In studying historical events, there’s a tendency to apply a “what if” analysis. This involves pondering “what if” some other influence had intervened and whether it could have resulted in a more favorable outcome.
For example, what if Colonel George Custer had waited for the reinforcements which were already on the way to assist him before charging into the Battle of the Little Big Horn? Or what if the captain of the Titanic had opted to hit the iceberg straight on rather than trying to glance off its side? Or what if a German soldier during World War I named Adolf Hitler had been killed on the battlefield rather than merely wounded?
In this vein, what if two influential people, who lived in separate eras in history, had lived during the same time frame? Would they have influenced each other in some way?
Take, for example, President Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), born in the Virginia Colony, and English journalist and poet Rudyard Kipling (1865–1936), born in British India. What if both were able to share insights with each other into a topic of mutual interest—Islam?
It is well known that one of the most knowledgeable presidents in U.S. history on Islam was Jefferson. Having a curiosity about the religion, young law student Jefferson purchased a 1734 translation of the Quran in 1765 that today is part of the Library of Congress collection.
While in London in 1786, Jefferson earned a quick education from Tripoli’s Muslim ambassador when he queried him as to why his Barbary Coast pirates were attacking U.S. merchant ships for no reason. The ambassador did not hesitate to make the bold declaration that, as Muslims, it was their right and duty to make war on non-Muslims and to enslave them as prisoners. It was also their belief that any Muslim killed in battle was guaranteed a place in Paradise.
The Tripoli ambassador also explained the Muslim right to sell captured sailors for ransom, and that in order to avoid further attacks, the U.S. would have to pay tribute. Jefferson wrote to Chief Justice John Jay explaining this and that the Muslim justification for attacking the U.S. “was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, [Mohammad] that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not become Muslim were sinners, that it was the right and duty of Muslim countries to make war upon non-Muslim countries….”
The U.S. would fight two wars with the pirates—the First Barbary War from 1801–1805 and the Second from 1815–1816. Fortunately, when Jefferson was serving as Secretary of State under President George Washington, construction of the first six ships of the U.S. Navy was ordered in expectation of confronting the future belligerence of the Muslim pirates. The first war ended with the U.S. paying ransom and tribute; the second ended in a decisive defeat of the pirates and no future tribute payments.
There was a lesson Jefferson learned from his direct experience with the Muslim ambassador that stayed with him for the rest of his life. He saw Islam as incompatible with democracy for two obvious reasons.
First, it was based on the premise it was superior to all other religions, empowering its followers with a perceived right to commit violence to force other religious believers into conversion or submission.
Second, in governing the nation, the Constitution does not unite church and state; however, as far as Islam is concerned, there is no such separation—i.e., both church and state are all-in-one, thus, making the religion incompatible with a constitutional democracy.
Sixty-six years after Jefferson’s death, Kipling wrote a poem and, while not directed specifically at Islam, it underscores the inherent cultural incompatibility Islam brings with it in attempting to fit in with Western democracies. Islam becomes the virtual square peg in search of the round hole it will never find.
The situation is underscored in the first line of Kipling’s “The Ballad of East and West.” It states, “Oh, East is East, and West is West and never the twain shall meet.” Clearly, the ballad suggests that differences between some cultures, such as Eastern and Western or Muslim and non-Muslim, are so vast that they can never really be truly bridged. If one recognizes what Islam seeks—i.e., total submission of all other religions to it and a life dictated by sharia law—where Islam exists, by definition, democracy simply cannot exist.
Because Jefferson was serving as minister to France when the Constitution was being drafted, he was not present during discussions concerning the document. Across the Atlantic Ocean in Europe, and based on his knowledge that Islamic culture was a misfit for American culture, he probably believed both cultures would thrive in their separate parts of the world and never the twain would meet.
Had Jefferson had any idea that Islam would spread its wings and arrive in the New World, it is difficult to believe a man with the great wisdom he and the other founding fathers possessed would not have imposed some necessary limitations within the Constitution.
No one religion may claim superiority—as Islam does—mandating that such other believers transition to Islam, or face death. Nor can an officeholder ignore the separation of church and state to claim they serve as an elected official on behalf of their religion—i.e., in a sectarian capacity rather than a secular one.
Our government has already bent a knee to Islam, particularly during the 21st century. While the offences might seem minor, they have opened the door to anything that may now follow. In 2006, the first Muslim elected to office, Keith Ellison, placed his hand on the Quran once owned by Jefferson to take his oath of office, instead of on the Bible.
For 181 years Congress had banned head coverings from being worn by members but in 2018 with the election of Ilhan Omar, a partial repeal of the ban was allowed so she could wear a headscarf in accordance with Islamic tradition.
Perhaps we ought to reflect on the wisdom and knowledge of Jefferson when considering how much Islam we allow into American society.
Jesus Christ is King
