RIGHT SPEAK: In Virginia, You Must Love Islam — Or Else; Virginia Begins Criminalizing Opposition to Islam: Sen. Saddam Introduces Bill to Fight ‘Islamophobia’

AP Photo/Kamran Jebreili

In Virginia, You Must Love Islam — Or Else:

In one sense, Saddam Azlan Salim is a classic immigrant success story. Born in Bangladesh, he grew up in northern Virginia and quickly demonstrated an aptitude for the political rough-and-tumble of his adoptive land. Now he is 36 years old, a Virginia state senator, and a rising star in that state’s now-dominant Democrat Party establishment. In another sense, however, Saddam Azlan Salim clearly retains at least some of the sensibilities of the land of his birth, and he wants to bring them to his new land: He has just introduced a bill to criminalize “Islamophobia” in Virginia.

In Bangladesh, criticizing Islam can get you a swift death sentence. Saddam Salim’s Virginia version of Islam’s blasphemy law is much milder. Fox News reported Tuesday that the ambitious young solon’s bill “would define ‘Islamophobia’ ‘as it relates to the crime of assault and battery as malicious prejudice or hatred directed toward Islam or Muslims.’”

This bill is a classic example of the proverbial camel getting his nose under the tent. At first glance, it appears to be crystalline common sense, and something that no one could possibly oppose. After all, no sane person is in favor of assault and battery of any innocent person. To come out against Saddam Azlan Salim’s bill would appear to be tantamount to saying that assault and battery is just fine. Salim is no doubt banking on his colleagues coming to exactly that conclusion and believing that they have no choice but to pass his bill.

Still, there are problems. All “hate crime” laws are problematic because they venture, however gingerly, into the realm of criminalizing speech, and they aren’t actually necessary: Assault is assault, and should be punished accordingly, and the penalty should not be heavier or lighter depending upon the racial, ethnic or religious identity of the victim, and whether or not the attacker said something about that identity.

Even worse, in the case of “Islamophobia,” is the fact that the word has been used for years to refer not only to assaults on innocent people, which no reasonable person condones, but also to honest discussion of the motivating ideology behind jihad violence. It has been quite clear for years that efforts to criminalize “Islamophobia” are actually efforts to restrict criticism of Islam and honest analysis of the jihad imperative under the guise of criminalizing assaults against innocent Muslims. --->READ MORE HERE

Virginia Begins Criminalizing Opposition to Islam:

Sen. Saddam introduces bill to fight ‘Islamophobia’.

Senator Saddam claims that Virginia is in the middle of an ‘Islamophobia’ crisis. The second Muslim selected for the state senate, after Ghazala Hashmi, who is now acting as Virginia’s Lt. Governor, the Bangladeshi immigrant, from a country where non-Muslims are being murdered in the streets, has made complaining about ‘Islamophobia’ in his new home his signature issue.

Sen. Saddam Azlan Salim’s first priority has been a bill to define ‘Islamophobia’. The most notable thing about his bill SB 624 ‘Assault and battery; definition of “Islamophobia”, penalty’ is how completely unnecessary it is. Virginia already has multiple layers of hate crimes enhancements for assaults motivated by race, ethnicity and religion. During Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s term, the legislature has already passed SB 7 (Senate Bill 7) and its counterpart enhancing the assault charge for anyone who “intentionally selects the person against whom a simple assault is committed because of his race, religious conviction, gender, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, color, or ethnic or national origin.”

That should cover Islam and Muslims. And yet Sen. Saddam introduced a 3 page bill with 10 clauses in its first section a whole lot of whom do nothing more than add (including Islam) where it isn’t remotely needed or useful. For example “because of his race, religious conviction (including Islam), gender, disability, gender identity” or “because of his race, religious conviction (including Islam)”. Islam appears to be the only religion being singled out this way.

Why provide Islam with this privileged status? Because it makes Islam distinct, which is a step towards making it superior, and making Islam distinct and superior is the religious mission of all believing Muslims.

This isn’t about making sure that attacks on Muslims are prosecuted, but about providing Islam with special privileges.

And it’s about using supposed crimes against Muslims as bait for Islamophobia indoctrination. The Islamophobia ‘switch’ in SB 624 comes after the ‘bait’ about assaults. First, the bill sets out a definition of ‘Islamophobia’ which transforms a term created by Islamists seeking to impose their religion on society into an official legal term.

Notably, the definition in SB624 states that “Islamophobia means malicious prejudice or hatred directed toward Islam or Muslims.” This distinction is legally significant as ‘prejudice’ towards Islam distinct from prejudice towards Muslims. For example, in the UK burning a Koran has been prosecuted as a form of hate towards Islam. And that opens the door to blasphemy law.

Having malicious prejudice towards Muslims is perfectly sufficient in prosecuting an assault or a case of discrimination. Islam however is a religion and just like any religion or any other belief system, people have the right to be opposed to it as long as they don’t mistreat others.