That’s not what I said.
Islam says that when they hit 10% of the population they are to work towards enslaving (literally) and killing non-Muslims and work to make that the policy of the US government.
IOW, this particular “religion” has said that when they reach that point their adherents are to become criminals.
I’m saying that our immigration policies should help them never reach that point. Sort of like limiting the number of ebola patients we will allow to fly into our country...
If another religion said that at some point or another their adherents all have to kill gays (for instance) then they likewise would be COMBATANTS.
I do recognize the need for limits on what is considered criminal. Refusing to bake a wedding cake for gays could be defined as a crime and we’d be in big trouble, unless the measure of what makes somebody an enemy of the nation is that they are actual physical enemy combatants.
What I’m saying is basically, as I understand it, what Geert Wilders was saying: we need to stop Muslims from becoming a large percentage of our population. How to do that without religious discrimination? I think the only way you legally do it is by recognizing Islam as a religion only up to the point where they are required to ALSO be a criminal/terrorist enterprise. Because they preach actual physical violence against non-adherents, which makes them combatants. Refusing to bake wedding cakes does not similarly make somebody an enemy COMBATANT.
I sincerely doubt the Koran or hadiths say any such thing. That may indeed be a common dynamic, but that's very different from it being official written Islamic doctrine.
This is especially so because until recently Islam did not expand by immigrants leaving Islamic countries and moving to secular/Christian countries. Islam expanded by conquest, making the 10% meaningless.