Mohammed was last, not first. He also said there won't be any more prophets after him.

thankfully this could never happen in the United States

I wonder whether those people who said that ever expect a spanish inquisition.

My parents loved to quote the old testament saying they could kill me if I was a disobedient child.

I've had people straight up say "Gilead is perfectly reasonable given the declining birthrates". Bro, you can't think of a better way to solve declining birthrates than ritual rape? Gilead doesn't even solve it very well in-universe, it does a bunch of stuff that is actually counter to that goal, and there's no particular reason to think it would do any better in real life.

...?

How could this never happen in the United States?

Have you never been to the south? They have endless churches chanting for stuff not far off from this.

The southern baptist convention literally exists because they wanted to define Christianity with God specifically choosing slavery of the white man over black people as commanded, they used stuff like this as basis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_Ham

I really worry sometimes, I didn't see the book as interesting, because it's not that far-fetched.

https://youtu.be/pA0W0pRqlDI

When I was young we could never imagine a psychotic clown like Trump running for office...

THANKS FOR THE TIP BROTHER! I'LL CHECK IT OUT, I QUITE ENJOY FUNNY SKITS! I'M SURE IT'LL CRANK MY HOG WHEN I WATCH IT LATER. AROOO!!!

You're making it really hard for me to not go see what dumb shit people are lecturing Margaret Atwood about regarding her own novel.

So an average day on Twitter?

The book wasn't about Islam. It also wasn't about Christianity. It was about the Dominion Theorcracy which resembles more what we see with the religious extremists in America.

Edit: I would like to add that it also fits religious extremism in Islamic countries, but that's not what the aim of the author was. She definitely meant America and their extremists. She even created a flag that looks awfully similar to the American flag.

Dominion Theology is a group of Christian political ideologies that seek to institute a nation governed by Christians based on their personal understandings of biblical law. Extents of rule and ways of achieving governing authority are varied. For example, Dominion Theology can include theonomy, but does not necessarily involve advocating Mosaic law as the basis of government. The label is applied primarily toward groups of Christians in the United States.

The red and white garb is from The Handmaid's Tale. I think the original cartoon might be suggesting that the voting booth is a chance for women to shed the garb that's representative of patriarchal oppression. Given reproductive rights are a big topic this election, I think that seems true, to an extent.

For figuring out what the twitter user was talking about, let's consider a more general interpretation of the cartoon, such as "the themes of theocratic and patriarchal oppression are relevant to this US election". It seems that they have picked up on the fact that theocratic patriarchy is a thing in the Handmaid's Tale, but they have (likely due to cognitive dissonance) concluded that the author clearly couldn't be talking about Christianity, because Christianity is Good, and they are Christian, and they are also Good, you see?

Now, I haven't actually read The Handmaid's Tale, so I don't know to what extent it is targeted allegorical criticism at Christianity. It is true that some Muslims also ascribe to (and attempt to enforce on others) a theocratic patriarchal ideology, and also the shape of this kind of oppression looks pretty similar no matter what religion is driving the theocracy — so it's certainly plausible that The Handmaid's Tale could be used to criticise theocratic patriarchal manifestations of Islam too. However, the twitter user is clearly not thinking along these lines. I think they believe that The Handmaid's Tale is aimed at Islam because it helps alleviate some of the cognitive dissonance they feel from a book that is directly criticising them. It definitely is very Christian coded though, I feel like this twitter user is so close to getting it that they're a self-awarewolf

Because certainly not all Christians are patriarchally oppressive. Some do the most progressive, compassionate people I know are Christian and they will be the first to acknowledge the argument that Christianity itself may be inherently patriarchally oppressive (as well as other kinds of oppressive). We can sort of imagine a separation, where there's an abstract "Christianity", and then there's the ways in which Christianity has been used as a tool of oppression by powerful people. I like the way my friend put it: "I really want to say that the assholes [who use Christianity as an excuse to hate and oppress others] aren't real Christians, but that feels too easy and appealing to do — denouncing them in that way doesn't feel very Christian of me, because it would allow me to ignore them. I think my duty as a Christian is to acknowledge the discomfort and be on the watch for this and challenge it where I can, especially in my own community."

TL;DR:

• the Handmaid's Tale is against religious theocracies (such as what conservatives Christians would have the world look like)
• this election is big for women's rights, which have been eroded largely by religious conservatives
• a Muslim theocratic patriarchy would look similar to the Christian version, especially considering that theocratic patriarchies aren't about religion per se, but using religion as a tool of oppression.
• thus the Handmaid's Tale can be seen as a criticism of both Muslim and Christian theocratic patriarchy, though it's obvious to most people who have read the book that it is more directly critiquing the Christian variant.
• The twitter user has (presumably) read the book and seems to have been close to "getting the point", but their xenophobia saved them from having to do some uncomfortable and difficult self reflection about their own (presumed) Christianity.

Oh you and your logic.