Monday, November 29, 2010

Sharia Threat is Real, Stop it Now …

"Sharia is terrorism!"

I adamantly disagree with Charles C. Haynes of the First Amendment Center, who recently wrote an opinion editorial, “Sharia scare threatens religious freedom,” which I read in my local newspaper, the Mansfield (Ohio) News-Journal on Friday, November 26, 2010. He claims that the overwhelming passage of the constitutional amendment prohibiting application of either Sharia Law or International Law in the state of Oklahoma violates the first amendment. He is wrong. He thinks, “… (P)assing state constitutional amendments stigmatizing a particular religion may violate both the establishment and free-exercise clauses of the First Amendment. On Nov. 8, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Oklahoma amendment after a Muslim American filed suit arguing that the amendment would invalidate his will, which he chose to base partially on sharia law. A hearing on a permanent injunction was Monday." 

Haynes goes on further to write, "First Amendment separation of church and state (including mosque and state) makes the Oklahoma amendment unnecessary. There is no danger that sharia - or any other religious law - will "take over" or shape final judicial decisions in America. The campaign to outlaw sharia in Oklahoma and elsewhere is fear-mongering at its worst" First, if the Oklahoma Amendment is so unnecessary, why the fuss? Why is C.A.I.R. and its attorneys wanting so badly to block it? Second of all, what Haynes calls "Separation of Church or Mosque and State" has been misinterpreted already by our courts as meaning "Separating God from the State." This was never the intention of the founders. Quite the opposite, God was honored and an integral part of the founding of this nation. Finally, we have some radically activist judges throughout our judicial system who have and will continue to disregard the Constitution and make laws themselves. Don't think some radical judge at any level will not recognize and allow sharia to be applied. We must protect the Constitution from these radical activist judges.  

I absolutely concur with the plaintiffs’ attorney in this case, who, “(S)pent six days arguing that Islam was not a religion but a political movement conspiring to replace the Constitution with sharia law. Sharia, he declared, is terrorism. This view insults millions of American Muslims who reject extreme interpretations of sharia applied in places like Saudi Arabia, and practice their faith in ways entirely consistent with American law. If the truth is insulting or if the truth is politically incorrect, so be it. Islam is not only an anti-American political system; it is also a militaristic system, as well as being a so-called religion. It is all three. It is a fabrication and deceitful to consider it just another ‘peaceful’ religion. It is much more than that!

The citizens of Oklahoma should be applauded for recognizing the dual threats of Sharia and International law on the American Constitution and the values and principles of this nation. I encourage Ohio and all other states to follow in the footsteps of Oklahoma in preventing the further infiltration of this deceitful terrorist tactic (Sharia & International law) from trying to transform America

1 comment:

  1. Though I basically agree with you, I don't think that they should argue that Islam is not a religion. It is a religion and that is exactly why it is wrong the judicial system to recognize Sharia law. Because that would be an establishment of religion.