I have been told by several Muslims that, according to their theology, if a person merely says the words, "there is no other G*d but Allah and Mohammed is his profit" (deliberate changes), that no matter how cynically it is said, even with no intent whatever to truly acknowledge Allah as such,
THE SPEAKER IS THEN A MUSLIM AND BECOMES SUBJECT TO SHARIA LAW. Thus, those proceedings may not have been INTENDED by the schools as religious rites, but those whose religion is being discussed do so regard it. Any Christian or Jew who understood that should properly regard it as sacrelige, not mere cultural education. One could either consider it a form of government enforced sacrelige against those who hold other faiths (for which the government has no power to prevent their option to refuse the proceeding via the free exercise clause) OR it is in fact a Muslim rite that has been misrepresented. In either case, as far as Muslims are concerned, those kids have subjected themselves to a religious rite that has placed their lives in either spiritual or physical jeopardy and certainly has no place in a public school.
IMHO, they are being set up. If all American kids have somehow "magically" (thank you NEA) said these words, then Muslims, knowing that, have a basis for passing judgment and executing punishment. America will have thus been put into a position of being forced to fight Islam to the death.
If this fact was not made a key point of the original case against the school district, then the way it was prosecuted is beyond incompetent. It is, in my opinion, a major failing of American law that such pertinent facts cannot be added for consideration upon appeal.
It is, in my opinion, a major failing of American law that such pertinent facts cannot be added for consideration upon appeal. If you could bring in pertinent facts on appeal that were known at the time of the trial, but not introduced, then it would become a deliberate tactic. No judgment would ever become final, because the losing side would introduce another piece of evidence to keep the cycle going.
I have been told by several Muslims that, according to their theology, if a person merely says the words, "there is no other G*d but Allah and Mohammed is his profit" (deliberate changes)*, that no matter how cynically it is said, even with no intent whatever to truly acknowledge Allah as such, THE SPEAKER IS THEN A MUSLIM AND BECOMES SUBJECT TO SHARIA LAW. [*smart move by CO so that he can't be said to have accepted sharia law by having written the phrase <G>]
This claim sounds plausible given that all it takes for a Muslim man to divorce his wife is to face Mecca and say three times "I divorce you." It is well worth vetting out the truth of the matter. The judge just dismissed this case -- she didn't give it a final ruling that could have ramifications further on down the line in all jurisdictions. So the truth might prove useful to others who might choose to make such curriculum the subject of a legal challenge in another jurisdiction.
Also, how the Islamists would bring such a demand to force compliance in this country is another, nontrivial, matter. However, it does fit well with those who have a PC and/or statist agenda. "You will comply!"