I’ve heard many people claim that Ron Paul is pro-Islam and that he’d allow Sharia Law to take over the country. People cite several reasons for this and one of the main issues seems to be the ground zero mosque and his position that the government shouldn’t be involved. The claim that Ron Paul is for Sharia Law because he doesn’t think the government should be in the business of banning mosques doesn’t make sense and here’s why: One, Ron Paul has also criticized the government for giving the Islamic organization seeking to build the mosque forbearance on their property taxes, which is showing political favoritism towards Islam by the New York state government. If he was for Islam he wouldn’t be calling for strict rule of law which would work against them.
Ron Paul disagrees with the state showing favoritism towards the Muslims as much as he disagrees with the state having the ability to say no to the mosque because above all, he believes in the Constitution and it’s supremacy as law that can handle this situation fully if we were to simply enforce it equally across all groups and stop allowing political correctness to introduce favoritism. The first amendment talks specifically about the government’s regulation of religious institutions, and that is that there shouldn’t be any for good or bad, in opposition or in favor of. This would solve the entire issue of creeping Sharia Law because the rest of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution speak plainly against much of the tenets in it. A person’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness cannot coexist in the presence of another law that would deny those rights to half of society (women).
Our Constitution does not allow for religious murder, regardless of it’s guarantees against specific legislation dealing with a religion or religion as a whole. Sharia Law is wholly incompatible with the Constitution and therefore, Ron Paul is against Sharia Law because, as he has said in the past, all we need to do is follow the Constitution and many of these issues would cease to exist as problems.
People are up in arms over the mosque proposal, which I fully understand and fully support their desire and ability to express their opinions on the matter, however asking the government to step in and enforce your opinion instead of simply relying on public opposition to dissuade the organization from building, or even allowing the public animosity to show the Muslims in the community that hateful rhetoric from them will not be tolerated would go a long way to stop the mosque or leave it abandoned in short order. This is a case of individualism vs. collectivism once again. Our society has been brought up to demand our government solve our problems, when in fact the government usually is complicit, at the very least, in the foundations of those very problems we’re demanding they fix. Such is the case with the Ground Zero Mosque and therefore it does not make sense to pursue a resolution through the government, but rather one in which individuals, exercising their rights, put pressure on those who would deny them those rights and clearly demonstrate that Sharia Law will not be tolerated here in America.
Ron Paul’s policy isn’t pro-Muslim, it is pro-individual and pro-Constitutional law, which is in total opposition to Sharia Law’s collectivist mentality and destruction of individual liberties.
No comments:
Post a Comment