I’m not aware of any attempts to impose Sharia law in the United States. I am, however, aware of efforts by right wing Christians to impose their religious beliefs on the rest of America.
Passing laws to mandate the display of the 10 Commandments in public schools?
Directing public funds (vouchers) to private religious schools while excluding Islamic and secular institutions?
Basing reproductive health laws on their religious beliefs?.
CINOs: christian in name only. H/T to Nina Simmonds. I was using American taliban, but CINO removes an implication that their beliefs or behavior are American.
This has been evident since I was a child in Christian church Sunday school in the 1960s — how I should look, how I should dress, how I should be in relation to men. Quit then; not going back.
It is downright scary when our, apparently, illiterate Republican members of Congress are unable to read and understand the Constitution. They seem to have trouble with the incomprehensible eighteenth century language, kind of like the Prez. Maybe we should make being able to read and understand the Constitution. Of course, that would discriminatory to the illiterate. I will clarify something for these Congressional dolts: The United States was founded as a secular country! It was not founded as a Christian or Christ/Judeo country.
It was initially mostly Christian, though, and just go back and reread the Declaration of Independence and the 1st Amendment. All laws ultimately come back to moral and ethical principles, at least to start with. "No false testimony under oath" looks a lot like "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" which looks an awful lot like the definition of lying in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, namely "lying is speech that is meant to lead another into error." But boy, ethical and moral principles—principles of ANY kind—is not so apparent these days, especially not in the last decade. This tit-for-tat nightmare seems unending and will end in disaster for the country, like Sara Longwell says. And JVL, for that matter. NB: these "MAGA Christian Soldiers" are absolutely 💯 not exempt from the rampant evil stupidity and cruelty evident everywhere on the left and the right. We are caught in a downward spiral and to quote a disfavored, hypocritical politician and founder of this country, "I tremble for my country when I remember God is Just."
But no legislation has been proposed or passed to ban dogs anywhere in the US. You’re posting some random person’s views which have not been proposed or passed into law in any legislative forum and equating that to actual laws passed requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in schools.
It is less of a threat in terms of the degree of support behind it. But there are two things to weigh on the opposite side. One, it is more intrusive on individual liberty than requiring public facilities to post the Ten Commandments. Two, while you didn't quite claim that there is no effort to impose sharia, I wanted to point out that there actually are people who would do just that given the power to do so.
The anti-sharia caucus deserves to be pilloried for conflating that with individuals choosing to live according to sharia. But rooting out such conflation from civic life should not blind us to ignore anyone calling for enacting laws because of sharia mandates.
Understood and appreciate the dialogue. My point is that none of these sharia law efforts have even been proposed in any legislative forum, let alone passed into law. There is no actual support for them in any meaningful way that would make it an even slightly likely occurrence that they would become law. It's getting people worked up for something that is as unlikely as an alien abduction. But at the same time, there are actual laws that impose the Christian religion on everyone regardless of their belief system. So wouldn't that be more of an immediate concern than some hypothetical sharia law ban of dogs that is never going to be seriously discussed? Is it really ok for children who are not Christian or even religious have the commandments of one religion presented to them every day as if they are state-sanctioned?
Where are the 10 commandments in public schools? I'm a product of mixed private and public school education from grade school through college, and I never, ever saw the 10 Commandments posted *anywhere,* including in my Catholic school, my private school, my public and private universities...not anywhere.
As of April 2026, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Alabama have passed laws requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. These laws, heavily supported by Republican lawmakers, generally mandate that the documents be displayed in 5th-12th grade classrooms and common areas, often using donated, large, and readable posters.
Scott - To be clear, I won't claim that there is no effort to impose sharia law (hard to prove the negative). What I do say is: I've never had anyone show me evidence of any consideration by any jurisdiction of civil government in the US to impose sharia law on the public.
May we also differentiate between "there actually are people who would do just that [impose sharia] given the power to do so" and your original post saying, "Here's an example of activists trying to impose one tenet of sharia on the general population"?
Admit I didn't watch the whole YouTube so don't know how far this dog issue proceeded into potential governmental consideration (let alone action). My observation is that I'm aware of individuals with some (to me) far out ideas they'd happily impose on all of us 'given the power.' Some of them even initiate petitions online, speak at their HOA or school board meeting, write a legislative rep about their pet issue (pun intended; both meanings apply)... I'm ever-grateful to live in a country where our regular democratic republic procedures provide numerous checks & guardrails against such ideas finding their way into regulations of The State. I also recognize the threat to others' rights increases considerably with either the number of individuals advocating for the intrusion, and/or the wealth and political power of the advocate.
F'rinstance, knowing Trump appears to disdain canines, we could be more worried about our pets if he starts talking about an Exec Order to ban domestic dog keeping. A Prez has means, motive, and opportunity to be able to impose that restriction on us at least until courts intervene. Nerdeen Kiswani does not, nor would any rando howling whatever nonsense on a street corner as passersby hurry along, avoiding eye contact.
That is Oren Cahanovitc, a seemingly likable Israeli tour guide with an unmistakably anti-Arab point of view. A good search also shows that Kiswani never called for the installation or adoption of Sharia law, and was joking about dogs during a public discussion about excess animal feces in public parks following a major snowfall in February.
What on earth are you talking about? Where, exactly, is the federal or state government passing laws to even allow the posting of the 10 Commandments anywhere in public, much less in public schools? Vouchers go to private schools, which are often religiously based, and secular schools, too. Taxpayers fund public schools, which are producing inadequate reading and writing and math and science in many places, especially in Detroit (in my home state) and in other urban centers. This is terribly unfair to kids, especially kids from poorer families and for students with disabilities. It's awful, and that's without getting into the sexual ethic the public schools teach, over parental objection, disguised as "anti-bullying." Anti-bullying is a fabulous concept, but the execution has been most unfair and unethical and unequal. As for "banning reproductive health care based on religion," that's not what's happening. Chemical abortions can be gotten by mail, via a phone call, sent to "a friend," without any verification. Women are being forced, poisoned by their abusers, pressured, coerced, and are dying because they are too scared to admit they had a chemical abortion. These are often done too far along, since there is no federal regulation barring an ancient study from the 90's done with "ideal" patients (totally healthy, on no other meds, very, very early along). Women are going through what amounts to labor pains at home, alone, in pain, bleeding out, seeing the very human remains of their child in the toilet or shower or on a pad, thus traumatizing them and in some cases killing them due to incomplete abortions, where fetal remains or placental bits are retained. It's not "care" to pass out medication with severe side effects like candy for a few hundred dollars to anyone who asks for it over the phone including abusive men and traffickers who are doing this with minors, even. It's not reproductive care to do surgical abortions, either, not unless there's a true emergency and the prospect is losing both the mom and the baby. How do I know, you say? I've been there. I had a teen pregnancy, and had an awful time of it, in and out of hospital for months with preterm labor and bleeding and such. My daughter was expected to be very premature and possibly die in the NICU. I somehow made it to full term, and she died of a cord accident probably related to my undiagnosed chronic illnesses. My second was a boy. With a very violent, emotionally and mentally and spiritually abusive young man. I only made it to 22 weeks that time, while all the while I was being pressured by my high risk doctor to abort. She said "what right do you have to bring a child into this world in such circumstances," as though she didn't hear me saying that I had a plan with my social worker to get gone with my son from the hospital into a secret women's shelter until I could move. I was also very poor and very sick. I ended up losing him to a placental abruption which turned into a medical disaster in which I briefly died and my son and the placenta causing the hemorrhage had to be surgically removed in an emergency D&E. I woke up in agony, in every possible way, in the ICU on a PCA pain drip because of repurfusion syndrome. My third baby was conceived in a rape. One of 3, by the way. The man was initially charged with 4 counts of 1st degree criminal sexual conduct, though the case was pleaded to "assault with intent" because the prosecutor got a much bigger, media sensation, rape-murder case on a local college campus. My rape crisis counselor, who I saw just the day I'd found out I was pregnant, said she had "an arrangement" to get "the problem taken care of" for free since I was a survivor of rape. She didn't hear my protests, or even hear my religious (and at the time, secular) background. Then I had the preliminary hearing for the case, and the day after that, I miscarried at home. I saw the tiny body of my child, whom I had not decided whether to keep or give up for adoption yet. I hemorrhaged at home, again, from the miscarriage. A friend took me to the ER, where I got another transfusion of blood and blood products to fix the anemia and blood loss. The resident I saw said, "your body did such a good job cleaning itself out, this saves you the trouble of getting it taken care of later." HE didn't give two craps about my (charted) religious background. His callousness to me made me so furious that if I could've gotten up, I don't know what I'd have said or done.
So I've been there, done that. Seen the bodies. Buried my babies, but for the miscarried one which I SAW but couldn't get out of the toilet to bury. Do you know what it's like to flush a baby down the toilet? Thousands upon thousands of women DO know. Finally, basic logic will tell you that elective abortion isn't "care." It's taking a life, every time it's successful. What are pregnant women pregnant WITH, exactly? If it weren't a human being, it wouldn't be anything but like extracting an infected tooth or an infected appendix or tonsills or adding a chest port or a feeding tube (all of which have happened to me). But pregnant women are pregnant with human offspring, which if left alone will generally grow into a newborn, an infant, a toddler, all the way through the developmental stages of human life until senescence and natural death. The basic rights of humans, based on fundamental principles and basic human rights, include the right to be alive in the first place, or nothing else matters. You don't have to belong to or not belong to any religion or none to understand this. When fundamental rights conflict, the most fundamental ought to win, and that's the right to be alive in the first place. My right to bodily integrity was violated over and over and over again, since my experience with CSA and SA as an adult. I won't tell anyone how to best live their lives, but what I will say is that your right to do whatever makes you happy stops when there's another human involved.
How is this all related to "sharia law?" Islam doesn't ban abortion, just FYI. So you should get along just great! This is why there's always been a so-called red-green alliance, between abortion rights advocates who also tend to care very little about basic freedoms and basic rights just like the most restrictive regimes on earth these days don't care. Funny how that works. And I do NOT want Muslim refugees and immigrants barred from the country. It's shameful how we abandoned our interpreters in Afghanistan under Biden and banned their immigration some more and kicked people out who we promised to save if they helped us. Those pictures and that horror from our troops flying away with men clinging to the airplanes and falling to their deaths were absolutely appalling. Where is the humanity in abandoning Ukraine to Russia, either? There seems to be no end to the evils this debated country will permit. Evil. Yes, I said it.
Please think about these things and how they all relate. Pope Leo XIV was entirely correct in his criticisms of this country. Trump is monstrous, but so are some so-called progressive policies.
You mean the Stable Genius needed someone to teach him, he was not born with the knowledge of Athena already implanted? Aren't narcissists born, not made?
I'd choose to have dogs in my house over Republican politicians any day - I don't think they're housetrained. As an atheist, I find Islam to be no more offensive than any of the other religions. All of them have rules that can interfere with the freedoms I hold 'sacred'. I'm happy to let people do whatever they want to do so long as it doesn't interfere with others' ability to do the same. And a call to prayer is no worse than a lot of regular noises in public places (like sirens, train whistles, and clocks that chime the hours).
One of my core beliefs is that people should be free to live and do however they want as long as they are not harming anyone (including themselves). Forcing others to accept your beliefs over their own is harmful.
Unfortunately, there is a large part of our citizenry that cannot accept anyone who is not white, yhe “right” kind of Christian and male.
"Themselves or anyone" includes humans at all stages of development and age, including human babies in the womb. Just...putting that out there, since these comments are wretchedly anti-Catholic and anti-life, I've noticed. Not that one has to be Catholic to be pro-life, because the ethical principles are obvious if you think them through and there are plenty of secular people (me very much included in the past, and I've been through 3 crisis pregnancies which all ended in the natural deaths of my babies at various stages from full term to 22 weeks to 8 weeks) who are pro-life using universal principles of ethics and logic. My rights stop at the end of another person's nose, and that includes humans who haven't yet been born or who are dying. Good grief, the hysterical tone in the comments is depressing. It's not only the "MAGA Christian Nationalist Right" that's out to lunch these days.
Absolutely! - some even have a formal religious name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelus ...in Catholic elementary school late 1950s into '60s I remember this. Every. Single. Day. Very disruptive to our lunchtime schoolyard games of tag or whiffle ball. After that, never lived close enough to a Catholic church to hear 'em but have read/heard it's still done at least some places in US
Yeah, well, no Catholic churches today do that, barring maybe a clock here and there. Probably because it was irritating to neighbors and got banned. I don't have a problem with calls to prayer of whatever variety, because I pray (I'm a practicing Catholic) so why would I be bothered by either? Acts of vandalism and arson and violence are happening to Jewish and Catholic churches and schools across the world. But banning immigration and denaturalizing citizens is not the way to go.
(Frankly, the Pilgrims would be horrified by the theology of most of today’s evangelical right. It’s ahistorical to think today’s right wingers would be any more accepted as good Christians by the Mayflower’s passengers than were their contemporaries, Catholic and Protestant alike. But right wingers Christian culture by and large doesn’t know its history, so…)
(And lolz for days quoting John Adams and thinking you’ve scored a win for evangelicalism. Again: these people are clueless.)
Protestants and Catholics were at war with each other in the 15th century. It may have been the 14th or 16th, but still 2 Christian religions discounted each other,
Brandon Gill probably doesn’t know this(he shouldn’t be paid to think), but neither did most Americans. The utter stupidity of these people is exhausting.
That idiotic statement about the Mayflower gives a clear picture as to what fools these f-ing knuckle-dragging Neanderthals are. Many who were sailing on the Mayflower were hardcore radical Calvinist Puritan Separatists with a strict moral code who were generally intolerant of other sects as well as the indigenous peoples they would later slaughter (the Thanksgiving kumbaya myth not withstanding). See JW's previous comments. Spot-on.
Who despised Catholics, BTW. I live near Dearborn, MI. It's not ALL innocent, anymore than "Christian nationalism" is innocent, if it means making war on random countries like Iran and kidnapping foreign leaders and bombing "drug boats" that could be just fishermen and shooting the survivors out of the water. You know, war crimes. Committed because "drugs are bad, mm'kay," to borrow a quote from South Park. I'm also a practicing Catholic and I think all this is ethically and morally wrong for so many reasons I can't count. Yes, ominous Pew polls from a couple years ago do demonstrate some alarming trends in Islamic thought, but that's in hard-core practicing Muslims, not cultural Muslims. Christian people are being slaughtered in Nigeria, and elsewhere Christianity is banned (eg. Iran, the KSA, etc.) so it's not all that surprising that truly stupid, cruel people would be making this kind of hue and cry.
The "didn't show up on the Mayflower" comment struck me, I assumed it was true, but it made me wonder, when did the first Muslim come to America. So, fun fact, Estevancio (sometimes known as Mustafa Azemmouri) was a Moroccan enslaved by the Portuguese and brought to America in 1527 and is considered the first Muslim in America, predating the Mayflower by almsot 100 years. He was one of four survivors of the Narvaez Expedition and spent more than 8 years traveling across present day Florida, Texas and New Mexico.
Later on in the 1630s, Anthony Janszoon van Salee was a prominent landowner in New Amsterdam known for his Muslim heritage.
>> "Republicans used to distinguish radical Muslims from mainstream Muslims. The caucus is abandoning that distinction. "
I mean, some Republicans did. Others never have.
All in all, quite rich for Christian nationalists to get up in arms about Sharia Law. Maybe this whole separation of church and state protects Christians too, eh?
And they have no idea of what Sharia Law actually is. There isn't a single Sharia Law. They are different all over the world.
In the US, they are social compacts that people volunteer for, independently agree to. The compact is used to solve social issues, disputes, agreements, support its members, no different than your standard HOA or Golf Club Bylaws.
Setting aside the sheer ignorance and desperation of this 'caucus', these are the same people that would legally impose Christianity on all Americans. The only thing better than GOP propaganda is their unflagging hypocrisy.
Except they’re not being hypocrites in this regard. They’re not saying they don’t want any established religion and then going around advocating for their flavor of evangelicalism to rule all our lives. They’re quite clear that their issue is with imagined Muslims who think that Islam should be enshrined in law, not with religious rules determining secular law generally.
Yes, this article is clear on their contempt for Muslims. It is impossible for me to read this and distinguish between the obvious goals of this caucus and the multiple, recent attempts in Congress to eliminate or mitigate secular law. Among these are Rep Harris and Sen Lankford introducing the Destroy Church-State Separation in Politics act in March 2025, the establishment of the Religious Liberty Commission in Sep 2025 that aims to "advance Christian dominance," a potential EO on encouraging prayer in school, along with various bills and guides related to making the distance between government and Christian organizations much thinner. Not to mention the similar goals happening at state levels, many of which use the guise of religion to cover naked cash grabs. It is hard to find a topic that the GOP is not hypocritical with, but I find the religious angle particularly gross.
Do they object to church bells ringing? That is a call to worship. Do they object to a Secretary of Defense who inserts Christian prayers into his press briefings? Or who tries to use Christian theology to justify acts of war? Disgusting!
Or a Secretary of Agriculture who sends a WILDLY Christian Easter email to all ~150,000 of her employees. (Give or take. USDA’s workforce is down over 20% from December 2024, so I’m not sure what the current number is.)
I receive such sinister whisperings in Facebook DM's from a retired Evangelical pastor. He insists that the vast majority of Muslims who have moved to America have moved here to take over the country, not to seek a better life. He has cited some of the circumstantial evidence documented in Will's post. I explain to him that similar conjectures have been throughout history about my people---Jews---and I know that the motives ascribed to us are baseless.
As the descendent of Catholic immigrants, this was also the cause of a lot of Anti-Catholicism for Irish, Italian and Eastern European Immigrants. Anti-Catholics alleged that us papists would have an undue loyalty to the pope, we couldn't follow Catholicism and also be loyal to the constitution, and we were going to take over the country in the name of Rome. It was a hurdle for JFK's presidency.
Catholics didn't get welcomed into the conservative religious movement until that movement took up anti-abortion after Roe v Wade. And I'm sure if Christian Nationalists achieved their dreams, it'd be last-in-first-out for the Catholics. Conservative Catholics who break bread with Klan sympathizers are boiling frogs saying, "Gee, thanks for the hot bath."
Kotszu - the JFK campaign of 1960 made an impression on this little catholic kid that I well recall today... neighbors that had always seemed pleasant suddenly displayed a peculiar... edge?
Here in Texas, I sure hope people listen to James Talarico's message over Keith Self's. All people deserve our love and care, not just white Christians.
I'm pretty sure Jesus said something very similar on many occasions.
I’m not aware of any attempts to impose Sharia law in the United States. I am, however, aware of efforts by right wing Christians to impose their religious beliefs on the rest of America.
Passing laws to mandate the display of the 10 Commandments in public schools?
Directing public funds (vouchers) to private religious schools while excluding Islamic and secular institutions?
Basing reproductive health laws on their religious beliefs?.
I cal them the Christian taliban.
Y'allqaeda
This is great
"Teahadists" is my go-to.
Yes. What they want is best referred to as Christian Sharia Law. Religious bigots is what they are.
CINOs: christian in name only. H/T to Nina Simmonds. I was using American taliban, but CINO removes an implication that their beliefs or behavior are American.
Talibangelicals.
I love this one and I am stealing it for future use!
It’s not an original; I stole it from somewhere else. :D
Onward Christian soldiers,
Muslims for to kill,
Like our President Jesus,
Triumph of the Will.
[Sorry, mixed fascist metaphors. You get what you pay for.]
Oh yes! I’ve been calling them this for years!
This has been evident since I was a child in Christian church Sunday school in the 1960s — how I should look, how I should dress, how I should be in relation to men. Quit then; not going back.
Post the Sermon On the Mount instead!
Or the Beatitudes. You know, the stuff Christ talked about.
That . . . would be the same thing.
🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯
The Xtian Taliban is alive and well (but obvs getting desperate).
It is downright scary when our, apparently, illiterate Republican members of Congress are unable to read and understand the Constitution. They seem to have trouble with the incomprehensible eighteenth century language, kind of like the Prez. Maybe we should make being able to read and understand the Constitution. Of course, that would discriminatory to the illiterate. I will clarify something for these Congressional dolts: The United States was founded as a secular country! It was not founded as a Christian or Christ/Judeo country.
It was initially mostly Christian, though, and just go back and reread the Declaration of Independence and the 1st Amendment. All laws ultimately come back to moral and ethical principles, at least to start with. "No false testimony under oath" looks a lot like "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" which looks an awful lot like the definition of lying in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, namely "lying is speech that is meant to lead another into error." But boy, ethical and moral principles—principles of ANY kind—is not so apparent these days, especially not in the last decade. This tit-for-tat nightmare seems unending and will end in disaster for the country, like Sara Longwell says. And JVL, for that matter. NB: these "MAGA Christian Soldiers" are absolutely 💯 not exempt from the rampant evil stupidity and cruelty evident everywhere on the left and the right. We are caught in a downward spiral and to quote a disfavored, hypocritical politician and founder of this country, "I tremble for my country when I remember God is Just."
Here's an example of activists trying to impose one tenet of sharia on the general population.
https://youtu.be/Rtf2ukEAJQs?si=V_5ucAmhTr5CqmLP
But no legislation has been proposed or passed to ban dogs anywhere in the US. You’re posting some random person’s views which have not been proposed or passed into law in any legislative forum and equating that to actual laws passed requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in schools.
It is less of a threat in terms of the degree of support behind it. But there are two things to weigh on the opposite side. One, it is more intrusive on individual liberty than requiring public facilities to post the Ten Commandments. Two, while you didn't quite claim that there is no effort to impose sharia, I wanted to point out that there actually are people who would do just that given the power to do so.
The anti-sharia caucus deserves to be pilloried for conflating that with individuals choosing to live according to sharia. But rooting out such conflation from civic life should not blind us to ignore anyone calling for enacting laws because of sharia mandates.
Understood and appreciate the dialogue. My point is that none of these sharia law efforts have even been proposed in any legislative forum, let alone passed into law. There is no actual support for them in any meaningful way that would make it an even slightly likely occurrence that they would become law. It's getting people worked up for something that is as unlikely as an alien abduction. But at the same time, there are actual laws that impose the Christian religion on everyone regardless of their belief system. So wouldn't that be more of an immediate concern than some hypothetical sharia law ban of dogs that is never going to be seriously discussed? Is it really ok for children who are not Christian or even religious have the commandments of one religion presented to them every day as if they are state-sanctioned?
Where are the 10 commandments in public schools? I'm a product of mixed private and public school education from grade school through college, and I never, ever saw the 10 Commandments posted *anywhere,* including in my Catholic school, my private school, my public and private universities...not anywhere.
As of April 2026, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Alabama have passed laws requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. These laws, heavily supported by Republican lawmakers, generally mandate that the documents be displayed in 5th-12th grade classrooms and common areas, often using donated, large, and readable posters.
Scott - To be clear, I won't claim that there is no effort to impose sharia law (hard to prove the negative). What I do say is: I've never had anyone show me evidence of any consideration by any jurisdiction of civil government in the US to impose sharia law on the public.
May we also differentiate between "there actually are people who would do just that [impose sharia] given the power to do so" and your original post saying, "Here's an example of activists trying to impose one tenet of sharia on the general population"?
Admit I didn't watch the whole YouTube so don't know how far this dog issue proceeded into potential governmental consideration (let alone action). My observation is that I'm aware of individuals with some (to me) far out ideas they'd happily impose on all of us 'given the power.' Some of them even initiate petitions online, speak at their HOA or school board meeting, write a legislative rep about their pet issue (pun intended; both meanings apply)... I'm ever-grateful to live in a country where our regular democratic republic procedures provide numerous checks & guardrails against such ideas finding their way into regulations of The State. I also recognize the threat to others' rights increases considerably with either the number of individuals advocating for the intrusion, and/or the wealth and political power of the advocate.
F'rinstance, knowing Trump appears to disdain canines, we could be more worried about our pets if he starts talking about an Exec Order to ban domestic dog keeping. A Prez has means, motive, and opportunity to be able to impose that restriction on us at least until courts intervene. Nerdeen Kiswani does not, nor would any rando howling whatever nonsense on a street corner as passersby hurry along, avoiding eye contact.
See my post above about attempts to argue Sharia law in a normal dom rel proceeding.
That is Oren Cahanovitc, a seemingly likable Israeli tour guide with an unmistakably anti-Arab point of view. A good search also shows that Kiswani never called for the installation or adoption of Sharia law, and was joking about dogs during a public discussion about excess animal feces in public parks following a major snowfall in February.
What on earth are you talking about? Where, exactly, is the federal or state government passing laws to even allow the posting of the 10 Commandments anywhere in public, much less in public schools? Vouchers go to private schools, which are often religiously based, and secular schools, too. Taxpayers fund public schools, which are producing inadequate reading and writing and math and science in many places, especially in Detroit (in my home state) and in other urban centers. This is terribly unfair to kids, especially kids from poorer families and for students with disabilities. It's awful, and that's without getting into the sexual ethic the public schools teach, over parental objection, disguised as "anti-bullying." Anti-bullying is a fabulous concept, but the execution has been most unfair and unethical and unequal. As for "banning reproductive health care based on religion," that's not what's happening. Chemical abortions can be gotten by mail, via a phone call, sent to "a friend," without any verification. Women are being forced, poisoned by their abusers, pressured, coerced, and are dying because they are too scared to admit they had a chemical abortion. These are often done too far along, since there is no federal regulation barring an ancient study from the 90's done with "ideal" patients (totally healthy, on no other meds, very, very early along). Women are going through what amounts to labor pains at home, alone, in pain, bleeding out, seeing the very human remains of their child in the toilet or shower or on a pad, thus traumatizing them and in some cases killing them due to incomplete abortions, where fetal remains or placental bits are retained. It's not "care" to pass out medication with severe side effects like candy for a few hundred dollars to anyone who asks for it over the phone including abusive men and traffickers who are doing this with minors, even. It's not reproductive care to do surgical abortions, either, not unless there's a true emergency and the prospect is losing both the mom and the baby. How do I know, you say? I've been there. I had a teen pregnancy, and had an awful time of it, in and out of hospital for months with preterm labor and bleeding and such. My daughter was expected to be very premature and possibly die in the NICU. I somehow made it to full term, and she died of a cord accident probably related to my undiagnosed chronic illnesses. My second was a boy. With a very violent, emotionally and mentally and spiritually abusive young man. I only made it to 22 weeks that time, while all the while I was being pressured by my high risk doctor to abort. She said "what right do you have to bring a child into this world in such circumstances," as though she didn't hear me saying that I had a plan with my social worker to get gone with my son from the hospital into a secret women's shelter until I could move. I was also very poor and very sick. I ended up losing him to a placental abruption which turned into a medical disaster in which I briefly died and my son and the placenta causing the hemorrhage had to be surgically removed in an emergency D&E. I woke up in agony, in every possible way, in the ICU on a PCA pain drip because of repurfusion syndrome. My third baby was conceived in a rape. One of 3, by the way. The man was initially charged with 4 counts of 1st degree criminal sexual conduct, though the case was pleaded to "assault with intent" because the prosecutor got a much bigger, media sensation, rape-murder case on a local college campus. My rape crisis counselor, who I saw just the day I'd found out I was pregnant, said she had "an arrangement" to get "the problem taken care of" for free since I was a survivor of rape. She didn't hear my protests, or even hear my religious (and at the time, secular) background. Then I had the preliminary hearing for the case, and the day after that, I miscarried at home. I saw the tiny body of my child, whom I had not decided whether to keep or give up for adoption yet. I hemorrhaged at home, again, from the miscarriage. A friend took me to the ER, where I got another transfusion of blood and blood products to fix the anemia and blood loss. The resident I saw said, "your body did such a good job cleaning itself out, this saves you the trouble of getting it taken care of later." HE didn't give two craps about my (charted) religious background. His callousness to me made me so furious that if I could've gotten up, I don't know what I'd have said or done.
So I've been there, done that. Seen the bodies. Buried my babies, but for the miscarried one which I SAW but couldn't get out of the toilet to bury. Do you know what it's like to flush a baby down the toilet? Thousands upon thousands of women DO know. Finally, basic logic will tell you that elective abortion isn't "care." It's taking a life, every time it's successful. What are pregnant women pregnant WITH, exactly? If it weren't a human being, it wouldn't be anything but like extracting an infected tooth or an infected appendix or tonsills or adding a chest port or a feeding tube (all of which have happened to me). But pregnant women are pregnant with human offspring, which if left alone will generally grow into a newborn, an infant, a toddler, all the way through the developmental stages of human life until senescence and natural death. The basic rights of humans, based on fundamental principles and basic human rights, include the right to be alive in the first place, or nothing else matters. You don't have to belong to or not belong to any religion or none to understand this. When fundamental rights conflict, the most fundamental ought to win, and that's the right to be alive in the first place. My right to bodily integrity was violated over and over and over again, since my experience with CSA and SA as an adult. I won't tell anyone how to best live their lives, but what I will say is that your right to do whatever makes you happy stops when there's another human involved.
How is this all related to "sharia law?" Islam doesn't ban abortion, just FYI. So you should get along just great! This is why there's always been a so-called red-green alliance, between abortion rights advocates who also tend to care very little about basic freedoms and basic rights just like the most restrictive regimes on earth these days don't care. Funny how that works. And I do NOT want Muslim refugees and immigrants barred from the country. It's shameful how we abandoned our interpreters in Afghanistan under Biden and banned their immigration some more and kicked people out who we promised to save if they helped us. Those pictures and that horror from our troops flying away with men clinging to the airplanes and falling to their deaths were absolutely appalling. Where is the humanity in abandoning Ukraine to Russia, either? There seems to be no end to the evils this debated country will permit. Evil. Yes, I said it.
Please think about these things and how they all relate. Pope Leo XIV was entirely correct in his criticisms of this country. Trump is monstrous, but so are some so-called progressive policies.
"Old Man Trump" is a song written by American folk singer-songwriter Woody Guthrie in 1954.
The song describes the racist housing practices and discriminatory rental policies of his landlord, Fred Trump, father of Donald Trump.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Man_Trump
So, his defense will be that it is in his "jeans", which is how he would likely spell it on Untruth Antisocial?
Donny learned from the best. Fred and Roy taught him everything he knows!
You mean the Stable Genius needed someone to teach him, he was not born with the knowledge of Athena already implanted? Aren't narcissists born, not made?
Mary Trump thinks it was a family affair:
Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World's Most Dangerous Man
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0898S8WP8/?bestFormat=true&k=too%20much%20and%20never%20enough%20mary%20trump&ref_=nb_sb_ss_w_scx-ent-bk-ww_k1_1_13_de&crid=CEKEFN1WXM3O&sprefix=too%20much%20and%20
I’m starting to think that putting America’s stupidest people in charge of our government was a bad idea.
Ya think?
They have been since Clinton.
I'd choose to have dogs in my house over Republican politicians any day - I don't think they're housetrained. As an atheist, I find Islam to be no more offensive than any of the other religions. All of them have rules that can interfere with the freedoms I hold 'sacred'. I'm happy to let people do whatever they want to do so long as it doesn't interfere with others' ability to do the same. And a call to prayer is no worse than a lot of regular noises in public places (like sirens, train whistles, and clocks that chime the hours).
One of my core beliefs is that people should be free to live and do however they want as long as they are not harming anyone (including themselves). Forcing others to accept your beliefs over their own is harmful.
Unfortunately, there is a large part of our citizenry that cannot accept anyone who is not white, yhe “right” kind of Christian and male.
"Themselves or anyone" includes humans at all stages of development and age, including human babies in the womb. Just...putting that out there, since these comments are wretchedly anti-Catholic and anti-life, I've noticed. Not that one has to be Catholic to be pro-life, because the ethical principles are obvious if you think them through and there are plenty of secular people (me very much included in the past, and I've been through 3 crisis pregnancies which all ended in the natural deaths of my babies at various stages from full term to 22 weeks to 8 weeks) who are pro-life using universal principles of ethics and logic. My rights stop at the end of another person's nose, and that includes humans who haven't yet been born or who are dying. Good grief, the hysterical tone in the comments is depressing. It's not only the "MAGA Christian Nationalist Right" that's out to lunch these days.
or like Church bells
Church bells are a call to prayer too.
Absolutely! - some even have a formal religious name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelus ...in Catholic elementary school late 1950s into '60s I remember this. Every. Single. Day. Very disruptive to our lunchtime schoolyard games of tag or whiffle ball. After that, never lived close enough to a Catholic church to hear 'em but have read/heard it's still done at least some places in US
Yeah, well, no Catholic churches today do that, barring maybe a clock here and there. Probably because it was irritating to neighbors and got banned. I don't have a problem with calls to prayer of whatever variety, because I pray (I'm a practicing Catholic) so why would I be bothered by either? Acts of vandalism and arson and violence are happening to Jewish and Catholic churches and schools across the world. But banning immigration and denaturalizing citizens is not the way to go.
"didn't show up on the Mayflower" lol what lunatics
Neither did any Catholics. Take that, Pope Leo!
(Frankly, the Pilgrims would be horrified by the theology of most of today’s evangelical right. It’s ahistorical to think today’s right wingers would be any more accepted as good Christians by the Mayflower’s passengers than were their contemporaries, Catholic and Protestant alike. But right wingers Christian culture by and large doesn’t know its history, so…)
(And lolz for days quoting John Adams and thinking you’ve scored a win for evangelicalism. Again: these people are clueless.)
Catholics were suspect for quite some time. Plank of the KKK.
Could Catholic JFK be elected? Was he taking orders from the Vatican?
Protestants and Catholics were at war with each other in the 15th century. It may have been the 14th or 16th, but still 2 Christian religions discounted each other,
Brandon Gill probably doesn’t know this(he shouldn’t be paid to think), but neither did most Americans. The utter stupidity of these people is exhausting.
That idiotic statement about the Mayflower gives a clear picture as to what fools these f-ing knuckle-dragging Neanderthals are. Many who were sailing on the Mayflower were hardcore radical Calvinist Puritan Separatists with a strict moral code who were generally intolerant of other sects as well as the indigenous peoples they would later slaughter (the Thanksgiving kumbaya myth not withstanding). See JW's previous comments. Spot-on.
Who despised Catholics, BTW. I live near Dearborn, MI. It's not ALL innocent, anymore than "Christian nationalism" is innocent, if it means making war on random countries like Iran and kidnapping foreign leaders and bombing "drug boats" that could be just fishermen and shooting the survivors out of the water. You know, war crimes. Committed because "drugs are bad, mm'kay," to borrow a quote from South Park. I'm also a practicing Catholic and I think all this is ethically and morally wrong for so many reasons I can't count. Yes, ominous Pew polls from a couple years ago do demonstrate some alarming trends in Islamic thought, but that's in hard-core practicing Muslims, not cultural Muslims. Christian people are being slaughtered in Nigeria, and elsewhere Christianity is banned (eg. Iran, the KSA, etc.) so it's not all that surprising that truly stupid, cruel people would be making this kind of hue and cry.
If these yahoos want to live under Puritan law, they have my blessing.
They just can't drag the rest of us into it! But would be hilarious to see all the scarlet A's walking around.
I'm saying THEY can live by Puritan law. I hate wearing hats.
🤣🤣🤣
These are some of the worst things I have heard these people say, and they say a lot of bad things.
The "didn't show up on the Mayflower" comment struck me, I assumed it was true, but it made me wonder, when did the first Muslim come to America. So, fun fact, Estevancio (sometimes known as Mustafa Azemmouri) was a Moroccan enslaved by the Portuguese and brought to America in 1527 and is considered the first Muslim in America, predating the Mayflower by almsot 100 years. He was one of four survivors of the Narvaez Expedition and spent more than 8 years traveling across present day Florida, Texas and New Mexico.
Later on in the 1630s, Anthony Janszoon van Salee was a prominent landowner in New Amsterdam known for his Muslim heritage.
But but but... America didn't exist until the white people arrived, so... 🤷♂️
It was just this big blank spot on the map that read, “there be monsters here!”.
Little did they know... lol
>> "Republicans used to distinguish radical Muslims from mainstream Muslims. The caucus is abandoning that distinction. "
I mean, some Republicans did. Others never have.
All in all, quite rich for Christian nationalists to get up in arms about Sharia Law. Maybe this whole separation of church and state protects Christians too, eh?
It’s not needed to protect right wing Christians if they get to run the whole show.
What I want is a wall between church and state that is high, wide and deep.
I would also add a large alligator 🐊 filled moat for good measure.
Works for me
Get sum-o-dem Ukrainian interceptor drones, take down any celestials trying to fly over the ramparts
And they have no idea of what Sharia Law actually is. There isn't a single Sharia Law. They are different all over the world.
In the US, they are social compacts that people volunteer for, independently agree to. The compact is used to solve social issues, disputes, agreements, support its members, no different than your standard HOA or Golf Club Bylaws.
Sharia cant be as bad as the average HOA.
Howid - I'm a few days late to this comment party... this was my 1st thought too! 🤣
Setting aside the sheer ignorance and desperation of this 'caucus', these are the same people that would legally impose Christianity on all Americans. The only thing better than GOP propaganda is their unflagging hypocrisy.
Except they’re not being hypocrites in this regard. They’re not saying they don’t want any established religion and then going around advocating for their flavor of evangelicalism to rule all our lives. They’re quite clear that their issue is with imagined Muslims who think that Islam should be enshrined in law, not with religious rules determining secular law generally.
Yes, this article is clear on their contempt for Muslims. It is impossible for me to read this and distinguish between the obvious goals of this caucus and the multiple, recent attempts in Congress to eliminate or mitigate secular law. Among these are Rep Harris and Sen Lankford introducing the Destroy Church-State Separation in Politics act in March 2025, the establishment of the Religious Liberty Commission in Sep 2025 that aims to "advance Christian dominance," a potential EO on encouraging prayer in school, along with various bills and guides related to making the distance between government and Christian organizations much thinner. Not to mention the similar goals happening at state levels, many of which use the guise of religion to cover naked cash grabs. It is hard to find a topic that the GOP is not hypocritical with, but I find the religious angle particularly gross.
Do they object to church bells ringing? That is a call to worship. Do they object to a Secretary of Defense who inserts Christian prayers into his press briefings? Or who tries to use Christian theology to justify acts of war? Disgusting!
Or a Secretary of Agriculture who sends a WILDLY Christian Easter email to all ~150,000 of her employees. (Give or take. USDA’s workforce is down over 20% from December 2024, so I’m not sure what the current number is.)
Full text of her letter, along with the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s response, is in the (PDF) link. https://ffrf.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Secretary-Brooke-Rollins-Easter-Email.pdf
That would be an Angelus, most church bells are indicating time.
I receive such sinister whisperings in Facebook DM's from a retired Evangelical pastor. He insists that the vast majority of Muslims who have moved to America have moved here to take over the country, not to seek a better life. He has cited some of the circumstantial evidence documented in Will's post. I explain to him that similar conjectures have been throughout history about my people---Jews---and I know that the motives ascribed to us are baseless.
As the descendent of Catholic immigrants, this was also the cause of a lot of Anti-Catholicism for Irish, Italian and Eastern European Immigrants. Anti-Catholics alleged that us papists would have an undue loyalty to the pope, we couldn't follow Catholicism and also be loyal to the constitution, and we were going to take over the country in the name of Rome. It was a hurdle for JFK's presidency.
Catholics didn't get welcomed into the conservative religious movement until that movement took up anti-abortion after Roe v Wade. And I'm sure if Christian Nationalists achieved their dreams, it'd be last-in-first-out for the Catholics. Conservative Catholics who break bread with Klan sympathizers are boiling frogs saying, "Gee, thanks for the hot bath."
Kotszu - the JFK campaign of 1960 made an impression on this little catholic kid that I well recall today... neighbors that had always seemed pleasant suddenly displayed a peculiar... edge?
Here in Texas, I sure hope people listen to James Talarico's message over Keith Self's. All people deserve our love and care, not just white Christians.
I'm pretty sure Jesus said something very similar on many occasions.
Sheldon Cooper's mom: "You don't respect me."
Sheldon Cooper: "Oh, please. You're my mother; of course I respect you. I just don't respect anything you do, say, or believe."
Calls for the faithful must include church bells
And LDS pamphlets...