The Stafford Voice

Our little place to talk about and share about life.

islam

Oklahoma Bans Sharia Law

by

by Connie Hair

Voters have passed an amendment to the Oklahoma state constitution to ban the use of Islamic Sharia law in the state courts by an overwhelming 70% of the vote.  The amendment also bars judges from using foreign law in rendering decisions.

Seen as a pre-emptive strike, Oklahoma now joins Louisiana in blocking Sharia law, a draconian legal doctrine that does not recognize the most basic human rights as measured by any Western standard.

As previously reported on HUMAN EVENTS, free speech rights are under assault worldwide through violence, threats of violence, and Sharia-compliant “incitement” laws.

Continue reading . . .

The Left Hates Free Speech – Juan at a Time

by

by Ted Nugent

National Public Radio’s firing of commentator Juan Williams is yet another example of how political correctness has poisoned free speech.

Mr. Williams didn’t say anything that the vast majority of Americans wouldn’t say or agree with regarding genuine and well-founded concerns about Muslims on airplanes. Who doesn’t know that Muslim voodoo loons have used or tried to use jets as a means to carry out mass murder and mayhem? It’s the truth, comfortable or not.

Juan Williams, a clear and present left-leaning guy, has now been exposed to the progressive’s anti-free speech grinder machine. Instead of rallying to his to defense as many on the Right and some on the Left have, I have a question for Mr. Williams: How do you like the Left now?

Continue reading . . .

The ‘Islamophobia’ Weapon

by

by Robert Spencer

“The Muslim world is going through an unprecedented difficult and trying time,” said the Secretary General of the 56-state Organization of the Islamic Conference, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, on Friday.

One might reasonably have thought that he was referring to the recent increase in violent jihad incidents in the West, perpetrated by Muslims who explained and justified their actions by reference to Islamic texts and teachings. But no, Ihsanoglu was exercised about “Islamophobia,” the invented term Islamic supremacists use to try to stifle realistic analysis of the global jihad in all its manifestations.

“We are facing daunting challenges and severe hardships,” Ihsanoglu complained. “Islam and Muslims are under serious attack, and Islamophobia is growing and becoming more rampant and dangerous by the day.”

It is not at all established that “Islamophobia” really is growing. In fact, the FBI has recently released data establishing that hate crimes against Muslims are comparatively rare. But if there is any actual suspicion of or negative feelings toward Muslims in the United States, it is solely and wholly the responsibility of Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood jihadist; Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Christmas underwear jihadist; Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who killed one soldier and murdered another in a jihad shooting outside a military recruiting station in Little Rock, Ark.; Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square jihadist; Khaled Sheikh Mohammed and Osama bin Laden on 9/11; the London jihad bombers of July 7, 2005; and so many others.

Continue reading . . .

Sharia vs. U.S. Law

by

Monday in a conference with Council on Foreign Relations, Imam Feisal Abdual Rauf said that Islamic Sharia law complies with the United States Constitution. What? Is there something wrong with this guy? Has he even read the Constitution?

Certainly Imam Rauf – the self-professed Islamic moderate – is trying to promote his agenda and trying anything to smooth over the idea of continuing the building of the Ground Zero Mosque. The only problem with his momentum is that it is rooted in hatred and that it is completely false in saying Sharia is compliant with U.S. law.

So, his sole purpose for having this organized question and answer conference was, in his words, to explain how “Islam and America are organically bound together.” And, as hard as he tried he wasn’t able to skirt every planned question. While the easy questions were just that, they give an inclination into the ultimate agenda, and that is total integration with American society and to shape the landscape to their liking.

When asked about how Rauf would build a team “to create a coalition of moderates” and what the team would look like, Rauf’s response was:

“We need opinion leaders. We need journalists. We need educators. We need politicians. We need religious leaders and faith leaders. We need academics and universities and schools and institutions, think tanks to create plays.”

Plays that would reshape and redefine other peoples agendas in order to help their own agenda. An agenda that – under the disguise of moderate Muslims who know how to pick and choose ‘which verses to quote from the Quran’ – would ultimately bring acceptance of sharia law to America. Which fundamentally undermines the history and founding of America. A way of law that would leave the Founding Fathers rolling over in their graves many times over.

A topic full of controversy itself, sharia law found its way into the line of questioning as the last and most difficult question of the discussion.

Peter Fedynsky, Voice of America. At a recent demonstration near Ground Zero opposing the Islamic center, there was a banner behind the (the state ?) that said “stop shari’a law before it stops you.” And I would venture to say that many of the concerns of those present were not only the planes slamming into the Twin Towers, but minor things like women refusing to unveil themselves for a driver’s license and then major things like news of stonings, of honor killings. And — or — and then some people would say that the Cordoba — Cordoba in history was a place of Muslim conquest. So this — the question is, what is the compatibility of shari’a law with American constitutional law?

The response?

The fundamental rights of — the opening lines of Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal” — the equality of human creationis a fundamental principle of the Abrahamic faiths — “endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights” — the fact the creator gave these rights to us, not any government or man-made agency, is a religious concept among which our life, life and property, then changed to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.

Seven centuries before these words were penned by Thomas Jefferson, Muslim jurists said all of shari’a law, all of Islamic law is intended to uphold six fundamental objectives: the protection of life, of human dignity, which (can ?) relate to liberty, to religion, to family, to property and the intellect. And what do we do (after ?) life to pursue our happiness? We get married to our loved ones, we seek material well being, we seek our intellectual pursuits and we seek to practice our faith religions.

90 percent of shari’a law is fully compatible, and not only — not only compatible, is consistent or compatible with American constitutional law and American laws. The areas of difference are small and minor.

Now, in commenting about ‘the equality of human creation’, it still leaves open the fact that in Islam women are not equal to men. And, ‘protection of life?’ What is ‘human dignity’ when it is Islam that produces acts like this:

Nick Berg beheading
The beheading of American Nick Berg.

There is nothing dignifying about acts of pure brutality like that, and any religion that supports and teaches followers to perform in that manner do not belong in America and do not comply with the Constitution or American law.

Who is the Enemy?

by

by Patrick Buchanan

The Rev. Terry Jones may just have exposed the ultimate futility of America’s war in Afghanistan. Consider the portrait of frustrated impotence America presented to the world last week.

Our president and the secretaries of state and defense deplored Pastor Jones’ plan to burn 100 Qurans but could do nothing to stop him, other than to plead with him. Jones decided to call it off himself.

What was the message received by a billion Muslims?

“Muslims must understand that our Constitution protects the desecration of your holiest book. America is a place where people have a right to denounce Islam as a religion ‘of the Devil’ and burn the Quran in public.”

Continue reading . . .

Purge the Evil

by

by Cal Thomas

Terry Jones, the Florida “minister” who threatened to burn the Koran on the anniversary of Sept. 11, is as much a distraction from the real challenge facing America as was Sen. Joseph McCarthy when it came to communism. Communism was (and remains in its Chinese incarnation) a real threat. But radical Islam — rabid, advancing, intolerant, subjugating — is potentially a bigger one and must be conquered.

Various apologists for the Nazis and communists in the media, academia and religion are now mostly forgotten and that’s the problem. Forgetting what happens when evil is accommodated leads to terrible consequences and more evil.

Some ancient wisdom about what must be done with evil is helpful for those who would pay attention: “You must purge the evil from among you” (Deuteronomy 22:21). Instead, we are tolerating, even welcoming evil, under the false assumption that evil can be neutered when it is in the midst of good. If that were so, the good works performed by various cultures would have long ago eradicated evil. Evil must not only be purged, it must be defeated.

The former co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Democrat Lee Hamilton and Republican Thomas Kean, write of the “Americanization” of al Qaeda leadership, reports the Washington Post. In a 43-page study by the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington, Hamilton and Kean warn of the radicalization of Muslims inside the United States and how al Qaeda’s strategy is changing from big events, like airplane hijackings and attacks of mass destruction, to plotting for smaller actions designed to spread fear and instability across the country.

Continue reading . . .

Burning a Quran vs. Building the Mosque

by

Buzz buzz buzz go the media about the burning of the Qurans down in Florida. But why? They tried to paint ground zero mosque opposers as radical islamaphobes. What makes this any different, even after supposed talks to cancel the burning fest and the moving of the mosque?

As time went on, and people got more upset Obama finally made a statement about the Constitutionality of the issue. And while they do have the right to build it, it still doesn’t give it good taste. But Obama was clear in another statement that he was not commenting on the wisdom.

It took little time at all for Obama to sit down with Stephanopoulos on ABC and talk about how the Quran burning should nor happen. He was very quick to judge the wisdom this time without discussing the Constitutionality.

These two cases are exactly the same. Both are viewed as sacred and both are viewed as a slap in the face. But there was no outrage from Gen. Petraeus on how the mosque building would endanger troops. Also, there was an enormous amount of crying from others in the administration about posing a threat by the burning Qurans, namely Defense Sec. Robert Gates when he personally called Jones to ask him to call it off.

Another ironic part of this whole story is one that has yet to recieve any attention. And that is how Imam Rauf is now saying that if he would have known there would have been this much stink he wouldn’t have built the mosque. Only one problem, and that is he hasn’t built anything yet. He was only on a state sponsered funding mission. If anything he would be out of a couple hundred thousand for the purchase of the building. It seems highly ironic that after someone threatens something sacred to him does he come out and make this statement.

Islam: Free to Exercise Religion?

by

With Islam continuing to emerge as an issue, the debate over exercise of religion takes debate. However, there are fine lines which make it difficult for some.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, of prohibiting the free exercise thereof – 1st Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America

While people are free to choose their religion and how they practice their faith, Islam has come forward namely because of its own set of laws. Sharia law is controversial to those who are not practicing members, but the reason it is heavily debated is that it doesn’t follow conventional laws.

The debate is because Sharia law provides a ‘religious activity’ that both harms public peace and others’ rights. This in itself should be enough to end the issue. But, compassion for others to freely worship their Creator is a foundation of America. Which furthers the fine lines over the practice of Islam.

A foundation of Islam is to oppose those who oppose them. And, while you can’t pick and choose what parts of religion can be allowed, the debate continues.

For more on this issue: