Auron MacIntyre argued that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with the constitutional and cultural foundations of the United States, telling Benny Johnson that he supports restrictions on Muslim immigration because he believes large-scale Muslim migration would eventually undermine assimilation and reshape American law and politics.

Johnson asked MacIntyre to explain the basis for that position.

"Why do you say that Islam is incompatible with America? Can you unpack why you would be in favor of an Islamic ban on immigration?" Johnson asked.

MacIntyre began by pointing to conditions in Muslim-majority countries and arguing that migration from those nations to the West reflects problems within those societies.

Gold. Upgraded. Buy real gold from $1. Store it in America. Sell it with one click.

"Sure. I mean, first and foremost, we can simply see what Islam produces. No one wants to live in Islamic countries. Muslims don't want to live in Islamic countries. They flee to the West, where they can have prosperity. Ultimately, Muslim countries are a disaster. The entire area where they are concentrated in the world is constantly at war. It's violent. It's brutish. It treats women terribly, and ultimately, it creates an environment that no one wants to be a part of."

MacIntyre then shifted to the American constitutional system, arguing that the country’s founding framework was built around a religious and cultural tradition that he believes does not translate to Islam.

"And so, obviously, just on its face, the products of Islam are terrible. Also, the fact that this is a competing faith is a big deal. You know, John Adams said that our Constitution is only for a religious people following the 10 Commandments, Christians, and it's completely incompatible with any other."

He claimed that this incompatibility creates pressure for legal and political structures outside the Constitution.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

"That means that literally, according to the founding fathers, the Constitution cannot govern Muslims. They can't do it. It doesn't work. So if we're going to have Muslims in the United States, we must have something besides the Constitution that govern us."

MacIntyre said he believes Americans are already seeing the effects of what he described as competing legal and cultural systems.

"And I think that's what a lot of people are seeing, even though they can't really put their finger on it. It feels like our country is no longer governed by the Constitution because we've invited so many people who can't possibly be governed by it. That we've made all these patchworks, all these different types of law, civil rights law, everything else that has really superseded the Constitution in many situations."

He then made broader claims about assimilation and political power, arguing that Muslim communities would seek to maintain their own cultural and religious practices rather than adopt existing American norms.

"And finally, it's really important to understand that Muslims will not adopt your way of life. You will end up being ruled by them. These are not people who are looking for assimilation, they're looking for domination. Islam is a violent, militant culture based on conquest. It always has been."

MacIntyre also argued that demographic growth and political organization would eventually translate into greater influence inside democratic institutions.

"Muslims are very clear that they're going to use the womb, birth, ultimately overflow with demographics that are going to destroy your country. They're going to become highly political and organize inside your democracy because we know ultimately democracies are built on these voting blocks, and they will be able to extract a price and eventually take over."

Sharia law was another central part of MacIntyre’s argument. He said legislative bans would not be sufficient to prevent Islamic legal traditions from being practiced within Muslim communities.

"And very importantly, Muslims are going to practice Sharia law. We've had a lot of people talk about banning Sharia law, and sure, I'm fine with that. But ultimately, that's not going to solve the problem because Sharia law is what Muslims do once you get enough of them anywhere."

MacIntyre pointed to France as an example of what he sees as the limits of secular assimilation policies.

"In France, they've banned all like public displays of religion because they just wanted to build this secular French identity built on principles, and ultimately we would just assimilate everybody into that. And guess what? Muslims are still rioting in France right now. They're still practicing Sharia law. The bands have done nothing."

He concluded by comparing Islamic legal traditions with the English common law tradition that influenced early American institutions.

"So we need to understand that when you bring Muslims here, they will do Sharia law because that's what Muslims do. You can write all the bans you want; it doesn't matter. When we had mainly Anglo-Protestants in the United States, we got Anglo-English common law because that's what we descended from. When you bring Muslims in the United States, you're going to get Sharia law because that's what Muslims bring with them. It's very simple."

WATCH:

Gold is the oldest answer. SoundMoney makes owning it as easy as the apps you already use.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.