Rev. Franklin Graham does not mince words when he speaks about the threat Sharia Law presents to America. He is not concerned with the attacks he has gotten from Sharia apologists over what he sees as his duty to warn America that Sharia is antithetical to Christianity and everything for which America stands.
In a recent interview, Rev. Graham advises those who would try to force Sharia on America to “Go back where you came from.”
Expanding on his message, Rev. Graham said that “We should be afraid of Sharia Law in America, and Muslims here who want to practice Sharia should go back to where they came from, to those nations that recognize Sharia law; we have our own laws here. We should be absolutely afraid of it. No question about it, because there’s no tolerance in Sharia law. It persecutes those that do not believe in Islam.”
His words stand in sharp contrast to those found in a squishy piece by Michael Gerson.
In a Capital Commentary article, Gerson, a show Republican whose desk at the Washington Post is undoubtedly near the front door, took up the side of allowing Sharia Law for those who want to live under it. This, of course, ‘sounds nice’; but liberal apologia usually does.
Gerson argued that Catholics and Muslims should be treated equally and there should be no governmental interference with their freedom to practice their religion. He commented, “First, religious liberty is owed, not just to individuals, but to institutions. It is not enough to say that citizens have the right to believe whatever they want. They also have the right to participate in religious groups that maintain their identity and standards.”
In his obvious reference to the Equal Protection Clause, Gerson holds that Islam and Catholicism are institutions equally deserving of protection for their doctrines and practices. This is exactly the type of dangerous sophistry honest observers like Rev. Graham warns us about. The “moral equivalence” argument that holds that one way of life is “just as valid as any other” is a cowardly abrogation of the responsibilities of anyone who has a “platform” as large and high as Gerson’s.
Where Gerson fails is exactly where Rev. Graham succeeds. The former refuses to honestly talk about why thinking non-Muslims recoil from Sharia’s savagery, while the latter entertains no rhetoric in support of “religious freedom for all.” Rev. Graham knows that “religious freedom” for Muslims means death for non-Muslims.
Thank you, Rev. Graham, for standing tall to protect us.