In America, our inalienable rights are granted by God and distributed equally to every citizen regardless of race, religion and other arbitrary factors. That’s not the case under Shariah laws and practices.
America, by her nature, is an optimistic nation which opens her arms of equal opportunity to all of the people of the world.
A reading of our Constitution offers the best glimpse into the body and soul of a free people who wish nothing less than freedom for others. Every word of the Constitution argues for freedom.
Simply put, our Constitution recognizes a standard set of rights granted to every American citizen.
Shariah, the theological and behavioral code of Islam outlined in the Koran and related pronouncements called Hadiths, spells out and allocates “rights” mostly by religion, gender, etc. If you are male and Islamic you fare much better under Shariah.
But how can the Constitution reconcile the inclusion of a Shariah-observant group in America’s public square?
The answer is simple and emphatic….our constitutional republic cannot accommodate an ideology/practice which contradicts its most fundamental assumptions at every turn.
Under the Constitution, identical rights are allocated to each individual.
Shariah starts with the assumption that every person is born a Muslim. It allocates certain privileges by group and it codifies the use of force against those who resist.
A good example of the contrast between the two systems is the treatment of religious liberty (or the lack thereof) in both the Constitution and the Koran.
The Constitution’s First Amendment states,” Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
The Koran is a very different story.
“Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.” Quran 4:89
“Whoever changed his religion, then kill him.” Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:57
In Shariah states, non-Muslims are given a second-class status of citizenship called dhimmi. They are prohibited from public worship, constructing or repairing churches, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells. Dhimmis who violate these laws are subject to the same penalties used for prisoners of war: death, slavery, release or ransom.
This is one example of the starkly contrasting views of basic freedoms like freedom of speech/dissent, right to self-defense and numerous other rights which are taken for granted here in America but routinely denied in Shariah-compliant nations.
In short, our Constitution delineates an extensive set of rights granted to every citizen regardless of gender, race or religion which the Shariah describes a limited set of privileges granted to male Muslims as a group. Individual freedom versus restricted group rights.
It is impossible to find any middle ground where these two diametrically opposed approaches can be reconciled.
That is why I support legislation similar to the model “American Laws for American Courts” which bans any application of Shariah law/practices in our courts.
Please let me know of any effort to impose Shariah or any other form of anti-Constitutional foreign laws in courts within the Commonwealth of Virginia.