Since Donald Trump suggested a halt, at least temporarily, to allowing Muslims into the country, he and those who agree with him have been denounced as racists and Islamophobes. Are they, or do they, have a justifiable concern? Americans should use hard facts and common sense instead of relying on emotion to decide the issue. A good place to begin is with this George Santayana warning: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
On the subject of Muslim assimilation, we have the excellent example of what has happened in Western Europe. We should ask if it could also happen here. Obviously Muslim assimilation in Western Europe has not gone well. Aside from the rash of sexual assaults and lawlessness resulting from the recent Muslim refugees in places like Cologne, Germany, throughout Western Europe Muslim enclaves have sprung up. In England in 2008 a Pakistani-born Church of England bishop, Michael Nazir-Ali, warned that there were “no-go” areas across Britain that were too dangerous for non-Muslims to enter. In 2011 Soeren Kern of the Hudson Institute documented the proliferation of such no-go zones throughout Europe, calling them “microstates” where Sharia law prevailed. In Germany a police commissioner confessed that there are areas where police do not enforce German law. Nothing indicates that this situation isn’t getting any better; instead it seems to be getting worse.
Progressives, who ignore the failed economic policies of Western Europe, claim that this could never happen here. They do have a point in that Europe has never been too good at assimilation. And America has traditionally prided itself as a melting pot, albeit an imperfect one given the existence of China Towns, Little Italy’s, and New Saigon’s. But that was in traditional America before the progressive policies of diversity came into existence. It also ignores the reluctance of some religious groups such as the Amish, Hadassah Jews, and others to accept mainstream American values. Wouldn’t that also apply to fundamentalist Muslims?
Progressives also ignore the fact that while these non-Muslim groups were content to be left alone and in general followed our laws, fundamental Muslims follow a religion that is much more aggressive, even pugnacious toward other ways of life. Areas in the United States where there are large numbers of Muslims who entered the country as refugees, such as the Cedar Riverside section of Minneapolis, and Dearborn, Michigan have seen a more belligerent behavior by them toward those they consider infidels. This is very similar to what happened in England and France as Muslims there grew in numbers.
Just last December a Muslim woman, Carolyn Walker-Diallo, was sworn in as a civil court judge in New York by placing her hand on the Quran. She was wearing a hijab during the ceremony. One hopes she and other Muslim judges and public officials like Rep. [score]Keith Ellison[/score], D-Minn., will follow American law, which is often contrary to what is in their holy book. But it is still a legitimate concern that they might not.
The same concern can be raised about progressive judges and public officials concerning Islam. In a New Jersey case, later overturned, a judge refused a restraining order against a Muslim who had committed spousal rape because the under the Quran it wasn’t considered rape. In a Pennsylvania case a judge dismissed charges against a Muslim who assaulted a man wearing a zombie Mohammed costume in a Halloween parade. The judge in that case claimed the charges were dismissed for insufficient evidence, but then went on to lecture the victim, calling him a doofus and saying, “I think our forefathers intended to use the First Amendment so we can speak with our mind, not to piss off other people and cultures – which is what you did. It’s unfortunate that some people use the First Amendment to deliberately provoke others.” There was no recorded lecture to the Muslim defendant that he shouldn’t have assaulted the man for wearing a mask that offended him.
And this is why the question of Islamic assimilation is a justifiable concern. In a 2012 Wenzel Strategies poll 40 percent of Muslims in America believe they should not be judged by U.S. law and the Constitution, but by Sharia standards. Under Sharia women are not treated equally and the Halloween costume wearer could have been killed with impunity. That is not assimilation.
So what should be done? For starters we shouldn’t be admitting anyone, Muslim or non-Muslim, who doesn’t want to become an American. That means changing our refugee policy and securing both boarders so we can determine who’s entering the country and why. It means deporting those that fail to meet basic standards of loyalty to our country and way of life. The diversity programs so loved by progressives should stress being an American first and anything else second. There are many Muslims and many others can do and have done this, but those were people who wanted to come here and adapt. We should insist that all our immigrants do so in the future.
Dr. Ben Carson summed it up very well when he said, “We must insist on assimilation. Immigration without assimilation is an invasion. We need to tell folks who want to come here [that] they need to come here legally. They need to learn English, adopt our values, roll up their sleeves, and get to work.”
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com