Posted on 12/09/2015 6:11:32 AM PST by Petrosius
Donald Trump's rhetorical excesses aside, he has a way of pushing us into important debates, particularly on immigration. He has done it again with his bracing proposal to force "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."
I have no idea what Mr. Trump knows about either immigration law or Islam. But it should be obvious to any objective person that Muslim immigration to the West is a vexing challenge.
Some Muslims come to the United States to practice their religion peacefully, and assimilate into the Western tradition of tolerance of other people's liberties, including religious liberty -- a tradition alien to the theocratic societies in which they grew up. Others come here to champion sharia, Islam's authoritarian societal framework and legal code, resisting assimilation into our pluralistic society.
Since we want to both honor religious liberty and preserve the Constitution that enshrines and protects it, we have a dilemma.
The assumption that is central to this dilemma -- the one that Trump has stumbled on and that Washington refuses to examine -- is that Islam is merely a religion. If that's true, then it is likely that religious liberty will trump constitutional and national-security concerns. How, after all, can a mere religion be a threat to a constitutional system dedicated to religious liberty?
But Islam is no mere religion.
As understood by the mainstream of Muslim-majority countries that are the source of immigration to America and the West, Islam is a comprehensive ideological system that governs all human affairs, from political, economic, and military matters to interpersonal relations and even hygiene. It is beyond dispute that Islam has religious tenets -- the oneness of Allah, the belief that Mohammed is the final prophet, the obligation of ritual prayer. Yet these make up only a fraction of what is overwhelmingly a political ideology.
Our constitutional principle of religious liberty is derived from the Western concept that the spiritual realm should be separate from civic and political life. The concept flows from the New Testament injunction to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's.
Crucially, the interpretation of Islam that is mainstream in most Muslim-majority countries does not accept a division between mosque and state. In fact, to invoke "mosque" as the equivalent of "church" in referring to a division between spiritual and political life is itself a misleading projection of Western principles onto Islamic society. A mosque is not merely a house of worship. It does not separate politics from religion any more than Islam as a whole does. There is a reason why many of the fiery political protests that turn riotous in the Middle East occur on Fridays -- the Muslim Sabbath, on which people pour out of the mosques with ears still burning from the imam's sermon.
The lack of separation between spiritual and civic life is not the only problem with Islam. Sharia is counter-constitutional in its most basic elements -- beginning with the elementary belief that people do not have a right to govern themselves freely. Islam, instead, requires adherence to sharia and rejection of all law that contradicts it. So we start with fundamental incompatibility, before we ever get to other aspects of sharia: its systematic discrimination against non-Muslims and women; its denial of religious liberty, free speech, economic freedom, privacy rights, due process, and protection from cruel and unusual punishments; and its endorsement of violent jihad in furtherance of protecting and expanding the territory it governs.
Let's bear in mind that permitting immigration is a discretionary national act. There is no right to immigrate to the United States, and the United States has no obligation to accept immigrants from any country, including Muslim-majority countries. We could lawfully cut off all immigration, period, if we wanted to. Plus, it has always been a basic tenet of legal immigration to promote fidelity to the Constitution and assimilation into American society -- principles to which classical sharia is antithetical.
So why isn't that the end of the matter? Why is Trump being vilified? Why isn't he being hailed for speaking truth and refusing to bow to political correctness?
Because Islam is more complex in practice than in theory.
In our non-Muslim country, there is no point in debating what the "true" Islam says or whether Muslims are at liberty to ignore or reform classical sharia. There may not be a true Islam. Even if there is one, what non-Muslims think or say about it is of little interest to Muslims. Our job, in any event, is to preserve the Constitution and protect our national security regardless of how Islam's internal debates are ultimately resolved -- if they ever are.
With that understanding, it is simply a fact that many Muslims accept our constitutional principles and do not seek to impose sharia on our society. They have varying rationales for taking this position: Some believe sharia mandates that immigrants accept their host country's laws; some believe sharia's troublesome elements are confined to the historical time and place where they arose and are no longer applicable; some think sharia can evolve; some simply ignore sharia altogether but deem themselves devout Muslims because they remain Islamic spiritually and -- within the strictures of American law -- culturally.
For those Muslims, Islam is, in effect, merely a religion, and as such it deserves our Constitution's protections.
For other Muslims, however, Islam is a political program with a religious veneer. It does not merit the liberty protections our law accords to religion. It undermines our Constitution and threatens our security. Its anti-assimilationist dictates create a breeding ground for violent jihad.
If we continue mindlessly treating Islam as if it were merely a religion, if we continue ignoring the salient differences between constitutional and sharia principles -- thoughtlessly assuming these antithetical systems are compatible -- we will never have a sensible immigration policy.
I have no idea what, if anything, Donald Trump knows about sharia. I do know that it's a system we must account for if we are going to succeed in welcoming pro-Western Muslims who will be a boon to our society while excluding Islamic supremacists who want to destroy it.
-- Andrew C. McCarthy is a policy fellow at the National Review Institute. His latest book is Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama's Impeachment.
How about just picking certain countries? If you were born there, you don’t come here, unless you go through an exceptional vetting process. Sort of like getting a clearance.
Carter did it during the Iranian crisis ...
Serious discussion is stifled by politically correct censure. It would be appropriate to discuss openly whether the policies that allowed over 5 million Muslims to enter this country over the past thirty years was beneficial for the United States. It would also be appropriate to discuss if Islamic culture is compatible with the values, practices and institutions of Western civilization. It would appear not.
A very good article by Andrew C. McCarthy.
HOORAY Trump
I expect Carter to shortly be appearing on every MSM outlet saying that his immigration action after the Iranian hostage taking was "the biggest mistake of mah Presidency."
The United States is composed of over 300 million people, each with their own diverse customs and beliefs. Among each group is peoples who hold very FUNDAMENTAL beliefs and customs.
We have ORTHODOX JEWS who adhere to the very basic tenets of Judiasm along with “modern” Jews who avoid parts of their traditions.
We have Fundamental Christians who hold to the strictest tenets of their Christianity, along with Christians who do not.
We have Buddhists who follow a religion from the Far East.
We have Protestants of many, many denomination, each observing their own versions of Christianity.
We have Amish, Mennonites, Ba’Hai, those who follow Native American beliefs who live in basic harmony with their fellow Americans.
The United States is blessed with widely diverse peoples who live together, each respecting the other’s religious beliefs, each respecting the other’s traditions, each wishing the other good tidings at their holidays and festivals.
What these people have in common is that THEY DO WISH TO KILL THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH THEM. There is no desire to destroy somone whose beliefs vary from yours. No desire to destroy places of worship of someone “different”. No desire to say, “you cannot and better not drive through my neighborhood.”
The USA has NO need or reason to allow the entrance of those who would then seek to destroy the host body. That is one description of a CANCER. This we need?
8 U.S. Code § 1182
(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.â€
Some people in the past day has said that this can’t happen...it can and would if we had a President that cared....until such time as we do get a President that cares about America and Americans...lets hope nothing happens that will harm us like 9/11....
“I have no idea what, if anything, Donald Trump knows about sharia.”
McCarthy starts off his piece with that, and ends his piece with that, as if sharia is a complex concept requiring years of study. I believe that Trump has the capability to master that concept, if he can master the concept of becoming a billionaire. Actually, it only takes a room temperature IQ to master the concept of sharia. You basically only need to see photos of the beheadings.
Hey good idea!
LINK TO OUR 30 MINUTE RADIO RANT OF 12/9/2015
(MAINLY TRUMP AND THE MUSLIM INVASION!)
You can access the show by clicking on this link to the Gradick Communications site: http://www.gradickcommunications.com/
Go to “PODCASTS” and click on the link to the show. You can play it from the site or download it to your computer and play it there.
HOW MUCH TROUBLE ARE WE IN? CAN YOU SAY “EXISTENTIAL�?
The time for talking has past, stop all muslims from entering the country and deport all those already here; end of discussion.
let the discussion begin here: (copied)
Islam, by law, is prohibited from US immigration
The Immigration and Nationality Act passed June 27, 1952 revised the laws relating to immigration, naturalization, and nationality for the United States. That act, which became Public Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of Aliens to the US and remains in effect today. Among the many issues it covers, one in particular, found in Chapter 2 Section 212, is the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by “force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.” This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States, but this law is being ignored by the White House. Islamic immigration to the US would be prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and to the Republic. All Muslims who attest that the Koran is their life’s guiding principal subscribe to submission to Islam and its form of government. Now the political correct crowd would say that Islamists cannot be prohibited from entering the US because Islam is a religion. Whether it is a religion is immaterial because the law states that Aliens who are affiliated with any “organization” that advocates the overthrow of our government are prohibited
The gope planned for a nice calm primary season, where no one even mentioned illegal immigration, where no one dared to open their mouth about internal threats posed by Islamic radicals, where everyone would be extremely dull, boring, and uninspiring so that Hillary could easily slide right into the White House, thus giving the nation the great benefit of its first female president.
Thanks to Donald Trump, the primary season is anything but boring, and he has forced a national conversation about illegal immigration, radical Islam, and Political Correctness. If he wins the nomination, he may very well sweep Hillary into the ashbin of history.
False meme - religious liberty is a Constitutionally protected concept that applies to citizens - it isn't a reason to let non-citizens from a high-threat group unhindered access...
Besides, there are already a couple precedents...
If 0bama could import muslim refugees who were exposed to ebola he would be happier yet. Such a disgrace as president.
Others come here to champion sharia, Islam's authoritarian societal framework and legal code, resisting assimilation into our pluralistic society.
Since we want to both honor religious liberty and preserve the Constitution that enshrines and protects it, we have a dilemma. .... How, after all, can a mere religion be a threat to a constitutional system dedicated to religious liberty?
... Islam is no mere religion.
Islam's a political system locked within a religion ...
Or a religious system locked within a political system... Either way Andrew C. McCarthy's making an important effort to understand underlying issues. It's a good start.
Others need to make the same effort - for our sake, for the country's sake, for moderate Muslims sake and for radical Muslims to know we 'get' them... Lines that are forceful, fair and just must be drawn.
For all of our sakes...
Note to the ‘COMPASSIONATE & MODERATE” GOP voters & others who just cannot decide:
Trying to ride the raft of AMERICAN VALUES down the roiling “RIVER OF RADICAL MUSLIM JIHADISTS” isn’t working.
Just as they do in the ME, Jihadists hide in plain sight in the civilian population.
We must be smart
No more complacency & political correctness. POLITICAL CORRECTNESS is a death sentence for Americans.
We are NOT SAFE.
Trump’s initial idea MIGHT not be the ending formulation, but hiding behind ‘American Values” & continuing to let these monsters into this country is not working & won’t work in the future.
More-—spending taxpayer dollars to feed, house, medicate all these intruders when our own vets cannot get the medical & mental health care they need for injuries fighting to free these animals in the ME is also VERY WRONG.
Stopping the medical care for those who got hurt in 9/11 is another slap in the face to America from Obama. That incident wasn’t just an airplane that hit a building. It was just as deliberate as what the radical & supporting Muslims are doing today—tomorrow & into the future if they are NOT STOPPED NOW.
It took over 6 years & the killings in San Bernardino for Obama to call the shootings at Fort Hood a terrorist act.
He is more than slow in the uptake. He is deliberate & misleading the American people.
The country (actually the media, Dems and the GOPe) cannot continue to hide under a rock and not discuss this.
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.