Opposition to Muslim immigration to the non-Muslim nations may be justified

Submitted by Prashant, Nov 30, 2017 at 08:53

Dear Dr Pipes, There is overwhelming evidence that Muslims do not support democracy.

Most of Islamic majority nations in the world have no separation of church and state and are ruled by one or the other kind of autocratic regimes. The Islamic doctrine obligates Muslim rulers to advance the cause of Islam.

When Muslims immigrate to a nation or if they are a natural minority in a nation, their goal is almost always to demand more rights for themselves, create separate identities for themselves, and demand separate break-away Muslim-majority nations for them.

There are hardly any examples of Muslim immigrants demanding more democracy in the nations that they leave behind.

In the Islamic history the Medina and Mecca periods of Muhammad's life are discussed with pride (Muhammad followed one kind of policies when his followers were in minority and changed his policy after they attained the majority). Islamic doctrine likes freedom and democracy only as long as Muslims are in minority.

Given all this who can blame the anti-immigrant parties of Europe and elsewhere for fighting to save the western civilization from the Islamic onslaught?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".