Sharia Law An Act Of Sedition?: Its Foundations of Freedom Thursday, a special day of the week where we get to answer questions from you, the listeners! Always answering your questions from constitutional principles! Tune in today as we answer your questions such as how possible is it for Washington to split into two states, what does the Constitution say about it, and what opposition can be expected? At what point does the application of Sharia law become an act of sedition? Can Muslims be deported for believing in Sharia supremacy? And so much more, right here on WallBuilders Live!

Air Date: 02/22/2018

On-air Personalities: David Barton, Rick Green, and Tim Barton


Listen:

Download: Click Here

Transcription note:  As a courtesy for our listeners’ enjoyment, we are providing a transcription of this podcast. Transcription will be released shortly. However, as this is transcribed from a live talk show, words and sentence structure were not altered to fit grammatical, written norms in order to preserve the integrity of the actual dialogue between the speakers. Additionally, names may be misspelled or we might use an asterisk to indicate a missing word because of the difficulty in understanding the speaker at times. We apologize in advance.

Faith And The Culture

Intro:

President Thomas Jefferson said, “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves. And if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

Rick:

Welcome to the Foundations of Freedom Thursday here on WallBuilders Live. At WallBuilders Live, we’re always talking about the hot topics of the day in policy, faith, and the culture. We’re always looking at it from a Biblical, historical, and constitutional perspective.

And we almost always get to have that conversation about those things with David Barton, America’s premier historian and the founder of WallBuilders. Also Tim Barton, national speaker and pastor and our president here at WallBuilders. My name is Rick Green, I’m a former Texas legislator and I look forward to these Thursday programs because it’s a chance to answer your questions.

You can send those into us any time that you like. You can e-mail them in – r[email protected], that’s [email protected] We’ll try to get to them on a Thursday program where we dive into foundational principles from the Constitution, the Declaration, from the Bible. We take questions on certain political policies of the day, what is our government doing and how does it line up with those principles?

So, all of that’s on the table, send in your questions and we’ll try to get to them as quick as we can. If you want to hear more of these Thursday programs on the foundation of freedom, you can find more of those at WallBuildersLive.com. Just click on that archive link there and it will take you back to programs over the last few weeks.

So, David, Tim, looking forward our Foundations of Freedom Thursday today. Are you guys ready to dive into some questions?

David:

You bet. Let’s go for it.

A Move to Split the State of Washington?

Rick:

Alright, so first one is going to come from Dawson. He says, “I’ve thoroughly enjoyed listening to you guys for about a year and a half now.” — That’s basically about five college degrees, right guys? A year and a half of listening to WallBuilders Live.

–“Thank you for all you’re doing at WallBuilders. I am from the liberal state of Washington. Most people outside of the Northwest may not realize this, but outside of the Seattle metropolitan area, Washington is a very conservative state. The east side of the state, in particular, is very conservative. Unfortunately, the Seattle metropolitan area makes up over half of the state’s total population.

“So, the rest of the state is stuck with the consequences of their politics. Currently there’s a movement to split the state. The east side of the state would become the state of Liberty.” –Now, he’s not saying a state of liberty like in a state of liberty. He’s saying they would actually name it Liberty, so the state of Liberty.

“There has already been a flag selected and a seal is currently being selected. It seems like this movement has a little momentum. I’d like to get your thoughts on this, please. Especially concerning the probability of this happening, what the Constitution says, what opposition can be expected, and any other information you may have. I’ve included the link to the Liberty State website below. Thank you and God bless you guys.”

Alright, David, Tim, so the state of Liberty out of Washington. I got to admit, this is the first time I’ve heard about this.

David:

Well, he’s actually raised two questions there that are worth addressing. One–

Rick:

And by the way, I’m sorry, David, I’ve heard of other states talk about this. Like California’s talked about new Northern California being a state. They’ve got a movement going on there. Texas is always talking about splitting. I just had not heard this about Washington.

Other States Have Thought About This

David:

Well, there’s been a number of states that have looked at this in some way, shape, fashion, and form. Particularly states get tired of the liberalism within the state. California actually had something going a few months ago to divide, I think, into five different states – five or six, I forget the number.

Southern California is driven by water rights, water concerns. People in the south use so much of the water from people in the north. So, the agricultural side is so different from the Metropolitan side. And Texas, you mentioned that as well, there have been other states that have raised this as an issue.

And the two things that go with that – number one, Dawson mentioned that the problem they have in Washington state is that the SeaTac area drives them. Now, in Washington state, you have a very large geographic state. But 55 percent of the state’s population is in what we call the SeaTac area of Seattle/Tacoma. So, the SeaTac area is one of the most secular metropolitan areas in the nation. And it also is very much what you see with New York City.

Let me say it this way. You’ve got a legislature of Washington state that, on the east side of the Cascades, they would fit perfectly into Alabama or Tennessee. They could be part of Texas, they would be part of the Panhandle Oklahoma, they are very, very, very, very, conservative. But the problem is that 55 percent of the state legislators come from the SeaTac area. So, even though you have a huge land area of Washington state that is very, very, conservative, you don’t have the population there for it.

Now, you have the same kind of thing when you look in other states. For example, New York City has two thirds of the population of the entire state of New York. If you go across New York State, get up into some of the rural areas, they are very, very, conservative. They look like they would be part of the southwest, or the south, or the midwest, but it’s New York City that drives. That’s where most of the legislators come from.

Why the Founding Fathers Did the Electoral College

David:

Same thing with Illinois. You get to Illinois, southern Illinois is as conservative, agricultural, and rural, as any place you’ll find in America. But they’re driven by Chicago which is more than half the population. So, you have a number of states where that’s the situation. And the people and those more conservative areas get really frustrated that the majority of their state, although it’s a minority of the geographic area, gets all the clout. That’s exactly why the Founding Fathers did the electoral college.

I know Dawson didn’t ask about that. But in the American founding you had, of the 13 colonies, four had more population than the other nine. And so they were concerned that, man, when you get a pure majority vote, we’ll never get a president out of Connecticut, or out of Rhode Island, or anything else. It will always be from New York, and from Virginia, and from Pennsylvania, and from Massachusetts. So, that’s why the Electoral College is there.

And I’ll say that in the last election, the number of votes that Hillary received, if you take the population of New York, and the population of California, and the population of Illinois, those three states have more population than the vote she received in the last election. Same thing with cities. There are 35000 cities in the United States, but 25 cities have more than half the population of the entire nation. So, that’s why the Founding Fathers spread it out where that you can’t always have a majority win. You have to have a majority of several majorities – you have a majority of the people, but you also have to have a majority of the states, and majority the counties, majority of the cities.

And by the time you throw all that together, Hillary only had a majority in one area and that was just a majority of the people. She didn’t have a majority in the states, she didn’t have a majority of the counties, or of the cities. So–

Rick:

So, she didn’t have what they call a “sufficient distribution”, right?

David:

That’s right. She did not have the distribution. She had the big cities wrapped up and just about nothing else.

States That Have Split in the Past

David:

So, back to the question he’s asking here about can Eastern Washington separate from western Washington? Okay, historically and constitutionally there’s a couple of things that come into play here. One is you have, for example, back at the founding, the state of Tennessee was created from the state of North Carolina. Tennessee and North Carolina all used to be North Carolina. North Carolina said, “We’re willing to split our state and make it a new state – Tennessee.”

Same with Virginia and Kentucky. Kentucky was part of Virginia. Virginia said, “We’re willing to give up some of our land. And they also gave up West Virginia.” So, Virginia was one state – now it’s three states, or it’s land was three states.

So, the first thing is you can’t get this done unless you can get the legislature of the state to agree to divide it. So, that means you’re going to have to pick up some of the SeaTac representatives. Get some of those guys over in the Sci-Tech area to say, “Yeah, we’re willing to allow a new state to be to be born out of our current state of Washington.” Because if you don’t get the agreement of the state, then you’re looking at some kind of an anarky, or combat, or something, to get it split.

So, to get it on a ballot means the legislature is going to have to put it on a ballot unless there is some type of an * provision in Washington’s Constitution that allows the people put it on the ballot. And then you’re going to have to have a majority of the people agree to it. The other thing is even if the state of Washington agree to split the state of Liberty out of the state of Washington, Washington D.C. federal Congress still has to be willing to accept it and to give an enabling act on how it becomes a state in the United States.

So, the enabling act for 32 of the states it was what was called the Northwest Ordinance signed by Washington. That was the provisions on what we’re going to expect if you’re going to become a state.

So, Liberty can make all the plans, but it’s going to have to take either majority of the people, or a majority of the legislature to agree with them to allow them to split. And it’s also going to take the Congress being willing to say, “Yes, we’ll accept you if you meet these standards and here’s the standards we expect you to meet.” So, that’s kind of the hurdles they’re overcoming.

An Economic Side to the Issue

David:

Now, here’s the other problem – let’s say that Liberty becomes a new state and let’s say that they take up everything east of the Cascades – roughly two thirds of Washington state. Guess what? They’ve got the minority of the population, but they’ve got the majority of the roads the upkeep and the infrastructure. They’ve suddenly have lost all of the tax base that comes out of Seattle/Tacoma and now they’ve got more roads to keep up than what Seattle/Tacoma has. So, where did they get the money?

And that’s the thing, a lot of times philosophically you’ll want to create a state because you’re just tired of the philosophy of the wackos in the rest of the state. But when you get to the infrastructure part and the state police part, you’re going to have to have state police for Liberty, you going to have to create jails over in Liberty,  how do you do all that? And there’s an economic side that’s going to have to be worked out that they’re going to figure out.

Tim:

Unless in Liberty they don’t have jails they just do executions.  

*laughter*

David:

That’s right.

Tim:

I don’t know what they’re thinking, but if they have self-defence classes, everybody carries a gun, we don’t have jails…I don’t know how they would do that, but–

Rick:

I tell you what, guys, I would love to see a conservative corner of some state do this and it become like–

David:

A model.

It’s Almost Like a Test

Rick:

–I don’t know. Almost like a test. It’s like, can you go put in conservative government principles and let’s see that test. Let’s see how many people move in from around the country that experience that.

David:

Well, I will tell you that on the east side of the Cascades there in eastern Washington, the churches I speak in out there, the political rallies I do, I feel like I’m in the Second Amendment range course–

Rick:

Yeah.

David:

— everybody’s got a gun, everybody’s armed, and it’s a lot of fun.

Rick:

And even if you go right across state line there to northern Idaho **–

David:

You bet.

Rick:

–** some kind of deal there.

David:

You bet. That’s– same thing, they’re just common sense folk and you don’t have the shootings up there because you know if you do something stupid you’re liable to get shot yourself. It’s just a whole different climate on the east side of the Cascades.

Rick:

Alright, quick break, guys. We’ll be right back. More questions from the audience. You can send them into [email protected] You’re listening to WallBuilders Live.

Outro:

Thomas Jefferson said, “The Constitutions of most of our states, and of the United States, asserts that all power is inherent in the people that they may exercise it by themselves. That it is their right and duty to be at all times armed. That they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of press.”

Share a veteran’s story

We Want To Hear Your Vet Story

Rick:

Hey friends! If you have been listening to WallBuilders Live for very long at all, you know how much we respect our veterans and how appreciative we are of the sacrifice they make to make our freedoms possible. One of the ways that we love to honor those veterans is to tell their stories here on WallBuilders Live.  Once in awhile, we get an opportunity to interview veterans that have served on those front lines that have made incredible sacrifices have amazing stories that we want to share with the American people.

One of the very special things we get to do is interview World War II veterans. You’ve heard those interviews here on WallBuilders Live, from folks that were in the Band of Brothers, to folks like Edgar Harrell that survived the Indianapolis to so many other great stories you heard on WallBuilders Live.

You have friends and family that also served.  If you have World War II veterans in your family that you would like to have their story shared here on WallBuilders Live, please e-mail us at [email protected]  Give us a brief summary of the story and we’ll set up an interview. Thanks so much for sharing here on WallBuilders Live!

Intro:

Questions of Power

Thomas Jefferson said, “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

Rick:

Welcome back. Thanks for staying with us here at WallBuilders Live. It’s Foundations of Freedom Thursday. We’re taking your questions. Before we take the next one, guys, I just want to read an e-mail that we got.

The Jefferson Lies

Rick:

It said, “Thanks for your ministry. I am reading The Jefferson Lies and learning so much. I’m 67 and I realize that my public school education, even in the 50s and 60s, even back then, not only lied to me, but also omitted, should I say ‘censored’, the history I was taught. I’ve been sharing what I’m learning with my family and friends.”

So what an encouragement, guys. And I know a lot of people out there may not have even heard of the book yet. Or maybe they heard about it, but haven’t read it yet. I encourage you, read The Jefferson Lies. You’re going to learn so much truth about our history. Not just the man, Thomas Jefferson, but about the way things were back then. Great book to pick up and get a copy of and share with your family.

At What Point Does Sharia Law Become an Act of Sedition?

Rick:

Alright, fellas, next next question comes in from, let’s see, this one comes from Wyoming and it says, “At what point does the application of Sharia Law become an act of sedition? Can Muslims be deported for believing in Sharia supremacy?”

And actually, I take that back, it’s the city of Wyoming in the state of Michigan. Which makes a lot of sense because you’ve got Dearborn, and a high Muslim population there and a lot of movements towards wanting to do Sharia. But the question specifically is how far does this go before it becomes sedition because you’re undermining the Constitution?

Tim:

I would say as soon as there is implementation it’s become sedition. In the sense of  under Sharia they don’t believe in the Constitution and they don’t follow constitutional principles. They don’t believe in the Bill of Rights.

David:

And by the way, just for grins, let me define “sedition”. Because what Tim says makes sense when you know the definition. Here’s the definition, “Sedition is conduct or speech that incites people to rebel against the authority of a state or a nation.” So, anything that leads to action, and causing them to rebel and try to overthrow a state or nation, that’s sedition.

Tim:

Right. So, as we were saying, as soon as there’s implementation of Sharia that is actually sedition. And so certainly in America we believe in free speech, we can have discussions, we can have debate, we can have disagreements, that’s wonderful. That’s part of how we can resolve things and hopefully discover truth in the midst of it. Let’s talk about ideas and let’s figure out what makes the most sense.

However, when your idea is that we need to kill people that don’t believe what we believe. Or we need to throw homosexuals from the rooftop, or women should walk behind.

Let’s Talk About Sharia

Tim:

And of course, there’s going to be people that would say, “Now wait a second, I’ve got a Muslim friend. He’s doesn’t really think that.” Well, if a Muslim believes in Sharia, that’s what Sharia is. A lot of times people get in this caught up in this thought of, “Well, I know some Muslims, they’re peaceful, they’re not extremists.” Well, if they believe in Sharia, they are extremists because Sharia is extremist.

That doesn’t mean their actions and behaviors are extreme, but their religion, their belief system, is extreme. Because Sharia does say you execute the non-believer, it does say the woman doesn’t have the same rights as the man, it does say that murdering homosexuals is beneficial because you need to purify them from the population. So, this is an extreme religion and behavior. And I would even argue that if you’re a Muslim that doesn’t believe in Sharia you’re not a very good Muslim because that’s kind of the whole point of it is Sharia.

And so certainly this question of sedition is a great question because even though in America we do believe in the freedom of religion, the difference with sharia is Sharia isn’t just a religion – it is a way of life. Which, for them, supersedes the Constitution.

Incompatible With Constitutional Freedom

David:

And people will say, “Oh there’s things in Sharia that are fine with what we do.” Yeah, there are, but Sharia law, as an entity, is incompatible with Constitutional freedom. Sharia law, as Tim said, it’s a political philosophy. They have a religious element to it, but it is a philosophy that guides a nation. And so it is completely incompatible with the Constitution.

We actually often call them Sharia supremacists because if you believe in Sharia, you are a supremacist. And that is incompatible with freedom and our way of life. And if you doubt that, look at any fully Islamic nation in the world and see how well freedom does for a republican form of government, or even for democracy, or anything else. It’s incompatible with any other system other than its own system.

Tim:

And even saying– look at a nation that’s fully Sharia. Really, if it’s the majority Muslim, they’re going to implement Sharia.

David:

Yeah.

Tim:

And so it doesn’t have to be 100 percent because I can just imagine somebody going, “Now, wait a second, there’s no nation where it’s 100 percent.” No, there’s not, but you can look in Syria, you can look in–

David:

Let me change it to a Sharia compliant – that’s fully Sharia compliant.

Tim:

That’s it. And that’s where when they’re the majority of the population, right, when the people that have this ideology and this belief are the majority of the population, they’re going to work to enact those policies, those beliefs, those laws. Which are, in the case of America, it wouldn’t be based on the Constitution, right. If you have 51 percent of Americans that are Muslim that believe in Sharia law, all of a sudden we’re not following the Constitution anymore, we’re following Sharia. And this is where Sharia and the Constitution are not compatible because they believe, “No, we follow Sharia. We don’t follow the Constitution.”

Sharia Courts

David:

And that’s where in the areas where you now have Sharia courts set up and operating, they’re operating against and outside the Constitution. Those two things are not compatible.

Tim:

Well, and let me jump back to this question. And so the idea of – is it sedition? Is there anything we can do? Well, although we could argue it is sedition, certainly you could argue that there are things that are unconstitutional, it’s almost like talking about the sanctuary cities in California. Where just because you can say something is wrong, or the fact that Colorado is one of many states now that have said marijuana is legal even though it’s still federally illegal.

There’s a lot of things that you can point to and say, “That’s not legal. That’s not constitutional.” At this point it becomes, “What is going to be enforced?” And we do not live in a nation that would currently enforce laws that are against– or in this case sedition, right. We’re not going to see those things enacted where people are going to be penalized for sedition.

When it comes to what’s identified as a religion because people want to be “tolerant” in today’s culture. So, it’s a great question, but I don’t see this really going anywhere with Shariah being considered sedition.

Rick:

Okay, guys, quick break. We’ll come back to this when we return. Stay with us, folks. You’re listening to WallBuilders Live.

Outro:

Samuel Adams said, “The liberties of our country and the freedom of our civil Constitution are worth defending against all hazards. And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.”

Biographical Sketches

Hi friends! This is Tim Barton of WallBuilders.This is a time when most Americans don’t know much about American history or even heroes of the faith. I know, oftentimes as parents, we’re trying to find good content for our kids to read.

If you remember back in the Bible, the Book of Hebrews it has the Faith Hall of Fame, where they outlined the leaders of faith that had gone before them. Well, this is something that as Americans we really want to go back and outline some of these heroes not just of American history, but heroes of Christianity and our faith as well.

I wanted to let you know about some biographical sketches we have available on our website. One is called, “The Courageous Leaders Collection” and this collection includes people like Abigail Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Francis Scott Key, George Washington Carver, Susanna Wesley, even the Wright brothers.

There’s a second collection called, “Heroes of History” in this collection you read about people like Benjamin Franklin, Christopher Columbus, Daniel Boone, George Washington, Harriet Tubman, the list goes on and on.

This is a great collection for your young person to have and read. And it’s a providential view of American and Christian history. This is available at WallBuilders.com.

Intro:

President Calvin Coolidge said, “The more I study the Constitution, the more I realize that no other document devised by the hand of man has brought so much progress and happiness to humanity. To live under the American Constitution is the greatest political privilege that was ever accorded to the human race.”

Rick:

Welcome back. Thanks for staying with us on this Foundations of Freedom Thursday here at WallBuilders Live. Our question today, in this particular segment, or last segment, was about when Sharia law becomes an act of sedition. And David, Tim, you guys were still going on that one. Jump back in.

David:

Yeah, I am agreeing with Tim. It’s not going to be legally determined to be sedition. Just because you believe sharia they’re not going to prosecute you for sedition. But here’s the situation that arises out of it. It is incompatible with our constitutional form of government.

You Can’t Use the Bill of Rights to Destroy the Bill of Rights

David:

And I can take you back to what happened with polygamy in the 1800’s. You got to the point where you could advocate for polygamy, you could not practice it. And so your free speech allowed you to say, “Hey, we should have a number of wives.” Alright, you can say that, but the first time you practice it, now you’re in trouble. And that was the legal line that you had to cross. It was not what you said.

And so you can say, “I’m all for Sharia and we need Sharia.” But when you cross the line of actually practicing and implementing it, now you’re into tricky waters.

President Eisenhower has a really good quote on this. And remember, Eisenhower went to war, leading guys into war, losing hundreds of thousands of guys in war, to defend the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, and the rights that we have. And I think he put his finger on it exactly here. This is what President Eisenhower said.

He said, “The Bill of Rights contains no grant of privilege for a group of people to destroy the Bill of Rights. A group dedicated to the ultimate destruction of all civil liberties cannot be allowed to claim civil liberties as its privileged sanctuary from which to carry on subversion of the government.” In other words, you can’t come in and use the Bill of Rights to destroy the Bill of Rights. You can’t come in and use the Constitution to destroy the Constitution.

So, we always understood that you had to put boundaries. We give you free speech, we give you all sorts of stuff, but when you start using that and practicing something that is going to ultimately destroy the Constitution or Bill of Rights, that’s where we draw a line.

Now, within that framework, where this really gets tricky is in the immigration area. Because right now you have so many immigrants coming in out of Sharia compliant countries. They come to America, they’ve been trained to think this way all their life and now suddenly they’re going to think differently in America?

“It Took Me Years to Think Like an American”

David:

Not likely. And that’s why back at the Constitutional Convention the Founding Fathers themselves– and of the 39 who signed the Constitution, nine were immigrants. And Pierce Butler, one of the signers of the Constitution from South Carolina said, “Look, I came out of English held domains I came out of”– I think it was Scotland. He said, “And if I had brought my Scottish ideas here to America, even though I thought I’m an American, it’s an English colony–” He said, “I would have done things that destroyed what America has become.” He said, “It took me years to learn how to think like an American.”

And so that’s why the Founding Fathers put requirements that you had to be a citizen of the state for X number of years before you can be a Congressman – was it nine years for a congressman, 14 years first Senator. We don’t want you close to our government until you think like an American thinks and get rid of the system that you had that was so different from what we have. And that’s why the first immigration law they passed in 1791 they required residency requirements before you can even become a citizen. We don’t want you voting until you learn to think like an American and understand the Constitution and Bill of Rights. You can’t exercise those rights of a citizen until you learn to think like a citizen.

And so that’s the real issue with Sharia law is not that it’s out there, but if you’re going to bring immigrants in, and if you’re going to give them rights to vote, and you’re going to use driver’s license as the basis of voting, now you’re using the Constitution and the country to destroy the Constitution and the country. Because people coming in from the outside it takes them a while to re-learn the American way of life, the American Constitution, the American freedoms, the American republic, the American thoughts and beliefs and what we do with our Bill of Rights. And that’s where it gets really tricky.

So, it’s not likely to be considered sedition, but once you do it, it should be. Once you put in implementation, at that point, man, it’s destroying the nation, undermining the country.

What To Look Forward To

Rick:

Alright, folks, that’s all the time that we have today on our questions. But that particular one we can dive into that a little bit more next week. We’ve got John Guandolo back with us. He’s the guy, David, Tim, of course know him well. He was FBI point guy on these issues, and knows it well, and certainly behind the scenes.

He’s not very popular with the establishment folks that want to ignore these things, but he’s getting very popular across the country with the people that want to understand it. Which is why his organization is called Understanding The Threat. It’s just powerful information, you need to know it. So, be sure and tune in next week to WallBuilders Live as well when John Guandolo is back with us.

Sharia Law An Act Of Sedition? Foundations of Freedom Thursday

Rick:

Thank you for listening today, folks. If you want more of your questions answered, send them to [email protected]. If you want to listen to more of these questions being answered, go to WallBuildersLive.com into the archives and choose any of those Thursday Foundations of Freedom programs. Appreciate you listening today to WallBuilders Live.

Outro:

President Calvin Coolidge said, “The more I study the Constitution, the more I realize that no other document devised by the hand of man has brought so much progress and happiness to humanity. To live under the American Constitution is the greatest political privilege that was ever accorded to the human race.”