It seems that the US entry “ban” isn’t about religion. But if it were…?

When I was at the creepy DEN airport yesterday – what’s with the enormous blue horse with the glowing demon-red death eyes? – trying to go home before DELTA (what else?) blew it, I saw a protest underway inside the creepy airport.  Outside the doors of the international arrivals area, but inside the terminal, there were, I am no making this up, Quakers and Muslims with anti-Trump, pro-Islam signs.

As far as I can tell from my reading, Pres. Trump’s (I want to repeat that for the Fishwrap – PRESIDENT Trump’s) policy isn’t about religion.  It’s about the association of certain countries with terrorism.

And so there are goofy protests going on and the liberal MSM is having a little mooing calf… or rather a blue demon-eyed death colt.  CNN?  Good grief!  It’s nothing but a hate-Trump meat grinder.  Unhinged.

In any event, if the libs say that this is about religion, okay, let it be about religion.  Here are a couple stories to consider as these “values” are brought to our shores.

Gateway Pundit:

Breaking: Lead Plaintiff In Trump’s ‘Muslim Ban’ Lawsuit Has Ties To Hamas, Supports Sharia

A Federal lawsuit in the United States District Court Eastern District of Virginia was filed against Trump on Monday and the lead plaintiff, Linda Sarsour has ties to terrorist organization, Hamas.

She supports Sharia Law.


The Gateway Pundit reported last week that Linda Sarsour who was one of the leaders of the ‘Women’s March’ is pro-Sharia law with ties to Hamas. We also documented Sarsour’s vicious attacks against Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Brigitte Gabriel for being anti-Islam activists. Both women have suffered greatly because of Islam’s barbarism. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a victim of female genital mutilation which makes Sarsour’s attacks on her even more egregious.

We also reported that the Council on American Islamic Relations CAIR would be filing a lawsuit against Trump’s so-called ‘Muslim ban’. We have obtained the legal complaint in full which shows the lead plaintiff isLinda Sarsour. You can read the document in full here.


Here’s something else from Israel Video Network:

The struggle for women’s rights in the World of Islam is perhaps the most alarming human rights issue in the entire world.

The concepts of honor and violence in the Islamic religion are often combined in a horrific manner.

This untold story is about the daily oppression of women across the world.

Educated and empowered women are perhaps the greatest threat to male dominance in the Islamic world. Muslim women are subjugated and persecuted and deprived of their humanity. The silence must be broken. The whole world must wake up!

Video is HERE

From The Guardian:

Yemeni child bride, eight, ‘dies on wedding night’

Yemen locals claim a girl has died of internal bleeding after marrying a man five times her age, but official denies allegations

An eight-year-old Yemeni girl has died of internal bleeding on her wedding night after marrying a man five times her age, a social activist and two local residents said, in a case that has caused an outcry in the media and revived debate about child brides.

Arwa Othman, head of Yemen’s House of Folklore and a leading rights campaigner, said the girl, identified only as Rawan, was married to a 40-year-old late last week in the town of Meedi in Hajjah province, north-western Yemen.

“On the wedding night and after intercourse, she suffered from bleeding and uterine rupture which caused her death,” Othman said. “They took her to a clinic but the medics couldn’t save her life.”

Othman said authorities had not taken any action against the girl’s family or her husband.


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, The Religion of Peace and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. 1173justin says:

    I live in an area that is predominantly Portuguese. I tell people their ancestors spent nearly 800 years driving out the Saracens. What the heck are you doing trying to invite them in again. I then provoke looks and say I don’t feel like having to teach my grandkids how to be guerilla fighters when I’m in my 60s. (I’m in my 30s)

    I had one guy tell me at my church’s men’s group that we should invite them in so we can evangelize them. I said It’s noble to be a martyr. It’s not noble to choose that option for other people’s children. This is not love, this is an addiction to a dopamine release in their brain when they think they’re being morally superior.

  2. Ages says:

    Repeal Hart–Celler.

  3. Kathleen10 says:

    We had a fair election. Someone won, someone lost. But the Left realizes they are out of power, and they can’t live with that. If he’s successful at improving life in these USA, that would be bad for the Left, so we have a full court press to delegitimize him, use the Leftist media to stoke up emotions in people who clearly don’t have enough intelligence to sift through things reasonably, and use Leftist politicians and church leaders to encourage further “action”. There you have it, recipe for I-don’t-know-what is coming.
    The Muslims and the Left are using our political correctness angst against us now, they have learned to work the system and present Muslims as “victims”. Our people are so callous and stupid they have entirely forgotten about 9/11 or Orlando or Paris or Fort Hood or any of the other hundreds of attacks. THEY DON’T CARE. It didn’t happen to them, it didn’t happen to their loved ones, so IT DOESN’T MATTER. It happened to other people, and they don’t care if other people live, or die, it’s all the same to them.
    Hey, this is no average problem of stupid people. This is a lot more. There is a level of hatred, rage against “the other”, dehumanizing of the other, if you disagree with me, you deserve to die. That attitude has been increasing, and now we have actors, people paid to put their face on tv, or perform in a show, using their public forum to gin up violence. We saw a march last week that was as vulgar, profane, and ugly as anything most of us could dream up in a nightmare, and that was touted as a “women’s march”. Young women and children were there, seeing people dressed up as female genitalia. Good people I know sent their young daughters! What has happened to people’s minds!
    We’re in a bad way. God help us. I just hope this administration holds the line. Hold it. Don’t cave in one iota to these people. We knew they were nuts and this was Custer’s Last Stand. Many of us felt if we didn’t win this election, it was over for the US. Please God he’s got enough moxie to refuse to back down from what he’s doing. God give him strength.

  4. Traductora says:

    The hideous horse sculpture has seriously bad ju-ju. The piece fell on the sculptor and killed him, but the city put it up anyway…it’s “art,” right?

    I think Delta is having problems it doesn’t want to discuss (this is not the first major outage) and it’s been targeted by Muslim “activists” – like the two who staged an “anti-Muslim incident” a few weeks ago – because of its support for US military members. I wouldn’t be surprised if this latest computer outage wasn’t connected with the immigration ban and actually a hacker attack meant to shut things down. That said, I think they’ve got to replace or at least fortify their system. My experience with Delta has always been pretty good, and their delay record is better than many airlines, especially given that they have a lot of southern routes where you never get in on time because of violent thunderstorms.

    But getting back to Islam, I saw a picture on a Spanish blog of some American Franciscans in the anti-Trump demonstration last weekend, marching in their habits and carrying a large poster with a graphical image of a woman wearing an American flag-patterned hijab. These poor fools. They’ll be the death of us all.

  5. bibi1003 says:

    Yet, the USCCB would have us believe that “The bond between Christians and Muslims is founded on the unbreakable strength of charity and justice.”


  6. joekstl says:

    In evaluating whether Trump’s ban is based on religion or terrorism you may want to consider two things: [In many cases, a distinction without a difference.] Rudy Giuliani’s comments [Who is not POTUS, btw.] on his involvement making a proposed Muslim ban legal by basing it on the risk of terrorism coming from seven Muslim countries. And, if terrorism prevention is really the aim of the ban, it’s curious to see which countries are not included, specifically Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates. Most of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and the other two countries have exported terrorists. Of course it helps to know that Donald Trump has business relationships with those three countries. [If I am not mistaken the Clintons did]

  7. LouLou says:

    That poor sweet child in Yemen, may she rest in peace in the arms of Jesus and Mary. My heart literally aches thinking about her. As for her ‘husband’, I can’t say / think what I want because I will have to go to Confession.

  8. Tony Phillips says:

    I haven’t noticed it for some time, but I recall when I used to come back to America, the little form we filled out asked if we’d ever been members of the communist party. In other words, an ideological test was applied. I don’t see much difference in asking whether someone’s a Moslem.
    We could of course play the game Abraham played with God. If 100% of communists (or Moslems) were bona fide terrorists, would you want to let them in the country? What if 90%? 50%? 10%? What if only 1% were terrorists–would you let them in?

    There are many good Moslems, but they are good in spite of Mohammedanism. There are good things in the Moslem religion (saying prayers, giving alms); these were lifted from Christianity and leavened with some rather nasty elements (like the Koran’s directions to crucify people).

    Some have likened this ban to the Know-Nothing anti-Catholicism of the 1800s. To be fair, there’s some truth there. Catholics did owe allegiance to a foreign temporal power, one that explicitly condemned the notions of religious liberty and the separation of church and state, and although that power proved to have feet of clay (the pope couldn’t hang on to the Papal States, let alone take over America), the influx of Catholics may have made the US rather less isolationalist and inward-looking. (That’s meant merely as a suggestion or observation, not a criticism nor anapprobation.)

    In any case, we should remember that, while Mohammedanism is by nature violent and expansionist, we in the West kicked that hornet’s nest by establishing the state of Israel, thereby imposing a sectarian state in what had for centuries been (to use modern parlance) a multi-cultural area. We reap what we sow.

  9. Peter in Canberra says:

    Roper: So now you’d give the Devil benefit of law!
    More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
    Roper: I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
    More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you — where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast — man’s laws, not God’s — and if you cut them down — and you’re just the man to do it — d’you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake.

  10. AnnTherese says:

    It’s curious that 9/11 hijackers were from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Lebanon. Yet none of those countries are banned.

    How anyone can believe Trump’s order will keep this country secure is beyond imagination. He just poured oil on and lit a match to the fire that is the growing hatred toward America. We will all pay for this. And he will get richer.

  11. Ellen says:

    I understand there is a push to allow men who were aides and interpreters to the US military in Iraq to be expedited to come to the US. I think that’s only fair. I know a woman here in town whose uncle worked for the US Embassy in Syria and he ought to be allowed to come (he refers to ISIS as that plague of locusts).

    What I hope is that Syrian Christians are allowed in to the US in greater numbers that Pres. Obama allowed. They are the ones in true danger.

  12. YoungLatinMassGuy says:

    If this is about religion… FANTASTIC!!!

    Let’s make this about religion!!! I’m ready to go on TV right now and make the case against muhammed, and the fake death-cult he founded, islam!

    NOTA BENE I do not care about muslims. One muslim can be and is totally different from the next. One muslim can be the nicest, kindest human being you’ll ever meet and would be horrified if they were faced with the truth of muhammed, and another muslim can be raping his newly-purchased Yazidid sex-slave, and know exactly what muhammed taught and be 100% okay with those teachings. My criticisms are only with the religion of islam, which is a philosophical system, and muhammed, an historical figure and the founder of islam, both of which are not classified as a “race” and both of which are open to criticism, and criticism of both does not make me a racist, anymore than me criticizing the Katana Sword from Japan makes me a racist against all Japanese people.

    Here are some reasons to ban islam from America:

    1. muhammed is “the perfect man” in islam, “Al-Ins?n al-K?mil.” The argument “muhammed was a man of his time and not everything he did is applicable for today.” does not work. muhammed’s example is the gold standard for islam and muslim behavior ordained by allah himself, and is therefore open to criticism, along with the doctrines of his religion.

    2. muhammed had sex with a nine year old girl, Aisha.

    3. muhammed had up to 800 men and boys who had surrendered beheaded.

    4. muhmmed raped his sex-slaves and allowed his thugs to do likewise.

    5. muhammed tortured the men of those sex-slaves to death.

    6. muhammed is quoted as saying: “I have been made victorious through terror.”

    7. muhammed ordered the executions of gay and lesbian people.

    8. muhammed had his critics assassinated.

    9. In islam, non-muslims, kafir (Arabic plural: kafirun) are semi-slaves, the lowest thing in creation quran: 37:18, 33:60, 23:97.

    10. In the quran us kafirs are to be mocked (quran 83:34).

    11. In the quran us kafirs can be beheaded (quran 47:4).

    12. In the quran us kafirs can be terrorized (quran 8:12).

    13. muslims are not to take kafirs as friends (quran 3:28).

    The points about the religion of islam and muhammed as well go on and on, and you get the drift. islam is totally opposed to the US Constitution and our entire way of life.

    Fr. Z. I hope and pray you never hold any sort “Interfaith Gathering” at whatever Church you are located.

  13. Tom A. says:

    Amen. Of course none of this would be happening if the Church did not abandon its mission to preach the Gospel instead of compromise with the world. The loss of objective reasoning and a believe in absolute principals has not only destroyed society, but it has decimated the faith. Modernism, as Pius X taught, is the sythesis of all heresies since it attacks not just an article of faith, but faith itself. Until the Church believes this again, the rot and destruction will continue.

  14. Pingback: Canon212 Update: People in Pews are Patriots, Not FrancisFlunkies – The Stumbling Block

  15. alexandra88 says:

    The meme of the apparent ‘ISIS flags in Dearborn’ is not true. This was an anti-ISIS rally and none of the flags were linked to the Islamic State.

  16. Kathleen10 says:

    AnnTherese, appeasement just does not work. Weakness and making nice is not going to evangelize or convince bloodthirsty killers to change their ways. Case in point, just happened Monday, when a Saudi frigate was hit by a suicide bomber in a little boat. Apparently the imbecile thought he was ramming a US warship. Now, Barack Hussein Obama just appeased the Iranians by giving them billions of dollars as he was scramming from our White House, so there’s your appeasement theory, crushed under the wheels of reality.
    I’ll open the window for your theory to fly out.

  17. AnnTherese says:

    Kathleen, I didn’t say I promoted appeasement. But I certainly don’t promote this ban. It will not make us more secure; and, there will be much more bloodshed as a result of Trump’s actions. That’s my theory. And– I pray with all my heart I’m wrong. We shall see…

    And that’s just regarding the US. I also am against the ban because I believe it is un-American and un-Christian.

  18. Semper Gumby says:

    Ellen: Good points.

  19. Semper Gumby says:

    AnnTherese: Well, this is 2017 and not 2001, thus the list is different. Notice the condition of the governments in, say, Libya or Somalia. A pause while vetting procedures are improved is reasonable. Nancy Pelosi singing last night “This Land is My Land This Land is Your Land” is a bit dramatic. Chuck Schumer weeping on national TV about this is a bit ridiculous.

    By the way, six of the seven countries in Pres. Trump’s executive order do not allow Israeli passport holders into their country. Some of them refuse entry to travellers who merely have an Israeli stamp in their passports. Libya, if I recall, prohibits Iranians and Syrians. Somalia does not prohibit Israelis, but Israel does prohibit travel to Somalia- unless you have a Mad Max vehicle and three-days rations (ok, I made up the part about vehicles and rations).

    Often Israeli customs officials, ask nicely, will provide a seperate document rather than stamping your passport.

  20. bookworm says:

    Yesterday there was a (relatively small) protest in my town against the new immigration policy. I was passing by as one of the speakers was quoting the Bible regarding our moral obligation to “welcome the stranger”. Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t the commands of Christ regarding welcoming strangers, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, etc. addressed to individuals rather than to national governments? In other words these are supposed to be personal acts of charity, not necessarily government programs. The notion that “welcoming the stranger” requires a no questions asked open border policy with little or no regard for national security makes about as much sense to me as assuming that “turn the other cheek” requires abolition of the police and court systems.

  21. joekstl says:

    Matthew 25 refers to the nations assembled before him. But if you want to go the individual route – then you may wish to call on individual legislators who are Christian to follow their religious imperatives.

    Now, if you propose that religious obligations are solely individual not governmental responsibilities you are opening the door to an argument that an abortion decision, due to an individual’s belief that at certain stages of development a fetus is not a person, is solely an individual decision not subject to government stricture.

  22. Semper Gumby says:

    AnnTherese wrote at 3:17 pm: “That’s my theory. And– I pray with all my heart I’m wrong. We shall see…”

    Ok, now we’re getting somewhere.

  23. Venerator Sti Lot says:

    Dr. Williams has an interesting look at Summa Theolgiae Q 105 Art. 3:

  24. Venerator Sti Lot says:


    I wonder how you could convince Dr. Qanta Ahmed how wrong she is, and “How anyone can believe Trump’s order will keep this country secure is beyond imagination”?

    I just read a transcription of part of an interview with her:

    “many of us, especially opposed to radical Islam, are welcoming it. We don’t want to prohibit refugees here forever. We, as Americans, want to help those in need, but we do think we have to make assessments based on the regions that are identified. Libya, the third front of ISIS. Somalia, beyond failed. It’s own government cannot travel outside its capital, let alone govern it. Iraq, we’re fighting ISIS, but special exception must be made for Iraqis helping US forces. So, we see it as very pragmatic. Muslim minorities that are persecuted badly in Pakistan and other places were thrilled that this draft wording includes penalizing those that commit honor violence or persecution of minorities. A lot of Muslims are subject to that. So, I think there is a positive feeling.”

    She added that Trump’s proposal to build safe zones in Syria is a “fantastic move, and one the last administration failed for years, when Muslim leaders asked President Obama to do the same. I think any Syrian that’s been displaced from their country would rather prefer to live there, if it was safe for them to do. That’s a strong move. Look at what’s happened, these people protesting in our city and around the world. Where were those protests when those babies were washed up? Nobody was carrying about the neglect of Syria for this — for the last six years. So these tears are rather hollow, in my opinion. It is a powerful move to argue for no-fly zone.”

  25. Kathleen10 says:

    AnnTherese, but your own words demonstrate you believe that Muslims are likely to get mad or annoyed or cranky because of the ban and increase their attacks. It is like pouring oil on a fire, you said, and that “we will all pay for this”. That is a climate of fear, and I’m just saying, that avoiding stoking up more hostilities and letting them do what they do and even inviting them into your homeland does not work. If it did, Germany and Paris would be Nirvana but they are developing Hell-holes. The only thing that deters the enemy at all is fear, fear of their own demise. That’s all. You are clearly afraid, and I don’t blame you, so am I, I’ve got no death wish and people I love and want to see grow up and live a life. But we can’t back down from an enemy that is doing what this one is. They are sworn to our destruction, promised to “conquer Rome”. Heh, it’s already been conquered but they must not know that. Anyway, at the very least we should do what President Bill Clinton said to Congress, which was basically the same thing President Trump just said. Clinton was given a standing ovation, we see the reaction to Trump, you’d think he suggested kicking puppies.
    I’m really curious as to what you think is un-American and un-Christian about this temporary ban. Can you explain specifically why you think that is the case? I must tell you, politics and attitudes can change. FDR set up internment camps for the Japanese American citizens during the war, and he’s a hero to the Left. All depends on what side of the fence you’re on, and what the elites want at the moment. We are all very manipulated by the power brokers.

  26. AnnTherese says:

    Yes, SemperGumby, this is 2017, which might explain, in Trump’s mind, why the other countries were chosen. But it’s curious that the countries that brought us our worst nightmares of terrorists are unaffected.

    Well. Not really so curious. We all know– national security is not Trump’s interest. It’s money and power. And he is having the time of his life with his power!

    This is all fascinating to watch, actually. Frightening, like watching a building implode in slow motion, but the most fascinating politics we might ever witness.

  27. Semper Gumby says:

    Kathleen10 and Venerator: Good points. John V: Useful links. AnnTherese: Note that the Obama administration also identified certain countries for travel restrictions. Certainly national security is an interest of Pres. Trump, see the links provided by John V. Your curiosity is well-expressed regarding 9/11 countries, I refer you to my comment of yesterday at 4:54 pm and to the links provided by John V.

    This is all fascinating to watch indeed, and we might agree, that in addition to executive orders of the Obama and Trump Administrations regarding improved vetting, that prayers for the well-being of this country are in order.

  28. 1173justin says:

    AnnTherese ,

    The ban is anything BUT un American. The Constitution in it’s preamble, says

    “… and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and OUR POSTERITY, (not the posterity of the world)…. do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of …”

    The first immigration act was passed in 1790. It restricted immigration to free white persons of good moral character. Variations of that lasted until 1965. When they passed the 1965 Immigration act, Ted Kennedy promised it wouldn’t change the demographics much. He lied, now people die.

    Your charge of a immigration ban being un Christian isn’t accurate either:

    Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
    – 1 Timothy 5:8

    As we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith.
    – Galatians 6:10

    It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.
    – Matthew 15:26

    Neither the Constitution (which I’ve taken an oath to defend) Nor the Catechism is meant to be read as a suicide pact.

    Trump isn’t perfect, but neither was Constantine. God may use him in the same way.

    Deus Vult

  29. Grant M says:

    If you peruse the hadiths and the Qur’an you can find ample justification not just for Sharia law, but also prima facie justification for the worst terrorist activity. For example, kidnapping schoolgirls to use as sex slaves can be excused by Sura 23:5-6. Of course many, maybe most Muslims would argue that such passages are no longer applicable these days, just as Catholics do not conclude from a reading of Leviticus 20 that all adulterers and homosexuals should be killed. For instance, I have seen a Government-endorsd edition of the Qur’an in Indonesian and Arabic, which in a footnote to Sura 23:5-6, insists that it was written for conditions that do not apply today. But of course, not all Muslims agree.
    Of course terror outrages like the Samarinda attack last November are quickly condemned by all Muslims. Everyone agrees that no true Muslin does such a thing. It’s more problematic when you turn to activities which are legal but unpalatable, such as the relentless, bullying campaign to see ( Christian) Jakarta Governor Ahok behind bars on a spurious charge of blasphemy. (He told Muslim voters that Sura 5:51 should not be used as an argument to dissuade Muslims from voting for a non-Muslim) The unsubtle hints that the law had better deliver the right decision or else, are unsettling. I remember the photos of the vast crowds in white rallying in the centre of the city last year. Not all Muslims support that campaign of course, but enormous numbers do, and it becomes difficult to excuse this one with the No-True-Muslim gambit. Of course you need to preserve charity towards individual Muslims, while towards Islam as a militant political/religious system you need to avoid dangerous naivety. My brother-in-law warned me frankly: “They hate our faith.”

  30. Venerator Sti Lot says:

    “After Donald Trump, now Kuwait imposes visa ban on five Muslim-majority nations including Pakistan”:

    Including, “The Kuwaiti Government has asked would-be migrants from the five banned nations not to apply for visas, as Kuwait City is worried about the possible migration of radical Islamic terrorists.”


    If you or anyone you know decide to contact their Embassy, do let us know if you manage to succeed in convincing them how useless and counterproductive this is, and how dangerously provocative it is for them to speak of “radical Islamic terrorists” or anything that our scrupulous Media could interpret as such.

  31. SKAY says:

    Anne Therese said:

    ” We all know– national security is not Trump’s interest. It’s money and power.”

    No Anne Therese, we do not “all” know that.

    I agree with others that Islamic immigration in large numbers is a Trojan Horse for the United States.
    Cardinal Burke has pointed out what Islamic immigration is really about.


    If you do not know real history you are doomed to repeat it.

Comments are closed.