Opinions? Can a devout Muslim be an American patriot and loyal citizen?

Partners:

• Vets for Victory
• Military Appreciation Day
• Army Paratrooper
• Patriot Guard Riders

 

[BuoyJumper]

Some food for thought while Congress allows our immigration policy to continue without revision for the changing world we live in.  Is it time to start limiting immigration from countries that harbor our enemies or from countries whose governments/peoples refer to us as their enemy and even call America the Great Satan?

Can a devout Muslim be an American patriot and loyal citizen?

A.  Theologically, no. Because his/her allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia, turned monothistic.
B.  Scripturally, no. Because his/her allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Quran.
C.  Geographically, no. Because his/her allegiance is to Mecca to which he turns in prayer five times a day.
D.  Socially, no. Because his/her allegiance to Islam demands that he make no friends of Christians and Jews (Q. 5:51)
E.  Politically, no. Because he/she must submit to the mullah, who teaches annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.
F.  Domestically, no. Because he/she is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Q. 4:34).
G.  Religiously, no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam—intolerance (Q. 2:256).
H.  Intellectually, no. Because he/she cannot accept the American Constitution since it is established on Biblical principles.
I.  Philosophically, no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot
    co-exist. Every Muslim government is dictatorial or autocratic except Turkey.
J.  Spiritually, no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian’s God is a triune God, while the Muslim’s is one entity
      called "Allah," who is never a heavenly Father, nor is he ever called "Love" in the 99 excellent names.

Interesting article from Renew America on this topic

[omahaprogrammer]

I believe this represents a very shallow and narrow view of Islam with respect to patriotism. You can give the same excuses why a Christian cannot be a loyal citizen by taking a shallow view of Christianity.

A. Theologically, no because we are to love God with all our heart, mind, and soul.
B. Scriptually, no because if we are to love Jesus, we must hate all others by comparison
C. Geographically, (well, this doesn't apply)
D. Socially, no because we are to associate ourselves only within the body of Christ
E. Politically, no because God is our king
F. Domestically, no because wives are supposed to submit to their husbands
G. Religiously, no because we have only one faith and we should not allow us to sin by accepting other religions (golden calf)
H. Intellectually, no, because the constitution enshrines the permission to worship any god or gods as one chooses and is otherwise a completely sectarian document.
I. Philosophically, (I can't really come up with a good one)
J. Spiritually, no, because we pledge allegiance to a flag, which is idolatry.

8 out of 10 isn't too bad when restricted to the same list, is it?

If you want, I can find Bible verses to support each one of these statements, but I'm a bit busy right now.

And no fair refuting these points unless you're not Christian: you have a lot of the knowledge with which to refute each one simply with a basic understanding of Christ's teaching and you have NONE of this knowledge with respect to Islam.

[BuoyJumper]

If you want, I can find Bible verses to support each one of these statements, but I'm a bit busy right now.

Big deal OP.  I can also find Bible verses to rebuke every point you made in the above post and prove your points as being false.

The point I was hoping to make ..... is it about time for Congress to do some serious reform on our immigration policies?  Restricting immigration from countries whose people hold to values and a form of government so different from our own they would not likely be a good candidate to become an American citizen.

[omahaprogrammer]

I'd hope you can. It's a very flawed list of charges based on ideas in the Bible taken out of context

My point in my list was that I believe the original list is inherently flawed and drawn up on an intentionally rudimentary understanding of Islam to contrive support for a personal claim that Muslims can't be Americans. I believe this list was drawn up with the same tactics that I used to construct my list.

[EX-CG-GM]

Restricting immigration from countries whose people hold to values and a form of government so different from our own they would not likely be a good candidate to become an American citizen.

As you know Ron, I spent a year in Iraq.  During that time I worked with Muslims from a variety of countries.  Many are Muslim in the same way that many people are Catholic.  They may have been born into the religion but they don't necessarily buy into every bit of the religion's dogma.

I'm sure you know a great many people that don't live their lives strictly according to scripture and my experience has been the same is true of Muslims.  And, of course, Muslim is one all encompassing word, but when you dig into it there are many different sects, just as there are many different Christian faiths.

If you restrict immigration based solely on religion you have now banned a great many people that want to come here exactly because of the freedoms and lwas we have.

So I have to say no, an overall ban would be wrong.  Don't forget, there are already many Muslim citizens as well as Muslims serving in the military.

It just doesn't work to lump them all into one bucket anymore than it would work to lump all Christains into the Westboro Church bucket.

[BuoyJumper]

Thanks Stan ... This is more along the lines of what I was hoping to do and that is develop some dialog.  I've worked with Muslims and I have had Muslims who had immigrated from the Ukraine working for me back when my family had Servo-Tek in New Jersey.  I don't have a problem with Muslims.  Good workers, pretty much kept to themselves.  For the most part they want for their children the same things we want for our children. 

There are many "Muslim" faiths so to take and lump all Muslims into one as the author of the A through J list has done is extremely off base and just wrong.  But have we come to a place in our nation's history where because of job availability, economy, our laws, etc where we need to begin to restrict the amount of people we allow to immigrate into this country annually.  Not just based solely on religious beliefs but on the form of government they have been living under that would allow the practice of laws in the name of religion that are contrary to our own. 

For example, Law and Order SVU did an episode that was about a Muslim family that had come here from a country that allowed the practive of Sharia Law.  As I remember the episode, a daughter of the Muslim couple was attending a New York university.  She fell in love with a Jewish boy from the same school and became pregnant by him.  Problem is she was bequeathed by her parents to marry the son of a Muslim family.  Her brother seeing that she had disgraced his family and shamed the family name murdered her as was set forth by his family's religious beliefs. 

From the Examiner.com Santa Ana ... 

Sharia, or Islamic law, influences the legal code in most Muslim countries. A movement to allow sharia to set  regulations that pertain to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and custody, is now expanding into the United States. All Sharia is derived from two primary sources, the divine revelations set forth in the Qur'an, and the sayings and example set by the Prophet Muhammad in the Sura.

There are sections of major cities in Europe where the police will not go into Muslim communities to arrest Muslims for murder because of their practice of Sharia Law.  So here is our dilema.  The first amendment says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." 

So where do we draw the line ...???        

[EX-CG-GM]

For example, Law and Order SVU did an episode that was about a Muslim family that had come here from a country that allowed the practive of Sharia Law.  As I remember the episode, a daughter of the Muslim couple was attending a New York university.  She fell in love with a Jewish boy from the same school and became pregnant by him.  Problem is she was bequeathed by her parents to marry the son of a Muslim family.  Her brother seeing that she had disgraced his family and shamed the family name murdered her as was set forth by his family's religious beliefs.

Ron, that show sounds eerily similar to something that happened here in Phoenix within the last year.  Muslim family, daughter was very westernized.  They arranged a marriage for her to wed a guy somewhere in the mideast.  She didn't want to do it and was living a typical western college girl life.  Her father ran over her in a parking lot at a mall and killed her.  "Honor killing".   

I believe the gov't has the right to prosecute people that commit criminal acts, whether it is because they believe their religion allows, or calls, for them to do so or not.  So even if they choose to practice some of Shariah law, if doing so ends up being considered criminal here they get punished for it.

[Salba]

Ron:

I'm sure you've followed my opposition to the Mosque/Community Center at 51Park Place.  And despite the tactics of the far left of trying to label everyone who opposes that as Anti-Muslim bigots, Religious Intolerant only towards Islam folks etc or ignorant fools, I'm not.

But this list, as is the announced burning of the Koran on 9/11, are just as divisive and provoking as any thing the far left is doing.  But let's discuss it anyway...

First and foremost - many, if not most, immigrants legal and illegal have flocked to America to get away from their governments and the conditions within their home countries.  Yes - many were economic refugees and not religious or political refugees in the SENSE this list is alluding to.  But the point is that America was and is a beacon of freedom, hope for a better life, and a more merit based than class based society.  

So when looking at immigration issues - look at the person and judge on the person not the country they are coming from.  We've made that error before (read about the Yellow Peril).  I'm not saying that certain countries don't deserve extra scrunity when looking at the person BUT judge the person's application and NOT the country they are coming from.  To do differently is a slippery slope I do not want to journey on.

Cubans?  Under Castro - we say no because of Castro?
How about under Chevaz?
Russians - Ukrainians - Checkzans(sp?)
France hasn't been particularly supportive of America - stop letting Frenchmen (but not women ) immigrate?

Nope... I'm not a fan of closing our borders to legal immigration.  
Now as to once here legally?   Yes there are certain things I expect immigrants to do. That's a different thread and pertains to all immigrants and not just Muslims or those of Islamic faith.

As to this quote: Sharia, or Islamic law, influences the legal code in most Muslim countries.

Influences?   God what a BS statement.  Influences!  Great word - you get the impression that MOST Muslim countries are under Sharia Law of the vilest form but you can always HIDE behind the technical word that you only said influences.  And IS Sharia and ISLAMIC Law the same.  Most people won't know but will assume.  Guess what - in a Muslin nation, even a democratic one, OF COURSE Islamic law influences the legal code  OF COURSE Sharia law influences the legal code. Duh!  That's like saying British Common Law influences the legal code of America!  Duh!  or that Christian values influenced the writing of the Constitution!  Duh!

And this quote:  A movement to allow sharia to set  regulations that pertain to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and custody, is now expanding into the United States.

We have a movement to return states to Mexico.  We have a movement to make monetary payments to descents of former slaves.  We have a movement to make drugs legal.  We have a movement to make use of certain fats in fast food resturants illegal.  We have a movement to split California into three states.  We have a movement to do away with the Electorial College.  We have a movement to Amend the Constitution to define Marriage.  WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT quote above really means?  What's the facts to support the BALD Statement?  2 people have now been joined by 2 more people thus 'expanding' movement.  Where's the BEEF?

Oh by the way - the Catholic Church has a movement to allow priest to marry... but guess what - Catholic "cannon law" does not allow priest to marry - so I guess the religion "sets regulation pertaining to marriage, divorce and raising of chidlren within the faith too".

Don't buy into this stuff, my friend.  We do set the line.  Stoning a woman that has TJ flipped out - is illegal here. It's murder as was what the brother did in your example.  JUST LIKE what a person does when because of their religious belief they KILL an abortion doctor.

Hope this makes sense.  But on a lighter note - maybe we shouldn't allow Texans to migrate to other states?  God knows what kind of bagage they'd bring to California?  

Have a great day and Best Wishes
Sonny

[EX-CG-GM]

maybe we shouldn't allow Texans to migrate to other states?

Could we maybe just ban them from Washington D.C.?   

[BuoyJumper]

maybe we shouldn't allow Texans to migrate to other states?

Could we maybe just ban them from Washington D.C.?  

Actually most Texans I know wouldn't have a problem with either of those suggestions. 

A poll taken a while ago indicated that the majority of Texans believe we would be better off if we pulled out of the corporate United States of America, Inc.  We have everything we need right here in the state.

[EX-CG-GM]

Well, AZ didn't become a state until 1912 and seemed to be doing OK before that, so I suspect most states would be fine on their own.  Until one state decided to invade another state. 

As individual states there would be a problem with minor details like having a strong military though.

We just need to somehow, some way, please Lord, fix friggin' Washington!   

[omahaprogrammer]

please Lord, fix friggin' Washington!

Only God could work such a miracle.

[BuoyJumper]

I believe the gov't has the right to prosecute people that commit criminal acts, whether it is because they believe their religion allows, or calls, for them to do so or not.  So even if they choose to practice some of Shariah law, if doing so ends up being considered criminal here they get punished for it.

Absolutely true for the time being.  How about an ounce of prevention being worth a pound of cure? 

What happens when, as is happening in some ghettos in France and Holland where the Muslim population of that area has become so dense that the police in fear of their lives, won't go into those areas to investigate crime.  They just turn their backs on crimes like assault and battery, torture, child abuse, spousal abuse and even murder (lawful under Sharia law) to let Muslims "handle their own business".   What do we do then? 

[omahaprogrammer]

It'd probably be a lot like other bad neighborhoods throughout the country.

[Salba]

I believe the gov't has the right to prosecute people that commit criminal acts, whether it is because they believe their religion allows, or calls, for them to do so or not.  So even if they choose to practice some of Shariah law, if doing so ends up being considered criminal here they get punished for it.

Absolutely true for the time being.  How about an ounce of prevention being worth a pound of cure? 

What happens when, as is happening in some ghettos in France and Holland where the Muslim population of that area has become so dense that the police in fear of their lives, won't go into those areas to investigate crime.  They just turn their backs on crimes like assault and battery, torture, child abuse, spousal abuse and even murder (lawful under Sharia law) to let Muslims "handle their own business".   What do we do then? 

WHaT IF?

We've had ghettos before and still do. Different issue - different cast of characters. Black, Brown, Yellow, White, etc. Sometimes they do go in, sometimes they don't. Why would this be different.  You think cops didn't avoid areasduring prohibition?  That's why the feds set up task forces.  You think there aren't hills and valleys in certain regions of this country where local LE tread lightly if at all?  You think it didn't happen before in Irish or Chinesse Ghetto's?

What IF?  What happens WHEN.

Simple answer.. we deal with it or we perish. I thank God that we don't deal with a LOT of issues like they do in Europe or other coutries. But I also SUSPECT that one of our saving graces is that you can escape the Ghetto much easier in U.S. than you can there... that's a valuable outlet to have don't you think?

Best wishes