Byron Allen Black
Aug 9, 2017 · 2 min read

Just one point. If you accept that the imposition of this behavior (the practice of Islam) on human beings is totalitarian — and it certainly is, as defined (substituting ‘ummah’ for ‘state’) — the question then becomes how this is to interact with a culture that values ‘… The way people are allowed to speak freely, to do as they wish, to worship the God they want, to live their lives the way they wanted …’ European countries by and large have given in to the intolerance of a belief system where the penalty for apostasy is death: a ‘parallel’ legal system, religious police patrolling the ‘no-go zone’, killing of adulterers and homosexuals, establishment unwillingness to force immigrants to do anything to pull their own weight, and so on. Genital mutilation of infants or toddlers — male or female — is horrendous abuse, no matter what sort of yammering about ‘traditions’ and ‘religious intolerance’ goes on, yet when Germany attempted to outlaw this, its legal system was beaten back (Jews curiously united with Muslims on the issue).

‘Allah has given us Germany.’

In the U.S.A. there is no ostensible surrender to the totalitarian edicts: a daughter about to be murdered, a wife beaten, dietary fascism are all met with the traditional response from the state (monopoly on violence).

A simple proposal: ask any refugee or legal applicant for immigration whose law is to be followed as supreme: that of the state or that of the individual’s religious belief. If the answer is the latter the potential immigrant cannot by definition function as a member of western society, and must be turned away.

Totalitarians, once in power, brook no opposition: the Earth is clearly divided into just two parts: the ummah and the House of War.