Diary

Is banning Muslims from entering the U.S. really an unconstitutional ban on religion?

Critics of Donald Trump wasted no time jumping on his recent statement that he favored placing a ban on Muslims entering the United States until the congress can “figure out what the hell is going on” with the radicalization of so many Muslim youth. This, after the massacre of 14 civilians and wounding of 17 others at a Christmas party in San Bernardino, CA on December 2, 2015.

Trump’s proposal has been called anti-American and unconstitutional because it’s just “not who we are as Americans.”  Really?

In violation of the constitution? Where in the constitution does it say that? I have as much respect for the First Amendment as anyone, but the First Amendment is neither absolute nor does it enshrine a legal mandate to engage in national suicide as a price to pay for its free exercise.

Incredibly two FOX legal analysts, Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle, both stated on the Bill O’Reilly show that it was a violation of international law (citing the United Nations of all places) and the U.S. Constitution to discriminate on the basis of religion. They were adamant but wrong on this point. The fact that those who may be screened are Muslims is not the reason for screening, but rather because of legitimate security questions with radical practitioners of that religion who must be kept out of our country. The issue is ideology, not religion. Moreover, Trump said the ban would be temporary until the congress could figure out how best to achieve this objective. What’s unconstitutional about that?

And I won’t even go into the ranting of the “Do you still hate women” FOX news host Megny Kelly who literally levitated from her chair when railing against Trump on her evening show, “The Kelly File.” She was literally frothing over what she wrongly perceived as a wounded carcass, coyly coaxing the republican party to ban Trump from its national ticket. Yeah, Megyn, that’s the way to go.

What would these critics have us do, open our nation’s doors and then ask questions later for fear that we might offend some?

Would they prefer we set up background checks, which have proved to be ineffective, since Jihadists are experts at concealing their true objectives, and pass immigrants through without asking any questions about their religious beliefs? The truth is: while not all Muslims are terrorists, the vast majority of terrorists operating in the world today are Muslims. The ban, which Trump said, and many in the press and both political parties and press ignored, would be temporary, is entirely constitutional because it is based on determining what standards a responsible government should use to screen out those of the Islamic faith who subscribe to a radical extremist reading of their religion — an ideology that is both anathema to our way of life and a clear and present danger to our national security.

Let’s be very clear about this there is not a religion on the face of this earth that has such a sizeable number of adherents to extremism and unspeakable barbarity as does the Muslim faith.  Beheadings, mutilations, mass murders, crucifixions, honor killings, genocide of Christian and Jews, kidnapping, rape and torture on a massive scale? Did Trump’s critics miss the fact that there are parts of Paris that not even French police will enter because Muslims intimidate even the police? Indeed, if Islamist extremists could get their hand on a nuclear, biological or chemical weapon , and sneak that weapon into the United States, who doubts that they would use it without hesitation?

The president not only has a duty to protect and defend the people of the United States from all enemies both foreign and domestic, but to faithfully execute his office as commander-in-chief to ensure that the safety of the American public is secured.

Indeed, while Trump’s comments regarding tightening of rules for entering the United States to a select group whose religion has been hijacked by a troubling number of ideological Islamic extremists bent on bringing violent Jihad to the United States, President Obama, by contrast, and a growing number of  local communities have, with reckless disregard for the public safety, opened our southern borders to millions of foreign citizens whose allegiance and intentions are unknown. Obama and the democratic party’s position, with the full cooperation of the Department of Homeland Security, which in my humble opinion should be disbanded, is far more troubling than anything Trump has said — and republicans should know better, instead of attacking him for his comments.

As for Trump’s comments, I suspect the public sides with him and understand full well what his critics are up to. It’s called political correctness. And WE ARE SICK OF IT!