Well I believe "places of worship" that which America counts as "religion" is a very large umbrella indeed.
This one would need to be sectioned word for word and argued by both religious scholars and government officials, being definitive on both sides of a argument for the Supreme Court to rule.
The major hurdle I would imagine would be by each individuals "participation" and religious beliefs to the letter. Many recognized religions today believe in Jesus Christ but their "organizations" differ in many area's of belief as recorded in the Bible.
Tough call on the surface IMO. bk could give clearer insight.
The Rock
Anony Mouse's Link
Islam is NOT a religion, but a hybrid political/(a)moral system under the guise of religion.
You get to define what a religion is now? Where is it written that a religion cannot encompass both political and economic systems?
Semper Fi!
Always faithful, God, Country, Corps.
A whole lot of people believe this!
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
Do you think it possible that modern Muslims feel as remote from the 7th century teachings of the Koran as mst modern Jew and Christians do from the proscriptions found in Leviticus?
Bad muslims aren't much of a problem. It's the ones that actually study the Koran and start following it devoutly that we gotta worry about.
By Tom Trinko
Americans are having a hard time discussing the problem of Muslim immigration and assimilation because Islam is not just a religion; it's a whole way of life, civil and spiritual.
The First Amendment was written because Christians of all denominations believed that while people's religious beliefs are the basis for the law, no one Christian group should be supported by the power of the federal government. After all, that's why many Americans had fled England.
Islam, according to many Muslims, rejects that principle and declares that all authority belongs to Islam. It's as though Catholics believed that the pope should be the ultimate authority for setting the fine you have to pay if you get a speeding ticket.
It's important to note that it doesn't matter what Islam "really teaches" so long as there are a lot of Muslims who say Islam supports theocracy and terrorism. We have to deal with reality, not some hypothetical "pure" Islam.
Because Islam demands Muslims' full civil as well as spiritual assent, it's fundamentally different from any faith that Americans are truly familiar with – which makes discussing it difficult. Is someone saying we should reject Muslim immigrants because of their religion, as Americans understand it, or because some Muslims believe that the Constitution must bow before the Quran, or because some Muslims believe that violence can be used in honor killings and to avenge insults against Mohammad?
While it's true that the majority of American Muslims are quite comfortable with the Constitution, the reality is that Islam lays claim to worldly authority in every nation. That means that it's possible to reject Muslim immigrants not because of their faith, but because it's not irrational to assume that the first civil loyalty of at least some Muslims, especially those from Muslim-majority countries, is to Islam, not the Constitution.
The current Muslim situation is not the first time America has been concerned with immigrants because of their faith. Historically, America discriminated against Catholics and Catholic immigration because many Protestants erroneously believed that Catholics wanted to establish a theocracy in America. Many laws with a religious test resulted from that concern.
But unlike the baseless scare over something the Catholic Church did not teach – namely, that the pope should be running America – Islam does teach, at the very least in the minds of many Muslims, that all countries should be theocracies. If anyone doubts that a large fraction of Muslims believe that Islam calls for sharia law, one only has to look at how things are run in most Muslim-majority countries. One can look in vain for all the Catholic-majority countries run by the pope or his bishops.
Pakistan is nominally a democracy with religious freedom, but non-Muslims can be killed for preaching their faith – hardly compatible with the American view of religious liberty. On the other hand, Ireland legalized so called same-sex marriage – hardly an indication of Catholic theocracy.
The critical question is, what fraction of Muslims who wish to come to America reject the idea that their first civil loyalty is to Islam? It's hard to tell, since there seems to be a dearth of polling of American Muslims where they are asked about sharia law. But according to a Pew survey, support for sharia law is fairly common among Muslims in a wide variety of countries.
(Studies have shown that well over 80% of imported Muslims to this country support the imposition of sharia law and over 50% of American muslims agree with this view. jack)
For the first time in its history, America is facing the question of how to deal with people whose religion is often interpreted by many of its adherents, as opposed to its detractors, to reject the principles of democracy and religious liberty.
With nearly 3,000,000 Muslims in America and a major terror attack requiring the support of only a handful of people, it doesn't take a large percentage of radicals to create serious problems.
In the end, the real question – considering that whenever and wherever Muslims have a chance, at least some of them try to institute sharia law, even if only for Muslims, and considering the widespread belief that advancing Islam justifies terrorism – is, is it reasonable to let a lot of poorly educated hardcore Muslims into the U.S.? Even if Islam does not teach that a Muslim's first civil loyalty is to Islam, the reality is that it appears that a lot of Muslims think that it does. Contrary to liberal beliefs, America is not strengthened by bringing in people who disagree with our founding principles.
Most Americans support the commonsense solution of differentiating between radical Muslims and those Muslims who can accept the Constitution instead of sharia law. Liberals, however, are causing controversy by condemning Christians for crimes of the ancient past while ignoring real issues with Islam.
Liberals have a strong incentive to ignore Islamic extremists because Muslims in America tend to be Democrats (70%) and not Republicans (11%). However, it is strange, if one assumes that liberals are trying to be coherent, that the same liberals who condemn Christianity because of the Crusades, defensive wars designed to free Christians from Islamic oppression that occurred centuries ago, become strangely silent in the face of modern radical Islam.
It's odd that liberals who tar all Christians for the crimes of one nutcase who attacked Planned Parenthood are unwilling to admit that some terrorists are inspired by the writings of a fanatical conqueror who advocated slaughter of those who opposed him and who married a six-year-old girl.
Saying we are at war with those who have an extremist view of Islam and not with all those Muslims, and there are a lot, who don't believe in the use of violence to spread Mohammad's heresy seems to make excellent sense, yet liberals reject associating Islam with people who say they are killing in the name of Islam and who can cite chapter and verse where the Quran supports them.
Perhaps we could have a better national dialog if liberals didn't ban Christian refugees while ignoring the potential problem associated with bringing in Muslims, whose faith may lead them to put Islam ahead of America on civil matters. That doesn't mean we have to ban Muslim immigration, and it certainly doesn't mean we should condemn all Muslims, but it does mean we should have a plan in place to ensure that the Muslims we let in share our view of civil authority vis-à-vis religious authority.
While liberals are right when they say that declaring that all Muslims, especially all American Muslims, are evil is playing into the hands of extremists, it's also wrong to simply ignore the links between Islam and terrorism and the fundamentally different natures of Christianity and Islam. We can't be safe if we bury our heads in the sand and ignore the root cause of Islamic terrorism.
A good resource on Islam can be found at The Religion of Peace
Are you ready to answer my questions yet? Your answers please, not ill-fitting C&Ps.
I must ask. If all above be true then why are they here and have resided here for decades? I am serious Spike not joking because this is not a joking matter.
zero that loser did not permit this invasion himself.
The Rock
peace, peas, pieces, pisces, malarky(whole)
Hillary '16 & '20
No, I do not, based on fact and experience...not prejudice (and certainly not blind faith to a counter-cultural movement such as modern progressivism that is based solely on anti-anti-communism)
you leftist chumps can continue to embrace your enemy's enemy all you want, aint gonna help
By Christopher J. Green
Since 622, devout Muslims have been waging war against unbelievers from virtually all non-Islamic faiths. The prophet of Islam, Muhammad and his band of bloodthirsty mujahideen waged war against Jews in the Middle East, raping, beheading and looting in the cause of Allah. As Muslims migrated to Africa, Asia and Europe, they waged war against Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Zoroastrians and Buddhists. For 1400 years, these wars against unbelievers have been waged almost non-stop.
As more and more Muslims enter the West, the presence of Islam grows gradually stronger resulting in murderous attacks against the hated infidels. The latest barbaric act of slaughter occurred in Brussels on 22nd March 2016. It certainly won’t be the last. Terror is part of jihad, it was practised by Muhammad himself and he stated:
“I have been made victorious with terror.” (Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220)
Many unbelievers believe these acts of terrorism constitute holy war, referred to in Islam as jihad. However, many unbelievers who don’t understand Islam believe it is a religion of peace and that jihadists who murder innocent people are distorting and perverting the faith. Some will even believe jihad is an “inner spiritual struggle”. All of these beliefs are wrong. Jihad is core to Islam, but it involves much more than a spiritual struggle, violence and terror as the following five uncomfortable facts show.
Jihad is obligatory – fard in Islam – on ALL Muslims. Every Muslim is by definition a jihadist, you simply can’t be a Muslim without being a jihadist. There are three categories of jihad:
Jihad al nafs – This is the struggle of the self, the personal struggle to develop spirituality.
Jihad al Shaytaan – The struggle against Satan, resisting his temptations and removing his doubts about Islam.
Jihad al kuffar wal munafiqeen – Fighting against the unbelievers, the deceivers and the hypocrites. Imams have the power to command fighting against the unbelievers and if an Islamic caliphate has been established, the caliph can command “offensive jihad”. The fanatical mujahideen of Islamic State are waging offensive jihad claiming they’re establishing a caliphate. Political charlatans, the duplicitous media and ignorant kuffar claim ISIS is nothing to do with Islam but the facts prove Islamic State is acting according to the laws and tenets of the faith.The worldview of Islam differs greatly from all other faiths. In Islam, the world is divided into two halves: Dar al Islam – the house of Islam, the lands where Islam is dominant and Dar al Harb – the house of war, the lands where Islam is not dominant. The goal of jihad al kuffar wal munafiqeen is to wage war against unbelievers to make Islam dominant until religion belongs solely to Allah as commanded in chapter 8, verse 39 of the Quran.Here is the vitally important fact to understand about Islam: Any act that furthers the cause of Islam is “jihad fisabilillah”: Jihad in the path of Allah. All such acts are considered as giving worship to Allah – terrorism included.This struggle to make religion solely for Allah is obligatory on all Muslims. Obviously all Muslims aren’t terrorists! So if jihad isn’t just about spirituality, violence and terror, what else is it about?
Building a mosque and praying to Allah. Muslims who pray in the streets or attend a mosque to give worship to Allah are waging jihad. You will never hear this in the mainstream media or from Western politicians. The mosque is the fulcrum of the Muslim community but it isn’t like a church, a temple or a synagogue and is much more than just a place of worship. The establishment of a mosque conquers territory from Dar al Harb into Dar al Islam. All mosques are modelled on the first mosque built by Muhammad. He used mosques as courts, as campaign headquarters for planning military campaigns, as barracks for his troops and as armouries to store weapons. Weapons have been found in many mosques and you now know why this is so.
Establishing Islamic customs is cultural jihad. Customs such as the allocation of washing facilities so Muslims can perform wudu and the allocation of prayer rooms so Muslims can pray five times a day. Building abattoirs where animals can be slaughtered according to Islamic law – halal – and imposing halal food on the infidels. Imposing Islamic law – the sharia – via the setting up of sharia courts for Muslims to have their grievances dealt with according to Islamic and not state law. Another common act of cultural jihad concerns Muslim women wearing the burka including demanding special dispensation for it in the workplace, hospitals, courts and travel. All of these are acts of jihad because they further the cause of Islam in Dar al Harb.
Deceit – jihad by the tongue – is one of the most effective strategies of Islamic jihad. Deceiving infidels to further the cause of Islam to make it dominant in the land is not only permitted and encouraged, it’s also giving worship to Allah. This devastating war strategy has two forms: First is al taqiyya, the disguising of one’s true beliefs, motives, strategies and objectives. Second is kitman, deceiving infidels about the true nature of Islam. A good example has already been mentioned, that of Muslims assuring the infidels that jihad is just about an “inner spiritual struggle” because Islam is a religion of peace.One of the commonest ways Muslims will deceive infidels about the true nature of Islam is by quoting chapter 5, verse 32 of the Quran. Desperate to believe that Islam really is peaceful, gullible infidels will accept this at face value and not even have the wit to read the next verse, chapter 5, verse 33. Read it for yourself and you’ll see it most certainly isn’t peaceful.
The destiny of a people is defined by demography and for a culture to survive, its people need to breed in sufficient numbers. Women have very few rights in Islam and men are allowed to marry as many as four wives and will strive to father children with all of them. The fertility rates in Muslim communities in the Western world are far higher than their hosts, by as much as an astonishing EIGHT times higher. You can see how these fertility rates are dramatically transforming Europe by watching this shocking video.
It is my contention that jihad by the womb with its high fertility rates among Muslims is the most devastating weapon of Islamic jihad, certainly far more effective than terror. Yet the nations of the West not only continue to import millions of Muslims, they provide them with free healthcare and generous welfare benefits to care for the very children who will wage jihad to make Islam dominant in the West
The five strategies of Islam listed here are being deployed in all Western nations. There are many others, but these five are the most effective. The host populations, brainwashed into self-hatred and meek obedience by Multicultural dogma, remain ensconced in blissful ignorance about the jihad being waged against them and are playing an active, unwitting part in aiding and abetting it. Should it continue, the West will be conquered into Dar al Islam without a violent, bloody war of conquest.
The problem now becomes how do we end this? The country in its present state of PC social justice has handcuffed and intimidated any movement to floor a bill by way of .....the Constitution.
Counter to popular belief I respect all who consider the Constitution manna from heaven.
These are the instances that inflame my anger to the forward thinking of our forefathers. The Constitution itself is not as open ended to "amendments" as we are led to believe. Immigration answered the call of a economic and physical labor cavity that existed in America that has since been filled to capacity. Where is the "amendment" that would serve its PARTICIPANTS and their offsprings whose blood, sweat and tears swelled the coffers being depleted?
The Rock
