Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Salon rolls out Shari'a law initiative for the USA

Salon ~ staunch advocates of Shari'a law in the US ~ play it a little bit more cautious in this article ~ do they really want to be seen as being connected to a legal system that would make all US non-Muslims second class citizens and would require conversion to Islam ~ to gain equal rights ~ their inalienable rights.

Perhaps it is better to take cover behind their 'everybody-is-racist-who-doesn't-agree-with-Shari'a' argument. Than to stand up and say what Shari'a law is really about.

Just what is Salon supporting?



Political Islam: Sharia is based on the principles found in the Koran and other Islamic religious/political texts. There are no common principles between American law and Sharia.

Under Sharia law:
  • There is no freedom of religion [No-compulsion-Muhamad and his marry band of 100 followers changed, when he picked up the sword to forcibly convert worshippers of the old Kaaba gods and goddess ~ some Allah's own daughters.]
  • There is no freedom of speech [The poet of Arabia ~ who was beheaded ~ for challenging Muhammad's newly formed kaaba ideology.]
  • There is no freedom of thought [Hadiths: meccan woman criticizes Muhammad in her own home has sword driven through her chest as she finishes nursing infant ~ Muhammad expresses pleasure at man's show of loyalty]
  • There is no freedom of artistic expression [Extreme limits are placed on what Muslims can draw or design ~ the same star pattern is seen in as many variations ~ on almost everything ~ across the Islamic world. Most other designs are forbidden or need to pass for approval.]
  • There is no freedom of the press [One Saudi journalist heard that the Kingdom was about to introduce more liberal policies ~ and wrote that a Muslim can change their religion ~ he was imprisoned.] 
  • There is no equality of peoples—a non-Muslim, a Kafir, is never equal to a Muslim [Koran 9:29, and other Koran chapters give clear instruction on subjugation of non-Muslims] 
  • There is no equal protection under Sharia for different classes of people. Justice is dualistic, with one set of laws for Muslim males and different laws for women and non-Muslims. [Muhammad lived in the 7th Century ~ to question, the religion or his vision ~ is death ~ so little or nothing changes ~ it is clearly something we don't need]
  • There are no equal rights for women [Shari'a law in the US would mean Muslim women or any woman who marries a Muslim man ~ would take a drop in civil rights ~ under Shari'a a Muslim woman has 1/3 of the rights of a Muslim man]
  • Women can be beaten  [Court in UAE recently ruled Muslim man 'can' beat their wives]
  • A non-Muslim cannot bear arms [In Pakistan non-Muslims can't join the army.]
  • There is no democracy, since democracy means that a non-Muslim is equal to a Muslim [democracy with a dash of Shari'a, meaning all rights and freedoms are limited to it - or to theocratic rule.]
  • Our Constitution is a man-made document of ignorance, jahiliyah, that must submit to Sharia [what is worrying is that groups like the Salon paper think that we can introduce a 'little' Shari'a law and then negotiate ~ with what is a multi-headed beast ~ if the moderates are successful  in introducing Shari'a law ~ the radicals are going to show up in no time ~ and the moderates being moderates ~ have a built in capitulation chip ~ they will fold to the radicals !! Who wants to be responsible for the results of this experiment ~ take a look around at the Islamic world!!]
  • Non-Muslims are dhimmis, third-class citizens [Citizenship status in the Islamic world is dependant on religious affiliation ~ a Christian would be granted more rights and privileges than a Bahai ~ for example Bahai children can't attend state school in Egypt, or a Bahai can be killed in Iran without penalty.]
  • All governments must be ruled by Sharia law [Muhammad ordered his men to rape captive women, told them they could sleep with the dead, one could begin to image the horror that he wrought to raise his religion from its pantheon origins ~ to the erasure of these gods. He order his followers ~ as Bin Laden his loyal servant understood so well ~ to make war with the unbeliever until all say there is no God by Allah of the Kaaba stone.  Rejecting is vision ~ stopping this madman once and for all is a must. May Islam go peacefully and settle into obscurity in Arabia ~ from whence it came]
  • Unlike common law, Sharia is not interpretive, nor can it be changed [The media in the US talk of an Islamic law, which is 'open to interpretation' or a play-doh Islamic Shari'a ~ a theocratic law that can be moulded?? ~ but isn't that counter-intuitive. We don't have religious law ~ because the laws can't be changed.] 
  • There is no Golden Rule

We must be careful ~ of those who know nothing of Islam ~ who promote it in the name of anti-racism. Anti-racism campaigns should never be used for the promotion of Islam or for the installation of Shari'a laws!!


The first anti-sharia law to pass in the nation, a ballot measure in Oklahoma that bars courts from considering Islamic law, creates "harmful, real-world consequences" and "tramples the free exercise rights of a disfavored minority faith," the American Civil Liberties Union charges in a new brief challenging the law.

When it was approved by voters last November, the Oklahoma "Save our State" amendment helped set off a wave of anti-sharia initiatives around the country. But less attention has been paid to the subsequent legal battle, which, so far, opponents of the measure appear to be winning.


Last year a federal district court blocked implementation of the measure. The state then appealed to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the venue in which the ACLU filed its brief today.

The brief argues that the plaintiff in the case, a local Muslim leader named Muneer Awad, would suffer real injury from the anti-sharia measure, known as SQ755:

Under SQ755, Mr. Awad’s last will and testament, which was properly executed in accordance with the laws of Oklahoma, will likely be rendered unenforceable in whole or in part because it incorporates instructions based on his Islamic faith. This injury alone is sufficient to confer standing for Mr. Awad’s Free Exercise and Establishment Clause claims.

Mr. Awad’s Establishment Clause claim is also supported by another harm suffered as a result of SQ755: injury attendant to official governmental condemnation of his faith, rendering him an outsider in his own political community.

The brief also takes aim at the "Save our State" amendment's ban on consideration of international law in state courts:

This development could have a number of troubling, real-world implications for Oklahoma citizens. For instance, in the area of family law, Oklahoma presently gives full effect and recognition to foreign adoption decrees “issued by a court or other governmental authority with appropriate jurisdiction in a foreign country.” ...

Similarly, Oklahoma courts would be unable to determine if a lawful foreign marriage existed in cases where an Oklahoma couple were married outside the U.S. and sought to have their marriage legally recognized in Oklahoma.

If more of these anti-sharia laws pass in various states, one wonders if they will simply be struck down one after another by the courts.

Salon

No comments: