Is it true that Spencer wants to stop all Muslim immigration?
Four weeks ago I noted that Robert Spencer had said in a FrontPage Magazine interview that Muslim immigration to the West should be stopped.
I had forgotten that last May, as brought to my attention by reader RB, Spencer wrote that a woman student from Mali, who had undergone female genital mutilation, was facing an arranged marriage, and was seeking asylum in the U.S., “should be granted asylum at once, and U.S. opposition to this practice—so often justified by reference to Islamic teaching—made clear.” Spencer thus enunciated a principle by which tens of millions of Muslim girls and women plus their relatives would have a free ticket to the U.S., along with housing, welfare, and all the rest of the package that comes to refugees and asylees. How does he reconcile his support for instant FGM-based asylum status with his December 2008 position that all Muslim immigration should be stopped?
Kidist Paulos Asrat writes:
Regarding Spencer and the idea of giving asylum to Muslim women undergoing various kinds of abuse ranging from FGM to honor killings to child marriage, this is an argument made by many vocal ex-Muslim women. The most vocal has been Hirsi Ali, who has advocated bringing these Muslim women out of their backward cultures into Western countries, for safety and reform. Another such voice is the brave, but overly emotional and at times illogical, Wafa Sultan.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 29, 2008 04:16 PM | Send