USA: Oklahoma Voters Ban Sharia Law – CAIR Announces Lawsuit [UPDATE]
Al-Shabab Sharia Court in Somalia ordered hand amputation of an alleged thief
On Tuesday, the voters of Oklahoma overwhelmingly voted for a measure to stop Sharia law in their state. Republican Rex Duncan sponsored the proposition that will block judges from considering any international or Islamic Shaira Law when giving a verdict.
So far, except for one incident in New Jersey where a family court judge refused to grant a restraining order to a woman from her abusive husband because of their Islamic belief, no other significant court case has been noted. However, it is not uncommon in Europe for the judges to use Shaira law to make a ruling.
Consequently, Mr. Duncan called the measure a “preemptive strike.”
Sharia means “path” in Arabic and Sharia law literally paves the path for the Muslims. Sharia law encompasses all aspects of a Muslim’s life including family matter, financial, social and religious obligations.
Here are a few prime examples of Sharia Laws that all Muslims scholars agree.
1. Drinkers, gamblers and those who fail to offer prayer five times a day must be whipped.
2. A husband may beat his disobedient wife.
3. A thief must have a hand cut off.
4. An adulterer should be stoned to death.
5. Anyone who leaves Islam must be killed.
6. Anyone who criticizes the Quran or the the prophet of Islam must be killed.
7. A man can have four wives and may marry underage girl.
8. All Muslims are obligated to fight until Islam becomes the religion of the world.
Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR
Initially, Muslims groups in America brushed off the bill banning Sharia law and argued that there is need for such law.
Today, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has challenged the validity of the new law and declared a lawsuit.
It may seem discouraging, but the reality is that CAIR may win the case. The First Amendment clearly dictates all government bodies to “make no law respecting the establishment of religion.”
UPDATE: 11/09/10
U.S. Federal Judge Vickie Miles-LeGrange has issued a restraining order to block the bill. The verdict will stop the State Election board from certifying the result of the votes on this bill.
The temporary injunction will remain in effect until Nov. 22, when a hearing will take place.
Plaintiff Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma complained that the amendment will stigmatize his religion and would invalidate his will.
He further argued, “My constitutional rights are being violated through the condemnation of my faith.”
Posted by Administrator
on November 9 2010. Filed under News.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
thefreemuslim,
I guess you are right. The word "Allah" is also used by the eastern Orthodox Christians and eastern Cathotic Christians as well, they use it often to refer to God.
But tell me: don't those (CAIR) feel a bit embarrassed for claiming that their constitutional rights are violated? What is it exactly they want? do they want to force their foreign law and put it above the law of the country? Truly brazen !
thefreemuslim says: November 14, 2010 at 7:44 pm (1) “Imam Al Nawawi, who was a Sunni Muslim, a popular hadith scholar and an authoritative figure in the Shafi Madhab, in his commentary on the collection of Muslim, wrote: “A number of scholars discovered many hadiths in the collections of Muslim and Bukhari which do not fulfill the conditions of verification assumed by these men.”
Imam Nawawi is Abu Zakaria Mohiuddin Yahya, ibn Sharaf AnÄNawawi ibn Murry, ibn Hassan ibn Hussain ibn Muhammad ibn Juma ibn Hazam. Nawawi refers to Nawa, a place near Damascus, in the suburb of the city of Howran. Imam Nawawi was born at Nawa in the year 631 A.H – (631 – 676 A.H. / 1234 – 1278 CE).
While Imam Nawawi may have said and shown skepticism as to the previous Islamic scholars he treads no new and undiscovered ground. He merely reinterpreted and placed a less cutting edge on that which was already in existence. Could not find Imam Nawawi’ Ahadith listed as Sahih.
Witness: Abu Zakaria Mohiuddin Yahya Ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi
Number 14 of Imam Nawawi’s forty Hadith: Number 14: On the authority of Ibn Mas'ud, who said: The Messenger of Allah said: " The blood of a Muslim may not be legally spilt other than in one of three; the married person who commits adultery; a life for a life; and one who forsakes his religion and abandons the community.
Witness: Imam Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj
Sahih Muslim Book 16, Number 4154: 'Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported: Allah's Messenger stood up and said: By Him besides Whom there is no god but He, the blood of a Muslim who bears the testimony that there is no god but Allah, and I am His Messenger, may be lawfully shed only in case of three persons: the one who abandons Islam (Apostatizes), and deserts the community. Ahmad, one of the narrators, is doubtful whether the Holy Prophet used the word ( li'l-jama'ah or al-jama'ah), and the married adulterer, and life for life.
Witness: Muhammad Ibn Ismail Ibn Ibrahim Ibn al-Mughirah Ibn Bardizbah al-Bukhari
Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17: Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle said, " The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostatizes) and leaves the Muslims."
Actually Imam Nawawi was a good Muslim that confirmed death for apostasy to Islam. So, Imam Nawawi gets no credit for that with disbelievers of Islam or apostates.
So, this one is not impressed nor persuaded as to the superiority of Imam Nawawi (631 – 676 A.H. / 1234 – 1278 CE) over Imam Bukhari (194 – 256 A.H / 809 – 870 CE.) or Imam Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj ( 202 – 261A.H. / 817 – 875 CE.).
So the Sahih ahadith of Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim are secure from the supposed corrections and disparagement of Imam Nawawi and the other unnamed “number of scholars”.
thefreemuslim says: November 14, 2010 at 7:44 pm (2) “Another Islamic scholar, Ibn Khaldun wrote: “I do not believe any hadith or report of a companion of the Prophet to be true which differs from the common sense meaning of the Qur’an, no matter how trustworthy the narrators may have been. It is not impossible that a narrator appears to be trustworthy though he may be moved by ulterior motive. If the hadiths were criticized for their textual contents as they were for the narrators who transmitted them a great number would have had to be rejected. It is a recognized principle that a hadith could be declared spurious if it departs from the common sense meaning of the Qur’an from the recognized principles of the Shari’ah, the rules of logic, the evidence of sense, or any other self-evident truth.”
IBN KHALDUN (1332-1395 C.E.) Abd al-Rahman Ibn Mohammad “Chief Malakite Judge and lecturer at the Al-Azhar University, but was removed from his high judicial office as many as five times”. – Ummah.net History
“ Ibn Khaldun's chief contribution lies in philosophy, history and sociology”.-Ummah.net History
“ Ibn Khaldun argued that history is subject to universal laws and states the criterion for historical truth: "The rule for distinguishing what is true from what is false in history is based on its possibility or impossibility:” – Witness pioneer org
“Because of his emphasis on reason and its necessity in judging history and social events, some scholars have claimed that Ibn Khaldun tried to refute conventional religious knowledge and substitute for it reason and rational philosophy”… – Witness pioneer org
Ibn Khaldun was a pioneer in education. “ He remarked that suppression and use of force are enemies to learning, and that they lead to laziness, lying and hypocrisy ”. – Witness pioneer org
How true is that in Islam as we now see it even in the World today? So respect to Ibn Khaldun for that sentiment, however he wrote no Hadith found by me, and like the others only commented on.
So this may be why Ibn Khaldun was so often “removed from his high judicial office as many as five times” at Al-Azhar Madrasa (later University). So in this there is no refutation of Shahih ahadith for he appears to have been a forward thinker and was maligned and disliked for it.
"The rule for distinguishing what is true from what is false in history is based on its possibility or impossibility:” – Ibn Khaldun
So, is it possible to actually “split the Earth’s moon asunder in two” as the Quran states emphatically? No it is not. So such does fails the test of Ibn Khaldun’ based on “ its possibility or impossibility ”. No other recorder or observers reported such as Earth’ moon splitting in two which should have been widely visible, except the people of the desert of Arabia.
The Quran is most likely exaggerating or badly mistaken in reference to splitting the earth’s Moon unless Quran appeals to the supernatural, unknowable and unseen. Then there were no miracles just things not capable of verifiable proofs that we do not understand, supported by faith only.
From the general impression Ibn Khaldun appears to be one that upset the apple cart (Islamic dogma) at times, nice.
thefreemuslim says: November 14, 2010 at 7:44 pm (3) “A prominent Muslim scholar of our times, Dr. Muhammad Mustafa Azami, M.A., Ph.D. and Professor of Science of Hadith, University of Riyadh, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia writes:Many scholars criticized Bukhari’s work. The criticism concerns about 80 narrators and some 110 ahadith” .
According to 'MYTHS AND REALITIES OF HADITH — a critical study by Akbarally Meherally
(Dr. Muhammad Mustafa Azami ) appears to be assisted under the Nom de plume of Akbarally Meherally. Is this so?
Read through the tome and one thing must be remembered as paramount, ahadith are a history and a telling of what supposedly actually happened or was said to. No Historian needs the sanction of religion to report on what people or even the companions of Muhammad said. As Ibn Khaldun said
“impossible versus possible ”, right !
Imam bukhari collected over 600,000 hadiths and published 2762. The criticism concerns about 80 narrators and some 110 ahadith is inconsequential in comparison, a small percentage of the whole.
Example: Section Two Of Hadith Book 'MYTHS AND REALITIES OF HADITH — a critical study'
Number 26 In the computer CD Alim the number is 8: 816.
[Hadith narrated by Ibn 'Abbas. Caliph 'Umar said, I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, 'We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book,' and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him.
The extended text of the above report appears in the next hadith 86.6830 (8-817). It is also narrated by Ibn 'Abbas. The obvious questions that would arise after reading the above text are: What is the penalty prescribed in the Qur'an for those who commit illegal sexual intercourse? Is that a substituted penalty for the abrogated or caused to be forgotten, earlier penalty of "stoning to death"? Did the Prophet and his companions in fact carry out the penalty of "stoning to death" as narrated?
The Qur’an on adultery - The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication flog each of them with a hundred stripes: let not compassion move you in their case in a matter prescribed by Allah if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment. ]
As I see it Rajam (stoning) or 100 stripes given can and will definitely lead to death or near so, the point being extrapolated on is mute. Religions and even Governments; that abuse humanity for personal sexual choice is barbaric and the argument of whether Rajam or 100 stripes is nonsensical.
In addition in reality it matters not whether Muhammad said Rajam (stone) or lash, or whether Sahih Hadith are now classed as irrelevant for Islam and Muslims do Rajam (stone) and Lash and humanity dies and suffers greatly at the hands of the so called pious of Islam everyday.
Such barbarity whether sanctioned by the Pagan Islamic God or anyone else, must be ended.
thefreemuslim says: November 14, 2010 at 7:44 pm (4) “Overall western academics view the hadith collections with caution. Bernard Lewis states that “the collection and scrutiny of Hadiths didn’t take place until several generations” after Muhammad’s death and that “during that period the opportunities and motives for falsification were almost unlimited.”
“This month marks the 20th anniversary (September 2010) of Bernard Lewis' seminal essay "The Roots of Muslim Rage." So profound was the impact of this work, it inspired Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" – a term coined by Lewis in the essay. Lewis wrote the piece in the shadow of Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, yet he makes no mention of that invasion “.- truth out org
“The central thesis of Lewis' essay is "something in the religious culture of Islam" is inimical to the West and western values. The overall theme of "Roots" is that the West now faces "a mood and a movement far transcending the level of issues and policies and the governments that pursue them. This is no less than a clash of civilization – the perhaps irrational, but surely historic, reaction of an ancient rival (i.e. Islam) against our Judeo-Christian heritage,…” – truth out org
Yes, Western academia and the public in general views Ahadith, Quran and the life of Muhammad with caution and a bit of disbelief, skepticism and that is how it should be. For very little of Islam including the Pagan Islamic God is capable of verifiable proofs and relies on faith, just as any other religion does.
thefreemuslim says: November 14, 2010 at 7:44 pm “Chiulo has once again mentioned 3:89 but not the verse immediately following it, 3:90 – “But as for those who seek refuge with people with whom you have a treaty, or who come over to you because their hearts shrink from fighting against you or against their own people, God could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they withdraw and do not fight you, and offer you peace, then God gives you no way against them. (3:90) (Hence one CAN NOT harm the Apostates if they do not fight or physically harm the Muslims.)
Muhammad never honored a Treaty in his whole vulgar desert pirate looting career. Ask the men of the Jewish Tribe Bani Quraiza, beheadings for everyone except for the females especially the luscious recently widowed Jewess Safiyah. Muhammad and his gang; had already butchered Safiyah’ husband, father and kinfolk. Muhammad supposedly helped Safiyah out of that tight situation by marrying Safiyah and sexing her up that same night. So submit and don’t fight, do or say any thing against Islam and be safe, what a big crock of nothing.
Quran 8:12 When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe (Muslims). Allah will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve (Non Muslims). Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.
thefreemuslim says: November 14, 2010 at 7:49 pm “ Is Allah a Pagan moon Gog? Please read – en wikipedia org wiki Allah ”.
No, Allah is the Pagan moon God!
Barbarians are at it again. They never sleep. These are cavemen from 8th century B.C.
LONDON: Pupils at Islamic schools across Britain are being taught how to chop off a criminal's hand and that Jews are conspiring to take over the world, a BBC investigation found on Monday. Up to 5,000 pupils aged between six and 18 are being taught Sharia law punishments using "weekendschool " text-books which claim those who do not believe in Islam will be subjected to "hellfire" in death.
A text book for 15-year-olds advises: "For thieves their hands will be cut off for a first offence, and their foot for a subsequent offence."
"The specified punishment of the thief is cutting off his right hand at the wrist. Then it is cauterised to prevent him from bleeding to death," it added. Young pupils are warned that the punishment for engaging in homosexual acts is death by stoning, burning with fire or throwing off a cliff and that the "main goal" of the Jews is to "have control over the world and its resources." The schools are part of the " Saudi Students Clubs and Schools in the UK and Ireland" organisation.
They are not state-funded , and do not use Government buildings, and therefore are not inspected by the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted). Education minister Michael Gove told the BBC programme: "I have no desire or wish to intervene in the decisions that the Saudi government makes in its own education system. "But I'm clear that we cannot have anti-Semitic material of any kind being used in English schools. Ofsted (Britain's education watchdog) will be reporting to me shortly."