In case you thought suicidal immigration policies were limited to Obama and his allies, think again.
Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) evidently believes there is a constitutional right to emigrate to this country. In addition, he appears to believe that the First Amendment of religious freedom applies to everyone in the world and compels us to bring in anyone from every religion, irrespective of the problems endemic in some of its practitioners.
Take a look at this clip from Sean Hannity’s show last night and understand that we have no opposition party in Congress:
Hannity: We have resettled 1.5 million Muslim migrants in the United States. Senator Sessions had put out a piece where all these people that we took in to the country then come here and then get involved in terror activity. I put it up on my website, I urge you to take a look at it. And we take in 100,000 Muslim immigrants into the United States every year. Do we have to think about somebody who grows up under Sharia— believes that women can’t drive, can’t be seen in public without a male relative, four eyewitnesses for rape— do we have a clash of cultures we’ve got to consider? How do we know if they want to assimilate? How do we know if they want to bring terror into the United States? How will we ascertain that?
Well, first of all, I don’t think a religious test is appropriate. That’s not who we are. We believe in the first amendment of religious freedom. And I don’t think it’s the appropriate test because anybody can come under the guise of something else. It’s not hard for a person to claim that they are something that they’re not— like a Christian or something like that to get into the country. That is why we are calling for a security test. I think the test that maters is a security test because anybody can try and infiltrate this country by posing as something that they are not, so I don’t think that’s the proper test. I think a security test is the proper test.’
Ryan is essentially saying we have a First Amendment directive to A) bring in everyone to this country and B) not be selective based on religion.
Mr. Ryan, the entire founding of this country was predicated on fleeing a theocracy and settling a land where everyone can freely practice their religion as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone. Sharia law is the antithesis of that religious freedom because it foments a totalitarian mindset based on a theocracy.
As I noted in my manifesto on religious liberty, Madison was one of the most passionate believers in religious conscience, which he referred to as “the most sacred of all property,” yet he made it clear that it must only be honored “in every case where it does not trespass on private rights or the public peace.”
During the House floor debate over the First Amendment on August 20, 1789, James Madison explained the purpose of the Establishment Clause as follows: “Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience.”
Let’s be clear, everyone admitted into our country has the right to peacefully adhere to their religion. That includes Muslims, and as social conservatives, we certainly appreciate that a lot more than the secular Left. However, there is no affirmative right to emigrate here. And the notion that we will continue to bring in mass numbers of people who subscribe to the very mentality we are seeing in Europe that represents the antithesis of religious liberty and the epitome of compulsion that seeks to trespass on the rights of others is an anathema to our Founding values.
That we have the leader of House Republicans who doesn’t understand the basic tenets of popular sovereignty, jurisdictional sovereignty, the social contract, the First Amendment, religious liberty, and the realities of Islamic supremacism, should scare us all.
Daniel Horowitz is a senior editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.