I rephrased what I was trying to say lol
1 Like
Agree.
Unfortunately, there is a difference between a religion and a book that lays out a plan to overthrow government.
There is literally no way to practice what this book teaches without following that plan because it is written to make people believe God determined it. Blindness to what the teachings are or trying to be nice/decent to others because that is our nature leads to danger in this situation. It’s not healthy to allow danger.
I recommend reading the following:
Not Peace But a Sword: The Great Chasm Between Christianity and Islam by Robert Spencer
and
Islam And The Suicide of The West: The Origin Doctrine and Goals of Islam by Luiz Sergio Solimeo
4 Likes
Both books are excellent… thank you for your comment.
2 Likes
Thats all fine and good but again im not debating the subject. And i am most certain that nobody would be super thrilled if I started comparing Jesus to Christianity Terror groups or the Spanish Inquisition… you may think what you think about the religion as a whole but the sole base one single individual Muslim person does not constantly go about thinking of ways to terrorize or overthrow the government, that is ABSURD.
I was born and raised right here in America and the last thing I would ever do is jeopardize the liberties of everyone else around me. My way of thinking in my religion might not fit that stupid narrative that all Muslims are terrorists and you can take whatever look you want at it but at the end of the day, I am just a man and whichever Lord anyone serves - we do so until the last day.
I am done here. I do not wish to progress this post into something it was not meant to be originally. Good day and happy new year
I submitted a final reply to your POV… If it does’t get past “censors” (it should), I’ll happily email it to you if you send me your email. bob
I’ll wait to see if they censor… I don’t think they will. If they do, I’ll do your suggestion.
Thanks
I’m tired of waiting for dispensation for my post so here it is: You: “The same can be said for any form of Abrahamism. All three sects support the death of heretics and infidels, functioning as subversive organizations that do not adhere to the constitution”. Really? Do you actually believe that? When is the last time a Jew killed anyone, Jew or gentile, for being a heretic? The Christians finally gave that up about 400 years ago. When was the last time a Muslim killed another Muslim or “unbeliever” for being a “heretic”? For the answer, just read today’s headlines for the latest “honor killing” or Muslims slaughtering Christians in Africa… or Muslim on Muslim slaughter as we see right now in Syria. In 2025, It’s still ubiquitous. What does that tell you?
My policy suggestion was NOT about freedom of religion. When one takes an oath to protect the constitution, it means just that. Jews and Christians are not REQUIRED by their religions to perform Taquiya as are Muslims for the specific reason that Islamic Sharia SUPERSEDES all other laws. There is no free speech in Islamic countries, women and children are lawfully “chattel”, etc. The fact remains that the Quran / Sharia “require” a Muslim to treat ALL laws as inferior to it and to “lie” if need be to surreptitiously promulgate Islamic law and values over everything else until one can do it openly and by force, if necessary. Just note the “frog in pot” takeover off the UK as a good example and the aggression of the “Palestinian protestors” are doing right now in USA.
In Islam, all men are NOT created equal. That’s why “kafirs” / “non-believers” are considered to be sub-human and infidels. They are STILL categorized in Islamic Dark Age terms as “converts, dhimmis and slaves.” You don’t see that in Judaism or Christianity. Another example: Sharia encourages Muslims to make a treaty (hudna) but they only need to abide by it as long as it takes until they become strong enough to break it and defeat their enemy. That’s Islamic “integrity” when dealing with kafirs. They can swear to uphold the Constitution while at the same time using its tenets to subvert it and the American legal system: think Ilhan Omar, Rashida Talib, etc. Allowing them to hold office is merely, as they say, “the camel’s nose in the tent.”
There is nothing inherently against Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Atheism, etc. in the Oath. But there is vis-a-vis Islam. I view political Islam as a threat to the republic since, as stated, it’s a political movement, not a “religion of peace”. Turkey’s Erdogan, who wants to be Caliph of the worldwide Islamic Umah, said, " The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers…”. Let that sink in for a minute. He was not kidding. They are also recruiting centers, weapons caches, etc.
Here’s an example of just how insidious political Islam is: Blasting the 5x per day call to prayer over amped up loud speakers is about intimidation… nothing more. Do they really “need” to BLAST it in neighborhoods where people practice many religions as in America… especially since EVERY Muslim has a cell phone with an alarm? Why are they even allowed to do it? Can you imagine a Christian blasting something similar and saying it’s part of their religion so it’s their “right?” How fast would they be forced to shut it down? And rightfully so. Yet, we are supposed to tolerate the same when the Muslims do it? Why? As stated, it’s really about dominance and intimidation.
Roughly, 80% of Muslims are peaceful and generous. I’ve lived in the ME. I know this from experience. But about 20% are barbaric practitioners with Dark Ages mentalities and ideals, inbred, low IQ, violent, etc. Forced child marriage (Mohammed is the example), rape, grooming gangs, no compunction about honor killing, murdering of “infidels,” etc. with superiority complexes to boot. Now realize that there are 260,000,000 of them: Taliban, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, Most Shi’ites (Iranian Mullahs). The Pakis are the most inbred people on earth but others are also highly inbred; average IQ of 80-85. They are easily manipulated. The Oct 7, 2023 attack in Israel proved the imperialistic Islamists to have no compunction about committing atrocities… they chopped of the heads of over 600 Israeli men, women and children. What would you call that kind of mentality and behavior if not barbaric? Again, there are 260 MILLION of them and they have learned how to use our system of freedoms against us; they are not just a few “crazies.”
Peaceful” Muslims like Austin will eventually be subsumed by the 240 MILLION Dark Ages fanatics if they don’t step-up and help to stop them. What I call “Reformed Muslims” (i.e. normal people who practice a peaceful Islam and IGNORE the barbaric verses and laws) are already used as human shields by the crazies who glorify those verses whenever they need or want to. It’s happening daily and will continue to do so until the fanatics are stopped. Go here and learn what you - a “kafir” are really up against: politicalislam.com; know WHAT you ARE in imperialist Islam, regardless of how you see yourself in your own inner world of high moral true liberal ideals. The massacre in Israel on Oct 7th 2023 was not an Islamic anomaly; beheading 600 men, women and children was not a slip of the axe; it’s “policy.”
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. But, again, this is not about freedom of religion. It’s about stopping those who want to take it away. You obviously are a passionate and caring individual. But, with respect, very naive and ignorant about the THREAT that political Islam poses to our way of life… We want to think the best of people; but political Islam – understood as the imperialist anti-Bill of Rights movement that it is - does not allow us that “liberal” attitude towards it if we want our way of life to continue. Those who believe it’s their religious duty to overthrow our Constitution are our enemies. Jefferson figured out what political Islam was quickly and ended the savages attacking us off the Barbary Coast while Great Britain continued to pay the the Jizya (tax). Which camp are you in? We will now see the escalation of what these fanatics are willing to do to us, Europe, UK, etc. Look at the headlines…Yesterday’s violence showed that the starting gun has been fired… The Jihadis are making their move in partnership with the NWO globalist terrorists… Stay safe. Watch your six.
4 Likes
If you copy it, you can edit ^ this reply and just paste the response that they are blocking. Or just DM me on this forum. @robokoch Thanks for the professionalism and respectful debate.
The argument is that it is hypocrisy to suggest that one sect is superior or more moral than the other, when both have evolved from Dark Age ideas.
Creating equality by holding both religious groups accountable and at the same standard when it comes to US rule of law.
Islam, Judaism, and Christianity can all come in radical forms, which is why freedom of relgion is extremely important. People need to see evil, and call it out for what it is no matter where it comes from-without restricting it’s existence, or favoring what is perceived as the moral high ground.
All need the opportunity to show their worth and morality as we evolve as a society. People need to resist conflicting ideologies through education, not restriction.
Shifting the “oath of office” to a legally binding signed contract could emphasize accountability and secularism. It might:
- Highlight Constitutional Priorities: By removing religious language, it underscores that officials serve under the rule of law, not under divine authority.
- Increase Accountability: A signed contract could be legally enforceable, perhaps with clear consequences for breaches.
- Inclusive Governance: This would respect the beliefs (or lack thereof) of all citizens, ensuring no one feels excluded by religious connotations.
I envision this being paired with some kind of review process or penalty system for those who fail to uphold their duties?
1 Like
Yes! Review could be alternated per each branch, modeled on our regular checks and balances.
It’s already a contract, but I like your ideas for spelling out the accountability and those tenets becoming parts of its terms and conditions. I would add that no public officer can call promote ideologies that advocate for violating the Constitution… otherwise they would be in danger of losing their office. Thus, they could look forward to a public hearing (“review”) and other potentially embarrassing and costly consequences including being impeached. Thank you for a very good comment RR.
1 Like
When they lie or fail their constitutional oath they should be held accountable. Remove religion from the equation.
1 Like
This paragraph is better than the entirety of the actual proposal above. Removing religion from the equation is the only unifying constitutional way forward.
Yet, the moment an Office holder begins preaching an idea of radicalism and change of government form, it’s up to the people to make educated choices based on the actions of their constituents, not necessarily through a series of guardrails.
For example, if someone of the Islamic belief ran for office on a platform of actual liberty and constitutionalism, the people should be able to look past their existentialism for the preservation of one another.
Yet, if someone of the same belief ran on a platform of extremeist ethnic religious policies, the people have the responsibility to not vote them in, for the longevity of our republic.
Granted our rights and the functionality of our representation is secured-which it is not.
The Bible prohibits swearing on anything. So swearing on the Bible is forbidden. However I agree with the proposal completely and the rest of your comment as well.
As for swearing on the Bible, all peoples of the U.S. swear on it in court despite their religious beliefs or lack thereof. So I believe that should remain.
I would like to feel good about a Muslim taking office. However, in the Quran it states: Sura 9:29, which commands fighting (physically) all Jews and Christians until they submit to your political authority. Sura 98:6 is number, calling all non-Muslims the “worst of creatures”. So explain to me how holding an office where you are to represent all U.S. citizens, and follow the political authority set forth in the U.S. can stand alongside faithfulness to their religious text?
4 Likes
I sent you a reply to your excellent and on-point comment but it and another from yesterday are “awaiting approval by a moderator”. Sorry for the delay. I don’t thing the Federalist and anti-Federalist papers had to go through this BS. It makes it very hard to communicate.
Here is what is pending: Thank you for your on-point comment. People simply cannot fathom the fact that Imperial Islam and Sharia is NOT a religion, but a Dark Ages political ideology of oppression and conquest. Giving it the credibility of a “religion” is like calling “Democratic Socialism” (i.e. Naziism) or Communism a religion. IMO: There are TWO “Islams”: The one that wants to dominate, enslave and rule the world (literally) that I’m calling “Imperial Islam” and its Sharia (unless somebody comes up with something better) with its 260 MILLION adherents, and; “Reformed Islam”, a kinder, gentler “peaceful” Islam that ignores things like Sura 9:29, 98.6 and scores of others - MOST of who PRETEND that the 260M aren’t the “real Muslims.” Sadly, the 260MM intimidate the other BILLION. The Imperial Islamists believe it to be the other way around. For Islam to become a religion of peace, there must be REAL reform and vocal, active condemnation of the 260MM and that will take courage from the reformers (who will face death threats and more) and the political will of the People of the USA, our government and other non-Muslim governments who are now being overrun in U.S., UK, EU, etc. When the Imperialist Islamists call us “The Great Satan” and say they will destroy us the 260MM of them are NOT kidding. We should believe them. They have another saying: “First the Saturday people; then the Sunday people”. That is why they are trying to totally annihilate Israel FIRST. As Churchill said, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”
1 Like
There is Taqkya, the allowed religious lie and deception, and also Hudna which is the strategic truce in which to build in numbers for the next wave of takeover and overthrow. These are loopholes exploited by extremists.
Christians and Jews are told to do the same in Deuteronomy. ‘There are about 60 references to the book of Deuteronomy in the New Testament, with 44 direct quotes. Jesus quoted and used the book of Deuteronomy more than any other book in the Old Testament.’
That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the Lord your God
You must purge the evil from among you.
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.
If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in 13 that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), 14 then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, 15 you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely,[b] both its people and its livestock. 16 You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt, 17 and none of the condemned things[c] are to be found in your hands. Then the Lord will turn from his fierce anger, will show you mercy, and will have compassion on you. He will increase your numbers, as he promised on oath to your ancestors— 18 because you obey the Lord your God by keeping all his commands that I am giving you today and doing what is right in his eyes.
Christianity and Judaism are just as radical and violent as Islam. Cut the fanaticism
Which is meaningless for anyone not of an Abrahamic faith, it’s the recognition and establishment of a religion. Requirements for oath taking that involve a religious text, are unconstitutional per the first amendment, as this recognizes an ‘official religion’.
That is the whole point, no they cannot practice their religion because their religion encourages them to kill jews and christians, to marry children, to treat women as property. I could go on but surely if we are being honest Islam is incompatible with the AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL way of life. They are free to go to their mosque and pray and that is about it. Yes being a Muslim is not comparable with taking the oath of office.
3 Likes
The exact same could be said for the other sects of Abrahamism. ^^^
I edited my last reply to you because they haven’t published my additional comment. See my reply to your original post to read it. Thanks again.