re: #39 Charles

The problem is that he didn’t say that — he said it was not a religion at all, as a preface to advocating taking away the right of Muslims to freedom of religion. And the crowd he’s talking to knows exactly what he’s saying.

True.

We have freedom of religion in this country, and that includes Islam and any sort of group, such as Scientology, The Branch Davidians, you name it. All religions are legal in the US.

We may not necessarily like these religions, and may have no intention of joining, but according to Constitution, we must allow them, however distasteful we may find some of them.

The difficult part is that some religions advocate — as part of their religious doctrine — principles or practices that are in violation of US law. Some Mormon breakaway sects, for example, allow and advocate child marriage and polygamy. Some cults like Scientology deny civil rights to apostates. Etc.

If there are any aspects to Islam which contravene US law, then those aspect must be disallowed on our shores. For example: Sharia is illegal under constitutional principles, because it establishes different legal systems for different citizens, which the Supreme Court has long ago already ruled unconstitutional.

But what do we do when some Islamic scholars say (which they do) that sharia as a legal system is indistinguishable from Islam as a religion? Puts us in a very sticky situation.

We need to allow the practice of a religion, but not allow the violation of US law by members of that religion. Hence, we raid Mormon sect compounds where men are marrying eight 12-year-olds simultaneously; we arrest any Scientologists who are harrassing apostates; and we prevent sharia from being implemented as a separate legal system.

In each instance however, the hardcore members of those religions feel we ARE violating their right to Freedom of Religion.

How do we resolve this dilemma?