Category Archives: Commentary

Commentary

Is Islam tolerant of other world religions?

4 Comments

Here’s the top article right now from National Review. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Non-Muslims are barred from entering the cities of Mecca and Medina — not merely barred from building synagogues or churches, but barred, period, because their infidel feet are deemed unfit to touch the ground. This is not an al-Qaeda principle. Nor is it an “Islamist” principle. It is Islam, pure and simple.

“Truly the pagans are unclean,” instructs the Koran’s Sura 9:28, “so let them not . . . approach the Sacred Mosque.” This injunction — and there are plenty of similar ones in Islam’s scriptures — is enforced vigorously not by jihadist terrorists but by the Saudi government. And it is enforced not because of some eccentric sense of Saudi nationalism. The only law of Saudi Arabia is sharia, the law of Islam.

[..]Saudi Arabia, the country from which 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers hailed, abides no pluralism or religious freedom. Sure, the Saudis will tell you they allow Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims to visit their country, which is awfully big of them. Still, the regime prohibits these infidels from polluting the kingdom with their Bibles, crucifixes, and Stars of David.

[…]In an Islamic country like Saudi Arabia, where they are in a position to impose sharia in full, that is exactly what they do. In other places, the degree of imposition depends on relative Islamic strength, and it increases as that strength increases. Thus, the standard Muslim position on “Palestine,” where Islamic strength is growing but not yet dominant: Muslims are to be permitted to live freely within the Jewish state, but all Jews must be purged from Palestinian territories. Again, that’s not an al-Qaeda position; it’s the mainstream Islamic view. To the extent there is a mainstream dissenting view, it is that the Jewish state should be annihilated immediately — not that the two sides should live in reciprocally tolerant harmony.

Not very tolerant!

Commentary

Ten things Obama did to discourage companies from hiring

Leave a comment

This article was written a week ago on Investors Business Daily, and it is still in the top five!

Below is my favorite of the ten.

Excerpt:

Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act of 2010 (ObamaCare).

According to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, ObamaCare will hike taxes an estimated $15.2 billion, and the middle class will get whacked. We’ve already seen health insurance premiums go up because of costly ObamaCare mandates, which means less money available for spending on other things.

Moreover, employer mandates, taxes and penalties will reduce funds available for private-sector hiring. The mandates, taxes and penalties kick in when an employer has more than 50 employees, and they apply to all employees, so one effect of the law is to discourage small businesses — which create most American jobs — from hiring more than 50 people.

If a business has 45 employees and it needs to hire eight more people for a total of 53 employees, but it doesn’t offer health insurance or its insurance plan doesn’t satisfy the latest ObamaCare regulations, hiring those eight additional people would entail a $2,000 penalty for each of the 53 employees — a total of $106,000!

Many other provisions are likely to have unintended consequences, as well. The 2.5% excise tax on high-tech companies that produce pacemakers, heart valves, stents, defibrillators and other medical devices that help improve the quality of life or save lives is an estimated $20 billion hit. Anything that increases the cost of doing business is bad for jobs.

A mandate, by the way, is when the government forces all insurance company plans to cover elective things like abortions. When insurance companies have to cover more politically correct lifestlye choices, the premiums that normal people pay go up to cover the weird stuff. Are you a normal person? Did your medical premiums go up, or did you lose medical coverage through your employer? If so, then thank Obama – he needed to make sure that all his favorite special interest groups (e.g. – Planned Parenthood) got their money.

Read the remaining nine here.

Commentary

What should we think about Obama’s use of the Bible?

20 Comments

Story here on the NewsReal blog. (H/T Mary)

Excerpt:

Dr. Jeffrey Siker, professor of religion at Loyola University and a liberal Presbyterian minister, was featured in the LA Times yesterday for an academic paper he did on Obama’s use of the Bible in public speeches and writings.  His findings show a candidate and President willing to pick and choose scripture that Obama considers pluralistic and in support of his policies.  Siker presents this fact as positive pragmatism instead of what it really may be – sacrilegious ambition.

[…]Obama uses “brother’s keeper” to convince Americans to support socialist policies.

“This vision of being my brother’s keeper has important political and social consequences when it comes to such issues as healthcare, consumer protection or education reform.” – Siker

The problem with that interpretation is that the “brother’s keeper” passage has nothing to do with supporting welfare policies.  Cain has just killed his brother Abel, and God was condemning Cain for the sin by asking Cain where his brother was.  Cain said he didn’t know where Abel was because he’s not responsible for him.  God does not respond by saying, “Yes you are Cain.  You are responsible to make enough money to pay not only for your healthcare but also Abel’s.”

Quoting the Bible to teach socialism only works on people who haven’t read the Bible. You can’t get socialism from the Bible, because there is no passage that teaches that Jews and Christians should embrace the idea of wealth redistribution by government. The Bible teaches private, voluntary charity.

Related posts