Ban Islam

It's been a pleasure to discuss and debate this topic. My opponent has suggested that Islam and democracy can coexist without instigating conflict and terror in society. This is a logical fallacy by nature. Islam's fundamental values oppose democracy, freedom, liberty and secularism. Take the United Kingdom for example. The UK has a significant Muslim population (around 5% of the total population). According to polls conducted by the Gatestone Institute, more than 100,000 British Muslims sympathize with suicide bombers and other Islamic extremists. Furthermore, only one in three (34%) British Muslims would report jihadist activity to the police. This is not a few radicals, it's the overwhelming majority. This brings me to my opponent's answer to my question. My opponent answered yes to "if Islam became the religion of the United States, will democracy and freedom function the same way as it is today? ". On the contrary, many American Muslims would be in favor of Sharia Law over American democracy. The fact of the matter is the "peaceful" Muslim majority means nothing because they stay silent when the radicals take over. This is the reason why groups like ISIS are so successful in Muslim countries. My opponent claims there are verses in the Quran which command Muslims to be loyal to their countries. I want to ask for proof for these statements from the Quran. What chapter and what verse do these statements appear? I can't take my opponent's word for it. There is a saying that "The radical Muslim wants to kill you, and the peaceful Muslim wants the radical Muslim to kill you". Muslims deep in their heart have a hatred for non-Muslims because their god hates non-Muslims. In comparison, the God of Judeo-Christianity is a God of love and therefore most Christians are loving people. I won't go into much on that as that would be for another debate. As for my opponent's criticism of the Holy Bible, the so-called violent verses are not verses of violence and hatred towards any religion but rather military protocol in the nation of Israel. In other words, these are close-ended verses and wouldn't make sense to be applied anywhere except that time and place in the Bible. However, the violent verses in the Quran are open-ended because they can apply to any generation. The issue is not context but the text itself. My opponent continues to quote verses in the Old Testament which are for the Jews and Israel but fails to quote any verses in the New Testament for Christians. My opponent simply quotes verses without researching to whom they were written to. These military verses of the Old Testament are not for Christians, period. I challenge my opponent to give me one verse where Lord Jesus commands violence. We give importance to the words of Jesus not military commands in the Old Testament taken out of context. Finally, my opponent talks about isolation of Muslims from society. This is true to some extent BECAUSE Muslims terrorize Americans and Christians abroad. Since Muslims won't speak up against radicals, Westerners can logically conclude Muslims are an enemy of the West and cannot be trusted. My opponent seems to suggest isolation somehow justifies the killing of 3,000 innocents in 9/11 or any other attack carried out by Muslims. In conclusion, I would like to thank my opponent for having a civil, and respectful debate. While there are many things my opponent had said that are false, I respect him/her for the input. I would like to ask voters to see both sides of the argument and choose what they feel is right. There is no doubt Muslims and extremism and anti-democracy go hand in hand. While we can be optimistic about how Islam is peaceful and most Muslims are peaceful, the sad reality is Islam is a religion of violence and hatred. For the sake of all those who died in the hands of Muslim terrorists, please vote for me. Thanks and God bless!