On October 11, Attorney General William Barr delivered a powerful speech on religious freedom at the University of Notre Dame. The Attorney General detailed the many ways in which the State has taken sides with various anti-religious pressure groups not only to curtail religious freedom, but to force irreligion and secular values on people of faith.
Barr reminded his audience that religion provides great benefits to the State which the State cannot provide for itself; and without which it descends either into totalitarianism or licentiousness. “The fact is,” said Barr, “that no secular creed has emerged capable of performing the role of religion.”
There’s nothing new here, of course, and Barr cites a number of brilliant thinkers who have said as much—John Adams, Edmund Burke and James Madison. The main point they all agreed on is that you can’t have self-government unless individuals learn to govern themselves. And the most reliable way that people learn to control their appetites is through religion.
But, as Barr points out, we need to keep reminding ourselves of the connection between religion, virtue, and freedom because, when we forget, religion declines and social pathology abounds. At which point the State steps in to restore order—but almost always with a heavy hand.
There’s much more. Barr’s talk is worth reading and pondering. It provides a great deal of much needed clarity on issues that are seldom discussed in the mainstream media.
But there is one area that Barr understandably avoids. If religion in general is declining in the West, there is one religion that is not. Islam is growing in the West, and all over the world. During the course of his talk he frequently alludes to the “Judeo-Christian moral system,” “Christianity,” and, not surprisingly given his audience, the importance of “Catholic education.” But he never mentions Islam—a religion that profoundly affects the lives of more than a billion people.
In one way that’s not surprising. Barr is simply following in the footsteps of the Founders. When they spoke of the benefits of religion to society, it seems obvious that the religion they had in mind was Christianity. After all, that is the religious tradition in which they were raised.
In addition, most of the founders would have had only a limited knowledge of Islam. When Jefferson and Adams—then ambassadors to France and England respectively—met with Tripoli’s ambassador to England, they were surprised to hear his justification for the Barbary State’s war against other nations:
The ambassador answered us that it was founded on the laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners…
Twenty years later, when the first American edition of the Koran was printed in 1806, the editor saw fit to offer a few choice words about its contents: “This book is a long conference of God, the angels, and Mahomet, which that false prophet very grossly invented.”
Although the Koran is now readily available in America, many, if not most Americans, don’t seem to know much more about Islam than was known in America circa 1776. A fair number of Americans still think that the word “Islam” means “peace.”
Undoubtedly, Bill Barr knows considerably more about Islam than the average American. And that may be why he does not include it in his mention of religions that improve the nation’s moral tone. That’s because Islam is not exactly the poster boy for the argument that religion benefits society.
Most Muslim majority nations are quasi-totalitarian states. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, Christians can go to jail for practicing their religion, and Muslim women can be imprisoned for refusing to wear the hijab. In Saudi Arabia, Christian tourists can be arrested for openly displaying a Bible, and in Pakistan, one wrong word about Muhammad can put you behind bars for years. Meanwhile, Islamic Turkey holds the world record for the number of jailed journalists.
Still, it is often argued that Muslims share many values in common with Christians and Jews, and that Islam plays a major role in helping Muslims govern their passions and curtail their appetites. After all, Muslims dress modestly, pray regularly, and fast during Ramadan. Moreover, like many Christians and Jews, Muslims are opposed to pornography, abortion, and the LGBT agenda.
But a closer look reveals that the self-governance practiced by Muslims is often akin to the “self-governance” exhibited by North Korean peasants. They behave themselves because they have to. Most people will learn to control themselves if the alternative is an electric shock or its psychological equivalent. And most will adjust their consciences accordingly. For every Iranian woman who refuses to wear the hijab, there are a hundred who have convinced themselves that wearing it is a proof of virtue.
There is, however, a double standard in Islam when it comes to controlling passions. Women are expected to control themselves; men, not so much. Indeed the woman carries a double burden. If a man loses his sexual self-control, he has no one to blame but a woman. Women are responsible not only for controlling themselves, but also for the man’s loss of self-control. In the presence of an uncovered women, the man cannot be expected to control himself.
This element in Islamic culture helps to explain why the incidence of rape skyrocketed in England, Germany, Sweden, and other European countries after the mass Muslim migration of 2015-2016. Young Muslim men suddenly encountered streets full of women who, in addition to being uncovered, were also infidels, and therefore completely unqualified for the protection owed to Muslim women who dress modestly.
This is the Islamic version of viva la difference. Indeed the whole Islamic system is built on a structure of differences and inequalities. Chief among these are that men are superior to women, and that Muslims are superior to non-Muslims. In fact, Islamic law stipulates that the value of a Christian or Jew is only one third the value of a Muslim.
Which brings us back by a circuitous route to the Founders and the founding document—the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration states that “all men are created equal,” and “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” But, as I wrote in an earlier article:
Which Creator is the Declaration referring to? It would make no sense to claim that Allah would qualify for the position, because in Islam all men are not created equal. Muslims, who are described in the Koran as ‘the best of people,’ are considered to be decidedly superior to non-Muslims.
It’s a good bet that when the Founders spoke of God and religion, they were not thinking of Allah and Islam. And it’s an even better bet that when William Barr talks about the benefits of religion, he’s mainly talking about the benefits conferred by the Judeo-Christian moral system.
In a sense, Barr’s speech was a counter-cultural statement. By omitting any reference to Islam he was going against the tide of contemporary culture—a culture which insists that all religions and cultures are interchangeable, and that all are equally good. Considering that Barr was speaking to a Catholic audience, it’s ironic that more than a few in the hierarchy now seem to subscribe to that very proposition.
I am sure that Barr would be the first to agree that a Muslim’s freedom of religion is and ought to be protected by the First Amendment. But Islam itself claims to be a whole different ball of wax in relation to other religions. On matters of equality and religious freedom, it differs markedly from Christianity. And it wouldn’t be truthful to pretend otherwise.
Since Muslims make up less than two percent of the American population, the questions raised here may seem like merely academic questions. But not too long ago, such questions would also have seemed academic in Europe. Now, however, in many parts of Europe the number of Muslims who attend mosque on Friday will soon surpass the number of Christians who attend Sunday services. By mid-century Islam may well be the dominant religion in some European states. At that point we will see whether the concept of religious liberty can survive the coming of Islam.
We tend to think that Islamization will never happen in America. But twenty years ago, who would have believed that the number of “nones” (the religiously unaffiliated) would exceed the number of Catholics in the U.S.? Barr asks, “What is it that can fill the spiritual void in the hearts of the individual person?” Right now there seem to be three contenders to fill the vacuum. Will it be a resurgence of Judeo-Christian morals as Barr hopes? Or will it be some rigid secular orthodoxy as he fears? Or will it be, as is increasingly the case in Europe, the religion of Muhammad?
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Kilpatrick writes of Thomas Jefferson and then of the first American translation of the Koran in 1806…In 2008 I attended a panel discussion at the University of Washington re “Faith and Reason” and the Muslim panelist (from Loyal Marymount University, Los Angeles) commented that Thomas Jefferson taught himself Arabic in order to study Islamic Law.
Two points and a quote:
FIRST, a question presents itself on this dip into Islamic Law and Jefferson’s well-known editing of a deist/rationalist version of the Bible (1804), with all references to the divinity of Christ and his miracles deleted.
Does Jefferson’s exposure to the Islamic mindset explain his broad-brush eagerness to sequester all religious influence from American politics (his “wall of separation,” later elevated from some private correspondence into a constitutional principle, by an activist/secularist United States Supreme Court)?
SECOND, a comment on Kilpatrick’s concluding speculation:
“Will it [the future] be a [a] resurgence of Judeo-Christian morals as Barr hopes? Or will it be [b] some rigid secular orthodoxy as he fears? Or will it be, as is increasingly the case in Europe, [c] the religion of Muhammad?”. . .
In early 2007 yours truly was in search of a book that might frame the future in this tripartite way. Finding none, five years were intensely devoted to researching and then writing such a tract, by this non-credentialed retiree (“Beyond Secularism and Jihad? A Triangular Inquiry into the Mosque, the Manger & Modernity”, University Press of American, 2012).
The Catholic World Report author interview can be found at this link:
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/5602/The_Mosque_the_Manger_and_Modernity.aspx
THIRD, One hundred pages of small-print footnotes. Wide-ranging. Here, with such footnotes, is a germane selection from Chapter 5 (“Modernity: Monologues and Dialogues”):
“The defense of [even] natural law [as distinct from religion!]—and resistance to the assimilation of Christianity into the presumptive faith community of Islam—even includes insights from an avowed atheist, the late Ariana Fallaci. Fallaci chastises the Catholic Church for winking at the ‘ideological robberies’ of Islam throughout history, the unchallenged Muslim presumption that ‘Christianity is an abortion of Islam,’ and for not raising clearly the banner of Western self-defense (fn. 69). Fallaci’s critique came before Pope Benedict XVI’s very clear Regensburg Lecture in 2006 (Chapter 1). Fallaci calls herself a ‘Christian atheist’ because for all of its alleged mythology, in her judgment, ‘Christianity truly is an irresistible provocation, a sensational bet that Man makes himself . . .’ We have a catastrophe, she says, ‘Because before invading our territory and destroying our culture, before canceling our identity, Islam aims to extinguish that irresistible provocation.’” (fn. 60).
fn. 69. Ariani Fallaci, The Force of Reason (New York: Rizzoli, 2004), 194-6. While Fallaci mostly faults the Left for forming a natural alliance against the West after the collapse of Communism (210), she also cites a pattern of specific failings by Church officials in the selling of convents and churches, in support in Paris for the Islamic Cultural Institute, in remaining silent when crucifixes are removed from hospitals, in assisting in the locating of a mosque in Lyon, and for saying nothing about polygamy, wife-repudiation, and about slavery which still exists in Sudan, Mauritania, and other parts of Muslim Africa.
fn.60. Ibid., 188-9.
Mr. Beaulieu;
I have a confession to make. Given your history of comments, I was prepared to read this one seriously, but when I came to the phrase “Loyal Marymount University Los Angeles” I stopped – stunned.
I will return later to read your commentary.
Thank your for that. A typo. Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles (there’s always something).
I’ll add here that the Muslim panelist evaded the listed topic of “faith and reason” (one of the three panelists was a Dominican, and the other a Christian evangelist in the Muslim hip pocket). The Muslim steered the discussion in the direction of “cultural” harmony, essentially reframing the discussion altogether. He gratuitously expressed consternation as to why Pope Benedict would make a big deal about St. Paul heading for Athens (what does Athens have to do with Jerusalem).
By this time in my research even I could see through this predictable redirect, so I rose to the occasion and explained without need for a microphone the providential (and human-elevating) harmony between faith and reason versus the kitch-blender substitute (and very Islamic) cultural endgame.
He then addressed the issue just a bit, while playing a recording of modern Muslim musicians mimicking modern-day contemporary Western “music”, to demonstrate how culturally fluid all-engulfing Islam can be.
Too bad that the “cultural” gambit seems to have made such inroads into Vatican dialogue with Islam. Makes sense at a certain level (as in shared efforts in the corporal works of mercy), but not as a sufficient witness or solution at our secularist and syncretic (e.g., Amazonian primitive) point in world history.
Gavin Ashendon – The choice is between Jesus and Mohammed. If you don’t choose Jesus, you will get Mohammed.
pls lets not get into these scare tactics, who says the choice is between Jesus (peace be upon him) and Muhammad (peace be upon him), for me as a muslim, they both brought the same message which was to tell people that there is only one God worthy of being worship, its us who keep on trying to divide people, lets come together as Quran describes in chapter 3, verse 64
Say (to them, O Messenger): “O People of the Book, come to common terms between us and you, that we worship none but God, and associate none as partner with Him, and that none of us take others for Lords, apart from God.” If they (still) turn away, then say: “Bear witness that we have submitted ourselves to Him exclusively.”
“who says the choice is between Jesus (peace be upon him) and Muhammad (peace be upon him), for me as a muslim, they both brought the same message which was to tell people that there is only one God worthy of being worship,”
Utter nonsense. Jesus is God the Son, the second Person of the Holy Trinity. Muhammed denies Jesus’ divinity. So one has a choice of the Truth, which is Jesus, or falsehood, which is Muhammed and the religion he created.
“its us who keep on trying to divide people, lets come together as Quran describes in chapter 3, verse 64”
That sounds delightfully peaceful. What about what the Koran says in chapter 9, verse 29? War against Christians and Jews if they don’t acquiesce to Muhammed’s religion; make them pay a special tax, and “subdue” them.
What you mean is “Let’s come together by denying Jesus’ divinity and submitting to Muhammed’s version of religion; and if you People of the Book, that is, Christians and Jews, don’t submit, we will force you.”
Hear, Hear.
“Let’s come together by denying Jesus’ divinity and submitting to Muhammed’s version of religion; and if you People of the Book, that is, Christians and Jews, don’t submit, we will force you.”
Your exegesis of that verse is accurate.
Catholicism also has a long tradition of Just War Doctrine, developed in large part by SS Augustine and Aquinas. https://www.catholicleague.org/just-war-doctrine/
For accuracy in understanding of 9:29, one may want to consider to whom it is addressed. This is provided first in the same chapter: https://quran.com/9
“Excepted are those who didn’t attack you.” & “God prefers the righteous.” (Quran 9:4)
-(He will prefer disbelievers over the Muslims if the Muslims disobeyed God’s commandments. Just how He wants things to work. Don’t take my words for it and try to break His rules and see where you eventually end up.)
It is also assumed that when one reads scripture, one brings a pure heart because our Creator loves us and wants us all to succeed and go to heaven. God calls himself “Relenting and Merciful”. We see this just further down in chapter 9:
“Do they not know that it is Allah who accepts repentance from His servants (believers and non-believers) and receives charities and that it is Allah who is Relenting, Most Merciful?” (Quran 9:104)
Our Prophet (pbuh) told us to seek repentance from God and after having done so it’s a sin to have any doubt of God’s forgiveness.
Nice try. But baloney.
https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/games/discover-truth/verses/9-29.aspx
It’s ironic that you say “peace be upon him,” regarding Mohammed. He never brought peace, just war and conquest. Unless you define “peace” as “submit to my religion or I’ll kill or enslave you.”
Good response to the Muslim.In 1 John 2:22, he states that “he who denies Jesus is the Messiah is the Antichrist. I have studied Islam since 9/11/2001 and conclude that Islam was Satan inspired. The statements by the allah god who supposedly revealed the Quran to Muhammad (no miracles,no witnesses), denies Jesus’ divinity and death on the cross. Theses are lies against the eye witnessed Gospels written 600 plus years before the Quran and Muhammad. Jesus says in John 8:44 that Satan is the father of all lies”. I conclude the allah god of Islam is Satan!
Thanks to Peter Beaulieu for an excellent assessment of Kilpatrick on the Bill Barr speech and its wider three pronged ramifications particularly the last.
I think many conservative politicians are weaponizing Christianity. It’s a great issue to persue an us versus them narrative. As a practicing Catholic,I have serious concerns with politicizing religion. And that is what I am seeing in many western democracies. I practice my faith as I see fit. Neither secular nor other religious beliefs have any effect on my worship of God. Barr’s diatribe against the secularists in society doesn’t match the day to day experiences of most people. Jesus left us with two deceptively simple commandments. Love God above all else and love your neighbor as yourself. Both of these are often difficult but we are expected to strive every day to do our best to follow them. We may not like our neighbor’s choices nor their lifestyle but Jesus commands us to love them anyway. It is not our role to judge and condemn. Our faith leaders must always encourage us to strive to be better.
Excellent points about the two great commandments and not weaponizing religion; and would that this were the end of it…
But, on the same good authority, Christians are also called/alerted to be BOTH “wise as serpents and innocent as doves” (Mt 10:16), with pure innocence and eyes-wide-open cunning as inseparable complements to each other—never to be severed and sent in opposite and overly “deceptively simple” directions.
It is one thing to uncharitably judge others, another to responsibly judge their actions.
Jihad in all of its forms is one set of actions; others are Western court rulings that would prohibit you and me from following the two commandments repeated above, and more generally a cultural betrayal that would fully replace these commandments with an “ethic” of abortion, euthanasia, same-sex “marriage”/demolition of the family, and atrophy of all intervening institutions between the individual person and a tyrannical state, whether this is pre-modern Islamic state or post-moral Secularist.
Yes, “our faith leaders must always encourage us to strive to be better,” and the (non-judgmental!) expectation is that they have a prudential clue about avoiding deceptively simplistic paths in an imperfect world.
One “faith leader,” Pope Benedict, had this to say about the post-Christian West and Islam (from the Muslim perspective):
“We [Muslims] are somebody too; we know who we are; our religion is holding its ground; you don’t have one any longer. This is actually the feeling today of the Muslim world: The Western countries are no longer capable of preaching a message of morality but have only know-how to offer the world. The Christian religion has abdicated; it really no longer exists as a religion; the Christians no longer have a morality or a faith; all that’s left are a few remains of some modern ideas of enlightenment; we (Muslims) have the religion that stands the test” (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Salt of the Earth [Ignatius Press, 1997], 246).
Translation, the West is no longer a dove nor a serpent; it’s a sitting duck. Attorney General Barr’s message is that the time is long-past to awaken from anesthetized abdication to weaponized secularism.
Mr Beaulieu,
A cursory glance of your books and comments informs me that you are a very faithful, loving, and wise Catholic gentleman.
I will purchase a copy of your, The Mosque, the Manger, and Modernity tonight.
Thank you for your great courage, clarity, charity, and example!
God Bless,
Jim Gill
In addition to weaponizing religion, the writer of this opinion piece seems to be putting words in Mr. Barr’s mouth, and misdirecting the real purpose of the speech with a misleading question: “what if the Muslims dramatically increase in numbers?”
Dr. Beaulieu, the real question, would you not agree is: is the writer doing an excellent job of covering for his boss, an Israeli Passport holder, Mr. H. Shillman? An atheist Jew and a super neocon!
Covering for neocons while they create an anti-Christ system: https://youtu.be/7biuiR2pgQA
ISIS, Al qaeda, Boko Haram, Al Shebab,…(the Death Squads of the middle east brought to you by those who brought you the “Death Squads of Latin America”).
The thought police. https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/10/15/controlled-explanations-rule-the-western-world/
Your sister,
Fran
What does an Israeli passport signify??
Weaponizing Christianity? I personally feel they are most of our politicians are cowards in addressing Islam. If Islam took over, you would feel the boot of Islam on your Christian neck. To me, “Love your enemies” applies to Muslims in that we are commanded by Jesus in the Gospels to preach the Gospel to all nation. Muslims need to know that their evil hate filled religion is FALSE and our leaders need to state that if they are truly Christ followers. In just 2 hate filled verses in the Quran (Sura 9-5 and 9-29), supposedly the allah god’s word to Muhammad, the Quran exhorts Muslims to fight and subjugate Christians and Jews and slay pagans. That’s 99% of Americans who are not Muslim. Islam should be outlawed in America because Muslims can get the evil spirit of the allah god and start killing infidels…9/11, San Bernadino, Ft. Hood, Orlando, Boston, etc. etc. Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father (God) as He states in the Gospels. Muslims need to know that out of Christian LOVE!…but alas, they can be killed by any Muslim for leaving Islam…the glue that holds good people in this evil, false, Satanic religion/ideology.
Now might be the perfect time for Pope Francis to gift the Pacamama figures to the Grand Imam.
I recommend the book “Seeking Allah, finding Jesus” by Nabeel Qureshi who was challenged to study Christianity in college became a medical doctor and researched the prophet Mohammed. He was a very devout Muslim with an image of a holy prophet, but he encountered truth and converted. His extraordinary lectures are on YouTube, on the height of his preaching career he died of stomach cancer two years ago in his mid thirties, however, many still find conversions through his ministry. One man challenged him to study Christianity!
Frankly, after Obama opened the floodgates to Islamic immigration using the levers of the federal bureaucracy behind the scenes (and simultaneously discriminated against Christians and other religious minorities from those same Muslim-majority nations), it is time for a succession of U.S. Presidents to drastically reduce Muslim immigration. Measuring rods should include a goal of making sure that the number of Muslims never exceeds the number of Jews in this country; another is to preserve the traditional ration of 2 (or 3) Christian Arabs for every Muslim Arab admitted to the U.S. Europe seems doomed to fall to Islamization, but just in case that turns out to be a really bad thing, let there be at least on developed Western nation that has protected itself such a fate. The citizens of no foreign country or particular religious group has a right to a pre-determined immigration ratio in perpetuity. So let’s play it safe with Islam rather than assume that all multi-cultural experiments are good.
Barr is a disgrace to the nation. His law is the rule of law when he circles the globe, directed by his client Trump, in a cavalier and completely visible attempt to gain “evidence” on why the Mueller Trump/Russia investigation is a sham. Not to mention his scrubbing of the Mueller report in favor of Trump. “No collusion an no obstruction” Democracy anybody?
MorganB, you know what is so great about being Catholic? The ability to forgive and be forgiven. I pity you and will say a prayer for you to not be so angry. The Holy Spirit tells me that Barr is a good and honest man.
GKA please say that prayer for me, but does Barr’s illegal actions not mirror another good and honest man, his client Trump? Sorry, but reality will strike and God will punish those who threaten our democracy for personal gain! God save the nation from those within who violate the Constitution and their pledge and honor to protect and defend our wonderful America!
If you cannot provide specific charges and evidence about these “illegal actions,” you are indulging in baseless calumny.
You are very fond of the Democrats, it seems. I have yet to see you say anything in the way of chastising them for their constant, devout support of contraception and abortion, not to mention sodomy and the various evils that accompany it.
You claim to be Catholic, but it appears to me that your religious affiliation is actually Democrat.
Leslie(man or woman?),you don’t say much good if you support an adulterer, misogynist, supreme liar, so much he has our allies and even more destructive our adversaries are confused. My political affiliation is no longer with my former GOP Tea Party, which has morphed itself into the Trump Party. If your an astute and committed Catholic you must apply the Catholic tenets and not be enamored by this thug whose pitiful record, including promising to release his tax returns, which he told us on the campaign trail that he would 100%! Now his other un-indicted conspirator, Jay Spekculo has run out of subpoena gas an threatens to take this weak motive saying “the taxes are under audit” to the SCOTUS.
Lastly, I can’t imagine any moral Christian, Catholic, Protestant, Born Again Evangelical or Mormon could align itself with this slippery and immoral character and remain true to their oath to God!
As I have mentioned before, I am a woman.
Once again you provide absolutely no specifics and no evidence for your accusation of “illegal actions.”
“you don’t say much good if you support an adulterer,”
Yes, he committed adultery, which is sad and tragic. I do not support him for the adultery he committed, but for the good things he has promised, and done, or tried to do.
“misogynist,”
What evidence can you provide that he is a misogynist?
“supreme liar,”
You make your charge ridiculous when you claim that he is a “supreme” liar. Has he said things that were not truthful? Very likely. So have you, and so have I, and so have most people. To what specific untruths are you referring?
“so much he has our allies and even more destructive our adversaries are confused.”
I am quite pleased if our adversaries are confused. As to your allegations, again they lack specificity; just ranting and repeating talking points.
“My political affiliation is no longer with my former GOP Tea Party, which has morphed itself into the Trump Party.”
You have become what’s called a “Never Trumper,” who would rather see anything, including legalized infanticide, including persecution of Catholics, rather than accept President Trump.
“If your [sic] an astute and committed Catholic you must apply the Catholic tenets”
President Trump has supported the most fundamental of Catholic positions, the right to life for unborn babies. He has also defended the freedom of Catholics not to have to pay for insurance coverage for contraception (frequently abortifacient), and for the basic recognition of the reality that there are two sexes and Catholics should not be forced to pretend that there are many, and that one can change from one to the other.
“and not be enamored by this thug whose pitiful record, including promising to release his tax returns, which he told us on the campaign trail that he would 100%!”
I frankly don’t care whether he or any other candidate release their tax returns. Their returns should be examined no more than any other citizen’s. He shouldn’t have said he’d release them in the first place, and I wish he would just say, “No.”
“Now his other un-indicted conspirator, Jay Spekculo”
Since nobody has been indicted for anything, there cannot be an unindicted co-conspirator, which is a specific legal concept and not, as you appear to believe, just some insult to be flung at anyone with whom you disagree.
“has run out of subpoena gas an threatens to take this weak motive saying “the taxes are under audit” to the SCOTUS.”
It appears to me that the argument he is making is that a sitting president is immune from criminal prosecution while he is in office.
It also appears to me that the spite-filled Democrats have been trying to overturn the 2016 election ever since they lost, and will use whatever means they can, foul or not, to do it.
“Lastly, I can’t imagine any moral Christian, Catholic, Protestant, Born Again Evangelical or Mormon could align itself with this slippery and immoral character and remain true to their oath to God!”
Your imagination is extremely poor, largely because you are looking at the President through a filter of “I hate him! I hate him! I hate him!” He is far from perfect; but do I hear you condemn, for example, Nancy Pelosi or Joseph Biden, or any of a string of other allegedly Catholic politicians, who support the evils of abortion, contraception, and “gender identity” idiocy against which President Trump is doing more than any recent politician of whom I can think?
Your argument boils down to “1. He commmitted adultery. 2. He has told lies. 3. He is a ‘misogynist,’ whatever you mean by that.” Because of that, you will ignore all the good things that he has done. Rather feeble grounds for such venomous hatred.
One thing not mentioned (unless I, the uneducated one, missed it) is the birth rate in the west, as compared to the birth rate among the Muslins. As the west continues to drop its birth rate below even replacement levels, it would seem that one day Muslims will be able to rule the world simply by attrition. The wages of abortion and birth control?
Jerry:
“One thing not mentioned (unless I, the uneducated one, missed it) is the birth rate in the west, as compared to the birth rate among the Muslins”
*********
Actually, birthrates worldwide have fallen dramatically. Most nations are headed towards an average 1.7 sub-replacement level fertility rate.
Only a very few regions in Africa & SE Asia still have high fertility rates & they’re being targeted by population control interests.
Muslims are generally following the demographic-collapse trend of the West, especially if they’ve emigrated to Europe. After a couple generations they’re having fewer children too.
But if Muslims even have a basic replacement level birthrate of 2.1, they’ll eventually outnumber Europeans. That goes for any other group who bothers to reproduce themselves. It doesn’t seem that most Europeans or Americans value their culture enough to ensure another generation will inherit it.
morganB:
“Leslie(man or woman?),you don’t say much good if you support an adulterer, misogynist, supreme liar”
*******
And our current president is the very first public servant to have ever committed any of those errors?
I prefer to be pragmatic & look at his lasting accomplishments. As in how many federal judges he’s put on the bench- I think it’s now over 150.
Not to mention our new (& future) Supreme Court justices, which I think is really at the heart of all the anti-Trump energy. At the end of the day, it’s always been about Roe.
“What is it that can fill the spiritual void in the hearts of the individual person?”
It is Love, not lust. God, The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Complementary Love, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage.