Should the U.S. Fear the Shariah?

           If we were to rephrase this question in the following different ways:

Should we fear the Roman Catholics?

Should we fear the Jews?

Should we fear the first amendment?

I am sure the reply would be in the negative.  As a Shariah Scholar who studied the Shariah for 10 years, I present the following for my American readers to ponder and learn.  

Shariah is an Arabic word that refers to a path leading to water from which animals and humans can benefit.  Based on its linguistic origins, the same word has been chosen as a name for the law, which according to Muslims, God has chosen for Muslims to live by.  Notice that I said, “…for Muslims to live by,” because the Shariah does not apply to Non-Muslims.  The first thing to learn about the Shariah that Muslims in America follow is the Shariah itself states that it cannot be applied to Non-Muslims. 

Imagine an American from Texas with a concealed handgun (which is lawful in Texas) crosses the border into Canada and is detained by Canadian authorities for having a gun.  Now he can plead as much as he wants that in Texas, it is lawful to have a concealed handgun, the Canadian authorities will say, “Sorry sir, it is not allowed here.”  A Texan American can only follow those aspects of the American constitution and state laws that conform to Canadian laws.  In Canada, Canadian laws will overrule American federal and state laws when there is a contradiction.  In the same manner, the Shariah states that in a non-Muslim country, only those aspects of the Shariah are applicable that conform to local laws.  Most Muslims living in America who are religious acknowledge this.  So the second important thing we learn about the Shariah is that in a non-Muslim country, it is only applicable to the extent that state laws permit and that state laws can override it.

What causes fear in Americans, according to my opinion, is the type of so called Shariah that is implemented in some Muslim countries such as Iran, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.  I have not yet met any Muslim who wants Taliban- or Iranian-style Shariah in the U.S.  Many Muslims in the U.S. fled from those laws and sought asylum here.  The 99% of Muslims want to live the American dream and be peaceful and law-abiding citizens.  Muslims come here mostly because of the tolerance of the American people and the vast opportunities this land offers.  The penal laws of Shariah are extremely vast and open to interpretation, and on top of that, the Shariah itself prohibits any implementation of penal laws by any individual in a Muslim country or non-Muslim country.  An Imam, a Muslim state appointed judge or a Muslim federal judge in the U.S. cannot implement any type of Shariah penal laws in the U.S. because not only does the American constitution prohibit that, the Shariah also prohibits it.  As the saying goes, “You cannot take the law into your own hands.”  The penal laws of the Shariah can only be implemented by a legal state-appointed authority in a Muslim state.  This is the third important point to know about the Shariah.

The U.S. constitution is protected by the supremacy clause that states:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Christian Science Monitor very rightfully published an op-ed about this under the heading Those defending US Constitution from sharia must have failed high school civics. The article states,

Those like Newt Gingrich who try to exploit sharia hysteria to foster fear of Muslims in the US not only fail to understand sharia, they also fail to understand the ideals of religious freedom upon which America was built.

Therefore, attempts to outlaw Shariah are not only absurd, they can potentially alienate millions of peaceful, law-abiding Muslims currently living in America. After all, Shariah safeguards essential rights such as acts of worship, instructs Muslims regarding their dietary regulations, and encourages them to be pious, truthful, and tolerant individuals. Misguided efforts to outlaw Shariah would in fact impede Muslims from practicing the very basics of their religion, from praying and fasting to consuming food according to Islamic guidelines. Hence, these anti-Shariah bills are far from securing Americans from an impending threat and actually infringe upon the rights of the American Muslim community.

The Hype Over Shariah Infiltrating the U.S.

As the Republican candidates continue their fight to become the Republican nominee for the highest office of the country, one thing they all agree with is their opposition to Shariah; also known as the religion of Islam.  From the current leading nominee Mitt Romney to Michele Bauchman and Herman Cain, all have stated in their campaigns that the Shariah is a threat to America and it must be stopped.  The ABC News website has confirmed this in an article dated March 29, 2011 titled GOP Presidential Hopefuls Blast Sharia Law in Pre-Primary Rhetoric. For those of you who do not know want to know more about the Shariah, I recently gave a presentation on it at the University Christian Church of Austin, TX during a workshop titled Sharia Law – Rumors and Reality.

The famous blog Media Matters for America posted a critique titled Wash. Times Fearmongers That Shariah Law is Coming to a City Near You on an editorial published in the Washington Times titled "Shariah In America's Courts."  The editorial was about an amendment that was put forth for ratification that would outlaw the use of the Shariah or any other international law in Oklahoma courts.  The amendment was approved in November, 2010 but was never implemented until a panel of federal judges deemed it unconstitutional and the 10^th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld its unconstitutional status.  Disappointed with the outcome, the Washington Times editorial stated,

A panel of federal judges has ruled that states cannot protect their courts from jurists who base their decisions on international or Koranic law. America needs better judges… It should be obvious that judges shouldn't look outside the laws and traditions of their jurisdictions when deciding cases, but in the liberal judicial-activist framework, anything goes.

What the editorial overlooked is that the Constitution already protects the American law from being overridden by another law through the Supremacy Clause.   Article VI, Clause 2 called the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution states,

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

It does not require a PhD to understand what the above clause means.  The Christian Science Monitor very rightfully published an op-ed about this under the heading Those defending US Constitution from sharia must have failed high school civics. The article states,

Those like Newt Gingrich who try to exploit sharia hysteria to foster fear of Muslims in the US not only fail to understand sharia, they also fail to understand the ideals of religious freedom upon which America was built.

To conclude, I would like to offer my two cents to the American people: Wake up and do not curtail the same freedoms you fought to defend and implement for yourselves.  There is a huge difference between accommodating for other cultures and religions and overriding the constitution with another law.  Muslims want accommodations just like other religions in the past were accommodated.  Jews have Kosher certification and we find supermarkets inundated with products with Kosher certification.  What is the big deal if Muslims want the same?