Restriction Controversy

Words: 597
Pages: 3

In the non inherently violent religion of Islam, Jihadists, Islamist, and Conservative Muslims do exist, but the overwhelming majority are still Passive Muslims; therefore, the travel restriction policy imposed by the U.S. is irrational. The restriction is on the countries of Venezuela, North Korea, Chad, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Iran, and Syria. This list includes six Muslim majority countries. The unethically of the restriction policy is what has caused so much controversy; it looks like President Trump did it to discriminate against those of the Muslim faith.
Although Jihadists, Islamists, and Conservative Muslims do exist, the vast majority are passive Muslims, just trying to live their lives the way the Quran tells them to. These passives
…show more content…
Islam has been around for 1,400 years; the youngest of the seven major religions. Like all religions, it was formed to help bring about peace. Now the world’s second most followed religion (behind Christianity) is thought of as a violent one. In Fareed Zakaria’s Why they hate us article, he states, “When experts try to explain that in the 14th century, Islamic civilization was the world’s most advanced, or that the Quran was once read as a liberal and progressive document, they’re not hundred and either realities of backwardness today. What they’re trying to say is that it can change.” This shows that Islam and the interpretation of the Quran has changed over time. The Jihadists are cherry picking verses of the Quran and interpreting them in different ways. These verses tell them that apostates should be killed and blasphemy punished. However, when Islam was beginning nowhere in the Quran did it say to kill apostates. Therefore, the travel restrictions imposed by President Trump are irrational because the violence in the name of Islam isn’t even based on Islam. It is 0.01% of so called Muslims who have distorted interpretations of the Quran telling them that they should kill in the name of Islam; the Quran doesn’t say that they should kill, but rather that they should not leave the