Hillary loves religious freedom … only for Muslim foreign nationals

leolintang | Shutterstock

leolintang | Shutterstock

Conservative Review, by Daniel Horowitz, October 10, 2016:

Hillary Clinton called for fact checkers to help her out tonight. At the risk of staying up the entire night debunking every word she spoke on policy, lets address what is perhaps the most scandalous part of the debate from a policy perspective. Hillary managed to flip two of the most foundational principles — religious liberty and sovereignty — upside down and inside out.

Early on in the debate, a Muslim voter, who was allegedly undecided, asked the following question:

There are 3.3 Muslims in the United States and I’m one of them. You’ve mentioned working with Muslim nations, but with islamophobia on the rise, how will you help people like me deal with the consequences of being a threat to the country after the election is over.

After a brief back-and-forth between the candidates on refugee policy — one of the few moments when Trump was fully on message — Hillary made the following laughable, hypocritical, outrageous, and dangerous comment:

But it is important for us as a policy, you know, not to say as Donald has said, we’re going to ban people based on a religion. How do you do that? We are a country founded on religious freedom and liberty.

How do we do what he has advocated without causing great distress within our own country … are we going to have religious tests?

Remember folks, Hillary is the leader of the party that believes religious Christians and Jews (or Muslims or anyone else) must service homosexual or transgender events with their own private property. They must engage in involuntary servitude or have their livelihoods terminated unless they agree to violate their conscience; the “most sacred of property” rights, as Madison put it. They believe unelected judges can force a grocery store to include every type of contraception in their pharmacy section when 30 other pharmacies within driving distance sell the products. And they believe a county clerk who has served her jurisdiction for 27 years — predating the concept of a gay marriage –—should be thrown in jail for requesting that someone else sign the license, which in itself runs country to state law that was never changed statutorily.

No, Mrs. Clinton, our country wasn’t founded upon the notion that foreign nationals have an affirmative right to immigrate to this country. But it was founded upon the self-evident truth of natural law and nature’s God — the very God you rejected with your defense of judicial tyranny tonight — that Americans and those accepted into our society through mutual consent have the right to secure their property, earn a living, and practice their religious liberty. They most certainly have the right to not have their religion debased with their own business and property.

So how about those litmus tests? Hillary seems to have figured out how to implement religious tests when it comes to the religions she doesn’t like. Oddly, she has no problem replacing the real religious freedoms of Americans with a phantom and dangerous right for any particular immigrant or groups of immigrants to come here against the will of the people, even though many of them come from cultures that will not disagree with her chosen religion — the sexual revolution — in an agreeable and cordial fashion.

Under Hillary’s dangerous conception of the First Amendment, a view shared by the majority of the modern legal profession, an American Christian has no right to run a business without violating his religion, yet a Pakistani national can sue for discrimination for not being allowed to immigrate to our shores in the first place. This position is not only dangerous, especially during a time of war; it’s ignorant.

Given that Hillary will not read my book, which debunks her premise on both accounts of religious liberty and sovereignty, she would be wise to read one court case: Turner v. Williams, [194 U.S. 279, 290 (1904)]. In Turner, which was unanimous and is the most accepted area of settled law, the Court stated, “[R]ested on the accepted principle of international law, that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty and essential to selfpreservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions, or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.”

This is one “precedent” from the courts liberals don’t like to abide by.

That we have a presidential candidate who is this ignorant of our most foundational values of sovereignty and religious liberty should scare us all. Then again, it’s not like we have a Republican Party beating the drums on behalf of true religious liberty either.

No, Opposing Sharia Isn’t Supporting “Religious Freedom”

unnamed (4)Counter Jihad, by Bruce Cornibe, April 14, 2016:

Moral equivalence at its essence denounces any kind of moral hierarchy between political actors in a conflict, thus placing participants on equal moral grounds. It blurs the measures of right and wrong and eventually leads to a certain type of moral relativism.

This has been a recurring tactic of the American political Left throughout modern U.S. history. Some examples include equating the Viet Cong with the U.S. military during the Vietnam War as well as U.S. and coalition forces to the Taliban’s ‘freedom fighters’ in the recent U.S. War in Afghanistan. More recently, President Obama compared the Crusades to modern day Islamic jihadism.

Today, one sees another absurd comparison between non-violent Christians and radical Islamists, more specifically in this case, reasonable religious liberty protections and sharia.

In “Why I Oppose Mississippi Sharia Law 1523 ,” author Heddy-Dale Matthias makes no apologies for her disapprobation of Mississippi’s H.B. 1523. Heddy writes,

“I ask those who support this law to consider themselves living in an Islamic-majority state whose other-than-Christian legislature passes a Sharia law that allows workers in the Department of Motor Vehicles from refusing to issues drivers’ licenses to women, that allows judges to impose cutting off the hand of a criminal convicted of robbery, that allows a judge to impose the stoning of a woman (only) who commits adultery.”

Furthermore, Heddy goes on to exhort professional associations to overturn what she calls an “anti-life, anti-human law.”

By the merits of her argument an Islamic law permitting the stoning a homosexual because of his/her sexual preference is basically the same as a religious liberty law allowing a baker to refuse to bake a cake for a same-sex ceremony based on his/her religious convictions. Absolutely absurd, right?

This type of moral equivalence and argumentation is not only a danger to civil dialogue but it diminishes the brutality and intent of sharia (or its result, a global Islamic Caliphate). Also, by placing sharia on the same level as reasonable religious liberty protections one indirectly gives more legitimacy to Muslim Brotherhood front organizations (ex. Islamic Society of North America/ISNA) that have more of a softer and subtler approach of introducing Sharia law in the U.S. through a process known as ‘Civilization Jihad.’ How can we expose the violence and prohibition of fundamental freedoms inherent in Islamic Law if we treat the subject so nonchalantly?

From Shariah: The Threat to America:

Institutionalized, authoritative Sharia is comprehensive and by definition without limit in its ambitions and scope, and it also includes legally mandated, recommended, permitted, discouraged and prohibited practices that are strongly biased and discriminatory against women, homosexuals and non-Muslims.

Sharia law provides a legal framework for violence up to and including legalized murder against apostates (people who have left Islam), homosexuals, blasphemers and especially women accused of various crimes.

Just this year in 2011, in Pakistan’s Sharia legal system, both apostates and blasphemers have been imprisoned and faced execution. Sharia criminal punishments are extreme, including amputations and lashings for numerous crimes.

Going forward, when invoking sharia it’s best to use accurate and valid analogies instead of using sensationalizing tactics that grab headlines. The battle against jihad depends on it.

Human rights groups call for release of condemned Sudanese Christian Meriam Ibrahim

2827160726Center for Security Policy:

On Thursday 12 June, the Institute on Religion and Democracy along with dozens of co-sponsors led a protest at the White House calling for the release of Sudanese “apostate” Meriam Ibrahim. Ibrahim, the mother of two young children and wife of a U.S. citizen, has been sentenced to death by hanging by the government of Sudan.

Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas)

 

Faith McDonnell, Institute on Religion and Democracy

 

Magdi Khalil, Coptic Solidarity

 

Tony Perkins, Family Research Council

 

Jimmy Mulla, Voices for Sudan

 

Penny Young Nance, Concerned Women for America

 

 

Obama Adds Insult to Injury for Sharia-Condemned Young Mother in Sudan

1401911517362.cachedBy Nina Shea:
Khartoum says Meriam Ibrahim, a Christian, must hang for “apostasy.” Soon she’ll be flogged. Her husband is American, but the U.S. may require a DNA test to prove her infants are, too.
On death row in Sudan last week, Meriam Ibrahim gave birth to a girl, whom she named Maya. The 27-year-old prisoner of conscience is now a step closer to the gallows. On May 15, Meriam was sentenced to be hanged for apostasy from Islam, but the execution was ordered delayed until the then-8-month pregnant defendant delivered and weaned the baby.Notwithstanding its assertion last weekend that Meriam would be released “in a few days,” by Monday Sudan had made it clear it has no such intention. Her defense lawyer is now pursuing legal appeals, but Meriam’s  only real hope of being spared lies in the moral pressure created in the court of public opinion.

Meriam’s case turned on the question of her religious identity—whether she is lawfully a Christian, a faith she inherited from her Ethiopian Orthodox mother and embraces, or whether, because her father was a Muslim, she too must be a Muslim, even though he abandoned the family when she was young.

The Sudanese court determined that she was a Muslim under sharia law and, after she refused to renounce Christianity at trial, convicted her of apostasy. It also found her guilty of adultery for marrying a man who is Christian, which is forbidden to Muslim women in Sudan, and, for that, the court ordered that flogging with 100 lashes be added to her punishment.

The cruel treatment and flagrant denial of religious freedom are shocking even by Sudan’s abysmal human rights standards. The case has received wide attention in the international media, and it has stirred high level outrage. British Prime Minister David Cameron, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, and various U.N. rights experts are among those who have raised their voices in protest.  Mia Farrow has started a hashtag campaign (#FreeMeriam) and others are circulating petitions.

But from one quarter there has been noticeable silence. For over two weeks since the verdict was announced there has been no public statements in defense of Meriam from President Barack Obama or any high level U.S. government official. The U.S. State Department spokesperson said the agency was “deeply disturbed” by the sentence imposed on Meriam but “understood that the sentence was open to appeal”, thus seeming to suggest that the administration is heartlessly preparing to stand by and passively watch the process play out .

Read more at Daily Beast

Also see:

US: Forms of Sharia Source of Worldwide Religious Oppression

Pakistani police

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom’s new report states a fact that the rest of the U.S. gov’t is afraid to talk about.

By Ryan Mauro:

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom’s new report recommends that eight more countries be designated as Countries of Particular Concern, all but one of which are Muslim-majority populations. The panel repeatedly identified interpretations of sharia as a source for the increasing violations of religious freedom.

The panel suggested designations for Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Vietnam.

Of these, Pakistan warranted the most concern. The panel said the state of religious freedom “hit an all-time low” last year. In April 2013, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan even said the country is “on the verge” of becoming an undemocratic society where violence is mainstream.

The report suggested the retention of eight countries previously labeled as Countries of Particular Concern (CPC): Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Uzbekistan.

The panel’s comments on Iran correspond with a United Nations report that found that Christian persecution is at unprecedented levels, even though the new President is supposedly a “moderate.” The Commission states that Sufis, Sunnis and Shiites opposed to the regime are also being victimized.

“[Rouhani] has not delivered on his campaign promises of strengthening civil liberties for religious minorities,” the Commission report states.

One of the most important conclusions in the report is that Saudi Arabia is still promoting radical Islam and religious intolerance in the school system. The Saudi government may be confronting theMuslim Brotherhood, but that has not stopped it from indoctrinating students with a Brotherhood-type worldview.

Read more at Clarion Project

Muslim father deeply offended by Easter egg hunt flyer depicting bunnies

Majed Moughni holds the offending article (photo: Ryan  Garza/Detroit Free Press)

Majed Moughni holds the offending article (photo: Ryan Garza/Detroit Free Press)

by Allen West:

And here’s yet another reminder of how stupid that “coexist” bumper sticker truly is. Hat tip to Gateway Pundit for reporting that a Muslim father is upset because his children were traumatized by a… well, a flier for an Easter egg hunt. Oh, the horror of getting an invitation to join other American children in a time-honored tradition of hunting for colored Easter eggs. Really scary huh? As reported in the Detroit Free Press, some Muslim parents are concerned about public schools in Dearborn handing out flyers to all students advertising an Easter egg hunt, saying it violates the principle of church and state separation.

A flyer with the highly inflammatory “Eggstravaganza!” was given to students this week at three elementary schools in the Dearborn Public Schools district, which has a substantial number of Muslim students. The flyer described an April 12 event at Cherry Hill Presbyterian Church in Dearborn featuring an egg hunt, relay race, and egg toss, and included images of eggs and a bunny.

“It really bothered my two kids,” said parent Majed Moughni, who is Muslim and has two children, ages 7 and 9, in Dearborn elementary schools. “My son was like, ‘Dad, I really don’t feel comfortable getting these flyers, telling me to go to church. I thought churches are not supposed to mix with schools.’ ” Moughni said he’s concerned about “using school teachers paid by public funds … to pass out these flyers that are being distributed by a church. I think that’s a serious violation of separation of church and state.”

First of all, the flyer was approved by the school district. Second, it was an invitation to an event that was not religious or church-related, only took place at churchs ground. Thirdly, I believe Mr. Moughni fails to realize that his religion, Islam, is a totalitarian ideology which has no separation between mosque and state. Islamic Sharia law dictates every aspect of a Muslim’s life and decrees the most heinous of punishments, such as stoning for women — and not with chocolate or marshmallow peep stones, but real ones.

It seems this burgeoning Muslim community in “Dearbornistan” actually believes it can coerce the remaining non-Muslims there to live in fear and cower to their intolerance. Sorry, sir. Ain’t happenin’.

Maybe Mr. Moughni can explain why the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) — an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist funding case and subsidiary organization of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood — is suppressing the first amendment right of free speech and free expression in the showing of the documentary “Honor Diaries” which we have featured here.

This is how it happens America. There are those who enact the Islamic principle of the hijra — “migration” — in order not to assimilate but infiltrate and eventually dominate the host country culture. We see it happening across the Atlantic Ocean in Europe. It becomes a spreading cancer that uses the host country’s freedoms and principles to turn it upon itself — as Mr. Moughni attempts to use “separation of church and state” as an argument.

Read more 

Syrian Christian Leaders Show Hope in the Face of Despair

In this exclusive report to the Religious Freedom Coalition Andrew Harrod reveals the feelings toward Muslims and the Assad government in Syria by  high ranking members of the Syrian Christian clergy. Christians in Syria refer to the “golden age” of freedom they have had since 1970 that now is threatened by the installation of a Saudi style regime by the United States government. – Editor

By Andrew E. Harrod

“There will come a time when there will be no more Christians in Syria,” the Syrian Presbyterian Rev. Dr. Riad Jarjour, former General Secretary of the Middle East Council of Churches, warned recently onJanuary 27, 2014, at Washington, DC’s Heritage Foundation.  Jarjour explained Syrian Christians’ “stage of hopelessness” while “boxed in” by Muslim sectarian fighting in Syria’s civil war during two successive presentations by a Syrian Christian delegation.

Syrian clergy visiting the United States speak favorable of the government of Bashir Assad (YouTube)

Syrian clergy visiting the United States speak favorable of the government of Bashir Assad (YouTube)

The Heritage event and the previous day’s panel at McLean, Virginia’s St. John the Beloved Catholic Church clearly showed the “tragedy of the church in Syria” described at St. John by Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo.  Sookhdeo, chairman of the Westminster Institute and international director of Barnabas Aid, the Syrian delegation’s sponsors, described a “Gethsemane that leads to a potential Calvary.”  One-third of Syria’s two million Christians had fled the country during “perhaps the single greatest humanitarian disaster in the world today.”  During a slide show, Syrian Orthodox Church Metropolitan Bishop Dionysius Jean Kawak at St. John noted United Nations estimates of ten million Syrians needing assistance by the end of 2013.  Food, water, and electricity shortages afflicting the Syrian population marked a “lost generation.”

Jarjour at Heritage, meanwhile, discussed how Syrian Christians are “pressured to leave” by Sunni jihadist groups fighting for the overthrow of Syria’s Shiite-backed dictator Bashir Assad.  Jarjour recalled one funeral of a Christian beheaded by such jihadists as well as the severed heads of two Armenian Christians sent to children as a threat.  Jihadists also used Christians as human shields in the Syrian town of Homs.  Kawak at Heritage also referenced the kidnapping by jihadists of Syrian nuns and bishops.

Such “very radical Islamist groups” entering Syria meant that local Christians had abandoned their support for opposition groups initially given when protests for reform of the Assad regime began in March 2011.  Many of these groups were linked to Al Qaeda that, “contrary to popular opinion…is alive,” Sookhdeo noted at Heritage.  Jarjour at Heritage saw a worrying precedent in Syria’s neighbor Iraq, where Muslim intimidation had expelled 70% of that country’s Christian population following Saddam Hussein’s overthrow.

Rev. Adib Awad, General Secretary of the National Evangelical Synod of Syria and Lebanon, explained at St John how such Muslim repression of Christians is not new.  Jews and Christians are “second-class citizens in a religious state” under orthodox Islamic laws, he explained.  While not always enforced in the past, these laws mandated distinctive clothing for Christians and low door construction in Christian dwellings so that Christians would humiliatingly bow upon entering.  Muslim repression also resulted in destroyed churches while Ottoman Empire rule in Syria enslaved Christian youth as soldiers in the Janissary Corps or as haram concubines.

While non-Muslims have had some freedoms under past Muslim rule, “it can change anytime,” Adib said to this author at Heritage.  Christians in the region have thus endured “different periods of fear for their future,” Kawak observed at Heritage.  As a result of such centuries-long repression, modern Syria’s population is only 10% Christian while the region was essentially completely Christian before Islamic conquest in the seventh-century.

Yet the Syrian church is “one of the oldest in the world,” Sookhdeo at St. John noted.  Christians are not “outsiders” in Syria, Damascus Armenian Church Primate Bishop Armash Nalbandian similarly affirmed at St. John.  Rather “Christianity belongs to Syria,” a “cradle of Christianity.”

Read more at Religious Freedom Coalition with video

Also see: