Sooner or later, the West has to realize that not all religions are equal. Now, for reasons only known to them, the Leftists would like to see Christianity squelched so that they can continue their sexual auto-demolition of western society. But when we’re gone, they’ll have a much harder time taking down the Jihadis. That will be a completely different cup of tea since the Jihadis don’t play by the same rules of social engagement. If they don’t like you, they won’t vote against you; they’ll simply blow you up.
There won’t be any Christians in influence to blame anymore, although Obama still likes to kick George Bush around for his problems. And there won’t be anyone left to fight the Jihadis either. (Leftists don’t fight, and when they finally figure out that we live in a rough and tumbly world, they’ll fold and play the dhimmi rather than actually fight for what they believe in. They have never understood or accepted the notion of sacrifice, and I don’t expect them to do so in the near future.)
But, beyond all this, there is a question of religious freedom we need to re-examine. Just like free speech, religious freedom is not an absolute “right” at all. You cannot simply stick the word “religion” on something and have a carte blanche to advocate for anything you want. A religion that advocates for murder or suicide, for instance, is clearly a threat to our society, and the State has every right to suppress it. Just like the State has every right to suppress Islam if Islam becomes synonymous with violence and destruction. If the moderates in Islam do not take control and start countering the poisonous rhetoric and violent teaching that its extremist members advocate for, then for the sake of the common good, they must realize that their religion will not and should not enjoy the same privileges that others do.
The Catholic Church, for instance, while recognizing the principle of religious freedom, places such a freedom within “due limits”:
This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.
The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.
It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth. However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. Therefore the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed. (Dignitatis Humane, 2)
In exercising religious freedom, adherents to religion are to do so “within due limits” and “provided that just public order be observed”. In other words, the Church is calling for a “common ground” in the search for religious truth by implicitly recognizing the necessity for everyone, regardless of their religion, to observe the natural law which binds everyone. If the public order is breached; that is, if anyone or any religion attacks the common good or seeks to break down public order, the State has every right to step in and suppress that religion. They have that right in order to protect society. Indeed, failing to do so may create a dangerous atmosphere of vigilantism where individuals and not the State take their own security (and the law) into their own hands and seek to maintain order and justice apart from the State. This can lead to civil unrest and even civil war.