Post Reply
Page 6 of 10  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Another Great Reason to Love & Accept Shari'a Law in America
2 years ago  ::  Aug 01, 2012 - 11:04PM #51
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

Aug 1, 2012 -- 8:13PM, rocketjsquirell wrote:


The problem with nonsense like the OP is that it distracts from very real concerns.


There is absolutely no threat that "Sharia Law" is going to be imposed upon America.


There is very little threat from American Muslims and the threat that exists is the same as from any other group of Americans. You are going to get a certain number of bad apples who end up on the wrong side of the law in any group. Since part of my practice includes representing people who get in trouble, I have met a few of these people. Believe me, being Muslim has nothing to do with their alleged actions. I have yet to meet a religiously motivated drug dealer, burglarer or brawler.


There is a threat from a very small percentage of people who call themselves Muslim. The fact that they call themselves Muslim is not the problem. The problem is their political ideas (which they associate with their religious ideas) and their willingness to use anti-social, criminal and terrorist methods to advance those ideas. These people would be a threat if they called themselves Christians, followers of the Great Spaghetti Monster, or anything else. 


We need to keep ourt eyes on those very few folks who actually are a threat, no matter what they wish to call themselves, and leave everyone who is not alone, even those who might call themselves by the same or similar names. Obsessing over crap like the "threat of Sharia Law" does nothing but distract us from actual problems and concerns.




Also, very well said.  Even after all this time, you can still surprise me, bro Kiss

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 01, 2012 - 11:42PM #52
mountain_man
Posts: 39,154

Aug 1, 2012 -- 10:59PM, Miraj wrote:

Yes, it is.  That is a fact.  Every observant Muslim in the US practices Shar'ia.  It is what makes us Muslim.  Shar'ia is not a court.  There are fiqh courts, not Shar'ia courts, where Islamic law is practiced.  I'm a formally trained Islamic law attorney, so it's incumbant upon me to know the difference.  That is part of the misunderstanding; I've explained the difference before.  It doesn't seem to stick.  Perhaps this will....


It won't. Where fear resides the facts are irrelevant. To the paranoids this is war, and what's the first thing to be lost in a war? The truth.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 02, 2012 - 12:08AM #53
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

Aug 1, 2012 -- 11:42PM, mountain_man wrote:


Aug 1, 2012 -- 10:59PM, Miraj wrote:

Yes, it is.  That is a fact.  Every observant Muslim in the US practices Shari'a.  It is what makes us Muslim.  Shari'a is not a court.  There are fiqh courts, not Shari'a courts, where Islamic law is practiced.  I'm a formally trained Islamic law attorney, so it's incumbant upon me to know the difference.  That is part of the misunderstanding; I've explained the difference before.  It doesn't seem to stick.  Perhaps this will....


It won't. Where fear resides the facts are irrelevant. To the paranoids this is war, and what's the first thing to be lost in a war? The truth.




Also, well said.  In fact, a rule of war is to first dehumanize your "enemy" into a nebulous "Other", making it easy to strike out at it.  For anti-Islam bigots, truth is an enemy.

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 02, 2012 - 12:18AM #54
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

Aug 1, 2012 -- 10:11PM, WannabeTheo wrote:


Aug 1, 2012 -- 4:25PM, 3neez wrote:


Talk all one likes about Christianity and no gets offended. Speak of Islam, then everyone's offended.


I only thought I had witnessed some of the greatest intellectual circle-jerks of our time, but I'm wrong.   




Well, I have no problem condemning the actions of the Islamist rebels/executioners.  And the actions of those destroying historical shrines.  There is no doubt much evil is done in the name of Islam; and the primary victims of ultra-strict Islamism are Muslims.


What I object to is using these tragic events to justify fear and suspicion of all Muslims, especially my countrymen.  The story in the OP is a tragedy, and the perpetrators most certainly deserve the harshest damnation.  But it has nothing to do with Muslim Americans, as implied in the thread title.


This whole "the Muslims are going to impose Sharia law on us" hysteria is a boogeyman cooked up by ultra-conservative politicians to get votes.




I'm basking in the enlightenment of intelligent responses  Cool

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 02, 2012 - 12:54AM #55
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

Expounding on post #50, fiqh is what the OP means to discuss, not Shari'a.  Still, it's difficult to know how to sound intelligent when there are people around who know you're just pulling crap out of your azz to see what sticks.  My advice: Don't let errant azz leaks stick to you.  You can do better.


Fiqh is a vast body of law that, in Sunni Islam, is primarily formed by four major schools (madh'hab) of thought; the Hanbali, the Maliki, the Hanafi, and the Shafi'i.  The Shia have three major madhahib. Within each madh'hab, there are legal trends that influence rulings, and social conditions that are taken into consideration.  A ruling by a qualified and licensed mujtahid is binding only on the parties involved in a situational ruling, and only on those under the jurisdiction of the court in the case of a legislative ruling.


Fiqh is also divided into obligations Muslims have to God (ibadaat) and obligations individuals have to each other (mua'malaat).   For example, Court One in X jurisdiction may rule that women have an obligation to God to cover their hair and for men to wear beards.  Court Two in Y jurisdiction may rule that women are allowed to choose to cover their hair or not, and men may choose to wear beards or not.  


Madhahib disagree about 25% of the time.  This is not considered to be a problem, since interpretation of Shari'a is also incumbant upon local needs.  Fiqh, being the mortal interpretation of divine law, is fallible and malable. It is open to criticism, critical thinking and change.  It is not a monolith.  Learned Muslims are allowed to disregard rulings they find to be flawed.  


There is plenty of heated debate about the use of stoning.  It is not, I repeat NOT, ever mentioned in the Qur'an.  In fact, it comes from the Talmud.   The Qur'an dictates the flogging of fornicators and adulterers, and disallows them from marriage with believers and virgins.  It's kind of hard to marry if you're stoned to death.


There are also very specific requirements applied to accusations of illicit sex, one of which is that there need be at least four credible witnesses to penetration.  If any of these elements are missing, the accusation is without merit and false accusors are to be punished. It is recorded that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) turned his back on self-confessers, giving them the opportunity to take the hint and retreat without consequence.  Only the most insistant received punishment.


Even the birth of an illegitimate child was not considered proof of sin.  Even if the child was born long after the end of the mother's marriage, jurists have been known to rule that the child was "hibernating" until God brought it forth, saving the women social humiliation and scorn in conservative societies.


Our base desires move us to pride, self-aggrandizement and seeking control over others.  The Qur'an tells us that God abhores extremism and pride; it instructs us to be humble and moderate in our dealings with others.  It's analygous to the command of Jesus (pbuh)  to turn the other cheek.  This is not easy to do.  That's why normative Muslims take serious offense when the prideful, power-seeking acts and declarations of the minority extremists are presented as the measure of proper Islamic practice.  Elevating terrorists to normative status is an attempt to reduce those who are following God to strangers in their own faith.  That is carrying terrorist water.  No devout Muslim will ignore the bigots who elevate terrorists to proper Islamic practice.  We will challenge them; don't try to stop us.


Insha'allah, that helps.

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 10, 2012 - 12:58AM #56
rangerken
Posts: 16,406

I just think this is for all intents a non issue. As long as shariah stays inside the mosque, and never, ever applies to non Muslims and never, ever has any secular authority in the US who cares about it? It's no different than Catholic canon law...a way to run a religion which must never impact non believers.


Now if someone wanted to apply the Wiccan Rede* to secular law THAT I might be OK with...LOL.


Ken


* And it harm none do as ye will


PS. Hope Ramadan has gone well, Miraj.

Libertarian, Conservative, Life member of the NRA and VFW
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 10, 2012 - 8:26AM #57
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

So called Judeo-Christian values should also be banned from secular society, being that, like Shari'a, they're all based on the 10 Commandments. Religious edicts like "Don't murder", "Don't steal", "Don't bear false witness" contained in Shari'a shouldn't be imposed on non-Muslims who should be able to lie, steal and murder all they want.


In order to avoid Shari'a, stay away from churches, synogogues and the US Supreme Court, which, BTW, features a large frieze of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as one of 18 lawgivers in human history.


www.supremecourt.gov/about/north&southwa...


I have a photo of the frieze in my photo gallery, but cant seem to paste from my PDA. I'm sure a simple search will yield a photo of it, on the SCOTUS wall, making Americans quake with dread since the 1930s.


The fear of Shari'a is rooted in a profound ignorance of one's own history and heritage. It's been a part of this society since the 1600s. Thomas Jefferson studied the Qur'an; his copy was used to swear in Rep. Keith Ellison, a Muslim American Congressman.


Defeat ignorance. Renounce fear and suspicion. Muslim or not, Shari'a is already part of your life and it has always been there, whether you realize it or not.


Aug 10, 2012 -- 12:58AM, rangerken wrote:


I just think this is for all intents a non issue. As long as shariah stays inside the mosque, and never, ever applies to non Muslims and never, ever has any secular authority in the US who cares about it? It's no different than Catholic canon law...a way to run a religion which must never impact non believers.


Now if someone wanted to apply the Wiccan Rede* to secular law THAT I might be OK with...LOL.


Ken


* And it harm none do as ye will


PS. Hope Ramadan has gone well, Miraj.





Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 10, 2012 - 10:28PM #58
mountain_man
Posts: 39,154

Aug 10, 2012 -- 12:58AM, rangerken wrote:

I just think this is for all intents a non issue. As long as shariah stays inside the mosque, and never, ever applies to non Muslims and never, ever has any secular authority in the US who cares about it? It's no different than Catholic canon law...a way to run a religion which must never impact non believers.


Even when Sharia stays within the mosque, it is tempered by US law. They will not be able to stone anyone to death and will not be cutting off any hands for stealing. The Imam can grant a Muslim a divorce, but they will still have to go through the US court system.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 10, 2012 - 10:50PM #59
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

Aug 10, 2012 -- 10:28PM, mountain_man wrote:


Aug 10, 2012 -- 12:58AM, rangerken wrote:

I just think this is for all intents a non issue. As long as shariah stays inside the mosque, and never, ever applies to non Muslims and never, ever has any secular authority in the US who cares about it? It's no different than Catholic canon law...a way to run a religion which must never impact non believers.


Even when Sharia stays within the mosque, it is tempered by US law. They will not be able to stone anyone to death and will not be cutting off any hands for stealing. The Imam can grant a Muslim a divorce, but they will still have to go through the US court system.




Shari'a never stays in the mosque and it is not tempered by US law. It has the same 1st Amendment protections as any other religious expression.  Thoughout US history, from slavery of Africans, the burning of "witches", the slaughter of Native Americans, Jim Crow and military rampages in the colonialist tradition, its been fervant Christians who have murdered innocents, wrecked havoc and caused division for centuries, not American Muslims.

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 10, 2012 - 11:54PM #60
mountain_man
Posts: 39,154

Aug 10, 2012 -- 10:50PM, Miraj wrote:

Shari'a never stays in the mosque and it is not tempered by US law.


No, it must.


It has the same 1st Amendment protections as any other religious expression.


No, it does not. Claiming "religious expression" does not let one break the law. The 1st Amendment, and any other amendment, or law, or rule, or whatever, does not protect illegal activities such as murder - stoning someone to death because they broke some religious law, or cutting off a hand because their religion says that's what must be done to a thief.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 6 of 10  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook