Gingrich's Outrageous Call to Deport All Practicing U.S. Muslims

[HCTC]

Nowadays, such courtesies would not be given to “evil, slaveholding racists”.

On the occasion of her marriage, my great-great grandmother’s parents gifted Ead to her - the African slave who had cared for her as a child. Ead, who was about 12 years older than my gg grandmother, is buried in our family cemetery that is also a Texas historical site. Her grave marker, which bears my gg grandmother’s maiden name, is stele-esque and taller than any of the other markers (if my memory servers me correctly). When the emancipation proclamation was issued, Ead declined emancipation - not surprising since sadly she had no family of her own. When Ead became ill, the surviving children of my g.g. mother whom she helped to raise took turns staying on the farm where they had grown up in order to care for Ead until her death in 1910.

This part of my family’s history is not something that I share with my friends - either in CA or in NC where we have homes - or even in Texas where I grew up and where I still have family. It just doesn’t come up in the normal course of conversation, and frankly no one in my family is proud of it.

I was educated in the south in the 50’s and 60’s. The Civil War was called The War between the States. When I went to public h.s., I was taught that the precipitating issue for the civil war was slavery; but the principal cause was the principle of states’ rights. Even as a high school student it seemed obvious to me that stopping the practice of enslaving people (human trafficking) should take priority over states rights - but I didn’t share that opinion with anyone at the time. I had tests to pass if I wanted to go to college, and I did.

My point is that I have come to terms with the sins of my ancestors. I suggest that you find a way to do the same. It happened. It was wrong. No one can change what happened. However, times change; people change. It’s past time to move on because grasping onto racially based, political grievances rooted in the distant past is NOT the way to create a better present, IMO.

 

[Feanor2]

I grew up in Richmond, VA. This type of hyperbole is pretty common. Hopefully becoming less so with time.

 

[Theo520]

Gingrich shows a startling ignorance of the constitution and basic tenets of the Muslim faith.

Do all practicing muslims believe in ‘sharia law’ as it should be the official law?

Serious question.

 

[LastStand]

Once the Union got Grant (very underrated in most conventional Civil War histories), Sherman, and repeating rifles, it was pretty much over. Though the South did make key missteps early on in the war on the political level despite the brilliant performance of their generals and men.

Getting back on track, Gingrich is talking of thought crime essentially, I would have thought conservatives in particular would have been opposed to such antics.

The problem with free speech is that the concept leaves itself open to subversion, hence we see on the Left pushing the catchy slogan that speech they consider “hate speech” is not free speech. The American Left is moving away from that concept, it is time for the American Right to do the same. While deporting all Muslims may be impractical, deporting radical imams, and barring the entry of any additional Muslims is an excellent starting point for rebuilding Christendom.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I don’t think many are concerned with Sharia as it affects commercial transactions or other aspects of the civil law. The concern is with the duty to do jihad. The question then is what is truly meant by it. There are apologists for it. But there is also the Doctrine of Abrogation.

 

[HCTC]

What does the term :”Christendom” mean to you?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Do all practicing muslims believe in ‘sharia law’ as it should be the official law?

Serious question.

The last poll I saw showed that the majority of Muslims in the U.S. want to see Sharia the “law of the land” in the U.S., at least for them, and about 1/5 believe it is ok to use violence to establish it.

Poll of U.S. Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels Of Support For Islamic Supremacists' Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad - Center for Security Policy

 

[dvdjs]

The concern is with the duty to do jihad. The question then is what is truly meant by it

Exactly. Those few who wish to re-establish the caliphate in Spain are a serious problem. But I have to confess that I am also concerned of those in the US who talk of rebuilding Christendom.

 

[Theo520]

Where on earth do you get the idea that I am "more worried about ‘christendom’ "? Very odd indeed.

skimmed and misread your post. mine deleted

 

[dvdjs]

skimmed and misread your post. mine deleted

mine too. …

 

[Ridgerunner]

Those few who wish to re-establish the caliphate in Spain are a serious problem. But I have to confess that I am also concerned of those in the US who talk of rebuilding Christendom.

When the majority of Muslims in America favor establishment of Sharia and 1/5 of them advocate doing it by violence, it’s more concerning that “a few…in Spain”.

There’s no question that Muslims are bound by the Doctrine of Abrogation and are therefore obliged to make war on “unbelievers” in order to spread Islam. The greater strength of the “Unbelievers” excuses them from acting on it; something for which many are undoubtedly thankful. Still, the nuclear ambitions and the territorial ambitions of other radical groups are very much supportive of the notion that Muslims are no longer excused from violent jihad or soon will not be.

 

[Theo520]

mine too. …

And to be more explicit, “I apologize” for my bad post.

I enjoy our banter, but it should be over things we’ve actually said.

 

[Niblo]

But US (state, actually) law always governs in these cases.

It is the same in the UK. Muslims have a contractual duty - under Islam - to abide by the laws of the non-Muslim country they reside in; either as citizens of that country, or as visitors.

 

[dvdjs]

When the majority of Muslims in America favor establishment of Sharia and 1/5 of them advocate doing it by violence,

I hope you don’t mind a request to reveal your source of this information.

 

[dvdjs]

And to be more explicit, “I apologize” for my bad post.

No need. I was touched already by the quick removal of the post.

I enjoy our banter, but it should be over things we’ve actually said.

Indeed.

 

[dvdjs]

It is the same in the UK. Muslims have a contractual duty - under Islam - to abide by the laws of the non-Muslim country they reside in; either as citizens of that country, or as visitors.

I have heard the same from a Muslim acquaintance, who noted that this obligation is part of Sharia law.

 

[upant]

Do all practicing muslims believe in ‘sharia law’ as it should be the official law?

according to The Islamic Supreme Council of America (ISCA)

Islam is a complete package – a complete message and way of life.

Shariah literally means ‘a well-trodden path to water,’ the source of all life, representing the Path to Allah, as given by Allah, the Originator of all life.

Muslim citizens must adhere to Islamic law - Shariah

 

[LastStand]

Historically, it referred to the European nations which were Christian by demographics, culture, and government. The USA was their descendant.

 

[HCTC]

Historically, it referred to the European nations which were Christian by demographics, culture, and government. The USA was their descendant.

While it is indisputable that the USA originally grew out of colonies established by the British Empire and populated with peoples of various European ethnicities, it does not follow that the Founding Fathers intended to create a country that mirrored European demographics, culture, religion, or government as they were at the time.

In fact, the founders intended very much the opposite, For example, they hoped to create a government that structurally prevented the establishment of hereditary rule.

Through a hope to avoid despotic rule of any ilk, the founders sought to break and control both the tyranny of a minority as well as the tyranny of a majority in two ways: (1) by divided government and (2) by growing a large and diverse country in which there would develop interests that cut across the ethnic and religious groups that for hundreds of years had caused such conflict, instability, and loss of life throughout Europe.

Starting with the Declaration of Independence, there are many documents that identify in what ways the founders hoped to mitigate European conditions that they believed to be destructive to the founding and longevity of a free and stable society. Another source would be The Federalist Papers. Published in 1787, they are essentially a series of editorials that were written to persuade the people of NY to ratify the Articles of Confederation. One of the most interesting, IMO, Federalist 10 explains, according to Madison, both some of the Founders theoretical considerations and specifics about how Confederation would address these potentially undesirable eventualities.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed10.asp

My feelings is that there is no benefit to be had by “rebuilding Christendom” which is - according to the definition that you cite - the “demographics, culture, and government” of Christian European nations preceding the founding of the USA. It would, in fact, be such a huge step backward that it seems outside the realm of possibility - let alone contrary to what the Founders hoped to achieve, IMO

 

[Niblo]

I have heard the same from a Muslim acquaintance, who noted that this obligation is part of Sharia law

That’s correct.