I was recently involved in a deal here in Virginia where the parties agreed to have certain portions of their dispute settled by an arbitrator using Sharia law. The Sharia provision in the contract is quite enforceable.
What if the outcome of the arbitration violates the US laws of contracts?
Generally speaking, the provisions of a contract trump most statutory provisions when it comes to contracts. Virginia contract law might say that doing x constitutes a default under general contract law, but you and I can agree in our contract that x will not be a default. Charging interest is legal under contract law, but you and I can decide in our contract that you cannot charge me interest for the loan you gave me.
What then, my friend? Which has superiority? What they agreed to, or the law of the land?
Unless what we agreed to is specifically illegal (a contract for prostitution) or violates public policy (a contract provision that says the husband gets custody of the kids upon divorce, no matter what the cause of the dirvorce), what the parties agreed to has priority.
Sorry, it just cannot be correct. And it better never be, either.
Islam is already an outrage and its swarming the West. They are willing to fight for Islam and Sharia....and I'm willing to oppose it.