Making Islam illegal -- is it the West's only choice?

When President Bush gave his "axis of evil" speech he went out of his way to make the world understand that it isn't a war with Islam itself that we were joining — and I say joining because the war had been started by the Jihadists decades before. And, in observance to our Western principles, that must be the correct way to view our conflagration with radical Islam.

Let's face facts, it certainly is uncomfortable to a Westerner who has been brought up on tolerance, freedom of religion, and liberty to contemplate a war against an entire religion. But are we approaching a time when Western nations won't have a choice but to target Islam itself in certain ways to keep their own people safe. The best course of action is to make public displays of Islam and certain of its practices illegal in Western nations.

So, the question becomes are we at that time now? Are we fast approaching a time when Mosques will be closed and banned? Have we come to a time when Islamic literature is turned away from our borders? Have the childish and dangerous reactions of Muslims to this cartoon in a Danish newspaper proven that Islam cannot be trusted to be a vital, peaceful, and law-abiding segment of society?

We are already approaching this today. In Ontario they have officially outlawed Muslim Sharia law, that law that uses religious precepts to enforce moral and society codes of conduct. And Muslim "family councils" have been stopped where local community groups may supplement Canadian law with their local custom.

Several members of the John Howard administration in Australia have spoken out against Islamic clashes with Western notions of law and societal comportment many times over the last few years.

Recently Howard himself said, "I do think there is this particular complication because there is a fragment which is utterly antagonistic to our kind of society, and that is a difficulty ... You can't find any equivalent in Italian, or Greek, or Lebanese, or Chinese or Baltic immigration to Australia. There is no equivalent of raving on about jihad, but that is the major problem."

Muslims routinely destroy property, threaten death and bodily harm to those who speak out against them, and they constantly fund terrorism throughout the world. In Syria they have burnt an embassy, in Europe Muslims have been responsible for murdering people who have written out against Islam or made movies, and other forms of art. These actions are also approved by Islamic teachers (Imams) and religious leaders, not just undertaken by warped loners claiming to represent Islam quite against the will of the majority or authority.

With this ridiculous cartoon issue, we have seen that Islam has no sense of perspective. In the west parody or satire is seen as not only common, but completely harmless for the most part. And religion is not immune to parody and satire, though even in the west most people are often uncomfortable with religious satire. Usually only people filled with hate attack religion in parody and most in the West instinctively know this. As a result, most people dismiss such parody as foolishness and bad taste.

But with Muslims overreacting — in western eyes at least — to this silly cartoon issue in the way they have, it becomes nearly impossible for Westerners to view Islam as a peaceful religion, but more as a vicious hate group itself. And that perception is justified with the actions that Muslims have increasingly perpetrated over the ensuing years. So, we find that Islam presents a danger to the safety of the populace all too often. It is violent, oppressive, and reactionary.

But, what is to be done about it? We have been raised to feel that religion should be left untouched by government. Freedom of religion is at the very core of our beliefs. And this concept is an important one to uphold. So, how can we honestly and without hypocrisy begin to look toward making Islam illegal?

There is a parallel of sorts in the USA that might be used as a template for action. The Ku klux Klan.

After the Civil War ended, the KKK arose from the ashes of war as an advocacy group for the disenfranchised white voter in the south. But it quickly became a terrorist organization bent on taking out revenge on the south's newly freed black population for having lost the war. It got so bad that even one of the original organizers, C.S. Cavalry General Nathan Bedford Forrest, denounced the organization and quit it in disgust.

But as the late 1800s rolled on and the south began to re-enter the Union as full partners in government, the KKK began to lose steam and prominence. For a time it subsided. But as the 20th century neared, it re-emerged and this time became a nationwide and powerful force taking on the flavor of religious, civic and racial duty. The KKK became invested in government and claimed millions of members nation wide.

In the 1920s, however, it became too much for a liberty loving country to allow the KKK to any longer exist. In Indiana, the entire state government was scandalized by their fealty to Indiana's Klan leader who had raped and beaten his secretary on a train trip. Violence against and frequent lynching of southern blacks became so pervasive that Congress finally acted and banned the Klan. The organization collapsed never again to reclaim the power and prominence it once had.

Now, the KKK has always based its precepts on Christianity, as well as racial identity. It also reacted with violence, rallies, death threats and killing when it was threatened. It careened far away from being a mere "idea" or religious theology and became a terrorist organization. And it became a terrorist organization even though literally millions of Americans that belonged to or identified with the Klan were not themselves violent, evil, or dangerous citizens.

The leadership of the Klan supported violence. The leadership preached violence. The leadership planned and fomented it. Therefore, it had to go because it became a danger to every law-abiding citizen, whether they agreed with the racial and religious concepts the Klan espoused or not.

Islam has become the KKK of the 21st century. The sooner we awake to this truth and take steps to ban the religion, or somehow curtail its pernicious influence the better. The west is going to have to put sever restrictions on Islamic Mosques and public display of Islam. Further, devout Muslims should not be allowed to hold public office (though it certainly should not become a racial issue — sins of the father should not be visited upon the sons).

This is no religious purge as in centuries past. In the past religions were banned to be replaced by the state sponsored sect and believers of the banned religion were mistreated, tortured, unduly taxed, and terrorized. This is absolutely not the model the west would follow by banning aspects of Islam today. No religion is replacing Islam and no one is suggesting that Muslims be mistreated. But the creed to which they hold is fast becoming the most dangerous one in the world today. It is a fine line that we walk to consider banning Islam, but the safety of society is at risk not to do so.

This is not an easy conclusion at which to arrive. But if we continue to turn a blind eye to the danger that Islam presents to the west, we are signing our own death warrants.

The KKK was put down in the USA and made powerless for the same reason. Communism was destroyed for the same reason, as well. Islam is a danger to the world.

If a møøslimb is following the tenents of his religion, as practiced then he does not have honesty, character, and integrity.

His faith as practiced requires him to deceive - al taqqia - to murder innocents - jihad - and to oppress his own people - sharia -.

I see no semblance of integrity, only of consistency.

Consistent evil.

YMMV

Islam is the reason for the treason!

I know it is, what I'm saying is that it doesn't matter. Yes, keep an eye on muslims entering the country. Yes, be more observant of muslims when they get on a plane. But the truth is, by their very nature, they will commit illegal acts. And we will incarcerate or kill them on the battlefield until there are no more muslim terrorists. Hopefully, this doesn't mean all muslims.

I know this seems like a matter of trivial semantics, but it is not trivial. It's one thing to wipe out a national security threat. It's quite another to wipe out or criminalize the whole religion. While, from a military standpoint, the two might be the same, it is quite different from a legal standpoint. I advocate we take the course that nets the same results but doesn't leave us with a b**** of a bad legal precedent.

Prosecute them because they are criminals, and bomb them because they are the enemy trying to kill us. Perhaps they are our enemies because of Islam, but we don't kill them for that. We didn't nuke Japan because they were Japanese, we nuked them because they bombed the hell of Pearl Harbor and started a war we didn't want to be involved in.

Islam won't accept 'correction' without the application of overwhelming force.

I think radical Islam requires application of overwhelming force, as many times as necessary. And I don't favor sitting back and waiting for new cells of radical Islam to form in this country. We must pass and enforce strict laws that make life exceedingly harsh and unpleasant for Muslims who seek to go the radical route.

To the extent that those laws infringe on their free exercise rights, so be it. The free exercise clause of the first amendment was never intended to be the means by which the Constitution itself could be destroyed.

But like all religions, it also has very timeless values in charity, mercy, fairness, and morality.

You want to flesh this out a little bit, like who, what, when and where. I'm serious. I would really feel a lot better if you could.

Pearl Harbor was a surgical strike aimed at purely military targets. The Japanese killed fewer uniformed military personnel than the islamists killed innocent civilians on 9/11.

Please don't tar the Japanese by comparing them to the møøslimbs.

It simply isn't fair.

Just FYI:

Muslim countries without 9/11 WTC (non-hijacker) fatalities:
Aceh
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Akaran
Azerbaijan
Baharain
Bashkortostan
Bangladesh
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Brunei
Burkina Faso
Chad
Chechmya
Cocos Islands
Comoros
Cote D'Ivoire
Dagestan
Djibouti
East Turkistan
Egypt
Eritrea
Ethiopia
The Gambia
Guinea
Ingushetia
Iran
Iraq
Jordan
Kabardino & Bakaria
Kashmir
Kazakhstan
Kosovo
Kurdostan
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Lybia
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Mauritania
Mayotte
Mindanao
Morroco
Niger
Oman
Pakistan
Palistine
Qatar
Sanjak
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Somalia
Somaliland
Sudan
Syria
Tajikistan
Tatarstan
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
United Arab Emirates
Western Sahara
Yemen
Zanzibar

Muslim countries with 9/11 WTC fatalities:
Indonesia (92% Muslim) 1 dead
Lebanon (75% Muslim) 3 dead
Nigeria (75% Muslim) 1 dead
Usbekistan (88% Muslim) 1 dead

I suspect that these 6 either didn't get the memo, or are from the non-muslim part of the populations...

It is ironic. PC thinking will get us killed.

I agree.

Reading thru this thread its become very clear to me that the solution may well be to take the cancer of islamic ideology, and the current resurgence, out at its source before it spreads any more.

The rioting, murders, rapes, etc. in the name of the Koran by Muslim fanatics is nothing more than Psychological Operations (PsyOps) against the west, and on Liberals its working like a charm.

I know as well as anyone that you can't outlaw a belief.

Well I don't accept the premise as I could and would be easily killed in the ME for my belief. I relish the fact that I can live in the USA and practice my faith undisturbed, but if we allow Islam to propagate...death will follow. Our own Freedom of Religion will be trampled. And in some cases is already happening the MSM just doesn't make a big deal about it. And the only time it gets reported to police is if it involves someone from outside the muslim community.

Are you familiar with the Spanish word for swine? Maranaro. It has special significance to this discussion, because it has a double meaning. In Spain, maranaro was the term used to describe those Jews who adopted the outward trappings of Catholicism, but practiced their true faith in secret. If you outlaw Islam, you won't ban the religion. Far from it, you'll energize it and drive it underground.

History is replete with examples of this phenomenon. The Jews in Spain, early Christians in Rome, Russian Christians in the 20th century, and even Chinese Christians in this part of the 20th century. Anyone who thinks you can successfully legislate a religion out of existence is mistaken.

I know as well as anyone that you can't outlaw a belief.

Correct. But what we can do is keep a very close eye on the segment of the population in question, concentrating our efforts on the money (often connected to terrorist orgs) going in and out of mosques and identifying (and prosecuting) the rabble-rousing "religious" leaders who advocate law-breaking, jihad, etc..

We should also deport as many illegal aliens from Muslim-dominated countries we can find, and needless to say our efforts to find them should be considerably more spirited than we're used to seeing. In addition we should put a completely halt to all legal immigration from those nations. .....and the issuing of visas as well, including the "student" variety.

A lot can be done. But will it? Doubtful. .....unless an American city disappears in a mushroom cloud.

"We can't lose sight of the fact that most Muslims DO NOT endorse terrorism, and are in fact very much against it."

You're deluded. I suggest you get a copy of the Koran and read it. For one thing, any action that advances Islam and the implementation of Sharia law is acceptable - that includes lying to people like you.

I spent 11 years in the CIA and read a lot of raw intel (translated intercepts) coming out of the Middle East. I can state for a fact that most Muslims are all in favor of the total liquidation of the Jewish race. You will be reduced to conversion or Dhimmitude - a status similar to the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto. And any means that gets them there is not only acceptable but blessed. Please do some reading on the subject.

One stupid Muslim does not justify banning a religion

Mohammad (P---be upon him) IS that "one stupid Muslim", and since all else follows from that "one stupid Muslim", YES it does justify banning a nonreligious world domination socio-political cult posing as a religion.

I have no problem with any of your suggestions as they all seem perfectly reasonable to me. However, please take note that your reasonable suggestions about surveillance etc etc are a far cry from the original post which was completely unreasonable.

Melas, I won't go underground to practice my religion ever again and as far as I am concerned that is the root of the my emotional reaction going on today.

Some of us will not ever allow anyone, thing, gov't., or theocracy take away OUR God-given rights. What is being purveyed by the ME is not a religion...it never was a religion, it is a theocracy. And as such is a very different concept than that of religious philosophy.

"But like all religions, it also has very timeless values in charity, mercy, fairness, and morality." Charity, Mercy, Fairness - lol - only extended to believers and then only to those from the same tribe and then only to those from your father's root and then ... you get the idea. Morality? Sex with goat and boys ok. Women are pigs and in most cases don't have souls. I could go on.

I don't thing banning a religion is a good idea but way too many people here are acting like American's frequently do - they are being too generous. A noble trait but at times dangerous.

"Join or die"

Not to be confused with "Join or be murdered".

In the first instance, "join us, or they will kill you and us;" in the second instance, "join them or they will kill you and us."

Subtle, but distinct, difference. ;)

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.