While it is true, the American ideal is largely predicated upon freedom of religion (conscience), it is essential that we understand that there are limits to our religious liberties. One cannot claim religious liberty as a protection against an act that is political or criminal in nature. For example, one cannot claim religious protection as a shield against subversion of the established government. Nor can one claim religious liberty as protection against prosecution for theft, rape or murder. Neither American civil nor Natural Law recognize any of these things (subversion, theft, rape or murder) as an inherent characteristic of any legitimate religion. They are — by civil and Natural Law — criminal actions because they are acts that cause harm to individuals, their property or the Social Contract under which they live and seek to protect their rights. However, due to the growth of general ignorance in American society — even among those in our governing elite — Islam is being afforded protections for which it does not qualify, nor does it deserve.
So, to those readers who do not see what I am trying to explain, or who see it but disagree with me, let me try something else. Maybe I can get you to see the problem more clearly. Rush Limbaugh has an effective means of making his point in cases such as this. He illustrates absurdity by using absurdity. The technique is even more effective when we use a related but different subject to make the point. So let me try to frame the real issue at hand this way:
Continue reading “LESSONS IN LOGIC: Islam, Freedom of Religion, and the American Ideal”