Posted on 08/18/2011 7:21:25 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator
The threat of the infiltration of Sharia, or Islamic law, into the American court system is one of the more pernicious conspiracy theories to gain traction in our country in recent years.
The notion that Islam is insidiously making inroads in the United States through the application of religious law is seeping into the mainstream, with even some presidential candidates voicing fears about the supposed threat of Sharia to our way of life and as many as thirteen states considering or having already passed bills that would prohibit the application of Sharia law.
Louisiana and Tennessee were among the first to approve such measures. The bills were based on model legislation issued by the American Public Policy Alliance, an advocacy group that defends the legislation as seeking to "protect American citizens' constitutional rights against the infiltration and incursion of foreign laws and foreign legal doctrines, especially Islamic Sharia Law."
When the legislation was introduced in the Tennessee state Senate in early 2010, the bill defined Sharia as a "legal political military doctrine and system adhered to, or minimally advocated by, tens of millions of not hundreds of millions of its followers around the world."
In defense of the bill, state Sen. Bill Ketron said it "deals solely with a single part of Sharia that is strictly political in nature," and "in no way inserts itself into the religious laws of Islam."
The language was nearly identical to that of similar bills considered in other states, some of which were thinly disguised in terms of protecting against "the application of foreign law."
All of this anti-Sharia activity has come despite the complete absence of evidence of the unconstitutional application of foreign or religious law in our judicial system. It has also come with a great deal of political handwringing - and myth making - about the threat of Sharia overtaking this country. This has led, in turn, to a false perception among a growing number of Americans that Sharia is a very real threat to our way of life and constitutional freedoms.
In fact, these legislative efforts are the proverbial solution in search of a problem. The separation of church and state embodied in U.S. and state constitutions prohibits our courts from applying or considering religious law in any way that would constitute government advancement of or entanglement with religious law.
But the anti-Sharia bills are more than a matter of unnecessary public policy. These measures are, at their core, predicated on prejudice and ignorance. They constitute a form of camouflaged bigotry that enables their proponents to advance an idea that finds fault with the Muslim faith and paints all Muslim Americans as foreigners and anti-American crusaders.
It is true that Sharia is being used elsewhere around the world in dangerous ways. While Sharia law can address many daily public and private concerns, it is nonetheless subject to radical interpretation by individuals or groups who subscribe to a more puritanical form of Islamic jurisprudence.
Some individuals try to interpret Sharia law for their own radical agendas. It raises more serious concerns when it comes to implementing Sharia law in its entirety, as can be seen with the examples of Iran, Saudi Arabia and the Taliban. But that certainly doesn't apply to America, where concerns about a "creeping Sharia law" are the stuff of pure paranoia.
If the hysteria over Sharia law continues to percolate through our political and social discourse, there is bound to be unintended consequences.
As we approach the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, in an uncertain economy with millions of Americans still out of work, we also face the prospect of a political season in which more political candidates may be tempted to invoke this mythological threat in an effort to pander to bigotry and fear, and to score political points.
We stand at a crossroads in American society. We have the option of heading down a path toward a greater tolerance of anti-Muslim xenophobia and fear of the "stranger in our midst," or we can rededicate ourselves to the ideal of an America that is open and welcoming to immigrants as well as minority groups who have been here for decades.
Let us hope that the better nature of America will enable us to proceed down the second path and reject those who seek to divide us for political gain, or those who wish to stereotype and scapegoat an entire people because of their religious faith.
We should never diminish the very real threat of terrorism motivated by Islamist fundamentalism coming again to our shores. But as responsible, free-thinking Americans we must be careful to distinguish between the true threats to our freedoms, and identifying their sources, and those who loudly declaim against phantom threats that don't really exist.
Ping.
If whats hiz name can scrap NASA and violate the 1st Amendment, why can’t we have a Jivaro Headhunter outreach program?
Aug 4, 2011
New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie defended his decision to nominate a Muslim judge to the state Superior Court against conservative critics who warned that the new judge will implement Sharia law. The notoriously blunt-spoken Christie calling their fears “crap” and “crazy.”
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/chris-christie-slams-fearmongering-over-sharia-law-210648303.html
The Saudis are sure spending plenty of money to establish colonies here building mosques in rural areas. The prohibition on STATE funding of establishment of theocratic rule in the country does not JUST prohibit THIS country from doing it TO this country.
Of course, because Abe Foxman is a Muslim-coddler, that means that the Jewish religion is one of coddling Muslims, right? I mean, that’s the kind of logic you constantly use to attack Catholics on every Catholic thread you find.
Fortunately, I can recognize that Abe Foxman is a clueless idiot who doesn’t speak for Judaism, but just a pathetic band of idiot leftists who happen to be Jewishand so deign to speak for Jews.
This is a simple question of demographics. As their numbers increase, they will begin to form their subcultures (outside the main stream culture) and exist in parallel. As their numbers continue to rise, they will influence policy makers and the markets. Finally as they approach 1/3 of the over all population they begin to make demands and essentially take over from within. Highly orgnaized, militant, a common vision/cause makes them more influential. Bottom line: In the Muslim world, "Islam" is the mechanism of societal organization and the Westerner when looking at these nations or culture looks at them with secular eyes as this author does.
Bosnia
Parts of India where their population is exploding (pun intended)
etc
etc
etc
Even in Israel, Denmark and the Netherlands we see the same trends. With Islam it's just a game with numbers.
Abe Foxman is an idiot who’d love to play the role of Max in the Sound of Music. But I’m not sure I can agree with critics of Christie for this. Even during the Spanish Inquisition, Muslims held high positions in Spanish society, such as judges, professors, and high ranking royal officials. (Contary to legend, The Inquisition only targeted people who claimed to be Christian.) The judge has sworn an oath to uphold the laws of America. I’m familar with Taqqiya, but I’d say judge him on his rulings and conduct. His clients *were* found innocent, and the accused deserve adequate legal counsel.
Or have I missed something? Is there something these articles have failed to explain? Has this guy ever expressed support for medieval Shariah law? Has he ruled like a leftist, activist?
Abe Foxman is an idiot who’d love to play the role of Max in the Sound of Music. But I’m not sure I can agree with critics of Christie for this. Even during the Spanish Inquisition, Muslims held high positions in Spanish society, such as judges, professors, and high ranking royal officials. (Contary to legend, The Inquisition only targeted people who claimed to be Christian.) The judge has sworn an oath to uphold the laws of America. I’m familar with Taqqiya, but I’d say judge him on his rulings and conduct. His clients *were* found innocent, and the accused deserve adequate legal counsel.
Or have I missed something? Is there something these articles have failed to explain? Has this guy ever expressed support for medieval Shariah law? Has he ruled like a leftist, activist?
"Every Catholic thread I find" almost always seems to have a post by a Catholic making a crack about young earth creationism, a "G-d-breathed Bible" (a quotation from your St. Paul, btw), "bobble toters," snake-handlers, and "know-nothings" (language remarkably similar to that used by Foxman's ADL, btw).
I will never cease to wonder why some Catholics insist on pretending that my criticisms of that religion have no basis in reality when the Catholics on this very forum wear their evolutionism and higher criticism on their sleeves--not to mention just about every Catholic book and periodical of the modern era.
This appears to be the opinion of a student at BYU.
At first I thought that it was a book by some Islamist (political Islam, Sharia law advocate) nut.
I believe though that Islamists will (have?) proclaimed Islam and Sharia law to be the foundation of everything so Mr. Foxman should consider talking to two Islamists and get back to us in the morning.
What do you make of this? The author has written extensively about Islam. The “Gates of Vienna” is referenced by the Oslo murderer in his long paper.
But if the article about what is going on at Lackland AFB is true, this is newsworthy.
“Lackland AFB Prepares for the Mahdi”
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/08/lackland-afb-prepares-for-mahdi.html
—
Would like your opinion.
Thanks for wasting three minutes of my time. That had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with my question.
(OK, Not a complete waste of time... anytime I listen to West is somewhat enjoyable.)
Oh, pleeeease.
More like someone will (in about 200 cases, me) make some comment which doesn’t agree with your exegesis, which will launch you on a tirade along the lines of “first you hold this opinion, and next thing you know you’re accepting evolution and condoning gay marriage.”
By “all the Earth,” does Genesis mean Mt Everest was covered? Maybe not? You ‘re an evolutionist!
Did Moses write Deuteronomy in his own hand? What’s that, you say? It was a redaction written after Moses? You’re evolutionist!
Was the first day 24 hours? Of course it was, you evolutionist!
Was the book of Daniel complete and in its current form by the time of the return from Babylonian exile? Of course, you evolutionist!
You even called me an evolutionist because I wrote that the Masoretic text was standardized after the publication of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Little wonder why you call Benedict XVI and John Paul II evolutionists despite EXTENSIVE writings, including dogmatic encyclicals, describing Adam and Eve as literal, historical figures.
(For any lurkers, I happen to believe that the universe legitimately appears old, but it was created in the state of looking old, just like Adam was created as an adult, and not as a newborn baby or zygote.)
The Department of Homeland Security has been trying for some time to deport Qatanani for lying on his 1999 immigration paperwork. He’d been granted a religious-worker visa in 1996, enabling him to be the imam at the Islamic Center. When it expired in 1999, he sought to become a permanent U.S. resident. Though specifically asked about his criminal history, Qatanani failed to disclose that he was convicted in an Israeli military court for his membership in, and support of, Hamas. Mohammed’s firm helped Qatanani prepare the I-485, and Qatanani later claimed that he’d signed the form because he “trusted his attorney, Sohail Mohammed.” (See Homeland Security Investigation, Appendix, p. 4.)
The deportation case against Qatanani was heard by an immigration judge in 2008. Christie was then the Bush-appointed U.S. attorney for New Jersey, though his office did not handle the case. In light of Qatanani’s track record and the Islamic Center of Passaic County’s connections to the Bush Justice Department’s then-ongoing HLF prosecution, it is nothing short of shocking that U.S. attorney Christie went to Qatanani’s mosque for a Ramadan celebration while the immigration case was underway. There, he is reported to have embraced Qatanani and praised the former Hamas operative as “a man of great good will.”
More astoundingly, Christie permitted one of his assistant U.S. attorneys, Charles B. McKenna, to testify at the immigration hearing as a character witness on behalf of Qatanani — i.e., a Justice Department official was dispatched to undermine the Homeland Security Department’s case against Qatanani, which was built in part on an investigation conducted by the FBI, an agency of the Justice Department.
The immigration judge, Alberto Riefkohl, ultimately ruled in Qatanani’s favor, an absurd decision in which he baselessly discredited two federal agents who’d testified about Qatanani’s admission that he’d been arrested for Hamas activities, and irrationally discounted the evidence of Qatanani’s Israeli conviction. The judge stressed, in arriving at this ruling, how impressed he’d been by “law-enforcement officers that took time from their respective duties to appear before the court.” I’m sure. But the feel-good hallucinations of bridge-building can’t erase the reality of terror promotion. Judge Riefkohl was later reversed by the Board of Immigration Appeals, which found that there was no basis for Riefkohl to have ignored the government’s evidence.
The questions about Governor Christie’s appointment of Sohail Mohammed and his exertions on behalf of Mohammed’s client, Mohammed Qatanani, have nothing to do with either sharia or the all-purpose smear of Islamophobia. They are about the governor’s judgment. They are about a U.S. attorney with political ambitions pandering to a politically active constituency at the expense of national security and enforcement of the immigration laws. They are about his decision to award a state judgeship to an attorney who was an active and vocal board member of a very troubling Islamist organization — and who has a penchant for presuming that perfectly valid anti-terror prosecutions are, instead, anti-Muslim persecutions.
Contrary to Abe Foxman's ignorant or delusional assertion, Sharia has already come to American courts. In August 2010, Judge Joseph Charles cited Shariah in refusing to grant a woman a restraining order after a divorce. And we all know that Foxman is not too lazy or ignorant to do a simple websearch for "shariah in american courts" . Had he bothered to do so, he would find multiple other instances of US courts citing Shariah. Since Foxman refutes none of these and simply writes "not necessary" and "racism", it is clear that he doesn't care about the facts. What I don't don't understand is why "The Jewish Press" would run such silly propoganda? Are you giving Foxman rope to hang his position with his own arrogance and foolishness? Or are you joining his crusade to keep the Jewish community docile until New York becomes like Malmo, Sweden?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.