For those who had the opportunity to watch the latest and greatest in the installment of debates for the GOP nomination, there was one comment by former Speaker Newt Gingrich that riled the Islaimsts at the Council for American-Islamic Relations -- that maybe, just maybe, a moral code that says the testimony of men is worth twice that of a women, and twice that of an unbeliever just might not be compatible with the U.S. Constitution...
CAIR of course didn't like that characterization, charging Gingrich with -- you guessed it -- being a bigot. The natural defense of any liberal losing an argument, you might say.
Of course, we had our own thoughts on CAIR's temper tantrum this afternoon:
“Speaker Gingrich was absolutely correct in his sentiment that Muslims should renounce Islamic shariah -- a code of conduct that much unlike Catholic canon law or Jewish Halacha law -- seeks to subvert and supplant American laws and civil liberties with an alien and abusive code that refuses to extend the same liberties it would claim for itself.
“What CAIR fails to mention in their cries for religious freedom is the utter lack of reciprocationshariah shows for its victims. Religious liberty is a two-way street, not a one way path to Mecca.
The facts remain facts no matter how hard CAIR tries to twist them into something else. There are simple questions that every Muslim must answer, among them a repudiation of violence, the equal station and treatment of women, and a committment to the U.S. Constitution.
Facts are, shariah doesn't permit for any of this. CAIR has some explaining to do as to why embracing shariah is somehow compatible with the idea of religious freedom, in any context anywhere in the world.