Pipes' language -- "shariah norms in the West," "the imposition of an Islamic order" -- evokes a potential transformation of our culture that is nothing short of revolutionary. Our elites seem not to have the slightest clue how devastating such a change, which comes under the rubric of Islamization, would be to our Judeo-Christian-rooted civilization. Indeed, it is increasingly clear they don't know the difference between "an Islamic order" and Judeo-Christian-rooted civilization -- or even that there is a difference.
There are exceptions. In November, there was Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla., who stood up for constituents' free speech under CAIR pressure. Now Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has become both the lone standard bearer of free speech about Islam and the favorite whipping boy of the PC elites. In a letter to constituents about the decision of Rep.-elect Keith Ellison, D-Minn., to use a Koran at his swearing-in ceremony, Goode expressed what I take to be his recognition that the laws of Islam -- which prohibit religious freedom, freedom of speech and conscience, equality before the law and women's rights -- do not augment, but rather contravene the founding principles of the United States. He also wrote: "I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America."
It's difficult to argue with Goode's logic. Indeed, the test case of the age -- Europe -- demonstrates that Islamic immigration brings Islamic law, which is demonstrably at odds with American "values and beliefs." Forgoing debate, however, Goode's critics have resorted to name-calling and platitudes about "tolerance," failing utterly to notice the gross intolerance of the Islamic tradition. Worst of all, their tactics seem designed to shut up Goode, and anyone else who might follow his bold example. Will they?
It's the question of 2007.