Not the Headlines - Threats to the Constitution Pt. 2

SPEAKER_00 0:00

The Listening Tube presents not the headlines.

SPEAKER_01 0:09

I'm Bob Woodley from the Listening Tube. This is part two of Threats to the Constitution. Part one explored the incompatibility of communism and socialism with the Constitution of the United States. I concluded that they are unable to coexist as forms of government. In this episode, we'll explore a religion that seems to also be incompatible with the Constitution of the United States of America. The first amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right to worship your religion as you see fit, and also prohibits the government from making any law that establishes a religion. That's why there's so much controversy with public displays of the first five of Christianity's Ten Commandments. That's why the subject of separation of church and state is always being re-evaluated and re-examined. Some would argue that freedom of religion is different than freedom from religion. And there's a case to be made there. It's important for people to be able to freely practice their religion without interference from the government. It's also important that people who choose to not practice religion not be subject to the influences of religion through government laws or regulations. Because of the separation of church and state, the state has had to determine what laws are civil laws and what laws are religious laws, and which laws are both. The Bible says to not murder, and we can all agree that it's a bad idea to murder, regardless of the fact that it's in the Bible that you're not supposed to. It's a religious crime and a civil crime. The Bible also tells us to love thy neighbor, but the government doesn't mandate that we love our neighbor. There's no doubt that much of what we consider to be morals are based on religious teachings. Many laws are based on those morals. Theft would be another example of an act violating both civil and religious doctrine. The founding fathers who debated and wrote the Constitution of the United States had morals that were rooted in religion. The pilgrims that relocated to America came here for the freedom to practice religion. There were religious battles of morality and civility that took place long before the colonies became a country. Different types of worshipers would often clash, almost exclusively Christian religions during the early days of migration to America. Ultimately, they found ways to accept the different ways in which we can worship, and coexist with the understanding that if you let us do our thing, we'll let you do your thing type of mentality. The founding fathers used their words very carefully when it came to religion. The goal was to minimize the influence or support of religion without suppressing it. By the way, there is nothing in the Constitution about the separation of church and state. But the establishment of the Constitution of the United States required religions to follow the law. For example, polygamy is illegal, although it was, for a long time, part of the Mormon religion. Having been raised Roman Catholic, I can't think of any church rituals that broke civil laws, unless you count the consumption of wine by someone under the legal drinking age. Wine symbolizes the blood of Christ in Catholic rituals. Beer, however, plays no role in Catholic rituals, but that didn't stop my priest from inviting my widowed grandmother over to the rectory for some after mass. Although all religions must follow civil law, there are no government mechanisms to force purely religious laws on anybody. At least not in the United States of America. For as powerful and influential the Vatican may be, or regardless of the relationship between the Israeli and American governments, the Constitution still makes the rules in America, and most religions have maintained a hands-off attitude when it comes to civil law. But there is an exception. I heard that some of what the Quran says is in direct opposition to American law and morals. I'm going to look that up.

SPEAKER_00 5:12

He's really gonna do it. You can't handle the truth.

SPEAKER_01 5:20

The Quran 929 says, Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the last day, and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful, and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the scripture. Fight until they give the jizya willingly and feel themselves subdued. Jiziah is a type of tax or additional monetary penalty levied on non-Muslim subjects, more specifically, Christians and Jews, of a state governed by Islamic law. While the Christians have commandments, there's no civil penalty for violating the religious ones. The Muslims have a whole separate list of laws, not religious laws, but civil laws that, although based on religion, have crossed over the line between church and state, or in this case, mosque and state. We always hear about the separation of church and state, but nobody ever talks about the separation of mosque and state. But the people who worship in the mosque have a whole different set of laws that directly contradict the Constitution of the United States. Christian religious services often ask for a monetary contribution from the worshipers in attendance, but they don't have the power to make non-worshipers also contribute. The jizya only applies to Islamic states and only affects non-Muslims through a state-run aka government mandate that is purely religious. In other words, the government will tax you for not being Muslim. That, in and of itself, is a violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

SPEAKER_00 7:21

And if that wasn't enough.

SPEAKER_01 7:23

Everywhere Islam becomes the dominant religion, the government soon follows. But it's not like any government with which a typical American would be familiar. Mostly because Islam has its own set of laws called Sharia, and the Quran dictates what is and what isn't allowed. Unlike the Ten Commandments, Sharia laws come with consequences in this world as well as the next. With Islam, there is no distinction between religion and government and the afterlife.

SPEAKER_00 8:00

Send email to thelistening to at outlook.com.

SPEAKER_01 8:05

Quran 434 says, Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others, and because they spend out of their property. The good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded. And as to those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them and leave them alone in the sleeping places, and beat them. Then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. I'll submit that the US Constitution declares that all men are created equal, but it doesn't say we're supposed to beat women. This verse basically says that men are superior to women and are also the breadwinners, and because of that, women are inferior and must be obedient to men. Then it goes on to say that if you're a crappy husband and she wants to leave you, you first browbeat her into submission and refuse to have sex with her and beat her. Now there may have been something lost in the translation, but I don't get the feeling it's recommending that you just try to talk to her first. You know, try to reason with her. And if that doesn't work, try the silent treatment for a couple of days and see if that brings her around. And then, and only if then, none of that works, beat her with a bat.

SPEAKER_00 9:47

Well, that can't be right.

SPEAKER_01 10:05

Not as a religion, but as a matter of religious laws that are in direct conflict with the Constitution. This one verse not only encourages violence against women, but also denies women the same rights as men and denies them of their right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. It's just one example of where Islamic religious law crosses the line of civil law and is in direct opposition to the United States Constitution. I have no issue with you practicing your own personal faith, whatever that may be. All types of religions have all types of rituals and traditions that build people's faith and gives them purpose and makes them feel better about themselves. And seldom do they intrude on the freedoms of the people around them, nor do they obligate anyone else to follow the same rituals and customs. Not religiously nor civilly. But Islam is the exception. Islam is the most intrusive and oppressive religion in the world today. There are many people who choose to follow it, and they're free to do so, preferably in a Muslim country and not in the United States of America. The Islamic religion and the Muslims who practice the faith do so in direct contrast to the values and morals outlined in the Constitution of the United States, and they are beholden to the religion and the laws under penalty of death. And not the kind of death glorified by martyrdom, but the death of an infidel with no reward, only torment. So when a politician who practices Islam wants you to trust them with your vote, and when they promise to represent you and the American values you hold true, and when they take the oath of office and swear to uphold and protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, they're lying to you. To them, there is no separation of mosque and state. Their only allegiance is to the Quran for all laws, both religious and civil. The practice of Islam is clearly and demonstrably incompatible with the Constitution of the United States and the American system of government and its laws.com. Be sure to play This Week in History and Guest Interviews. Thank you for putting your ear to the listening tube. I'm your host, Bob Woodley, for Thou ad Infinitum.