Friday, December 11, 2015

The Islamic "Religion" and Religious Freedom

Our people are tearing up the airwaves with angst and vitriol over Donald Trump's declared intention to stop Muslim immigration.  At first glance it seems like a violation of Freedom of Religion.  In reality, it isn't, because in essence, Islam is not a religion at all.

In the 500's a man named Mohammed sat down and wrote up a set of rules, which he claimed were given to him by God.  It is apparent that somewhere in his past, a Christian tried to catechize him, because he includes several Christian facets, such as the tenets of One God, the Virgin Birth and Jesus.  Beyond that, it is a book with three manifest purposes: to make Mohammed powerful, to make Mohammed rich and to get Mohammed as much sex as he could stand.  If you are shocked by this assertion, read the book, it's all in there.  Also, this false religion of Mohammed, in order to effect these goodies for Mohammed, uses the force of the sword to spread the "word".  Talk about violation of Freedom of Religion!  It is the antithesis of Christianity.  His forces spread like wildfire through Northern Africa, the Middle East and Spain.  It was a real and present threat to Italy which prompted the Crusades, to beat back this scourge.  Spain was the only country who successfully purged themselves of Islamic invaders, a fight which lasted over 500 years and was finally completed by Queen Isabella, yep, the same queen who funded Columbus in the late 1400's.  Though Queen Isabella pushed them out 500 years ago, the pressure has always remained and today, Spain is high on the Islamic State's list of reconquest, but sadly, Spain has saturated herself in this modern social liberalism mush and has no strong leader capable of effective resistance.

Our politicians and media heads keep talking about "Radical Muslims" and the "religion of peace".  Both of these are lies hidden in euphemisms, such as a "woman's right to choose".  Firstly, Islam is NOT a religion of peace.  It isn't even a religion.  It is a political method of force which has, as it's stated purpose, the conquest of all lands.  It's in the book.  The proper term for Radical Muslim is, Muslim Fundamentalist.  In other words, he believes the tenets of his "religion" and puts his life where his mouth is, and those tenets are to kill unbelievers and conquer lands.  He will not emigrate into a foreign country to fit in, but rather to destabilize the current social order so to replace it with Islam! as this is the first order of Sharia law.  In truth, he is more honorable that the majority of the proponents of Islam, because he isn't a hypocrite, he read the book and takes action,  But even the "peaceful" followers of Mohammed will work to undermine the existing social structures, for it is their basic method for the propagation of the faith.  This was the hard reality that Spain faced after expelling the armed forces of Islam.  The reason for the Spanish Inquisition was not forced conversion to Catholicism, as is often claimed by Protestants, but rather the exposition of covert Muslims who publicly claimed to be Catholic but were actually working to subvert the Church and re-instituting Islam.

Let's talk about the reasoning behind Freedom of Religion.  Up until the 1500's there was mainly the Catholic Church in the western world.  She was the source and structure of Christianity.  She fought many battles, through the middle centuries, in the minds of men and governing councils, preserving the Faith from error and mutation.  She preserved the scriptures, in the form of the Latin Vulgate Bible, and evangelized all nations, as directed to Her personally by our Lord Jesus Christ.  She never used force of conversion, never.  Force of conversion is repugnant to the very gospel of our Lord.  She taught nations of the value and dignity of each and every human being, rich or poor.  She commanded kings and emperors to cease killing their own people at will.  She taught men and women to marry once and for life and to raise their children well.  She made it abundantly clear that the only pathway to heaven was to willingly and completely surrender oneself to Christ and his moral teachings.  She taught her children how to defend themselves against terror and assault.  Then came the Protestant Revolt in the 1500's.  It was the new churches of Calvin, Luther and King Henry of England that started persecutions, to push away the Catholic Church.  Read the history of Henry's wicked daughter, Elizabeth, who pilloried and quartered her people for being faithful to Catholicism and retains, shamefully, an honored part of England's political history.  It was always the new churches persecuting Catholics and each other as they vied for political stability and property for themselves.  That persecution is the genesis of the Pilgrims and other new sects moving to the new world seeking religious freedom.  At the core of all of these new "Christian" religions are the basic tenets of love of neighbor and social order.  With that commonality, it is possible to agree to disagree and to live with Freedom of Religion.  However, when another "religion" teaches violent primacy, then social order disintegrates.  That is why Islam cannot be accommodated by Freedom of Religion, for it is the forceful application of a lie and the Truth of Christ deserves defensive action against it.  The symbols say it all, the sword of Islam or the self-sacrifice of Christ?  I will never submit to the sword!

I have written in this blog a couple of posts which lament the idea of walls on our borders and the restriction of people's freedom of movement across any national borders.  I stand behind all of that because, as I stated, the freedom to move into another country is predicated on the absolute Christian responsibility to live in harmony with the host country's laws and civil order.  If one cannot do that, then one has no right to move in.  It is obvious that Muslims cannot do that, for it would be an apostatizing of their own statements of faith.  As they did in Spain, they will do everywhere they go.  This is why Donald Trump, while certainly not my choice for president, actually got this one right.

No comments:

Post a Comment