If Congress passed a law pouring billions of tax dollars into the Catholic Church, or fundamentalist Baptist churches, the outrage across the land would be widespread—and entirely justified.
Yet Barack Obama, who never seems to be held accountable for anything, has relentlessly poured billions of American tax dollars into the Muslim Brotherhood-backed gangs attempting to take over Egypt. He does it in the name of American interests. Yet what American interests are served by forcing productive, tax-paying American citizens to support this organization, or others like it in the Middle East?
Most Americans, even those who pay taxes, yawn at developments in Egypt or elsewhere in the Middle East. But a portion of their earnings are going to subsidize gangs (more politely called governments) who support ideologies they would never support voluntarily.
Wikipedia reports, ‘The Muslim Brotherhood’s stated goal is to instill the Qur’an and Sunnah as the ‘sole reference point for …ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community … and state.”
Dailycaller.com states that ‘The [Muslim] Brotherhood’s policies call for a regional Islamic dictatorship, a subordinate apartheid-like status for non-Muslims and undying hostility to any majority-Jewish jurisdictions, such as Israel.’
The Muslim Brotherhood’s stated credo is, “Allah is our objective; the Quran is our law, the Prophet is our leader; Jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations.”
Do you need it any clearer, you social liberals who still love Obama out there? Obama is on their side, in Egypt. To my knowledge, none of the warring factions in that conflict are rational or defensible. But why take sides with militant Muslims at all — ever?!
Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry insist that the United States supports ‘democracy’ in Egypt. This is code for: “Have elections because the Muslim Brotherhood will win.” But the Muslim Brotherhood, who continues to enjoy Obama’s support, is democratic only if you subscribe to the Islamic religion. As with all things Islam, it denies the separation of church and state, openly and in principle. If you follow Muslim law, you’re safe; if you disobey Islamic religious law, the government may do with you whatever it wishes.
Is this the kind of ‘pro-democratic rebellion’ the nation founded on the principles of individual rights, including separation of church and state, should be supporting with tax dollars?
U.S. Senator Rand Paul nails the issue when he says, “While President Obama ‘condemns the violence in Egypt,’ his administration continues to send billions of taxpayer dollars to help pay for it.’
Exactly right. Any political system which criminalizes the separation of church and state, and denies rights to anyone who does not adopt the state established religion, is—by definition—no friend of a Constitutional republic grounded in support for individual rights.
It continues to amaze me how Obama gets a free pass on his support for all things Islamic. People who admire Obama point to his support for legalization of gay marriage. How well does gay marriage square with Sharia law, a totalitarian system of religious fundamentalism which punishes infidels on sight? Gays and lesbians are murdered in Islamic totalitarian states. So are a lot of other people who defy the church-state authorities. Women are worse than second-class citizens. Any objection to that, Obama-worshipping citizen-feminists out there?
Doesn’t it occur to any of Obama’s supporters that he’s being violently inconsistent by using tax dollars to assist in the spread of militant Islam, while supporting gay marriage at home? Doesn’t this seem the slightest bit disingenuous, or questionable?
I have not yet encountered an Obama supporter who will address—much less answer—this question.
Some of his supporters keep insisting ‘democracy’ is all that matters. So long as Egypt has democracy, then U.S. support is justified. But democracy means majority vote. It doesn’t have anything to do with individual rights. In an Islamic democracy, gays, lesbians, independent women, or anyone else who eschews Sharia law may be prosecuted or put to death, if that’s what the majority wills. Why is majority will such a sacred cow?
Let’s bring the issue closer to home. What would supporters of Obama say if he proposed billions of dollars to be sent to the Catholic Church—which still opposes gay marriage, not to mention reproductive rights? They would call for impeachment. Why no response at all when he sends billions of tax dollars to militant Islamic regimes?
I’m not suggesting that the military government in Egypt is necessarily any better, morally speaking. But I am saying that Obama, as well as his bipartisan partners-in-hypocrisy in Congress, ought to be held accountable for their glaring inconsistency. Just once.
Be sure to “friend” Dr. Hurd on Facebook. Search under “Michael Hurd” (Rehoboth Beach DE). Get up-to-the-minute postings, recommended articles and links, and engage in back-and-forth discussion with Dr. Hurd on topics of interest.