Constitution vs. Sharia Law

Never the Twain Shall Meet

Republican candidate Dr. Carson has stirred the proverbial hornet's nest with his statement that he would be against a Muslim ever becoming president, though he probably has a lot of company in this country, especially in light of the worldwide atrocities being committed by Muslim jihadists in the name of their god, Allah, actually a figment of the imagination of Mohammad, an illiterate caravan-raider in the long ago. Carson's reasoning was that a Muslim president, instead of enforcing/upholding the U.S. Constitution, would attempt to make the inhumane Muslim “Sharia Law” the law of the land.

Freedom of religion is not the issue. American presidents of all faiths have sworn to uphold the Constitution, with their personal beliefs not a factor. Any Muslim in this country can freely practice his/her religion, though there are laws against polygamy, contrary to Sharia Law, which allows for a man to have four wives, though not for a woman to have four husbands. Actually, Mohammad had fourteen wives, one of them age ten.

The issue is seen clearly in the oath taken by Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison with his hand atop the Koran, the Muslim holy book in which are the directives, along with other writings, that infidels (everyone not a Muslim) at every opportunity are to be made to pay the tax (enslaved) or killed, except for Jews, who are to be killed only. Mohammad's recipe for the endgame is that the Dajjal (Muslim one-eyed, scar-faced warrior) will with his armies overcome the world and set up the eternal reign of the Twelfth Imam, who will then have the Dajjal assassinated, with all infidels enslaved or dead.

This is Ellison's belief, whether brought up in it or not. He, like many other African Americans, may be a convert. This surely is the belief of the Nation of Islam, headed by Louis (Calypso Louie) Farrakhan (nee Louis Eugene Walcott), the outfit deserted by Malcolm X when he discovered the infidelities of then-leader Elijah Muhammad. Malcolm left the NOI and was assassinated while making a speech. In 1984, Farrakhan and his friend, the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah (God damn America) Wright—Obama's mentor—traveled to Libya for a visit with Qaddafi. Memory says Farrakhan's purpose was to cadge a million bucks from the Libyan. Farrakhan returned to Libya in 1996 but was disallowed by the U.S. from accepting $1 billion from Qaddafi then.

President Obama, as all other presidents, took the oath of office with his hand resting on the Holy Bible, in which is not found a directive that Jews and Christians must at every opportunity gratuitously kill or enslave anyone, whether or not religious or atheistic. On U.S. currency as well as government buildings and documents are references to God—not Allah—as represented in the Bible. This involves faith (in God we trust) , loyalty, obeisance, and supplication concerning God while recognizing the separation of church and state. In Islam, the faith is the state, so an oath taken on the Koran is a repudiation—not an endorsement or upholding—of the Constitution. Ellison's oath was such a repudiation.

Whether or not by design, Carson has pointed to the number-one enemy of the world—Islam. ISIS is obsessed with establishing the Caliphate, the Islamic government it claims will rule the world through enslaving the infidels and is already entrenched (using U.S. weaponry abandoned by Iraqis) in its captured territory in Syria and Iraq and being spread through huge influxes of Muslims into Europe, especially Germany, France and Sweden. Many if not most of these people can be expected to do as their ayatollahs, imams and mullahs tell them, no matter how sanguinary the results.

In a press conference in Ohio on 22 September, Carson reiterated his position and called attention to the political-correctness craze in the country that inhibits folks from saying what they think. Carson said what he thought, let the chips fall where they may. No other candidates are likely to publicly agree with him, no matter how they feel. The super-tolerant elitists, whether of high or low esteem, will self-righteously castigate Carson as bigoted, biased, stupid, discriminatory and all the rest, including, as always in every disagreement, racist. He was being truthful, no matter the cost, and that counts for something.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark