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:
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.