Ron Paul melds the teachings of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament to remind “Values Voters” at the 2011 Summit of the Biblical imperative and the blessings of peace, and personal sovereignty; of the need to follow the Golden Rule (treat others as you wish to be treated), of the importance of striving for virtue and excellence as individuals—and not as subjects beholden to the proverbial king about whose evils Samuel forewarned. Above all, Paul emphasized the urgent need to revive the restraints this country once placed on the federal government. And fast.
The Texas congressman won 37% of the poll at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, sponsored by the Family Research Council, a social conservative group.
“Mubarak’s dictatorial powers were directed, unjustly indubitably, against the Islamic fundamentalists of the Muslim brotherhood,” I wrote here. For the sake of accuracy, let’s remember that Mubarak was not an equal opportunity oppressor; he went after members of the Muslim Brotherhood, mainly.
The BBC concedes as much in an upbeat expose on the Brotherhood’s Egyptian acolytes. “For decades, keeping the Brotherhood and other Islamists from power was the main justification for the authoritarian rule of President Hosni Mubarak.” (Here.)
Here are some of the musings of gentle Doha, a Muslim Brotherhood steel magnolia:
“The first thing to do is to sever all ties with Israel because it is the cause of our ruin. And Mubarak was their agent.” …
“Egypt follows French law, and we do not want that, because when someone steals for example, he spends a month in jail and then he’s released to do the same again. But under Sharia law he gets his hand cut off and that’s better.” …
“Sharia doesn’t allow women to participate in government because women are emotional. Women should be responsible for their houses and their jobs, but not government,” she said.
The BBC correspondent says that “some of [Doha’s] views reflect the official Muslim Brotherhood line.”
The BBC would never entertain the notion that where the radicalism of dear Doha doesn’t jibe with that of her “moderate” Brothers—it’s because the latter practice Takiya: lying to advance and protect the faith.
The official Right in this country did not tell it like it is: Feisal Abdul Rauf, Chairman of the Cordoba Initiative, and the man behind the mosque in lower Manhattan, was picked by the Bush administration to serve as the American emissary to Muslim countries. Did you know this? I was under the impression that the Imam was B. Hussein’s pick.
I find nothing outrageous about the Imam’s opinion, also mine, that America’s adventurous foreign policy is a necessary condition for Muslim aggression. But that’s not the entire story. Rauff would never admit that our meddling abroad is far from a sufficient condition for Muslim aggression.
However, when Abdul Rauf, in this clip, soothingly says that Islam and America are organically bound, and then proceeds to describe the American Founding Fathers, without mentioning their Christian background and beliefs, as non-parochial men of faith—then I get the creeps.
Rauf sees the three faiths as enmeshed and America’s history as intertwined with Islam and Muslims. At least so he says. Taqiyya, anyone?
Provocative to say the least: Dr. Fleming (to mimic the “Dr. Johnson” sobriquet) of Chronicles magazine makes mincemeatof the popular argument that the Ground Zero Mosque monsters cannot be “denied a permit because that would infringe their religious freedom.”
I, of course, argued from private property rights, recommending immigration policies as the broader remedy to an incompatible culture. Construction boycotts would work as a local solution.
“Religious freedom,” writes Dr. Fleming, “is a gift of a society or commonwealth, not a natural right. This is partly because religion is not faith–what one believes or feels–but an organized public action. Thus the public or republic has the right and duty to protect itself from alien or malignant cults. In a diverse Christian society, naturally, the various churches have had to learn to tolerate each other, though in practice toleration is generally a sign of indifference. Church becomes that thing you do or don’t do on one day a week. It is like the beautiful jewel you take out of the box every once in a while to admire and feel good about yourself for owning. But religion is more like a wedding ring, a visible symbol of an enduring commitment.”
“The idea of Christians according religious freedom to Muslims who define themselves in part by their hatred of Christianity and who have oppressed Christians whenever they have had the power to do so, is preposterous. It is worse than preposterous, because the point of the exercise is not to liberate Muslims but to enslave Christians.”
“The Hard Left—whether Marxists, Libertarians, or Multi-Culturalists—take their stand on freedom of religion, while the Soft Left (otherwise known as Conservatives) say that while there is a freedom of religion, it does not quite extend to Satanists or Muslims wanting to build a mosque at Ground Zero, though a mosque anywhere else is just fine and dandy.”
Nothing if not original is our friend at Chronicles.
UPDATE I (Sept. 8): “International Burn a Koran Day” is set to take place in a decidedly provincial setting in Florida, America. It would be a tourist curiosity if not for the media having so hyped up Terry Loony Tunes Jones’ act. Ron Paul has it right:
UPDATE II (Sept. 19):Pat Buchanan is even righter that Ron:
“This episode reveals the gulf between us and the Islamic world. Despite all our talk of universal values, tens of millions of Muslims, in countries not only hostile but friendly, believe that a sacrilege against their faith, like the burning of theQuran by a single American oddball, justifies the killing of Americans. What kind of compatibility can there be between us?
What do we have in common with people who believe that evangelism by other faiths in their societies merits the death penalty, as do conversions to Christianity, while promiscuity and adultery justify stonings, lashings and beheadings.
And what does it say about our ability to fight and win a ‘long war’ in the Islamic world if our war effort can be crippled by a solitary pastor with 50 families in his church who decides to have a book burning?”
UPDATE III:Julia Goren wants to know, “Why is there so much more tolerance of extremism in the name of tyranny than in the name of liberty? Why is tyranny more politically correct than liberty?”
