with the firearms.
That's a slippery slope, how about Baha'i, Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, Jainism, Judaism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, and Zoroastrianism. All these religions affect the mindset of a judge sitting on a bench...
The law and only the law should be the benchmark their rulings are based on...
The Koran is not compatible with freedom and liberty.
Completely agree, so we know she will rule based on the Koran ?
No, but first time she does, she should be recalled ...
That is not a slippery slope.
Not a single one of the religions that you mentioned have scriptures which require that their faithful adherents institute a theocracy with religious courts brutally enforcing their religious decrees like Islam does.
It is not possible to advocate Islam without at the same time advocating a governmental system with authority that supercedes that of the Republic.
America’s got lots of problems. Let’s hope Trump can sort them out.
Not going to disagree...
Do we know this judge will advocate for Islam ?
It is a slippery slope because their are people in this country who would love to ban Christians from the legal system enforcing laws...
There are all sorts of organizations dedicated to marginalizing our Christian heritage in all institutions across the country.
The day after Muslims are banned form holding judgeship's, there will be court action demanding the same for Christians...
Some idiot Judge would agree...
By declaring herself dedicated to the Koran, she has of necessity declared her intent to work towards a Muslim theocracy. There is no allowance for a separate church and state in Islam.
Again, I'm not going to disagree
How many Judges place their hand on the Holy Bible swear a oath unto God Almighty and not mean a word of it ?....Most
Do you expect a Muslim to take an oath on a Bible...?
Personally, I don't like it, but until she actually starts making rulings by Sharia Law, it's much to do about nothing taking the oath on a Koran...
Swearing (sincere or not) on the authority Bible is not swearing to work to supercede our constitutional government with religious courts.
Swearing (sincere or not) on the authority of the Koran is of necessity swearing to work to conform the world to Allah’s Sharia courts.
There in lies the difference.
You cannot pledge allegiance to the Republic and follow Islam at the same time. And judges must uphold the law of the Republic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.