Muslims

D’Souza: Muslims Hate 'Blue America'

Author: Fight Bin Ladin’s appeal by opposing “homosexual marriage.”

Robertson: Muslim Politicians Will 'Destroy' American Civilization

On today’s “700 Club,” Pat Robertson warns that Muslims becoming involved in politics, such as Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota), want to “take over” and “institute Sharia.”

“If the Christians don’t get involved—We’ve been harassed by People for the American Way, we have been harassed by Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, we have been harassed by the federal court system, but if the Christians won’t stand up and not worry about the IRS, not worry about whether you’re going to lose your tax exemption, not worry about whatever because you’re going to lose your country if Christians don’t mobilize and vote,” warned Robertson. He added that “The curse of God is to bring in people who don’t share your point of view and then ultimately destroy your civilization.  Well, that’s what we’re facing for our children and grandchildren.” 

Get the Flash Player to see this video clip.

700 Club, 3/20/07

Low Bandwidth

Robertson’s comments echoed statements denouncing Rep. Ellison as a threat by right-wing commentators such as Roy Moore and Dennis Prager, by Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia), and by Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the Robertson-founded American Center for Law and Justice.

Worse Than Falwell

Not long ago, Dinesh D'Souza took to the pages of The Washington Post to defend his new book, "The Enemy at Home," from the savaging it is receiving in the press. In his Post piece, D’Souza claimed that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda attacked the US on September 11th for reasons that had nothing to do with US foreign policy, in spite of evidence to the contrary in bin Laden’s own words.  In D’Souza’s view, at least as expressed in his Post column, what really angered bin Laden and other radical Muslims was the fact that “Islam is under attack from the global forces of atheism and immorality -- and that the United States is leading that attack”:

It's more likely that they would do it if they feared their values and way of life were threatened. Even as the cultural left accuses Bush of imperialism in invading Iraq, it deflects attention from its own cultural imperialism aimed at secularizing Muslim society and undermining its patriarchal and traditional values. The liberal "solution" to Islamic fundamentalism is itself a source of Islamic hostility to America.

D’Souza insists that his argument “has nothing to do with [Jerry] Falwell's suggestion that 9/11 was God's judgment on the ACLU and the feminists for their sins”:  

And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way - all of them who have tried to secularize America - I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen."

In fact, there is a key difference between Falwell’s and D’Souza’s claims - whereas Falwell merely said of 9/11 that the Left “helped this happen,” D’Souza eschewed claims of secondary responsibility and blamed the “cultural left” directly, stating explicitly in the Post that he does not “believe that the 9/11 attacks were payback for U.S. foreign policy.”

Remarkably, just a week later, in a column published on TownHall, he appears to have changed his tune and now says that it was actually President Clinton’s “cowardly and weak” foreign policy that gave them “the confidence and the opportunity to strike”:

The conclusion seems unavoidable. The Islamic radicals made the decision to attack America on 9/11 because they decided that America was cowardly and weak. They came to this conclusion largely as a result of the actions—and inaction—of the Clinton administration and its allies on the left. What could have been done to get rid of Bin Laden and avert 9/11 was not done. In this sense liberal foreign policy gave radical Muslims the confidence and the opportunity to strike, and they did.

So, which is it Dinesh? Is 9/11 the fault of the “cultural left” for undermining traditional Muslim society? Or President Clinton for being too “cowardly and weak” to protect this country? The shifting sands of D’Souza’s “scholarship” may explain why he felt compelled to write in the Post, “I am not…an unqualified right-wing hack.”

More Attacks on Muslim Congressman: FrontPage Warns He'll Undermine Profiling

“[A]re law enforcement officials not justified in directing particular scrutiny at Muslims?” insists Horowitz web site.

Keith Ellison and the Right's Version of Religious Liberty

On the web site of the American Center for Law and Justice, the Pat Robertson-founded legal group where Jay Sekulow serves as chief counsel, Sekulow describes himself as a “nationally recognized and respected defender of religious freedom.” On last night’s “Hannity & Colmes” on Fox News, Sekulow perhaps elaborated on what he means by “religious freedom” when he said that a freshman Muslim lawmaker “should have just abstained from” using the Koran in a ceremonial photo op following his official swearing in as a member of Congress. Sekulow, although aware of the constitutional prohibition of religious tests for office, insisted that such a use of the Koran represented a "danger" to the country and its "Judeo-Christian tradition."

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) has been a target of some on the Right since an article by radio talker Dennis Prager wrote that he “should not be allowed” to be photographed with the Koran, calling the use of the Bible “essential to the continuity of a civilization.” Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia) pushed the “controversy” into the headlines when he wrote a letter to his constituents warning that, “if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran.” Goode later invoked the terrorists attacks of September 11 as justification for his concerns about immigrants.

Apart from Goode’s tirade against immigrants, Sekulow is the most prominent figure to embrace this attack on religious liberty. Sekulow has made a name for himself as a right-wing superlawyer, defending violent anti-abortion activists before the Supreme Court and advising the president on judicial nominees, all while pulling down an impressive salary.

While Sekulow was clearly aware of the ban on religious tests – he told Sean Hannity that Ellison didn’t have to actually hold the Bible – he insisted that Ellison’s use of the Koran (the copy once owned by Thomas Jefferson, architect of religious liberty) represented a “danger” to the country.

Get the Flash Player to see this video clip.

Jay Sekulow on Hannity and Colmes, 1/8/07

Low Bandwidth

Virginia Rep Invokes 9/11 in Continuing Comments on Muslim Congressman

Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia) returned from the holidays to revive his comments decrying the decision by an incoming Muslim congressman to pose for a photo op holding the Koran after the new Congress is sworn in. Goode published an opinion column in yesterday’s USA Today reiterating his letter to constituents, in which he linked the election of Minneapolis Democrat Keith Ellison, an African American, to a supposed need for a crackdown on immigration, both legal and illegal. (“If American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Quran,” he wrote.)

Goode Now, Goode is expanding his web of connections to cite 9/11. Noting that some people are emigrating to the U.S. from the Middle East, Goode wrote yesterday:

Let us remember that we were not attacked by a nation on 9/11; we were attacked by extremists who acted in the name of the Islamic religion. I believe that if we do not stop illegal immigration totally, reduce legal immigration and end diversity visas, we are leaving ourselves vulnerable to infiltration by those who want to mold the United States into the image of their religion, rather than working within the Judeo-Christian principles that have made us a beacon for freedom-loving persons around the world.

Goode on TV Stands by Comments

Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia) met with reporters today to respond to the press around his recent attack against Congressman-Elect Keith Ellison. Following a right-wing campaign against Ellison, a Muslim, for his choice to hold the Koran during a photo op after his official swearing in, Goode wrote a letter to constituents to assure them that “I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way” and linking Ellison’s photo op to immigration policy. "[I]f American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran.”

In today’s press conference, “he essentially did not back down one iota from his letter,” according to CNN reporter Brian Todd. Todd pressed Goode on whether he was against Ellison’s use of the Koran, and whether he favors the legal immigration of Muslims, but “he did not answer the question.”

Watch the segment from “The Situation Room”: Broadband or Dial-Up.

Goode at press conference

Anti-Immigration Virginia Congressman Joins Campaign against Muslim Rep (Updated)

Rep. Virgil Goode, Jr. (R-Virginia), in a letter to constituents obtained by a Charlottesville newspaper, joined a right-wing attack on an incoming Muslim congressman, and linked the presence of the Koran in Congress to a supposed need for draconian immigration laws to stop the influx of Muslim congressmen streaming across the border. "[I]f American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran," wrote Goode.

When right-wing columnist and radio host Dennis Prager lashed out against incoming Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) for “announc[ing] that he will not take his oath of office on the Bible, but on the bible of Islam, the Koran,” he created a small firestorm. Wrote Prager late last month:

He should not be allowed to do so -- not because of any American hostility to the Koran, but because the act undermines American civilization.

He added, “If you are incapable of taking an oath on [the Christian Bible], don't serve in Congress."

Not least among the criticisms were (1) that the Constitution specifically prohibits any religious test for office, and (2) that members of Congress do not take their oaths of office on the Bible at all. Instead, they raise their right hands as a group, and then pose for pictures after the fact.

However, Prager stood by his ridiculous attack, and a few right-wing figures came out of the woodwork to support him. WorldNetDaily wove a complicated conspiracy attempting to link Ellison to international terrorists, and Roy Moore – the former Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court who was removed from office for refusing to relinquish a two-ton Ten Commandments monument from his court – argued that Islam “rejects our God” and is “simply incompatible with our law.” William Donohue of the Catholic League and Don Feder, under the auspices of his obscure group “Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation,” issued a joint statement calling critics of Prager “scurrilous” and repeating the false factual claim that all congressmen historically swear an oath on the Christian Bible. Feder went further, writing, “It’s no coincidence that most terrorists on four continents are Muslims. Nor is it a coincidence that those who are killing U.S. servicemen in Iraq do so in the name of the bible of Islam. And it isn't by chance that Osama bin Laden, Hamas, Hezbollah and Imanutjob in Iran all cite the Koran as the source of their lunacy.” Feder added that he would rather Ellison swear on “The Pop-Up Kama Sutra.”

Virgil GoodeNow, at least one fellow congressman is joining this quixotic right-wing campaign against Ellison and the U.S. Constitution. Goode, a Republican representing the southside of Virginia, wrote his letter in response to constituents complaining about Ellison. One accidental recipient forwarded it to an alternative newspaper in Charlottesville. In it, he connects the anti-Islam message of the Right to the anti-immigrant positions that he has made his political hallmark:

Dear Mr. Cruickshank:

Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.

The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.” Thank you again for your email and thoughts.

Sincerely yours,
Virgil H. Goode, Jr.
70 East Court Street
Suite 215
Rocky Mount, Virginia 24151

UPDATE 12/21:

Tell Goode to apologize!  A spokesman for Goode says that the congressman “stands by the letter” and refuses to apologize for the letter he wrote to constituents despite universal condemnation from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Virginia Muslim PAC, James Zogby of the Arab American Institute, the ACLU, and at least one Democratic congressman. A spokesman for incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) called the remarks “offensive.”

Goode has made illegal immigration a primary target of his congressional career – introducing a bill to build a fence along the US-Mexico border and pushing to make English the official language of the US. 

Representative Ellison has the right idea about what it means to be an American - telling Rep Goode that he has “nothing to fear” because “the fact that there are many different faiths, many different colors and many different cultures in America is a great strength.” 

You can call Goode’s office at (202) 225-4711 and ask that he apologize for his intolerant and divisive comments about Muslims and immigrants. (Let us know how your call went here.)

10 Commandments Judge Roy Moore: Muslims not Fit for Congress

After Keith Ellison was elected the first Muslim member of Congress last month, talk show host Dennis Prager, among others, attacked the Representative-elect for indicating that he would swear his oath of office with his hand placed on a copy of the Qur’an. Now, former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice and regular WorldNetDaily columnist Roy Moore has decided that regardless of how they are sworn in faithful Muslims are not fit to serve in Congress.
Our Constitution states, "Each House [of Congress] shall be the judge ... of the qualifications of its own members." Enough evidence exists for Congress to question Ellison's qualifications to be a member of Congress as well as his commitment to the Constitution in view of his apparent determination to embrace the Quran and an Islamic philosophy directly contrary to the principles of the Constitution.
Citing the recent actions of the rebel government of Somalia and the public statements of the founder of a “radical Islamic school,” Moore argues that the Islamic faith “rejects our God” and is “simply incompatible with our law.” To Moore, these two examples are enough to prove that none of the world’s more than one billion Muslims could fulfill an oath to uphold the US Constitution. Never one for subtlety, Moore goes on to invoke Godwin’s Law:
[C]ommon sense alone dictates that in the midst of a war with Islamic terrorists we should not place someone in a position of great power who shares their doctrine. In 1943, we would never have allowed a member of Congress to take their oath on "Mein Kampf," or someone in the 1950s to swear allegiance to the "Communist Manifesto."
Oddly, Moore seems to forget the sixth article of the US Constitution:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.[emphasis added]
Roy Moore has demonstrated a unique understanding and interpretation of the US Constitution in the past, though it may take a truly singular intellect to explain how preventing Muslims from serving in government would not constitute the application of a ‘religious test.’

Sen. Brownback Goes to Prison

Fresh off of announcing the formation of his exploratory committee as he considers running for president, Sen. Sam Brownback spent a night at the Louisiana State Penitentiary in order highlight what the Right sees as the success of religious-based prison fellowship ministries at reducing violence and recidivism:

Brownback%20Prison.jpg

Sen. Sam Brownback took his budding presidential campaign to prison this weekend, spent a restless night among inmates and pressed his message that faith can work even to improve the lives of hardened criminals.

... His mission at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, rather, was to promote religious-based prison efforts to curtail violence and provide inmates with an alternative to crime once -- or if -- they got out.

Burl Cain, the prison's warden since 1995, attributed a drop in violence at the prison to Angola's commitment to ''moral rehabilitation'' programs. The prison has six interfaith chapels, nightly prayer services, four part-time chaplains and a ''Bible college'' that has trained dozens of inmates to be ministers.

Brownback, 50, said programs such as Angola's can ''break the cycle'' that sends two-thirds of inmates back to prison after they are released.

''We don't want to build more prisons in the country,'' he said. ''We don't want to lock people up. We want people to be good, productive citizens.''

As luck would have it, at the same time as Brownback was engaged in this stunt, the New York Times was taking a look at these sorts of programs and noting that more than a dozen have been ruled unconstitutional since 2000:

Robertson: Muslims Trying to Take over Queen of England, Windsor Castle

RobertsonOn the “700 Club” today, Pat Robertson expressed his outrage that England is commemorating the Muslim holiday of Ramadan by offering the Muslim staff of Windsor Castle the use of an office for prayer. According to Robertson, this is yet another sign that Muslims are trying to “take England over”:

England has been a Christian country. They ought to stand up and say so. “We’re a Christian country. We’ll tolerate you, we’ll give you freedom, but we’re not going to let you take over our castle and take over our queen”—because that’s what the Muslims would like to do. They really would like to take England over.

They almost had it with Jodi [Dodi] Fayed and Princess Diane [Diana]. They almost had somebody who would have converted to Islam if she had married a Muslim. Didn’t happen. She was tragically killed. But nevertheless, the Muslims would like to take over England, and I think our British cousins had better be alert to that. But having a prayer room for Ramadan in the middle of the castle? No. Way.

Watch the video: Broadband or Dial-Up.

Dobson: Hoping a Little Bit of 'IslamoFacism' Goes a Long Way (To the Polls)

DobsonThe round-up of the formally named “Washington Briefing” put on by the Family Research Council’s C4 entity, Focus on the Family Action, described an “impressive A-list of conservative leaders and public officials [who] packed the schedule from early morning till late in the evening”  who spoke to the 1700 attendees about “pressing family issues” as they sought “energy and encouragement.”  And in keeping with the gathering’s goal of energizing its religious right base with strategic messaging, a new emphasis on terrorism was on display beginning with Dobson opening the two-day conference calling it a “family issue.”

Dobson shared his view of the War on Islamo-fascism by looking at the big-picture numbers. He made clear he does not believe all Muslims are terrorists, but a small percentage obviously are. With an estimated 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, Dobson said, a small percentage adds up to a lot of trouble.

He said the estimates are that 10 to 15 percent do buy into the notion that jihad calls for the killing of infidels.

"Let's say that's grossly overstated, and it may be," Dobson said. "What if it's 4 percent worldwide? What if 4 percent want to take us down and are willing to give their lives for it? When the point of negotiation is that the other person wants to kill you, there's not a whole lot to talk about. So, what if it's 4 percent? That's 48 million people in this world who want to kill us. What if it's one tenth of 1 percent? It's 12 million people that want to kill us.

"We're in a war and it's time that we recognized it."

Dobson said he sees the effort to stop terrorists as having a place among family issues.

"Because if we don't have security for ourselves, our children, for future generations," he said, "there is no future for the family."

No doubt Dobson has read the same exit polls as we have showing that 86% of voters in 2004 who thought that terrorism was the most important issue were Bush voters, and 73% of voters who thought the Iraq war was the most important were Kerry voters.   Religious right voters can now expect to hear their leaders joining Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Tony Snow and others in the right-wing echo chamber putting a pro-Bush, “pro-family” spin on the war on terror by adding it to their growing roster of dubious “pressing“ family issues.  

No Service

According to USA Today, some taxi drivers serving the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport are refusing for what they say are religious reasons (the drivers are identified as Muslims from Somalia) to pick up passengers who are carrying or suspected of carrying bottles of alcohol.  According to an airport spokesperson, "Travelers often feel surprised and insulted.  Sometimes, several drivers in a row refuse carriage."  Rather than insist that the drivers transport all passengers (and isn't that their job?), airport authorities have been sending the refusing drivers to the back of the waiting cab line.  The drivers are unhappy, so authorities are considering allowing the refusers to change the lights on their car roofs, "possibly to a different color," to indicate they won't transport alcohol-carrying passengers.  So who will authorities allow drivers to refuse to pick up next?  Women who aren't dressed “properly”?  People they think are gay?  Teenagers with nose rings?  Where does it stop? 

I Wasn’t Talking To You 

The GOP has a time-tested electoral strategy: when making remarks for public consumption, sound moderate; but when addressing the right-wing base, let your inner right winger loose.

As if Rep. Katherine Harris’ futile bid for the Senate didn’t have enough problems, she has now gone and violated the GOP’s most basic rule

Rep. Katherine Harris sought Saturday to smother a campaign brushfire stoked by an earlier claim that failure to elect Christians to public office would allow lawmakers to "legislate sin."

Harris, appearing at a gun show in Orlando, said she did not mean to offend non-Christians in her comments to the Florida Baptist Witness last week. She explained that she referred exclusively - and repeatedly - to Christians because she was being interviewed by the weekly journal of the Florida Baptist State Convention.

Harris' campaign also released a statement Saturday. It described her strong support of Israel and said when Harris called the separation of church and state a "lie" she was addressing "a common misperception that people of faith should not be actively involved in government."

"My rallying cry," she said, "has always been people of all faiths should be involved."

Harris ignited a furor with her Witness interview. She sounded a fervent evangelical tone, saying that God "chooses our rulers," that voters needed to send Christians to political office and that God did not intend for the United States to be a "nation of secular laws."

Speaking to Witness editors, Harris said:

"If you are not electing Christians, tried and true, under public scrutiny and pressure, if you're not electing Christians, then in essence you are going to legislate sin."

"If we are the ones not actively involved in electing those godly men and women," then "we're going to have a nation of secular laws. That's not what our founding fathers intended and that's (sic) certainly isn't what God intended."

On Friday, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Democrats and Republicans blasted the comments, saying Harris was suggesting non-Christians were less suited to govern or should be excluded altogether.

To her credit, Harris at least recognized her error – not the error of what she said, mind you, simply the error of allowing her remarks to reach an audience beyond her intended target

"My comments were specifically directed toward a Christian group," said Harris.

Note to Harris: You are running for office from Florida, not Las Vegas.  

Religious Profiling

Bill O’Reilly weighs in on the recent alleged terrorist plot to blow up several inter-continental flights and, as would be expected, he makes a typically erudite argument [watch the video: Broadband or Dial-Up]

Now it's long past time for the USA to stop the nonsense and institute profiling at airports. We're not at war with Granny Frickett. We're at war with Muslim fanatics.

So all young Muslims should be subjected to more scrutiny than Granny. And we should blend some Israeli screening procedures with our own.

For example, trained security people should receive the passenger list on every flight and interview those people most likely to be terrorists, folks who have traveled to Muslim countries, people who have criminal records. Passengers who are Muslims ages 16 to 45 all should be spoken with. And if the ACLU doesn't like it, tough. This isn't racial profiling. This is criminal profiling.

Well, President Bush has traveled to a Muslim country and has a criminal record, so he apparently qualifies for extra screening.  

In addition to the President, O’Reilly also wants all Muslims ages 16 to 45 to receive additional scrutiny and correctly notes that such scrutiny isn’t “racial profiling” – it’s “religious profiling.”  Of course, it’s not clear how screeners would identify passengers’ religion, though O’Reilly seems to presume that anyone who appears to be of Arab descent is Muslim and vice-versa.

Assuming that individuals of a specific race or religion are more likely to be criminals or terrorists, which is what O’Reilly is espousing, is - by definition – both racial and religious profiling.  

Calling it “criminal profiling” doesn’t change that fact.  

Fighting a Straw Man, and Losing

There is just so much to say about this recent Kathleen Parker column that it is difficult to know exactly where to start.  

Parker begins by dismissing concerns regarding the influence wielded by “Christianists” such as Jerry Falwell and John Hagee because … well … they aren’t as bad as Islamic terrorists

Although both groups may be "true believers," those who try to connect the dots of Christian belief, specifically evangelical Christianity, to Islamism seem willing to overlook the fact that Islamists praise Allah and fly airplanes into buildings while Christianists praise Jesus and pass the mustard.

 And though both groups of people may use scripture to shape their approach to the public square, Islamist interpretation of doctrine permits religious expression through suicide-murder, beheadings, public stonings (preferably of women) and Jew-hating, while Christianist doctrine deals in such wimpy notions as forgiveness, tolerance, redemption and cheek-turning.

Parker is confusing her terms.  Forgiveness and cheek-turning are Christian teachings – but Christianists refers not to all Christians, just to those who are part of a political movement that seeks to use government power to impose their religious beliefs.  Similarly, not all Muslims are Islamists -- those who want to use government power to impose their religious beliefs.  And not all Islamists resort to terrorism.

Parker’s setting up a straw man here – nobody is really equating Falwell with terrorist leaders.  And just because Christianist leaders aren’t recruiting suicide bombers doesn’t mean they’re harmless, or their political goals aren’t dangerous.

Parker goes on to note that Hagee is a vocal proponent of a joint US-Israel strike on Iran in order to bring about Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ.   But Parker doesn’t see this as much a problem because nobody takes him seriously - least of all the White House

Right Decries Gay Pride in Israel -- "Even Muslims" Will Be Offended, Recruited

The D.C.-based group Faith and Action has launched a petition drive to protest "Love without Borders: WorldPride 2006," a gay and lesbian rally to be held in Jerusalem next week. The group claims it is seeking to "preserve the sanctity of Jerusalem" from the "abomination" of "the same atrocious scenes we have viewed out of San Francisco, New York and Boston!" According to Rev. Rob Schenck, president of Faith and Action's National Clergy Council,

The WorldPride agenda includes pornographic movie festivals, the recruitment of Israeli young people to the gay lifestyle and other immoral demonstrations offensive to Jews, Christians and even Muslims. ... Jews are restricted from visiting the Temple Mount in Jerusalem because it might inflame Arab Muslims, but homosexual activists are allowed to do whatever they want no matter who they offend. When it comes to militant homosexual activists, there are always two rules: one for them, the other for the rest of us. If anything is going to inflame anyone, it's this kind of public decadence.

Schenck can already claim a partial victory: Jerusalem police recently denied a permit for the WorldPride march, citing security concerns and the war with Hezbollah.
Syndicate content

Muslims Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Friday 04/08/2011, 4:11pm
Leading Republicans have signed up to address the conference led by disgraced Religious Right activist Ralph Reed this summer in Washington. Following commitments by potential presidential candidates Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), numerous Republican congressmen are now confirmed to speak to Reed’s 2011 Conference and Strategy Briefing. Reed, who also plans to speak alongside presidential candidate Herman Cain and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) in Florida next week, has just announced a new list of speakers: Rep. Allen West (R-FL); Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO); Rep.... MORE
Brian Tashman, Friday 04/08/2011, 12:19pm
The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer is doubling-down on his view that the U.S. should ban Muslim immigration, and on Wednesday he called Muslim immigrants a “toxic cancer.” Fischer, who believes that the First Amendment doesn’t apply to Muslims, now claims that the U.S. should use the Book of Numbers when establishing its immigration policy and that Muslims should “be prepared to drop his Islam and his Qur’an at Ellis Island.” According to Fischer, all new immigrants must “convert to Christianity” or “stay home”:... MORE
Brian Tashman, Wednesday 04/06/2011, 11:44am
Bryan Fischer is back on his almost-daily attack on Muslims. The American Family Association’s Director of Issues Analysis, Fischer believes that Muslims should not be protected by the First Amendment and that the government should deport all Muslims, ban Muslim immigration and prohibit the construction of mosques. Fischer, who has called Islam the “the spirit of Satan,” again demanded that the government forbid Muslim immigrants from becoming a “toxic cancer into our culture”: We allow unrestricted Muslim immigration into the United States we are welcoming to... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 04/05/2011, 4:47pm
Chris Rodda @ Dispatches From the Culture Wars: Michele Bachmann Lies About Her Own Family History To Sound More Iowan. Lee Fang @ Think Progress: Bristol Palin’s Nonprofit Paid Her Seven Times What It Spent On Actual Teen Pregnancy Prevention. David Weigel: Sharia, USA: The conservative panic about Muslim laws in Oklahoma. Ryan J. Reilly @ TPM: O'Keefe Hits Up Supporters For Cash, Mingles With D.C. Conservatives. John Aravosis @ AMERICAblog: Religious right hate group accuses Calvin Klein of hiding f-bomb in scantily clad NY billboard. Media Matters... MORE
Brian Tashman, Monday 04/04/2011, 11:15am
After telling a reporter from Think Progress that he wouldn’t appoint any Muslims to his administration, Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain has doubled-down on his religious test for public office. Cain told the conservative site NewsMax that his opposition to Muslims serving in government comes fro his belief that “they are not free to infuse their religious beliefs into our laws”: “They can accuse me of bigoted speech all they want,” Cain counters. “I want people committed to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Wednesday 03/30/2011, 10:26am
Last week, the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer declared that the First Amendment does not apply to Islam and therefore, Muslims have no right to freely practice their religion in this country. A few days later, Fischer was in Iowa to broadcast his radio program from the Rediscover God in America conference where he lined up an all-star list of guests, including Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, and Haley Barbour.  As such, People For the American Way released open letters to Gingrich, Huckabee, and Barbour, asking them not to give Fischer credibility by... MORE
Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 03/29/2011, 10:24am
Bryan Fischer's anti-Muslim bigotry has become such a standard part of his rhetoric that it is getting to the point where it is difficult to determine whether his latest outburst warrant mention any more ... even when he is calling for a ban on immigration by Muslims and for local communities to ban the construction of mosques since he has made both of these demands before. But so long as Fischer is going to continue to voice his bigotry and assert that First Amendment protections do not apply to Muslims, we are going to keep making note of it: Immigration is obviously a matter for Congress... MORE