Your Dunkle Sans posted:

For as much as conservatives love to masturbate and self-fellate over constitutional rights, I don't see many people standing up for the first amendment in this case.

Funny, that.

GreyjoyBastard posted:

I suspect that in context Dunkle may be talking about the freedom of religion clause.

Helsing posted:

Woolie Wool posted:

Christianity and Judaism have both had systems of religious law and managed to secularize eventually, believing Islam can't despite being very similar to its Abrahamic predecessors is just dumb. Political Islam is political, it's driven by political forces and the solution must be political too. For the most part it didn't even exist until after World War II.

Woolie Wool posted:

We no longer have Christian or Jewish theocratic governments (please don't let Ben Carson with the election ) and most Christian-majority countries put some amount of effort into keeping Jesus out of government. Several hundred years ago, most of Christendom lived under Catholic canon law, which is basically the same poo poo as sharia in a different wrapper. Muslim-majority countries at one point were largely secular, until repeated American and Soviet political fuckery pretty much made radical Islam the only viable ideology left after the superpowers co-opted, corrupted, or destroyed all others. Iran had a bona fide democracy until the US rewarded them for their bold democratic experiment by overthrowing it and installing their pet tyrant in its place.

Political Islam has nothing to do with Islam being "incompatible with secularism" or other such nonsense, it is a condition that was created only a few decades ago and could go away if the West stopped constantly inflaming it. If Christians and Jews can live under democracy, so can Muslims, the religions are not really all that different.