Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back

VICTORY Is Not Defeat

Why Islamic Law is Intolerable


Spell it Sharia,  spell it Shari’ah or call it Fiqh, it is Islamic law,
based on the Qur’an & hadith which are the primary sources of
Islam.  Islam conflates spiritual & temporal authority and
imposes its law on the entire society.

The fact that Shari’ah imposes corporal punishments
including amputation, decapitation, lashing & lapidation is common
knowledge.  We recognize that such punishments are incompatible
with our Constitutions.  Many people assume that incompatibility
to impose a total exclusion on Shari’ah, but it does not. In the last
three decades, there have been fifty cases and appeals involving Islamic Laws in
American courts
.

Unfortunately, Islam is not an a la carte menu  from which you can select the items you like; it
is all or nothing; a package deal.

2:85.
After this, it is you who kill one another and drive out a party of you
from their homes, assist (their enemies) against them, in sin and
transgression. And if they come to you as captives, you ransom them,
although their expulsion was forbidden to you. Then
do you believe in a part of the Scripture and reject the rest? Then
what is the recompense of those who do so among you, except disgrace in
the life of this world, and on the Day of Resurrection they shall be
consigned to the most grievous torment.
And Allâh is not unaware
of what you do.

If Muslims reject part of the Qur’an, they will be disgraced in this
world and damned in the next.  Muslims can not reject jihad,
corporal punishment inequality, indignity or the disgusting fiqh of
marriage, divorce & child custody.

I have compiled screen shots of some crucial rulings
into  gifs for your reading displeasure.  The first gif is
entirely sourced from Reliance of the Traveller, which is the most
widely accepted codification of Shari’ah.  These rulings impact
issues of equality, dignity, justice and ‘family law’.  They come
from books M, N & O of Reliance of the Traveller.

Islamic laws incompatible with our Constitution.

The following table includes links to the three main
codifications of Islamic law which you can purchase at Amazon in two
cases or read on line in pdf format. Risala is the shortest and easiest
to read but less detailed than the others. Hedaya uses arcane &
archaic vocabulary & type face and is rather dense.  Reliance
set the standard, and is accepted as authentic and accurate by sheikhs
of Al-Azhar University in Cairo.

Reliance of the Traveller Risala Hedaya Volume II

Amazon.com: Reliance of the
Traveller
: A Classic Manual of Islamic 

http://www.amazon.com/RelianceTraveller-Classic-Manual…/0915957728
 40
reviews – $25.33 – In stock

Text:
English, Arabic (translation) Original Language: Arabic. Product
Details. Hardcover: 1232 pages; Publisher: Amana Corporation; Revised
edition (July 1, 

 

 

The
hedàya, or guide; a commentary on the Mussulman laws: translated by
order of the Governor-General and council of Bengal, by Charles
Hamilton. … Volume 2 of 4
 by Ali lbn Abi Bakr Burhan a al-Marghinani (Paperback – May 30, 2010)

Buy
new
$51.75 $37.78

 

11
new
 from $28.10
 1
used
 from $58.20
In
Stock
[PDF] 

Reliance of the
Traveller
 and
Tools for the Worshipper.

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat

Reliance
of the Traveller
 and.
Tools for the Worshipper. A CLASSIC MANUAL OF ISLAMIC SACRED LAW BY
AHMAD IBN. NAQIB AL-MISRI (Died 1368 AD) 

[PDF] 

Islamic E-Book

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat

The Risala : A Treatise on Maliki
Fiqh
. ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (310/922 -.
386/996). Translated by Alhaj Bello Mohammad Daura, MA. (London) 

The Hedaya : commentary on the Islamic
laws

Internet Archive
BookReader – The Hedaya : commentary on the Islamic
laws. The BookReader requires JavaScript to be enabled. Please check
that your 

The second gif follows; it displays the Qur’anic
ejunctions of jihad, the confirming ahadith from Sahih Bukhari &
Sunan Abu Dawud and their codification in Hedaya, Volume II, Book IX,
Chapters 1 &2, and Risala. The subset of the law displayed here
covers the following vital  issues:

  • Allah’s commands to fight
    • Moe’s confirmation of those commands
  • Islamic jurist’s interpretation of those original sources
    • legal definition of jihad
    • obligation to perform jihad
      • communal
      • individual
        • in every year
        • continuously until Judgment Day
    • jihad is primarily offensive, not defensive
      • undertaken on Islam’s initiative
        • proceeded by Dawah
          • involves killing men
          • involves enslaving women and children
    • jihad is undertaken by the caliph as the regular order of
      business

      • against Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians until they are
        subjugated and pay jizya

        • jizya is a punitive tax in lieu of execution
          • according to the Hanifi school, collected in a punitive
            & humiliating manner
      • against all other people until they become Muslims.

The most important points of the law of Jihad

February 16, 2012 Posted by | Islam, Jihad, Qur'an, Religion | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dispelling the Sharia Threat Myth


http://apps.americanbar.org/cle/programs/t11dst1.html

Dispelling the Sharia Threat Myth:

Implications of Banning Courts from Referencing Religious, Foreign, or International Law

Date: Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Format: Live Webinar and Teleconference
Duration: 90 minutes

 

In the last year nearly 50 bills and state constitutional amendments intending to ban state courts from considering international, foreign, or religious law were introduced in more than 20 states.   Such provisions—commonly referred to as “Sharia law bans” or “anti-Sharia law legislation”—have already passed in Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Louisiana.

Once adopted these bans have the potential to obstruct state courts from performing essential functions including enforcement of commercial contracts, intra-country adoptions, foreign marriages, Native American rights, foreign, judgments, and the outcome of voluntary faith-based dispute resolution forums as well as efforts to thwart child abduction. The provisions also have serious implications for individual rights under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.

Our panel will discuss the origin of these bans, their potential impact on how state courts function, and efforts to combat the provisions in legislatures and the courts.

Do we really want Islamic commercial law to be enforced in our courts? To be Shari’ah compliant, Zatat of 2.5% is required on financial transactions. 12.5% of Zakat must be paid to those “fighting in Allah’s cause”.  Zakat paid on Shari’ah compliant investments, insurance, annuities & mortgages will be used to finance terrorism. Wasn’t that what the Holy Land foundation trial was about? Reliance of the Traveller, Book H codifies the law of Zakat.

h8.17 The seventh category is those fighting for
Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military
operations for whom no salary has been allotted in
the army roster (0: but who are volunteers for
jihad without remuneration). They are given
enough to suffice them for the operation, even if
affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing, and
expenses (0: for the duration of the journey,
round trip, and the time they spend there, even if
prolonged. Though nothing has been mentioned
here of the expense involved in supporting such
people’s families during this period, it seems clear
that they should also be given it).

Several of the cases described in http://www.shariahinamericancourts.com involve divorce and child custody.  Islamic laws of marriage & divorce are codified in books M & N of Reliance of the Traveller Do you really want those laws enforced in our courts?

Shari’ah empowers the father of a pre-pubescent virgin girl to compel her to marry the man of his choice.  How does that square with our age of consent laws?  Should a girl be allowed to choose her own mate, and wait until she is sufficiently mature to make the decision?

m3.13 Guardians are of two types, those who
may compel their female charges to marry someone,
and those who may not.
(1) The only guardians who may compel
their charge to marry are a virgin bride’s father or
father’s father, compel meaning to marry her to a
suitable match (def: m4) without her consent.

Shari’ah allows a Muslim to divorce his wife by repeating “I divorce you.” three times, it is quick and simple.

n3.1 The words that effect a divorce may be
plain or allusive. Plain words effect the divorce
whether one intends divorce by them or not, while
allusive words do not effect it unless one intends
divorce by them.
n3.2 Using plain words to effect a divorce
means expressly pronouncing the word divorce
(0: or words derived from it). When the husband
says, HI divorce you,” or “You are divorced,” the
wife is divorced whether he has made the intention
or not.
(A: Here and in the rulings below, expressions
such as “The wife is divorced,” or “The
divorce is effected,” mean just one of the three
times (def: n9.0(N:» necessary to finalize it,
unless the husband thereby intends a two- or
threefold divorce (dis: n3.5) or repeats the words
three times.)

The Shari’ah of support could be an important consideration in divorce cases.

m 11.1 0 As for a woman in her postmarital waiting
period (def: n9), she is entitled to housing during
it no matter if it is because of her husband’s death,
a divorce in which the husband may take her back,
or a threefold, finalized divorce. As for her support
(A: in terms of food) and clothing:
(1) it is not obligatory to provide her with
it during the waiting period after (N: a threefold
divorce, a release for payment (def: nS), or) her
husband’s death;
(2) it must be provided in the waiting period
of a (A: not yet threefold) divorce in which her
husband may take her back;
(3) and if a woman in the waiting period of a
threefold divorce is pregnant, she is given support
each day (A: until the child is born, after which
she is entitled to support and wages for taking care
of it), but if not pregnant, she is not entitled to
support.

In matters of child custody, which parent is better qualified to have custody?  Islamic law might not meet your expectations.  Custody is a function of age and religion.

m13.5 When a child reaches the age of discrimination
(0: which generally occurs around seven or
eight years of age) he is given a choice as to which
of his parents he wants to stay with (0: since the
Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)
gave a young boy the choice between his father
and his mother. The child is only given such a
choice when the necessary conditions for child
custody (def: m13.2) exist in both parents. If one
of them lacks a single condition, then the child is
not given a choice, because someone lacking one
of the conditions is as though nonexistent).
If the child chooses one of the parents, he is
given to the care of that one, though if a son
chooses his mother, he is left with his father during
the day so the father can teach him and train him.

What if the father is Muslim and the Mother is Christian?

m13.2 The necessary conditions for a person to
have custody of a child are:
(a) uprightness (def: 024.4) (0: a corrupt
person may not be a guardian, because child care
is a position of authority, and the corrupt are
unqualified for it. Mawardi and Ruyani hold that
outward uprightness (def: m3.3(f) is sufficient
unless there is open wrongdoing. If the corruptness
of a child’s mother consists of her not performing
the prayer (sal at) , she has no right to
custody of the child, who might grow up to be like
her, ending up in the same vile condition of not
praying, for keeping another’s company has its
effects);
(b) sanity (0: since a mother uninterruptedly
insane has no right to custody, though if her
insanity is slight. such as a single day per year. her
right to custody is not vitiated by it);
(c) and if the child is Muslim, it is a necessary
condition that the person with custody be a Muslim
(0: because it is a position of authority, and a
non-Muslim has no right to authority and hence
no right to raise a Muslim. If a non-Muslim were
given charge of the custody and upbringing of the
child, the child might acquire the character traits
of unbelief (kufr».

m13.4 A woman has no right to custody (A: of
her child from a previous marriage) when she
remarries (0: because married life will occupy her
with fulfilling the rights of her husband and prevent
her from tending the child. It makes no difference
in such cases if the (A: new) husband
agrees or not (N: since the child’s custody in such
a case automatically devolves to the next most
eligible on the list (dis: m13.I)), unless the person
she marries is someone (A: on the list) who is
entitled to the child’s c!Jstody anyway (0: as
opposed to someone unrelated to the child, since
such a person, even if willing, does not deserve
custody because he lacks the tenderness for the
child that a relative would have).

The offspring of a Muslim father must be raised as Muslims. A Christian mother can not obtain custody. If she remarries, she loses custody.  Do you want that Islamic law enforced in our courts?

There are many other details that make Shari’ah incompatible with American law. You can read about them in Reliance of The Traveller. Consider the laws of eligibility to give testimony in court.  You can obtain the book from Amazon.com for about $30; it is 1251 pages long including the index. .

Examine the House Resolution before the Congress. It simply excludes foreign law unless it is explicitly required by the Constitution or federal legislation.

H.R. 973: To amend title 28, United States Code, to prevent the misuse of foreign law in Federal courts,…112th Congress: 2011-2012

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-973

SECTION 1. USE OF FOREIGN LAW IN FEDERAL COURTS.
Part VI of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘CHAPTER 183–USE OF FOREIGN LAW IN FEDERAL COURTS
‘Sec. 4201. Limitation on use of foreign law in Federal courts
‘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.’.

Michigan House Bill 4769 would ban enforcement of foreign law which abrogates constitutional rights.  Take a close look at its operative provisions.

Sec. 2. A court, arbitrator, administrative agency, or other
4  adjudicative, mediation, or enforcement authority shall not enforce
5  a foreign law if doing so would violate a right guaranteed by the
6  constitution of this state or of the United States.
7  Sec. 3. (1) If any contractual provision or agreement provides
8  for the choice of a foreign law to govern its interpretation or the
9  resolution of any dispute between the parties and if the
10  enforcement or interpretation of the contractual provision or
11  agreement would result in a violation of a right guaranteed by the
12  constitution of this state or of the United States, the contractual
13  provision or agreement shall be applied as modified or amended to
14  the extent necessary to preserve the constitutional rights of the
15  parties.
16  (2) If any contractual provision or agreement provides for the
17  choice of venue or forum outside of the states or territories of
18  the United States, and if the enforcement or interpretation of the
19  contractual provision or agreement applying that choice of venue or
20  forum provision would result in a violation of any right guaranteed
21  by the constitution of this state or of the United States, that
22  contractual provision or agreement shall be interpreted or
23  construed to preserve the constitutional rights of the person
24  against whom enforcement is sought. Similarly, if a natural person
25  subject to personal jurisdiction in this state seeks to maintain
26  litigation, arbitration, agency, or similarly binding proceedings
27  in this state, and if a court of this state finds that granting a
claim of forum non conveniens or a related claim violates or would
2  likely lead to a violation of the constitutional rights of the
3  nonclaimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in
4  dispute, the claim shall be denied.
5  (3) Any contractual provision or agreement incapable of being
6  modified or amended to preserve the constitutional rights of the
7  parties pursuant to the provisions of this section is null and
8  void.
9  (4) If a corporation, partnership, limited liability company,
10  business association, or other legal entity contracts to subject
11  itself to foreign law in a jurisdiction outside of any state or
12  territory of the United States, this act does not apply to that
13  contract.
14  Sec. 4. This act applies only to actual or foreseeable
15  violations of the constitutional rights of a person caused by the
16  application of the foreign law.

Exactly how does prohibiting the enforcement of foreign law which would violate the Constitutional rights of one party impair a Muslim’s right to practice Islam?  Please explain in a comment or document your answer in a blog post and post the url in a comment.  Does the proposed legislation stop him from Iman, Salat, Saum, Hajj or Zakat?   What real harm is done to the Muslim if the legislation deprives him of a frivolous defense against charges of bigamy, marital rape or domestic violence?

Must we allow Khalid Sheikh Mohammed & conspirators to assert a defense based on religious obligation and let him get off Scott free because “Allah made me do it.”?

Does anyone comprehend the fact that Muslims present a real, present & persistent danger to our personal and national security precisely because of Shari’ah, which codifies Allah’s imperative, threat & promise?  Allah said “fight them“;  Shari’ah  says that  if jihad is neglected when possible to perform,  all who knew of it are in sin.  Shari’ah says that “The  caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians”…

Shari’ah’s provisions for perpetual conquest may not be tried in our courts, but its child custody provisions have already made an appearance there.  Despite 50 trial and appelate cases in the last 30 years, the ABA assures us that Shari’ah poses no threat.

The Shari’ah threat can not be exorcised by the magic of legal incantations, it can only be exorcised by expelling Islam and its advocates from our shores.  At present, legislation to exclude Shari’ah from court decisions is the only proximate solution to an insoluble problem.

November 12, 2011 Posted by | Islam | , , , , | Leave a comment

White House Shari’ah Rally: What Do They Want?


I learned from a Daily Mail article that three infamous British Muslims have been asked to address a pro Shari’ah rally at the White House March 3, 2011. The event is sponsored by the International Institute of Islamic Thought.   If we had rational and patriotic leaders in power, Anjem Choudary, Abu Izzadeen and Sayful Islam would be denied visas.

The theme of the rally is supposed to be exhortation to rise up and impose Shari’ah on America. Literally the “path to life giving waters”, Shari’ah is a codification of the laws laid down in the Qur’an & hadith.

The Sunnis comprise the majority of Muslims and the Shafi’ite school of jurisprudence is the most widely accepted of the Sunni schools. Its handbook of fiqh is Reliance of the Traveller and Guide to the Faithful.

I have included images from a pdf file scanned from Reliance of the Traveller. Click them to view full sized images. Lest you doubt the authenticity of the text, I included two certifications of authenticity, from al-Azhar & IIIT.

Reliance is divided into topical books. Book o treats of “Justice”; chapter 9 treats the law of jihad, beginning with a definition:

09.0 JIHAD
(0: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims,
and is etymologically derived from the word
mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the
religion.[…]

The text cites several verses of the Qur’an and hadith to back that up.  o9.1 discusses the communal obligation of waging war against infidels, which is “meaning upon the Muslims each year”  Islamic law requires a minimum of one military expedition against infidels in every year.

O9.8 reveals the practical application of that communal obligation.

o9.8 Thc caliph (025) makes war upon Jews,
Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has
first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice,
and if they will not, then invited them to
enter the social order of Islam by paying the nonMuslim
poll tax (jizya, def: 01 L4)-which is the
significance of their paying it, not the money
itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions)
(0: and the war continues) until they
become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll
tax (0: in accordance with the word of Allah Most
High,…

The text continues with the scriptural basis of the ruling, which is 9:29.  Note the similarity of expression used by J.M. Rodwell.

Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled.

O9.9 follows up with warfare against pagans.

09.9 The caliph fights all other peoples until
they become Muslim (0: because they are not a
people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are
not permited to settle with paying the poll tax…

Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf and other advocates of Shari’ah won’t tell you about those provisions, why not?

There are important considerations other than violence. The concept of equality is one of them.  Consider what chapter 24 says about testimony.

024.2 Legal testimony is only acceptable from a
witness who:
(a) is free;
(b) is fully legally responsible (mukallaf, def:
c8.1) (0: as testimony is not accepted from a child
or insane person, even when the child’s testimony
regards injuries among ehildren that oeeurred at
play);
(e) is able to speak;
(d) is mentally awake;
(e) is religious (0: meaning upright (024.4)
(A: and Muslim), for Allah Most High says,
“Let those of rectitude among you testify”
(Koran 65:2),
and unbelief is the vilest form of corruption, as
goes without saying);

If you ain’t Muslim, you can’t be a witness!  Let that sink in for a moment. Read it again.  What do you think about Shari’ah now?  The testimony of a man is worth that of two women.

024.7 The testimony of the following is legally
acceptable when it concerns cases involving property,
or transactions dealing with property, such
as sales:
(1) two men;
(2) two women and a man;
(3) or a male witness together with the oath
of the plaintiff.

Why is the feminist movement silent about this?

In England and some American states, there is pressure for application of Shari’ah to domestic matters; family disputes.  The laws concerning marriage are laid out in book m.  I will raise one quote from that book, containing a concept which will cause any rational and compassionate person to reject Shari’ah.

GUARDIANS WHO MAY MARRY A VIRGIN
TO A MAN WITHOUT HER CONSENT
m3.13 Guardians are of two types, those who
may compel their female charges to marry someone,
and those who may not.
(1) The only guardians who may compel
their charge to marry are a virgin bride’s father or
father’s father, compel meaning to marry her to a
suitable match (def: m4) without her consent.
(2) Those who may not compel her are not
entitled to marry her to someone unless she
accepts and gives her permission.
Whenever the bride is a virgin, the father or
father’s father may marry her to someone without
her permission, though it is recommended to ask
her permission if she has reached puberty. A virgin’s
silence is considered as permission.
As for the nonvirgin of sound mind, no one
may marry her to another after she has reached
puberty without her express permission, no matter
whether the guardian is the father, father’s
father, or someone else.

Let that sink in for a moment.  Read it again. Do you want Shari’ah to be applied here?  Why/why not??

Divorce is one of the more important family law matters. Under Shari’ah, a husband need only declare divorce three times to give it legal effect.

n1.3 The person conducting the divorce may
effect it himself or commission another (def:
k17.5-6) to do so, even if the person commissioned
is a woman.
The person commissioned may effect the
divorce at any time (0: provided the one who
commissions him does not cancel the commission
before the divorce takes place (dis: k17.16»,
though when a husband tells his wife. “Divorce
yourself,” then if she immediately says, “I divorce
myself,” she is divorced, but if she delays, she is
not divorced unless the husband has said, “Divorce
yourself whenever you wish.”

n2.1 A free man has three pronouncements of
divorce (0: because of the word of Allah Most
High,
“Divorce is two times, then retain with kindness
or graciously release” (Koran 2:229),
and when the Prophet (Allah bless him and give
him peace) was asked about the third time, he
said,
“It is Allah’s having said, ‘or graciously
release’ “).

I have furnished links to the pdf file containing Reliance. The images below are screen shots taken from that file. Click them to view full sized images. You don’t need to take my word for the facts, I make it easy for you to verify what I write.

Certificate of authenticity from IIIT. Certificate of authenticity from al*Azhar U.
Certificate of authenticity from IIIT Certificate of authenticity from al-Azhar University
o9.0 defines jihad. o9.1 describes the communal obligation to attack disbeleivers.
o9.0 Defines jihad. o9.1 Describes the obligation of annual attacks on disbelievers.
o9.8 confirms war on Jews & Christians. The caliph fights all other peoples...
o9.8 “The caliph makes war on Jews, Christians… o9.9 …fights all other peoples…
o24 details who can serve as a witness. It takes two women to match one man's testimony.
Christians can’t testify in court. Woman’s witness: half weight.
More on testimony. Compulsory juvenile marriage.
Further details on testimony. A father may force his pre-pubescent daughter to wed.
Partial contents of the book on divorce. Divorce: contents.
Book N: Divorce: contents Book N: Divorce: contents
N2.2 Divorce
N2.2 Divorce

Reliance is not the only handbook of Islamic law, though it is the most popular. Others are generally less detailed in some matters. Al-Hedaya is not as easy to read but it explains the differences between Shafi’ite and Hanifi fiqh.

For the Maliki fiqh on jihad, turn to chapter 30 of Risala, which offers less detail than Reliance.  The Hanifi fiqh of jihad is in  al-Hedaya, Vol. II, Book IX, Chapter 1.

The fiqh of wudu & prayer tends to be arcane, nonsensical and harmless to us. But the Islamic law regarding war is totally unacceptable, as is the inequality of women and religious minorities.  The concepts of arbitrary divorce & forced marriage are so repugnant as to compel vigorous objection to imposition of Shari’ah.

Let us therefore rise up as one with a loud voice shouting HELL NO!!! to those who demand imposition of Islamic law.  Let us support the state legislation designed to ban it and make demands for national legislation to prevent the imposition of Shari’ah in the federal courts.

February 21, 2011 Posted by | Islam, Political Correctness | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Al-taqiyya about Shari’ah Must Be Refuted!


 

The S-Word

Fearmongering about Sharia law in America needs to stop

Published: Thursday, November 18, 2010

I did not find the article to be rich in substance, but a few points need to be raised.

The proposal was bolstered by a case in New Jersey in which the court considered Sharia law in its decision to deny a Muslim woman a restraining order against her sexually abusive ex-husband. That decision, thankfully, was overturned on appeal.

What if?  Suppose there was a technical error in the appeal, causing the original verdict to be upheld?  What if the appeals court failed to recognize the lower court’s error?  An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

After the negligence comes the sarcasm.

But it was enough to drive seven out of ten Oklahoma voters toward the “Save Our State” Amendment,” to “save” Oklahoma from, in the words of the bill’s main author, Muslims who desire nothing more than to take away “liberties and freedom from our children.”

A student, occupied with learning and passing exams, can be forgiven for being ignorant of Islamic doctrines & practices, but not for assuming that he knows everything about the subject. I was ignorant of Islam when I was a student, but I have learned a great deal in the last ten years.  Islam’s strategic objective is total world domination: making the entire human race slaves of Allah. Islam does not recognize man made legislation, it demands the imposition of Shari’ah, derived from the Qur’an & Sunnah.

But the law exemplifies something far more insidious than bad public policy. Quite simply, there is a dangerous amount of ignorance in the United States about what Sharia law actually is. And until this misconception is corrected, as another concerned columnist so eloquently put it, the war on global Islamist terror will also continue be a war on American Muslims.

Basing American court decisions on the American Constitution, legislation & case law is not “bad public policy”, it is common sense.  There is a dangerous level of ignorance about Shari’ah. That ignorance can be corrected by reading Reliance of the Traveller, Noah Ha Mim Keller’s translation of Umdat Al-Salik, the Shafi’ite school’s handbook of Fiqh.  The text includes certificates of authenticity and accuracy from scholars at Al-Azhar.

In England, Shari’ah courts deal mainly with family law. Safe, sane and simple; no threat there, right?  Wrong!!!  Book m treats of the laws of marriage. Lets examine a sample.

m3.13: Guardians Who May Marry a Virgin to a Man Without Her Consent

Guardians are of two types, those who may compel their female charges to marry someone, and those who may not.

-1- The only guardians who may compel their charge to marry are a virgin bride’s father or father’s father, compel meaning to marry her to a suitable match (def: m4) without her consent.

-2- Those who may not compel her are not entitled to marry her to someone unless she accepts and gives her permission.

Whenever the bride is a virgin, the father or father’s father may marry her to someone without her permission, though it is recommended to ask her permission if she has reached puberty. A virgin’s silence is considered as permission.

As for the nonvirgin of sound mind, no one may marry her to another after she has reached puberty without her express permission, no matter whether the guardian is the father, father’s father, or someone else.

So much for the minimum legal age. So much for choosing your own lifetime mate.  Book n treats of divorce.  Who can do it?
Divorce is valid from anyDivorce is valid from any

n1.1

Divorce is valid from any:

(a) husband;

(b) who is sane;

(c) has reached puberty;

(d) and who voluntarily effects it.

A divorce is not valid from:

-1- (non-(c) above) a child;

-2- (non-(b) ) someone insane;

-3- or (non-(d) ) someone who is wrongfully coerced to do it, as when one is threatened with death, dismemberment, being severely beaten, or even mere verbal abuse or a slight beating if the person being coerced is someone whose public image is important and would thereby suffer. (O: Someone being forced should use words that give a misleading impression (def: r10.2) for his ostensible “divorce.”)

n2.1

A free man has three pronouncements of divorce (O: because of the word of Allah Most High,

“Divorce is two times, then retain with kindness or graciously release” (Koran 2:229),

and when the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was asked about the third time, he said.

“It is Allah’s having said, or graciously release”’).

n3.1

The words that effect a divorce may be plain or allusive. Plain words effect the divorce whether one intends divorce by them or not, while allusive words do not effect it unless one intends divorce by them.

n3.2 Using plain words to effect a divorce means expressly pronouncing the word divorce (O: or words

derived from it).  When the husband says’ “I divorce you,” or “You are divorced,” the wife is divorced

whether he has made the intention or not.

(A: Here and in the rulings below, expressions such as “The wife is divorced,” or “The divorce is effected,” mean just one of the three times (def: n9.0(N:) ) necessary to finalize it, unless the husband thereby intends a two-or threefold divorce (dis: n3.5) or repeats the words three times.)

 

 

Let divorce cases be handled by Shari’ah courts; great idea, ladies?   How about honoricide?  Book o treats of “justice”. o.1 details retaliation for death or injury. There are certain cases in which no retaliation is due. Here they are.

o1.2

The following are not subject to retaliation:

-1- a child or insane person, under any circumstances (O: whether Muslim or non-Muslim.

The ruling for a person intermitently insane is that he is considered as a sane person when in his right mind, and as if someone continously insane when in an interval of insanity. If someone against whom retaliation is obligatory subsequently becomes insane, the full penalty is nevertheless exacted. A homicide committed by someone who is drunk is (A: considered the same as that of a sane person,) like his pronouncing divorce (dis: n1.2) );

-2- a Muslim for killing a non-Muslim;

-3- a Jewish or Christian subject of the Islamic state for killing an apostate from Islam (O: because a subject of the state is under its protection, while killing an apostate from Islam is without consequences);

-4- a father or mother (or their fathers of mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring;

-5- nor is retaliation permissible to a descendant for (A: his ancestor’s) killing someone whose death would otherwise entitle the descendant to retaliate, such as when his father kills his mother.

You can not execute a Muslim for killing a kuffar, an apostate or his own offspring. That’s the law. It should be enforced, of course. It is so much superior to our man made laws.   How about the blood money to be paid for murder?

o4.9

(A: For the rulings below, one multiplies the fraction named by the indemnity appropriate to the death or injury’s type of intentionality and other relevant circumstances that determine the amount of a male Muslim’s indemnity (def: o4.2-6 and o4.13). )

The indemnity for the death or injury of a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man.

The indemnity paid for a Jew or Christian is one-third of the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid of a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth of that a Muslim.

A Muslim woman is worth only one half of her Muslim husband. A Christian is worth only one third as much as a Muslim. What a great system, lets implement it!

Then there is the matter of eligibility to give testimony in court.

o24.2

Legal testimony is only acceptable from a witness who:

(a) is free;

(b) is fully legally responsible (mukallaf, def: c8.1) (O: as testimony is not accepted from a child or insane person, even when the child’s testimony regards injuries among children that occurred at play);

(c) is able to speak;

(d) it mentally awake;

(e) is religious (O: meaning upright (o24.4) (A: and Muslim), for Allah Most High says,

“Let those of rectitude among you testify” (Koran 65:2),

and unbelief is the vilest form of corruption, as goes without saying);

(f) and who is outwardly respectable (O: respectability (muru’a) meaning to have the positive traits which one’s peers possess in one’s particular time and place. Sheikh al-Islam (A: Zakariyya Ansari) says, “Respectability is refraining from conduct that is unseemly according to standards commonly acknowledged among those who observe the precepts and rules of the Sacred Law.” It is according to standards commonly acknowledged (def: f4.5) because there are no absolute standards for it, but rather it varies with different persons, conditions, and places, Such things as eating and drinking (A: in the marketplace or wearing nothing on one’s head may vitiate it (A: though the latter is of no consequence in our times), as may a religious scholar’s wearing a robe or cap in places where it is not customary for him to do so).

o24.7

The testimony of the following is legally acceptable when it concerns cases involving property, or transactions dealing with property, such as sales:

-1- two men;

-2- two women and a man;

-3- or a male witness together with the oath of the plaintiff.

o24.8

If testimony does not concern property, such as a marriage or prescribed legal penalties, then only two male witnesses may testify (A: though the Hanafi school holds that two women and a man may testify for marriage).

 

Christians can’t testify, nor can menial laborers and it takes two women to give evidence. What a great system! Other schools of Islamic jurisprudence are not exact matches, but are objectionable, none the less.  For example, the Maliki’s Risala. Marry off your virgin daughter, unequal blood wit, female testimony, infidel testimony. Is that warm glow of Ivy League superiority holding still holding up?

One senator had words of wisdom about basing rulings on foreign law.

I did want  to mention it in that connection. But lf me U.S. Supreme Court. ls not going to look to the laws of the Uunited States, including  the fundamental law of tho Unted Status, which In tho Constitution, but lnterpreting what is and is not constltutlonal under tha U.S. Constitution by looking at what foreign governments and foreign Iaws have to my about that same issue. I fear that bit by bit and case by case the Amerlcan people are slowly losing control over the meaning of our laws and the Constitution itself. It this trend continues, foreign governments may have a say in what our laws and
our Constitution mean and what our policies  ln America. should be.

Senator John Cornyn, March 20,2005, Congressional Record, Vol. 151, Pt. 4, pg. 5516

International and Foreign Law Sources: Siren Song for U.S. Judges? By Chimène I. Keitner on page ten, cites legislation proposed in 2005 that would limit federal judges to domestic sources except for British common law at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. Justices cited as favoring consideration of foreign law, cited by Chimène I. Keitner. include William Rehnquist, Sandra Day O’Connor,Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Anthony Kennedy.  Shari’ah is not mentioned in that article, but the same principle applies.

For the grand finale, lets glance at the temporary injunction.

Munir Awad vs. Oklahoma  State Board of Elections;  Case No. CIV-10-1186-M

State Question No. 755, which was on Oklahoma’s November 2, 2010 ballot, provides: This measure amends the State Constitution. It changes a section that deals with the courts of this state. It would amend Article 7, Section 1. It makes courts rely on federal and state law when deciding cases.
It forbids courts from considering or using international law. It forbids courts from considering or using Sharia Law….

“Specifically, plaintiff asserts that the ban on the state courts’ use and consideration of Sharia Law violates the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

Three elements are listed:

  1. by Oklahoma’s official condemnation of his religion/faith as reflected through the amendment to Oklahoma’s constitution banning state courts’ use or consideration of Sharia Law,
  2. by the invalidation of his last will and testament which incorporates various teachings of Mohammed, and
  3. by the excessive entanglement of the state courts with religion that would result from the amendment as the state courts in implementing the amendment would have to determine what is and is not encompassed in Sharia Law.

Constitutional elements:

  1. must have a secular legislative purpose,
  2. its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and
  3. it must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.

The amendment specifies the local sources of law and proscribes use of foreign law and Shari’ah. It is unreasonable to equate rejecting Shari’ah as an input to judical decisions with rejection of Islam.

Does any reasonable person believe that the amendment rejects or invalidates the plaintiff’s last will and testament?  If his will is probated, it will be subject to state law, regardless of Shari’ah. Book l treats of inheritance. Only one third of the estate can be bequeathed, the rest is divided according to a complex formula. If you are crazy enough to want to figure it out, go to Book l.1.

Entanglement?  All the courts need to do under the amendment is perform  their duties as they do now, considering the facts, law and constitutions but not Shari’ah.  There is no need for the courts to read Reliance, Risala or Hedaya, they just need to do their job. The complaint is obviously unfounded.

The amendment has a constitutional purpose: preserving the primacy of the federal and state constitutions.  It neither advances nor inhibits religion, it prevents entanglement the court system with Shari’ah.  It does not foster government entanglement with religion, it prevents entanglement. 

November 19, 2010 Posted by | Political Correctness | , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: