Muslim Woman: Last amongst the Equals

Note: 

The intent of Sharia is to serve justice, indeed, the foundation for a safe and peaceful soceity rests on justice where no one is apprehensive of the other. However, Sharia like all other laws of the land is literllay owned by the ones who desire to control the future of society. Unless the technicalities are debated freely, it remains a control mechanism of in most of the Muslim majority states. Much of the Personal Sharia is fine, bus some parts of the Public Sharia dealing with rape, adultery, divorce, apostasy, child custody and blasphemy are contentious. More on Public and Personal Sharia at: http://sharialaws.blogspot.com/2011/07/sharia-in-one-gulp.html

Mike Ghouse
# # #
Muslim Woman: Last amongst the Equals
By Mohammed Khan Hanif(UK)

I was talking to a Muslim sister on the topic Women's status in Islam and during our conversation she told me that her daughter had read a book entitled "Price of Honour"[1] by an English woman journalist Jan Goodwin. She told me that this book had turned her daughter against Islam. I was naturally very curious, so I read the book. However, it contained little that was new to me. The book deals with issues relating to the appalling treatment that Muslim women suffer in Muslim society. The articles were well researched, cleverly put together and unfortunately contained painfully true accounts of Muslim women around the world. Reading them was unsettling and disturbing for anyone - particularly for those who have little or no knowledge of the Qur’an, the Book Muslims believe to be God’s guidance revealed verbatim.

After reading the book I felt I must at least attempt to clear one point. If this is fully understood, then people will recognise the disparity between Islam, as found in the Qur’an and Islam, as currently practised by those who profess to be Muslims. If the reader understands this fundamental difference, then I will have achieved my aim.

There is a common misconception that a law that is implemented in a ‘Muslim’ state is an Islamic law.[2] Unfortunately this misunderstanding not only lies with the non-Muslim, but those who are presumed to be the pillars of established Muslim authority have also embedded it into the image of Islam. This situation has remained unchallenged for fear of repercussions by the religious establishment; and whosoever challenges their autocratic dominance and `divine' right is likely to be condemned as an apostate. However, I will attempt to challenge the misconception that what a ‘Muslim’ state calls laws, are what the Qur’anic teachings direct and condone.

The primary source of Islamic law is in the Qur’an.[3] Readers of this Qur’an will realise that these laws are also near common sense. On the other hand, most prevalent ‘Muslim’ laws are based on tradition, and that is not necessarily in accord with Qur’anic injunctions. Many of these laws are wrongly attributed to God’s Messenger - Muhammad ^pbuh [4]. The basic rule to remember is that any law that is against the Qur’an, we, as Muslims, should not accept it as Islamic and it cannot be the word of our Prophet, as he would never preached anything anti-Qur’anic. "I but follow (naught but) what is revealed to me (The Qur’an)". Qur’an 6:50, 10:15, 7:3.

Nevertheless, some religious jurists over, a thousand years ago, constituted certain laws according to their own beliefs, interpretations, experiences and traditions of the time. Perhaps more importantly some of the Shariah laws were interpreted and enacted under the direction or influence of the ‘Muslim’ monarchs.[5]

Therefore some of the Shariah and Hudood laws are not based or supported by Qur’anic injunctions. In fact, some of the laws are in clear contradiction with the Qur’an but are wrongly credited to Islam. Under the current Hudood law, maximum punishment for Zina (adultery) is death by stoning - although this is not found in the Qur’an.

As reported in the Daily Nawa'e Waqt Pakistan, 22^nd March 1981 and Pakistan Times, 10^th April 1981, a court in Pakistan concluded that stoning to death was un-Islamic because it contravenes a clear Qur’anic injunction. "The woman and man guilty of Zina (adultery/fornication), - flog each of them with a hundred stripes…" Qur’an 24:2.

The late General Zia-Ul-Haq, the then President and Chief Martial Law Administrator, challenged and rejected the court decision because in his opinion "The Judges did not do their home work". As a result, Zia dismissed the whole bench and appointed judges of his own choice who predictably overturned the former decision. It was said that Zia had been criticised and put under immense pressure by the Saudi king to dismiss all judges for setting a ‘wrong’ precedent.

This example clearly demonstrates how certain traditional laws are constituted and labelled as Islamic laws. As a result of this perverted belief, that all laws made by ‘Muslim’ governments are Islamic and in accordance with the Qur’an, the media (and other ill-informed people) can attack Islam for the un-Islamic beliefs that are in reality rooted in tradition and culture. This myth is perpetuated, by people such as General Zia and other figureheads in ‘Islamic’ establishment and that consequently tar all Muslims with the same brush.

An ordinary person cannot offer any proper answer to such attacks as he or she has also been indoctrinated by corrupt leaders and priests with beliefs that wrongly imply laws to be Islamic, when if fact they are not.

In March 1995, an article, published in the `Eastern Eye', London, `Women at the Verge' accompanied by a critic’s letter entitled `Degrading Law' claimed that a woman raped, under Muslim Shari'ah law, has to produce four witnesses to corroborate her accusation, otherwise she risks being jailed. This absurd situation is shown to be true, because in ‘Muslim’ countries wherever Shari’ah is enforced, this is exactly what happens. However, the requirement of four such witnesses is totally against the teaching of the Qur’an.

Because of the examples set in countries implementing Shariah law it is difficult to blame non-Muslims for quickly latching on to such displays of unjust punishments – however wrong and obscure they may be from the teaching of the Qur’an.

The requirement of four witnesses is not as complex an issue, as it has been made to appear. The Qur’an states: "…those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations) flog them with eighty stripes". (Qur’an 24:4).

“And as for those of your women who are guilty of “immoral conduct”, call upon four from among you who have witnessed their guilt; and if these bear witness thereto, confine the guilty women to their houses until death takes them away or God opens for them a path [through repentance]. And punish [thus] both of the guilty parties; but if they both repent and mend their ways, leave them alone: for behold, God is an acceptor of repentance, a dispenser of grace”. (Qur’an 4:15). Please read underline emphasis. How could you leave one alone? Once punishment of stoning by death has been executed?

If women are proven guilty after a full and thorough investigation, then Qur’an impose "…Confine them to their houses”. The punishment prescribed here for the crime is house confinement, not death by stoning. The Qur’an takes very tough stance and prescribe sever punishment to men who harass innocent women. If actual or presumed harassment is based on religious or sexual orientation then the offence becomes aggravated. (33:59-61).

The distinction between illicit relationships - zina by consenting sane adults must not be confused with rape. The rape is heinous crime against women and it should be met with sever punishment as a deterrent.

For the context in which we are talking about, the Qur’anic verse specifically applies to women who are found guilty of indecency. The term ‘indecent’ means offending against recognised standards of propriety. The important point to remember is that there is no mention of a hundred stripes or stoning to death. More importantly in the entire Qur’an, God does not prescribe stoning to death as a punishment for any crime. In the Qur’an, the verse 19:46, stoning is recorded as an act carried out only by pagans – such as Abraham’s father who threatened to stone Abraham ^pbuh.

The verse 4:15 simply means if a person witnesses women committing lewdness (or any such action leading towards adultery, e.g. loitering, curb crawling or soliciting, etc.). Then evidence of less than four witnesses is insufficient to convict the accused. Some scholars draw inference from this verse that it also means sexual transgressions such as lesbian relationship.

You will see that the Qur’an has taken extra ordinary measures to protect honour and dignity of women and therefore as a deterrent it prescribes; "… And those who accuse women and produce not four witnesses to support their allegations; flog them with eighty stripes and reject their evidence forever…" (Qur’an 24:4).[6]

Under the current English law (Street Offences Act 1959 - Police law) only one witness is required; a police constable may arrest any women without a warrant, in a public place and with reasonable cause to committing an offence. Whereas the Qur’an demands four witnesses in public order ‘indecency’ offence and leave no room for a wrongful conviction in the first place.

Call it pathetic or sinister of all Hudood Ordinance; even if one were stupid enough to rape a woman in front of four witnesses, it would be impossible to convict any man of this crime under the Shariah laws.

You must not be surprised if no one has been stoned to death for a rape in Pakistan, in spite of Shariah Ordinance in force (Since 10^th Feb 1979). There are hundreds of women in Pakistani prisons who have been waiting for their case to be heard, and they have been waiting for years. How sorry they must feel, as they realise, that let alone get "Islamic justice", their ordeal in prison may never end.

According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, every two hours a woman is raped in Pakistan and every eight hours a woman is subjected to gang rape. The frequency of rape is thought to be much higher but many rapes remain unreported due to a combination of social taboos, discriminatory laws and victimization by the police. Meanwhile, Pakistani law is punishing victims of rape as though they were criminals while the perpetrators go free. www.amnesty.org/wire/July2004/Pakistan According to report by Pakistan National Commission on the Status of Women (NCSW) “an estimated 80% of women were in jail in 2003 because they had failed to prove charges and were consequently convicted of adultery. (Jails and prisoners, State pf Human Rights 2004, HRCP).

According to Amnesty International[7], these helpless women are repeatedly raped in prisons on daily basis yet; no man can be prosecuted successfully of raping a woman. Why not? - Because a rape victim cannot produce four witnesses. (It needs to be said that since the implementation of this draconian law, not a single man has ever been convicted, on strength of evidence provided by the eyewitnesses in the entire Muslim history). Approximately 70% of all women in Pakistani jails are specifically charged under adultery ordinance and consistently raped by police officers because these victims are perceived as immoral. (27^th November 1988 Manchester Guardian Weekly). www.geocities.com/capitolhill/Parliament/3251/spring99/pakistan.html

The purpose of the Qur’anic injunction was to protect women but the Hudood Ordinance does exactly the opposite.

The forensic science, such as DNA testing or other conventional methods to establish whether sexual intercourse has taken place are not relied upon in the Shariah court. The circumstantial or corroborative evidence is inadmissible. This again is in contradiction with the Qur’an. In Prophet Joseph’s ^pbuh case when he was falsely accused of attempted rape[8], material evidence was sufficient to clear him of this charge. If a critic laughs at the medieval ‘Shari'ah’, we should not condemn those critics of not understanding God's wisdom; just give them an opportunity to validate it with God’s guidance - in the Qur’an. The stoning is biblical punishment and ironically it was even rebuked by Prophet Jesus ^pbuh (John 8).

Suppose somehow all four witnesses appear before the court and one witness during the trial says he did not see the actual act of penetration. Not only will the whole case crumble and the defendants discharged on the strength of one admission, but the remaining three witnesses will be charged for falsely accusing the suspect and all three could be sentenced to eighty lashes apiece (Fatawa Alamgiri - Full Shari’ah Ordinance details published in Pakistan Times 12^th February 1979), Only a fool would put himself in such a predicament. The pendulum of justice swings in favour of a single witness.

However, filing a complaint of rape without producing four reputable witnesses would tantamount to a self-confession and therefore a woman is charged of having illicit sexual intercourse, then the victim would be charged of Zina (adultery/ fornication). The victim’s testimony, medical examination and circumstantial evidence would be held unreliable. The burden of proof lies with the victim otherwise she is presumed guilty. This is another erosion of Allah’s clear injunction. “Every one is presumed innocent until proven guilty” (24:12-16).

The Rape must be proved either by the rapist's confession or by the testimony of four male witnesses. The fact alone should casts serious doubts on credibility of 4 witnesses that they saw the act of penetration but failed to prevent it? In real world this is virtually impossible to prove. All sexual relationship including married couple, are carried out in privacy, away from inquisitive eyes. Nor would any sane couple invite 4 witnesses to see them commit adultery. However, if a woman is raped by daring out-laws or at gunpoint then that constitute rape. All most all women in Pakistani jails awaiting trial for illicit sex had actually filed complaint of rape. Ironically, the majority of the Muslim Jurists agree that the raped woman should not be subject to any punishment.[9] Mufti Taqi Usmani a former Shari’ah bench judge cited that prosecuting a raped woman, would be contradictory even to the current clauses of Qazaf ordinance (false accusation).

Allah’s clear injunction was misinterpreted by jurists and substituted with absurd man-made law. “…woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from Allah …," (2:79).

The current Hudood law also goes against overwhelming majority of Muslim jurists. But Pakistani Shari’ah law makers have failed to do their `home work': that it is not possible for a woman to rape her self.

The Hudood Ordinance is totally flawed and even defies all logic but unfortunately it is the law of the land. This is the reason the Supreme Court of Pakistan was informed by Advocate Dr Babar Awan that the law in its present shape cannot protect victims of ‘Zina-bil-jabr’ (rape). In his formulations, Dr Awan suggested that section 10 (4) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 was against the injunctions of Islam as well as the principles of justice as this was contradictory to other provisions of section 10 of the ordinance where lesser punishment had also been prescribed for similar offences.[10]

Qur’anic injunctions propose to safeguard the status of women in society and to make it difficult for anyone to defame their character. And when she does face false allegations or becomes a victim, the perpetrators when caught, do not escape punishment. This is why, according to the Qur’an, four witnesses are required to prove a woman’s guilt in cases of lewdness and indecency. However, this is not the case that four male witnesses are needed to substantiate allegations such as rape or adultery.

All such suspecting women held in jails by Pakistani authorities under the guise of Shari’ah ordinance are victims. The parliament must take immediate action, first of all repeal draconian ordinance and replace it through due legal process. Secondly, set all women free, provide adequate compensation for the ‘wrong full’ arrest, mental and physical torture, repeated rape and make sufficient provision to rehabilitate them back in to a civil society as respectable citizens.

Note: After civil society and women’s right organisation’s uproar, despite much opposition from religious establishments, in November 2006 Pakistan senate ratified Ordinance, allowing rape women to be prosecuted under civil law. However, the requirement of four witnesses remained on the statute.

This article was published in Tolu-e-Islam monthly Lahore in August 1998. The writer is a former BBC Radio presenter, editor and producer, currently employed as an advisor with Middlesbrough Citizens Advice Bureau. (UK) Email: hanif_mo@hotmail.com

REFERENCES

---

[1] Price of Honour: Plume-Penguin ISBN 9780452283770

[2] The question which is likely to confront Muslim countries in the near future is whether the law of Islam is capable of evolution - a question which will require great intellectual effort, and is sure to be answered in the affirmative: Provided the world of Islam approaches it in the spirit of Omar - the first critical and independent in Islam who, at the last moments of the Prophet, had the moral courage to utter these remarkable words: "The Book of God is sufficient for us". - (The Reconstruction of Religious thought in Islam by Sir Muhammad Iqbal, Published by Institute of Islamic Culture Lahore, page 129, edition April 1999).

[3] Should I seek other than God as a source of law when He has revealed this book (Qur’an) fully detailed. 6:114 - Those who do not rule according to God’s scripture are the disbelievers. (5: 44-47).

[4] Peace Be Upon Him: this is generally appended to Prophet’s name as a mark of respect.

[5] Sir Iqbal in his Presidential address of All-India Muslim League session at Allahabad, in December 1930 declared: “I, therefore, demand the formation of a consolidated Muslim state [Pakistan] in the best interests of India and Islam. For India, resulting from an internal balance of power; and for Islam, an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp that Arabian imperialism was forced to give it, to mobilise its law, its education, its culture and to bring them into closer contact with its own original spirit and with the spirit of modern times". Islamic fundamentalism since 1945, P-25 by Beverley Milton-Edwards, Routledge ISBN 0-415-30173-4

[6] “According to the most of the commentators, this refers to immoral conduct on the part of a man and a woman as well as to homosexual relations. Some of the commentators attribute to the term “fahishah” (here rendered as “immoral conduct”) the meaning of “adultery” or “fornication” and are, consequently, of the opinion that this verse has been “abrogated” by 24:2, which lays down the punishment of one hundred stripes for each of the guilty parties. This is unwarranted assumption must, however, be rejected. … the expression fahishah does not, by itself, connote illicit sexual intercourse: it signifies anything that is grossly immodest, unseemly, lewd, indecent or abominable in word or in deed (cf Lane Vl, 2344f.), and is by no means restricted to sexual transgressions. (Commentary verse 4:15, The Message of the Qur’an by Muhammad Asad).

(i) "Although Zina covers both fornication and adultery, in the opinion of Muslim Jurists, the punishment laid down here applies only to unmarried persons. As for married persons, their punishment, according to the Sunnah of the Prophet is stoning to death". (24:2. Note 2954 - Commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali). Most later-date revised editions omitted last 2 paragraphs of the above note. Please refer to revised and edited [edition 1410 H] for full quote; published by King Fahd Holy Qur’an Printing Complex, Saudi Arabia.

(ii) Abu Hurairah reports: That the Prophet (S.A.W.) said'. "Imam Shafi'i, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad (Muslim Jurists) have said that if the offender is married the hadd (punishment) of stoning to death will be applied, but if he or she is unmarried, only punishment by Ta'azir will suffice". (Shari'ah: The Islamic Law - by Abdur Rahman I. Doi - Page 243) However, Ta’azir; punishment is not specified by the Qur’an.

[7] For example Amnesty International News Release on Pakistan, 10^th June 1997 highlighted a case: “Fifteen-year-old Jehan Mina became pregnant after being raped by her uncle and cousin. Her family filed a complaint of rape but since there were no witnesses, the alleged rapists were acquitted. Yet her pregnancy was proof that "zina" [extra-marital sexual intercourse] had taken place and she was sentenced to 100 lashes in public. The punishment was later converted to 3 years imprisonment and 10 lashes."

[8] The Governor’s wife accused Joseph (Yusuf AS) of attempting to rape her but the testimony of a witness and evidence of Joseph’s shirt torn from the back (not front) was enough to clear him from the false charge of attempting to hurt and dishonor the Governor’s wife. 12:24-29.

[9] Bidayat al-Mujtahid Vol. II, P-317

[10] http://risingpakistan.wordpress.com

[This article was initially published in Tolu-e-Islam monthly magazine, Lahore, in August 1998 but the article has been revised and some passages have been re-written, amended, edited and updated]. – MK Hanif.

Tolu-e-Islam founded at the behest of Allama Iqbal & Quiad-e-Azam in 1938 - http://www.toluislam.com

Professor Stern has shared the Jewish experience on the Sharia issue. I have listed this in the top ten articles to understand Sharia from simple to complex perspectives at www.ShariaLaws.com on the left panel.

A Sharia conference is a must, Insha Allah, I will put a proposal, program outline and the content together, whoever wants to run the conference anywhere, they are welcome to do it on their own, it becomes a basic model to improvise and enhance from. Or they can fund the project, we can do it.

For this to be successful the guests have to be politicians running for elections, area Mayors, state and national representatives and of course, the clergy from EVERY religious tradition must be invited to participate and speak on the panel. I have identified Non-Muslim authors, politicians, clergy and professors who can present Sharia along with our Imams. We need to place all cards on the table and find comprehensive and sustainable solutions. The hardcore guys like Gingrich, Palin, Horowitz and others will not change, that is their livelihood, but the majority wants an assurance from us that there is nothing to be afraid of, we need to reach them.

Don’t Fear Islamic Law in America
http://sharialaws.blogspot.com/2011/09/dont-fear-islamic-law-in-america.html

---
Please do attend the event on Sunday, September 5, 2011 - a Muslim initiative on 9/11 events in its 7th year public event. Details are at www.Unitydayusa.com, please share this with your friends.

Mike Ghouse
Committed to Cohesive Socities
www.MikeGhouse.net
Op-Ed Contributor

Don’t Fear Islamic Law in America

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/opinion/dont-fear-islamic-law-in-america.html?_r=3&hp

By ELIYAHU STERN

Published: September 2, 2011

MORE than a dozen American states are considering outlawing aspects of Shariah law. Some of these efforts would curtail Muslims from settling disputes over dietary laws and marriage through religious arbitration, while others would go even further in stigmatizing Islamic life: a bill recently passed by the Tennessee General Assembly equates Shariah with a set of rules that promote “the destruction of the national existence of the United States.”

Supporters of these bills contend that such measures are needed to protect the country against homegrown terrorism and safeguard its Judeo-Christian values. The Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has said that “Shariah is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States and in the world as we know it.”

This is exactly wrong. The crusade against Shariah undermines American democracy, ignores our country’s successful history of religious tolerance and assimilation, and creates a dangerous divide between America and its fastest-growing religious minority.

The suggestion that Shariah threatens American security is disturbingly reminiscent of the accusation, in 19th-century Europe, that Jewish religious law was seditious. In 1807, Napoleon convened an assembly of rabbinic authorities to address the question of whether Jewish law prevented Jews from being loyal citizens of the republic. (They said that it did not.)

Fear that Jewish law bred disloyalty was not limited to political elites; leading European philosophers also entertained the idea. Kant argued that the particularistic nature of “Jewish legislation” made Jews “hostile to all other peoples.” And Hegel contended that Jewish dietary rules and other Mosaic laws barred Jews from identifying with their fellow Prussians and called into question their ability to be civil servants.

The German philosopher Bruno Bauer offered Jews a bargain: renounce Jewish law and be granted full legal rights. He insisted that, otherwise, laws prohibiting work on the Sabbath made it impossible for Jews to be true citizens. (Bauer conveniently ignored the fact that many fully observant Jews violated the Sabbath to fight in the Prussian wars against Napoleon.)

During that era, Christianity was seen as either a universally valid basis of the state or a faith that harmoniously coexisted with the secular law of the land. Conversely, Judaism was seen as a competing legal system — making Jews at best an unassimilable minority, at worst a fifth column. It was not until the late 19th century that all Jews were granted full citizenship in Western Europe (and even then it was short lived).

Most Americans today would be appalled if Muslims suffered from legally sanctioned discrimination as Jews once did in Europe. Still, there are signs that many Americans view Muslims in this country as disloyal. A recent Gallup poll found that only 56 percent of Protestants think that Muslims are loyal Americans.

This suspicion and mistrust is no doubt fueled by the notion that American Muslims are akin to certain extreme Muslim groups in the Middle East and in Europe. But American Muslims are a different story. They are natural candidates for assimilation. They are demographically the youngest religious group in America, and most of their parents don’t even come from the Middle East (the majority have roots in Southeast Asia). A recent Pew Research Center poll found that Muslim Americans exhibit the highest level of integration among major American religious groups, expressing greater degrees of tolerance toward people of other faiths than do Protestants, Catholics or Jews.

Given time, American Muslims, like all other religious minorities before them, will adjust their legal and theological traditions, if necessary, to accord with American values.

America’s exceptionalism has always been its ability to transform itself — economically, culturally and religiously. In the 20th century, we thrived by promoting a Judeo-Christian ethic, respecting differences and accentuating commonalities among Jews, Catholics and Protestants. Today, we need an Abrahamic ethic that welcomes Islam into the religious tapestry of American life.

Anti-Shariah legislation fosters a hostile environment that will stymie the growth of America’s tolerant strand of Islam. The continuation of America’s pluralistic religious tradition depends on the ability to distinguish between punishing groups that support terror and blaming terrorist activities on a faith that represents roughly a quarter of the world’s population.

Eliyahu Stern, an assistant professor of religious studies and history at Yale, is the author of the forthcoming “The Genius: Elijah of Vilna and the Making of Modern Judaism.”

The $43 Million Islamophobia Machine

http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/09/the_43_million_islamophobia_machine.html

Is President Obama a secret Muslim? Is Sharia law the radical scourge that’s threatening the very fabric of U.S. democracy? Contrary to the saying, a lie repeated often enough won’t make it a true. But that doesn’t mean anti-Muslim activists, armed with millions of dollars of foundation support, won’t stop trying.

It turns out a handful of seven donors have given nearly $43 million over the last decade to fund a close network of right-wing intellectuals and scholars who’ve concocted and fanned Islamophobic hysteria to push an anti-Muslim political agenda.

According to “Fear Inc.,” a new report released by the Center for American Progress, those millions have gone to a coordinated network of anti-Muslim thought leaders: Frank Gaffney at the Center for Security Policy; David Yerushalmi at the Society of Americans for National Existence; Daniel Pipes at the Middle East Forum; Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch and Stop Islamization of America and Steven Emerson of the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

This network, with millions of dollars behind it, has moved an agenda that seeks to pit Islam against the West, that imagines Muslims as untrustworthy and dangerous, that has painted Muslims as a looming threat who are out to undermine American democracy and national security. And with the help of activists, right-wing bloggers and a platform from a more than obliging cable news system, these fringe ideas have become more and more mainstream.

“There is a coordinated, strategic, deliberate, interconnected agenda here, which has very detrimental effects on fellow Americans and our communities and which really poisons the well of civil discourse,” says Wajahat Ali, the lead author of the CAP report.

“We’re living in a post-9/11 environment so what the network does is very cynically exploits fear, hysteria and misinformation and ignorance for the sake of profit, and for the sake of pushing an anti-Muslim agenda under the guise of allegedly combating radical Islam and protecting our national security,” Ali said.

It’s in this post-9/11 climate that the most absurd statements have become commonplace in the mainstream political discourse.

“Arabic is not just another language like French or Italian, it is the spearhead of an ideological project that is deeply opposed to the United States,” Pam Geller wrote in February on her right-wing blog Atlas Shrugs. She is closely connected with David Horowitz, whose anti-Muslim group the David Horowitz Freedom Center has raked in $8.3 million in the last decade. Or, in the words of Bridgitte Gabriel: “[Muslims and Arabs] have no soul. They are dead set on killing and destruction.”
It’s the kind of extremist thought leadership that has paved the way for Rep. Peter King’s congressional hearings on the supposed Islamic radicalization of the country. They’re the authors whose anti-Muslim rants were cited dozens of times in the Oslo, Norway shooter Behring Breivik’s manifesto. These are the people who’ve singlehandedly brought anti-Sharia laws to over a dozen statehouses. They’re the machine that’s given rise to the idea that Obama might secretly be Muslim, and that were that true, it’d somehow be a terrible offense.

Ali says that the success of this messaging rests in part on the fact that 60 percent of Americans claim not to know any Muslim person, and so people rely for on mainstream media and the words of political leaders for information.

The anti-Muslim rhetoric firing across the airwaves and in congressional hearings has real-life impacts, too. It’s provided the political cover for a whole slew of policies that have targeted Muslim, Arab, Middle Eastern and South Asian communities. An AP investigation published last week uncovered a years long domestic surveillance program that the NYPD had undertaken to gather information on Muslim communities. The invasive surveillance measures meant that New York police had broad powers to monitor, harass and racially profile New York Muslims.

But the manufactured threat has been overblown, experts say. A 2010 study from Duke University found that the imagined threat of Muslim fundamentalists committing acts of terrorism was exaggerated. The study tracked 139 known radicalized Muslim-Americans who had attempted to carry out acts of terrorism or had been prosecuted in connection with suspected acts of terrorism—they are just a handful of the nation’s 6.2 million Muslims.

“Muslim-American organizations and the vast majority of individuals that we interviewed firmly reject the radical extremist ideology that justifies the use of violence to achieve political ends,” David Schanzer, an associate professor at Duke and the director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, said in a statement at the report’s release.

And this week a new report from the Pew Research Center found that American Muslims are concerned about the exact same things everyone else is: they take national security seriously and are distrustful of extremism in many forms, even as they report being unfairly seen as suspect themselves. American Muslims overwhelmingly have both, Pew reports, “mainstream and moderate” attitudes.
Nevertheless, in the last decade, Muslims, Arabs, Middle Easterners, South Asians and those who’ve been confused for any of the above, have been the targets of a marked rise in job-related discrimination, hate crimes and biased-based bullying.

“Fear is a two-way street,” said Zahra Billoo, the executive director of the Bay Area chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations, a national Muslim civil rights and advocacy group. “It’s created fear within the community too.”

Billoo said that since September 11, it’s not uncommon for American Muslims to be confronted by anti-Muslim incidents in their daily life, the the utter frequency of which have begun to normalize Islamophobic rhetoric in even her community members’ eyes.

“Some sort of hate is manifested but it doesn’t rise to the level of a hate crime,” Billoo explained, “where someone calls me a terrorist, or someone looks at me funny, or someone yells something from their car at me.”

“It’s happened for so long that many people have taken it in as their reality and stopped complaining when it’s not okay, whether it’s happening to them or anyone else.”

Ali urged people to put the current debates within a historical context. “What’s happening right now is simply a remake. The characters in the past were Jews, Irish Catholics, and Japanese Americans,” Ali said. “And the scapegoating of those minority communities represents in hindsight the worst of America.”

Ali said he hoped the report would give these funders an opportunity to assess their political priorities and distance themselves from the obvious fearmongering that they’ve funded. He said that the U.S. needs to learn from its past mistakes and regain its moral compass to bring some moderation back to the national discourse.

“What’s inspiring is that America usually does find its way back,” Ali said. “Sometimes grudgingly, and sometimes after making mistakes along the way. But we’re a resilient nation, eventually we find our way.”

Anti-Sharia Republicans Still Don't Know What Sharia Is

By Adam Serwer | Posted 07/12/2011 at 10:30 AM

Justin Elliott interviews Bob Vander Plaats, the Iowa social conservative who authored the pledge that suggested black families were better off during slavery:

There's one section in the pledge that says the candidate has to reject -- the phrase used is "Sharia Islam" -- can you describe what you mean by that phrase and what you want the candidates to reject in that?

Well, Sharia Islam -- and I'm not an expert on Sharia Islam -- but I think just in the brief knowledge [I have] of Sharia Islam, one you can have multiple wives, and two is you can have temporary wives, and three is I think it disrespects women as a whole. And so we see Sharia Islam as being an issue. 

And you see that as something that is a dominant thing in Islamic cultures and societies, or more of a historical idea? 

No, there's a lot of American Muslims who reject Sharia. And we believe the president of the United States needs to be aware of some of the threats to our culture, and one of them is Sharia Islam in our opinion.

First of all, "Sharia Islam" is a nonsensical term, akin to "Halacha Judaism." Sharia refers to Islamic principles subject to wide interpretation, but since all observant Muslims adhere to what they consider to be Sharia the term makes no sense. This is why banning "Sharia Islam" would criminalize Muslims praying five times a day or following dietary restrictions, and it's not as though polygamy isn't already illegal in the United States. 

The term is not without "political use" though, since as the interview implies Americans have internalized enough about the inhumane religious laws in countries like Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia that the term evokes something bad. The idea that a few million American Muslims are going to impose their religious beliefs in a mostly Christian country where the Christian Right has failed time and again to do so however, remains laughable. But even if Muslims were someday numerous enough and sufficiently committed to Taliban-style Islamic law to do so through the political process, a ban on sharia wouldn't save us.

What could survive any manner of demographic change however, is a commitment to a separation of Church and State that doesn't interfere with the rights of the faithful to adhere to their beliefs. Unfortunately, social conservatives' commitment to that principle begins and ends with Islam.

Stop Sharia law

Stop Sharia Law, Foreign Law from Entering American Courts

I wish the neocon gang spends their time in mitigating conflicts, their passion to do wrong if funneled to bring peace will produce great results. But it is about making money for them, peace will stop their income hate will augment their income. What a shame that the simpletons write them checks for creating chaos – Mike Ghouse

http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/2011/07/stop-sharia-law-foreign-law-from-entering-american-courts-2/

Shariah Law’s main “mouthpiece” and organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, has as its goal the downfall of the West and the establishment of a worldwide caliphate. Their motto is “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

Middle East analyst Marwan Muasher declared: “The Muslim Brotherhood has been used for a long time as a scare tactic.” Then he half-heartedly added: “That is not to say they don’t have designs.” This militant spokesperson oversees research for the Middle East at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, funded by leftist multi-billionaire GEORGE SOROS, one of the leftist world’s most influential men, politically.

According to Frontpagemag.com: “Soros is waging his own personal ideological war against America by shoveling seemingly limitless funds into organizations giving life to his ‘progressive’ vision of social justice.”

“That vision, like the Muslim Brotherhood’s, identifies America and Israel as the ‘Great Satan’ and ‘Little Satan’ respectively, who must be demolished to pave the way for a purifying, redemptive utopia.”

“Soros and his spokesmen like Muasher see opportunity in the unrest roiling in the Middle East and North Africa – opportunity to support the enemy. The numerous ties of Soros and his Shadow Party cohorts have been documented; they include the master puppeteer’s own Open Society Institute and various anti-Western Islamist groups in the revolutions. It has been confirmed, for instance, that the International Crisis Group (ICG), led in part by Soros, has long petitioned for the Egyptian government to ‘normalize’ ties with the previously banned Brotherhood.”

The Muslim Brotherhood is gaining popularity by leaps and bounds in Egypt. Some say the election will show just exactly how strong they are in Egypt…..very strong!

With our heart and soul, we will stand against Mr. Soros, the Muslim Brotherhood and Shariah Law! This is literally a battle of survival for the integrity of the United States and our U.S. Constitution. But with the pro-Muslim leadership of Barack Hussein Obama, we must continue in this all-out war for the literal soul of America.

We have made a very patriotic, serious decision to bring this fight to America! The Bill which outlaws foreign law from our U.S. Court system (H.R. 973) only has 56 co-sponsors. WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE THE OTHER 379 House Representatives in this fight?

Do you know where your Representative stands in this very important piece of legislation? You need to find out! And quickly.

What is H.R. 973? This is a simple, short bill designed to protect Americans from being forced under laws which we did not enact, but were enacted by foreign powers or foreign peoples. The motivation for this bill is primarily that the sponsors do not want judges to use Shariah law, but this bill would apply to any foreign law which judges might use to subvert the Constitution or the will of the people of the United States. We are a sovereign nation.

Please CLICK HERE to FAX every Member of Congress to co-sponsor H.R. 973 and urge them to become a co-signer right now! YOUR FAX will ALSO force Congressmen to ACTION to get this important bill OUT of the Subcommittee.

You can also CLICK HERE to send a FREE message directly to YOUR U.S. Representative and Senators!

Part of the bill reads:

‘In any court created by or under article III of the Constitution of the United States, no justice, judge, or other judicial official shall decide any issue in a case before that court in whole or in part on the authority of foreign law, except to the extent the Constitution or an Act of Congress requires the consideration of that foreign law.’

However, It is still in the Subcommittee of the U.S. Constitution and has been since March 9th – almost 4 months ago! This bill is too important to stay in a Committee for that long!

With your help we can expand this intensive NATIONAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN to put the other 379 House Members and U.S. Senators “ON NOTICE” that they should support this Bill, before too many cities include foreign law and Shariah Law in their judicial system!

We urgently need your help today?

Since this is an all-out war for the very soul of America, a national media campaign is necessary to get this important bill passed. Our immediate plans include:

• Create ads that will tell people what their Member of Congress is doing on this vital bill
• Create and run television ads in key areas, as well as satellite ads
• Run urgent campaigns on FACEBOOK and GOOGLE
• Keep up the pressure via our critical and massive Congressional faxing efforts

U.S. Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL) introduced H.R. 973 which outlaws foreign law from our U.S. Court system. She had 56 co-sponsors. Why aren’t more Congressmen committing to this very important bill? That’s why we must fax them to let them know how patriotic Americans truly feel. Let’s fax our Congressmen to raise our voice of support.

Please CLICK HERE to FAX every Member of Congress to co-sponsor H.R. 973 and urge them to become a co-signer right now! YOUR FAX will ALSO force Congressmen to ACTION to get this important bill OUT of the Subcommittee.

You can also CLICK HERE to send a FREE message directly to YOUR U.S. Representative and Senators!

We must not let radical Islam penetrate our legal system!

According to Shariah Law, their law supersedes any Constitutional Law!

Little-by-little, Shariah Law is infiltrating the United States that you and I once knew. Our founding fathers of our U.S. Constitution would rise up in rebellion to what is going on, even in our own court system where some places have already “embraced” Shariah Law in various degrees.

I am NOT against Muslims! I am not against the right of any religion to practice their religion in the United States. Freedom of religion is one of the chief cornerstones of our republic and democracy. However, when a religion goes against our sovereign Constitution, then it must be thought of as sedition; and that religion must be limited.

One of the objectives of Shariah Law is to make sure they take over every aspect and area of life in a country: political, military, religion, everyday life. That is the ultimate goal of Shariah Law—to CONTROL every area of your life.

That is only one of the dangers of Shariah Law infiltrating our Justice system.

Governmental appointees of Shariah-compliant Muslims are drastically on the increase. In fact, it is in epidemic proportions. Do you want Shariah Law to replace our United States Constitution? Of course not. Then we must continue to fax every Member of the United States Congress to keep the pressure on!

Please CLICK HERE to FAX every Member of Congress to co-sponsor H.R. 973 and urge them to become a co-signer right now! YOUR FAX will ALSO force Congressmen to ACTION to get this important bill OUT of the Subcommittee.

You can also CLICK HERE to send a FREE message directly to YOUR U.S. Representative and Senators!

Conservatives, such as you, oppose a dual legal system in the United States that would weaken the U.S. Constitution (NO FOREIGN LAWS!) Of course Liberals are the first to line up to oppose almost anything that Conservatives are for. In the United States, most feminists, gays, liberal professors and atheists line up to support Islam and Shariah Law. Ironically, according to Shariah Muslim Law, these are the very first groups that will be beheaded, hung or stoned to death in a radical Muslim takeover.

The liberal media helps to foment public opinion in the wrong way. Has the liberal media given any space to the long-range bad effects of Shariah Law?

Of course not! That’s one of the reasons why this national media campaign to create ads that will tell people what their Member of Congress is doing on this bill is so important. We want to create and run ads in key areas, as well as satellite ads. There will be campaigns on FACEBOOK and GOOGLE. Of course, with your help today, we will keep up the pressure via our critical and massive Congressional faxing efforts! We need your help today!

The biggest threat to you and me is right here in the United States. Under the auspices of being “politically correct” and taking in “the poor, huddled masses,” we have thrown the door wide open to radical Islam. Shariah is not complete until it controls every single area of our society. In Shariah Law, our United States Constitution would be finished. Women’s rights would be a thing of the past.

And George Soros, and his kind, will have won their victory! But we will not ever let that happen!

In every way possible, Shariah Law will not stop at your street-corner. It will try to come inside your very household. And we must do all we possibly can to stop Shariah law IN ITS TRACKS before it invades ALL of the United States of America!!

Shariah Law is trying to overtake our U.S. Judicial System and must be stopped! H.R. 973 passage will prevent foreign law in our federal court system. We must fax NOW!

The bottom line: If we do not stop the growth of Shariah now, we will not be able to stop it later! Your faxes today will assist us in this all-out war for the very soul of America!

Help us this very moment to NOTIFY every Member of Congress to Co-Sponsor H.R. 973 right away; and to help get this important bill out of Subcommittee!

Sincerely,

Tony Adkins

Conservative Action Alerts

P. S. Please help us to STOP SHARIAH LAW in the United States by faxing every single Member of the United States Congress to Co-Sponsor H.R. 973! I know you do not want our country being taken over by a foreign, radical religious set of laws; or even by extremists like George Soros!

Please CLICK HERE to FAX every Member of Congress to co-sponsor H.R. 973 and urge them to become a co-signer right now! YOUR FAX will ALSO force Congressmen to ACTION to get this important bill OUT of the Subcommittee.

You can also CLICK HERE to send a FREE message directly to YOUR U.S. Representative and Senators!

Sharia Politics - My random thoughts

Sharia law like any law is mis-implemented from time to time; innocent people get on the electric chair or the lethal injection in our own US of A.   In at least 3 out of 56 Muslim majority nations, wrong people get stoned to death for adultery or blasphemy. It is neither our laws nor Sharia that is wrong; it is the mis-application to suit the ones in power that is wrong.

Parents are not to abuse Children, yet, incest and beating of innocent children continues.  The men who beat their wives violently are Muslim, Christian, Jews, Hindus… and every one, it is not the Christian or Islam thing – it is the precisely because they did not get their own religion to guide them, even if they wear a loud label of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism or any religion or tradition and even if they go the Church, Mosque, Synagogue, Temple… you see them in all groups.

Qur’aan is a binary book, everything is addressed in pairs - when it talks about male, it is followed by the word female, day follows night, and life follows death. Traditionally Quraanic interpretations have been done my men, like in all other religions. Thank God, women contributions are pouring in and bringing a balance to the meaning of the words in Qur’aan.

Sharia interpretations have been men-appeasing and justice busting in some, but not all the cases. A very small percent of Muslim women endure the non-sense of men's Sharia misapplication - while women across the world be it in America or Arabia, Chile or China,  Native American or African are mistreated in jobs, harassment continues unabated, violence, rape... all of these are shameful acts that few men have stood up against. We need the majority to speak up.  

Great example is the interpretation of the word Daraba, which suited the men “to discipline the woman if she does not remain faithful to you” to “separation” by Dr Leila Bakhtiar that most people are subscribing to now, which was covered very well in the www.Quraanconference.com . Michelle Bachman talks about obedience to husband, rather than partnership. More women in America are violently killed by their spouse than anywhere else in the world; does that make Christian faith bad? Heck no.

Men in power and some Qazi’s are usually rigid when it comes to punishing others. They do not see the essence of Sharia; Justice. If the Sharia laws are turned over to Regular attorneys and let there be arguments and discussions, it will serve justice. There is no stoning to death in Qur’aan... There is no triple Talaq in Qur’aan as it is practiced; the men have allowed it to happen in three to four nations out of 56 Muslim majority nations.

We all, Muslims or not, have a stake in creating just societies and we need to speak up and thank God, in democracies we can do that. Unfortunately the kings and dictators care less about religion and more about saving their tail...

As an example of shared stakes in the world, take a look at the comment in face book from a Jewish friend Paul Goldstein – “Since Sharia, to my understanding, is similar to Halacha in Judaism, it might be helpful to consider its application within secular democracies as is Halacha. To take the U.S. as an example, there exist Jewish religious courts within sizable Orthodox communities such as New York. These courts are purely voluntary for all concerned; rabbis and religious scholars are the "judges" who decide cases, and litigants can be represented by lawyers familiar with Jewish law. There is no way to enforce the religious court decisions through the regular civil courts; enforcement is only through respect of community mores, community pressure, and maintaining one's standing as an honorable member of the religious community.”

Sharia counseling in the US is indeed voluntary. The decisions are not legally binding, but morally binding. Those couples, who want to be religiously right, prefer religious guidance. It's almost like sitting with friends or going to marriage counselor. It's to maintain one's standing as an honorable member of the religious community.

If the Republican Right wingers can come out clean and say – no one has a bloody right to tell a woman or a man, what to wear, eat, worship, believe or think, and then we can look forward to a positive change.  They are no different than the Bin Laden kind who believed in imposing his understanding of religion on others. Is the right wing Christians any different?

# # #

Our first task is to communicate a comprehensive outline of knowledge to those who are attacking Sharia. The traditional Imam explanations give strength but are deficient in communicating with non-Muslims. Americans have to relate with each instance to understand it. God has blessed me and several other non-bearded, suit and jeans wearing Muslims in public, who can bridge that gap in communicating.

# # #

We should expect every Muslim to know about his or her religion. The religion was completed and perfected while the prophet was alive. In his last speech he left the book for us, each Muslim to live by it. Prophet Muhammad did not assign any one, not one single person to interpret the religion for us. The Shia denomination of Muslims believes that Prophet had said to follow his progeny and we respect their belief, it works for them.  We are accountable on the Day of Judgment and not even the Prophet will do favors. We had the time to be right and the only thing we have on that day is our deeds, the good things we have done to fellow beings and environment in preserving God’s creation.   

# # #

No Mufti, no Imam, no Khalifa is needed for Muslims.  You are individually responsible for your actions. When we began life in the United States… each one learned the religion on his own like Prophet wanted us to. Talk to the people who have been here from the sixties. The clergy in every religion including Islam have made the religion dependent on them, it is their job security.  Neither Jesus likes the clergy nor did Muhammad like it – if it becomes a profession. Clergy in every religion fall in the same proportions of good, ugly and greedy.

# # #

Mother Teresa once said if you want to make peace, go talk with your enemies, you don’t make peace with friends and scholars. Hazrat Ali has also said something to that effect. A Chinese saying goes, if you want to eliminate your enemy, understand them and make friends, then you are free and they are free, if you fight head on, the battle continues. In light of these, I am pleased to carry the dialogue with my friends.

To be effective, we will have input from Imams, Scholars, Shari experts, non-Muslims, lay persons and others. We will encourage everyone to place his or her cards on the table so we can deal with the issue comprehensively.

 I have been reaching out to ISNA, ICNA, CAIR and others, if they cannot do it, I am planning to pick the slack and just organize it. If you recall last year Qur’aan and the Prophet were attacked by Pastor Robert Jeffress, no Muslim Organization took it up. Thank God with the help of 10 Pastors, Rabbis, Pundits, Shamans, and elected Reps (Lon Burnam) who read the so called troubled verses from Qur’aan to the audience, while the 5 Muslims; Imam Zia Sheikh, Imam Shakoor, Dr. Basheer Ahmed, Ahmadi Muslim and myself either confirmed their understanding or corrected the misunderstanding. Today, those Pastors from Mormon, Baptist, Catholic, Unitarian, Presbyterian, Methodist…. will correct any misquotes from Qur’aan. All the details are at www.QuraanConference.com
We are all in this together and find solutions.

Mike Ghouse is committed to building cohesive societies. His work is indexed at www.MikeGhouse.net and his current articles at www.TheGhousediary.com

Sharia solutions initiatives

Great initiative, it is fairly close to the Sharia conference I have been planning, indeed, I had sent the initial plan to Imam Mujahid along with a large group of Muslims leadership in the US. Glad to see this coming through. Together, we can reach out and allay the Sharia Phobia among the right wing Americans, and hope to assure the Moderate Americans, the majority that the Sharia law portrayed by them does exist in 3 out of the 56 Muslim Majority nations, but will never make it among Muslims living in other nations, and certainly not in America. Muslim Americans are not asking or want that part of the mis-applied  Sharia. Please refer to the article on the left panel.

Mike Ghouse
Muslims Together working for a cohesive America
----------------------
Hate against Muslims is becoming lethal.

The Norway terrorist Anders Breivik, who killed 77 people, was influenced by    American anti-Sharia Islamophobes. He said that he was killing to stop a Sharia    takeover.

Breivik’s brand of hatred is based on intentional ignorance. The same ignorance is represented in the 49 bills in 25 states calling for a Sharia ban. Now a number of U.S. presidential hopefuls are calling for a federal  Sharia ban.

The major source of this ignorance and hate is the internet. Just Google the    word “Sharia” and see the search results in    images,    videos, and    articles. This is what the Norway terrorist quotes and this is what anti-Sharia    lawmakers cite.

We Muslims must tell our story.

Practicing Islam is practicing Sharia. Our month-long fasting, our prayers,    eating Halal and serving our communities are all Sharia. But that is not what    our neighbors know.Banning Sharia affects you and I in concrete ways. These bills will prevent    Muslims from being able to marry, divorce, inherit, bequeath, and finance according    to Sharia.

We cannot allow the criminalization of our faith, or for that matter, any faith    in our country. Freedom from state interference in religious practice is one of    the cornerstones of our nation. Anti-Sharia bills do just the opposite.

This ignorance will not die if we remain silent. It is crucial that we urgently    provide accurate information about Sharia. Even those who oppose these bills are    searching desperately for more information. Abraham Foxman, National Director    of the ADL, says that “People don’t know what Sharia means…”

Sound Vision is developing fresh information on Sharia to answer the critical    questions the public has on the topic. We plan to put this material on Sharia101.org,    to be launched this fall and updated regularly thereafter insha Allah.

Alhamdu lillah, so far we have written about 100 articles on Sharia, and filmed    professors from Harvard, Columbia, Duke, and other universities on different aspects    of Sharia, Jewish and Catholic laws, and freedom of religion in our country.

However, a great amount of work still needs to be done. We need to retain more    scholars, producers, and SEO experts. Sharia 101 requires retaining top-notch    experts who must be compensated for their time and effort.

Sound Vision has been serving the community for the last 23 years by producing    high quality Islamic information for Muslims and non-Muslims. This is our area    of expertise.

Please support this initiative during this blessed month of Ramadan through    your Zakat and Sadaqa. I urge you to consider giving $40, $80, $500, $1,000, $2,500,    $5,000 or whatever you can for the sake of our Deen.Your donations are Zakat-eligible and tax-deductible.

Donations are needed now to develop the content of our project before the presidential    campaign, in which a federal ban of Sharia is likely to be proposed.

We need to raise $480,000 for this project. So far we have raised $120,000. With Allah’s blessings and your support we will insha Allah be able to assist    our neighbors to understand Muslim perspectives on Sharia so that ignorance can    no longer be used as a weapon by hate-mongers to kill, attack our Masjids, or    criminalize the practice of Islam.

Thank you.
 May Allah reward you for your generosity.
Wassalam,

Abdul Malik Mujahid
 President

 P.S. Sound Vision is a tax deductible not for profit 501 (C) 3 organization. You    can learn more about our   Sharia101 project    here. p.s.s. We have already produced three brochures for non-Muslims about Sharia.    Please feel free to call to get copies for your friends or Masjids at 1-800-432-4262

Sharia Resources Available Now

These three brochures are available now for our neighbors providing some aspects    of Muslims perspectives on the Sharia debate. Order printed copies   here,   here, and   here or    Download free from the links below:

 Sharia American Muslims
http://sharia101.yolasite.com/resources/The%20Sharia%20Muslim%20Americans%20Live.pdf

Prophet Honored by Supreme Court
http://sharia101.yolasite.com/resources/Prophet%20honored%20by%20Supreme%20Court.pdf

Sharia and Freedom of Religion
http://sharia101.yolasite.com/resources/Sharia%20and%20the%20Freedom%20of%20Religion.pdf

Sharia 101
http://www.soundvision.com/info/shariah/shariah101.asp

What you can do against the anti-Sharia bills today!
http://www.soundvision.com/info/shariah/what-you-and-your-family-can-do-for-sharia.asp

What your Masjid can do?
http://www.soundvision.com/info/shariah/what-masjids-can-do-to-defend-sharia.asp

What your interfaith partners can do?
http://www.soundvision.com/info/shariah/what-interfaith-partners-can-do-for-sharia.asp

Volunteers for the project
http://shariavolunteers.surveyconsole.com/

Sharia project
http://www.soundvision.com/info/shariah/shariah101.asp

Shari'a and Western Compliance

Article 22 of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam states:

1. Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'a
2. Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'a.

This declaration - made by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and intended as an counter measure to the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights - exposes the slippery slope on which Western societies tread when indulging Shari'a-based interpretations of rights and freedoms. If every such right and freedom is bounded by religious edict, then no such rights and freedoms will exist.

Accommodation without limit is in effect enslaving supplication. Any parent with a wayward histrionic child will know that. Churchill knew it. Even Roosevelt knew it. Certainly Lincoln and JFK knew it. Do our leaders (politicians, intellectuals and clergy) know it?

Apparently not. Many Western European countries (Holland, UK, France, Italy, Norway) have made allowances for these fundamental restrictions, the same restrictions that have produced deadly fatwas issued against those who propagate ideas hostile to Islam. Where does it end? Imams central to current Islamic orthodoxy (such as Qadi 'Iyad, who died in 1149) confirm that any Jew or Christian who reviles Mohammed, or commits blasphemy, should be burned or beheaded unless they convert.

Authorities in these same countries often inhibit the criticism of Islamic history and doctrine. One can easily exhibit, in the West's leading museums, Christ and Pope figures fornicating, or publish in our press cartoons of demonic Jews with Stars of David and skulls-caps feasting on Palestinian babies. Yet our media will not dare publish cartoons of Mohammed or demand an open, fear-free discussion of all the reasonable and varying interpretations of the Koran that stand as alternatives to the current immovable, literal and fundamentalist doctrine - to do so will engender an earthquake, as the Danish Jyllands-Posten newspaper found out.

To censor any criticism of Jihad, to disallow any open discussion thereof, is to accommodate fascist authoritarianism, anti-Semitism and anti-secularism. This supplication by its very nature is oppressive and dehumanizing. This is not what the French Revolution was about, nor the American Bill of Rights - never mind what brought Moses down from Mount Sinai.

If we are honest with ourselves, we must admit that it is not pleasant for non-Muslims living in societies influenced by Sharia law. We see the ongoing burning of Coptic churches in Cairo, forced abductions and conversions of Coptic daughters, suicide bombings against the Baghdad Christian community, the de-Christianizing of Bethlehem, a simmering war on the Hindus in Kashmir, the illegality of bibles and crosses in Saudi Arabia, and Bahai's under enormous pressure in Iran. Our goal in the West should be to foster tolerance, not to make allowances for its erosion.

Until the Muslim world rejects its dominant fundamentalist ideology, until it allows a long overdue reformation in Islam, the hazards of Shari'a and the inviolability of Koranic law will remain an ominous threat to the West's ongoing freedoms, democracy and tolerance.

Leslie J. Sacks