"Real liberty is neither found in despotism or the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments.
Alexander Hamilton

Saturday, July 16, 2016

Newt Gingrich: Muslim Comments Un-American by Any Definition

“Let me be as blunt and direct as I can be. Western civilization is in a war. We should frankly test every person here who is of a Muslim background, and if they believe in sharia, they should be deported, Sharia is incompatible with Western civilization. Modern Muslims who have given up Sharia—glad to have them as citizens. Perfectly happy to have them next door.” Newt Gingrich  on Fox News

I was under the impression that Newt Gingrich was a pretty smart guy. Maybe on Trump's shortlist for Secretary of State. It is apparent that he is not only ignorant of what Sharia means, but also the US Constitution. The First Amendment as I recall guarantees the freedom to practice religion.
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was asked directly about the former speaker's comments."It sounds like he may need to consult his copy of the pocket Constitution as well," adding that "proposals like that, rhetoric like that, is un-American by its very definition."

The following is taken in part from The Atlantic and explains very clearly why Newt got it wrong:
There are a number of problems with the timing and content of Gingrich’s statement. At a moment when the world—and by “world,” I mean all non-Muslims and Muslims who reject the ideology of ISIS and the theology of radical Islamism—should be united in its defense of enlightened civilization, Gingrich, and others like him, do ISIS a favor by making Islam itself the culprit. The war we are experiencing is not primarily a war between civilizations, but a war within a civilization. ISIS, and its fellow travelers, will ultimately be defeated only by Muslims themselves, including Muslims who adhere to Islamic law. Muslims who meet with ISIS disapproval—which is to say, most Muslims—are the constant targets of murderous Islamists. The countries that are fighting ISIS include several Muslim-led, Muslim-majority states, and include states that are governed by Islamic law. Among other goals, ISIS seeks to convince devout Muslims that there is no place for them in the West. Suggestions like Gingrich’s reinforce this core ISIS message.

And about this sharia that Gingrich finds so outrageous:  Sharia, in many ways, is analogous to Jewish law, or “halacha.” (Both words mean, more or less, “the way,” or “the pathway.”) There are several schools of sharia thought, that range from fundamentalist to liberal in approach. The conservative, Hanbali, interpretation, when stringently applied in matters of punishment for criminal and sexual transgressions, is very harsh by Western standards, but sharia, as Muslims understand the term, is not merely about punishment. Islam, like Judaism, is a law-based religion, and Islamic law concerns itself with all aspects of human existence: from marriage and divorce to economics and commercial law to personal behavior and hygiene. To attack “sharia” so broadly is to offend Muslims who are also offended by ISIS and repulsed by the sort of jihadist terrorism afflicting much of the world today.

It surprises me that people who proclaim to be ardent supporters and defenders of the constitution, are so willing to readily abandon it.  Ironically, they would accomplish this by utilizing a tactic they claim is unconstitutional: an executive order.


Fred Van Magness said...

Sorry Blogger, but you are not accurate in my opinion. First, the Constitution does provide for the right to practice religion, but Sharia is not a religion...it is a set of laws within a religion. So I would not challenge Newt on his knowledge of the Constitution.....stick to local politics. Second, many in politics today would support LGBTQ rights...check out what Sharia does to these folks in Islamic societies. Third, check out how they treat women. If you believe Sharia has a place here, then you would support their treatment of women, LGBTQ folks, etc. etc. How would you feel if a friend was stoned (and not with alcohol) or had fingers cut off as a penalty? Your statement that ardent supporters of the Constitution are so willing to abandon it is out of touch with reality. Just my opinion.....

Moultonboro Blogger said...

The definition of sharia is simply a body of religious rules and laws that Muslims adhere to. The vast majority of Americans that are Muslim do not subscribe to the perverted interpretation of their faith that is causing turmoil and terrorism we see nearly every day. Here is a link that is helpful in understanding what that means: http://www.tolerance.org/publication/sharia.
It does not take a constitutional scholar to accept that the government deporting people because of their religious beliefs is unlawful and unconstitutional.
We are ( should be) fighting terrorists, not waging war with everyone of Islamic faith.

Not religious, but God believer said...

The definition of Sharia may have nothing to do with "practice" and interpretation.

"... in both Sunni and Shia, as influenced by Qutb and Shariati, are quite clear that yes, offensive Jihad and killing the infidel are acceptable. More liberal and some more traditional movements say it is not."

"To paint all Muslims of today with broad strokes is as fallacious as painting all of any other large group the same way. There are over one and a half billion Muslims in the world today, spread through most of the world, observing numerous denominations (or none). To suggest they all read the Qur’an the same way is clearly ignorant; if that were true, there’d be only one denomination. It’s the same reason there are several different Jewish denominations, and countless Christian ones: They do not all agree on it, but instead have numerous different interpretations."

Would the "Crusades" be legitimate today?
That doesn't mean a temporary "timeout" to immigration is wrong!

Christians have saints. Jihadists get 72 virgins! What do Jihadist women get;
an ACLU misogyny lawsuit ?

Moultonboro Blogger said...

Let's not muddy the waters and get off topic. This has nothing to do with immigration. It has everything to do with Americans already here, maybe born here and perhaps family here for generations, that happen to be Muslim having to pass a religious litmus test or get shipped back to ...where exactly? Just pick a random Muslim country? That is in direct opposition to the founding principles of our Constitutional republic.
That rumble people thought was an earthquake the other day was really our founding fathers rolling in their graves.

Anonymous said...

Who mentioned immigration?
Our Founding Father's wrestled with slavery, not Sharia law!

Moultonboro Blogger said...

Not religious-"That doesn't mean a temporary "timeout" to immigration is wrong!"

Anonymous said...

The Left is so quick to change the meaning of the Constitution when it comes to the 2nd amendment. "Our founding fathers could not have imagined automatic weapons with 15-30 round magazines" is their mantra. Well I don't think they could have imagined hundreds of thousands of Muslim refugees (mixed with how many Islamic Terrorists) spreading themselves around the free would. I don't think they could have imagined back-packs, box cutters, airplanes, the internet and 50k pound vans, let alone the destruction they can cause by evil people. So if the many gun laws we already have are not an assault on the phrase ..."shall not be infringed" I think someone who ascribes to Sharia law might deserve a second look, be they immigrant or second generation.
Last August in Portland Maine 4 men entered Freddy Akoa's apartment. Freddy, a Christian was one of them; the other three were Muslim acquaintances. The Muslims left the apartment several hours later leaving Freddy dead; beaten to death with over 22 bone fractures. His bible was found next to this lifeless body as a statement. How about Fred Akoa's constitutional rights?
My point is the common denominator in all these Islamic Terrorist attacks is not guns, vans, immigrants or native born. It is however, an ideology of Jihad, Islamists given the nod for killing infidels. So whatever it takes to rid this country and the world of these evil people is fair game.
Blogger, Fred Van Magness is right... stick to local issues

Moultonboro Blogger said...

"So whatever it takes to rid this country and the world of these evil people is fair game. " Scary.
Even if it means denying basic liberties to American citizens? You have lumped every Muslim as a jihadist and that is dangerous rhetoric.
There are countless examples of incidents in the USA of people beaten and worse by others for may different reasons, drugs, money, etc. by non Muslims. Using your logic it would be ok for Christians to beat up or kill Muslims?

Because we may disagree on some national and political issues doesn't mean my opinion is not valid or should not be published. I will continue to write about whatever I want to and I hope that the American people come November will reject across the board politics of hatred and mistrust.

Keep on writing said...

Keep writing blogger. Don't let the haters get you down. The right wing pundits write all kinds of outrageous vitriol, but they are the first to want to censor any semblance of progressive thought.

Anonymous said...

"So whatever it takes to rid this country and the world of these evil people is fair game. " Scary.

"Scary" or some, common sense for others!

Moultonboro Blogger said...

no anon, scary and Un-American. Dou you know that we have Muslims here in Moultonboro? Your dangerous rhetoric would imply that you would condone going to their homes and evicting them if they don't pass a religious litmus test.
Why don't you share your name anon so that the readers of this blog can know who the extremists are in town. Afraid someone might ask you some questions?

Anonymous said...

anon at 7:35 says
You sir and your president and your party have lumped all law abiding gun owning citizens with those few who have broken all the rules and inflicted pain on many. Rather than go after the guilty and the ideology of hate you prefer to take the easier route. So if my rights may be infringed, I guess it wouldn't be so bad if others' rights were infringed upon as well. You twist logic to fit your agenda. The left makes out the NRA to be more evil that ISIS. When has any Jihadist or mass murderer been found to be a member of the NRA? When it comes down to right I'll protect mine over a Sharia Law, jihadist any day.

Moultonboro Blogger said...

Where to begin anon- ( also unwilling to put you name out there eh?). A discussion on forcing law abiding citizens to take a religious litmus test or be sent elsewhere and you go off on a rant about OUR President and then lump every Democrat as exactly like minded. We are not.
I am a gun owner and have a concealed carry permit. I don't want or expect anyone to take that away from me or you from yours. You sir are so caught up in the NRA and Tea Party hysteria that common sense clear thinking is no longer possible.
Here is a link to a very good article in the Concord Monitor by a retired Army lieutenant colonel.http://www.concordmonitor.com/Gun-control-Second-Amendment-3443909 It ends with some very good advice:

"Hard truths and reality are difficult concepts to deal with, especially when skirting or avoiding these discussions is so much easier. We can do what is right by supporting the Second Amendment and that which it is intended to do while also protecting our citizens from the criminals, felons, terrorists and the unstable among us who may want to use such weapons. It should not be a choice of one or the other.

Leaders in our country must have the willpower to do both, support the Second Amendment as it was intended by the Founding Fathers and protect our people, but with severe punishments for any felonious criminal acts committed with any type of weapon.

It is not that difficult."

Dave A. Rossetti said...

All this banter about guns, violence, Muslims, Christians, labels, and distractions. if I am on my way to your country, state, town, burrow, or into your living room to bomb, shoot, set on fire, cut in half, drive a truck through, fly a plane into your reality it is most likely because you have really pi$$ed me off to the point where I am not concerned with my well being, only yours.
So this is bad foreign policy. So bad that our neighbors on this very small celestial body we call home are willing to sacrifice their children, homes, and families to make it stop.
Perhaps if we spent 1/2 of the $ we waste on bombs, guns, drones, missiles, etc, etc, collectively/globally and helped our neighbors build farms, hospitals, roads, and drive-in movie theaters we would all win and with tremendous fanfare we could rejoice in knowing that we were working together to create the utopian future we all dream about for our children.
Now back to to reality. Until people turn off the TVs, and just pay attention to what is going on around them, they will continue to focus on distractions and consume valuable resources with negative energy perpetuating the same.

Chapter 1, Behavioral science said...


Only common denominator; people, or a semblance thereof.

Anonymous said...

There is a fear of change. Today, the Muslims are a small percentage of the population and have little political power. In Singapore, with 14% Muslims, laws were passed to require business cafeterias to have a separate set of plates, trays and utensils, along with two cleaning windows, to satisfy the wishes of Muslim employees. It is accepted as normal by everyone and life goes on. It is called tolerance, and seems to be in short supply.

Anonymous said...

Check out the PDF of the 2016 GOP platform at www.gop.com/platform/ On page 12 it states "We assert every citizen’s right to apply religious values to public policy and the right of faith-based organizations to participate fully in public programs without renouncing their beliefs, removing religious symbols, or submitting to government-imposed hiring practices." No wonder they want to keep the Muslims out.

Almost an agnostic said...

"No wonder they want to keep the Muslims out." ??????????

Did check out page 12 and didn't find Muslims.

Did read on page 12, the starting paragraph of the quote by anon 7:22:

"The first provision of the First Amendment concerns freedom of religion. That guarantee reflected Thomas Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which declared that no one should “suffer on account of his religious opinion or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion....”

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

More attention should be paid to "... peaceably to assemble ..."

Keep religion out of politics. Acts of violence, no matter the religion, are not a religious issue. They are assault, battery, or worse in our system of government.

Atheists also have rights, and religion should not be part of governance, in this day and age.

Anonymous said...

I agree that Tolerance and humility are in short supply!

Muslims are not a/the problem, however are a potential opportunity to police uneducated "extreme radicals".

Christians are not a/the problem, however are a potential opportunity to police uneducated "extreme radicals".

I believe that most of us can agree that many, if not most of these home grown attackers are not right in the head, white, black, brown, etc. doesn't matter the color or who they claim they represent. Somewhere along the line they became lost, without purpose, or at least feel as their actions are justified. They certainly don’t represent the majority!

Many of us are manipulated and programmed now to “think” that Muslims are bad evil, based upon instances in the news, and “what we’re told is true”. Search for the majority; I think many feel that Christians are good, aside from the “extreme radicals”. Accept it or not, Muslims/Islam is part of the fabric of our nation and flag, as they have and do serve and fight for our country. American Muslims pledge allegiance to our country, and its laws, for the very reasons we do. And from what I’ve learned they are more insulted by and against ISIS than most of the people we know are, where ISIS claims to represent Islam. ISIS does not! Muslims are the first to denounce these attacks and offer help to the victims and families. Imagine if there was a group who did the same and they do claiming to represent Christianity, or all white people, including you!

We are not the Middle East, where they live their short lives in chronic fighting, however if we all lean to the extreme, always against and insulting the other, we can become just like that of the Middle East. Is that where we're heading? Is that what we wish to become?

So what to do; take the easy way, beating our chest, flashing our guns, attacking and insulting our fellow Americans because they have different color skin, or religion, (Gee wonder what might come of that), or MAN UP (I think we owe that to our kids) and have the courage to have dialogue with the Muslims that we do meet in our everyday lives? I know “SCARY”! but you’ll be pleasantly surprised. They are certainly available and willing to talk. Many are professionals, doctors, engineers, etc. and got there through discipline and their efforts, also part of their faith and religion.