Me:I don't think that is necessary to the proof. Islam has uniquely disqualifying attributes, as are manifested in its behavior, simply from a mechanistic perspective. They MUST kill or force into submission followers of ALL other religions under penalty of death, meaning that for the dhimmitude there is no possibility of free exercise. Islam alone allows no other belief enforced on pain of death; it is the ultimate vow.
Me: It's easier, but it won't work, or as we say in mathematics, necessary but not sufficient. Sometimes, forcing oneself to face said conundra is the path we must take. C'mon, you know you'd like that anyway. ;-)
I think we're actually having different arguments. :-)
Yours, as I understand it, is that islam is incompatible with the concept of Biblical law and Natural law as well as the Constitution. This I both understand and accept as truth.
The problem is is that the Constitution doesn't sit in judgement of anyone's beliefs. It leaves one's beliefs in the realm of one's conscience, and it's ability to impact someone can only be outside of that.
Of course, if a terrorist actor comes from a particular mosque in the US, that mosque should be closed and all its members investigated. Countries that have terrorists in them should have ALL of there citizens evicted from the US and no citizens from those countries should be allowed in.
There are some perfectly Constitutional remedies to reduce the barbarian horde, and we always have the last recourse in a judicious application of the second amendment.