Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Did CAIR Tip Its Hand in Oklahoma?

If you were not paying attention, in the recent election, the state of Oklahoma passed a ballot measure (with 70% approval) that would make any future implementation of shariah law against the state constitution. Predictably, the Council on American Islamic Relations filed an immediate lawsuit and as usual, a friendly judge has passed a temporary stay on the law until hearings can be held.

Many might jump to conclusions and say that the ballot measure was ridiculous and there is no possibility of shariah law gaining a foothold in the US.

You might want to think again.

Just recently, a New Jersey judge ruled in favor of a Muslim man who abused his wife on the grounds that Islamic law denied the woman the right to refuse sex with her husband. British courts have already approved dozens of shariah courts to handle "family and community matters". As the measure's advocates have stated, passing such a law in Oklahoma was viewed as preventative measure for future rulings as the New jersey outrage.

What is even more ridiculous is the CAIR position that such a law would discriminate against Muslims. In the case of the New Jersey wife, it would protect Muslims and ensure they are afforded all the rights and protections given to all Americans. It would also seem obvious that the Oklahoma law would be in conformance with the principle of separation of Church and State.

But why is CAIR so quick to jump to the defense of shariah law in the US? After all, this is supposedly a "moderate" organization, right? Never mind their roots back to the Muslim Brotherhood (another organization that claims to be "moderate", but is also  the parent organization of Hizbollah, Hamas and even Al-Qaeda.) The bottom line is that CAIR is now in the position of going through legal contortions to defend the idea of shariah law in America. In essence, they have screwed up in this matter. They have revealed their true colors. All we need do is to go back to a reputed quote from one of CAIR's co- founders, Omar Ahmad, which was reported in 1998 by a journalist named Lisa Gardiner who was present at a Muslim gathering in which Ahmad spoke.

"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant, he said. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth, he said."

Ahmad and CAIR later denied the quote and demanded a retraction. Gardiner refused to retract the story.

Bottom line? CAIR is fighting a state law in Oklahoma that would prevent shariah from becoming part of the state's legal system. Does that mean that CAIR favors a legal system in the US based on shariah? Looks like that to me.


Siarlys Jenkins said...

Hmmm... CAIR sounds like the Roman Catholic Church. Of course we can't permit any religion to assume such authority. If there is one good thing which will come out of this controversy, it is that conservative American Christians are suddenly going to be friends of the "separation of church and state" again. Tip off Christine O'Donnell about that, should she be so foolish as to run again. Her concession speech was worthy of a Democrat "Be encouraged, we have won."

The judge in New Jersey is, of course, wrong. U.S. law also allowed lawyers for a husband charged with rape to argue "Your honor, she's his wife" until about thirty years ago, but those days are over. No doubt the New Jersey case will be overturned. Individual judges in this country do all kinds of crazy things. That's why we have courts of appeal.

Anonymous said...

"Does that mean that CAIR favors a legal system in the US based on shariah? Looks like that to me."

That's because you're a bigoted simpleton.

Gary Fouse said...


No, a bigoted simpleton might favor seeing Christianity as the law of the land and I don't favor that at all.

Even if I were a bigoted simpleton, I still have the courage and conviction to sign my name to everything I write, unlike you.

Siarlys Jenkins said...

I second Gary on this point. I've gotten into arguments with sincere Roman Catholics who, because they sincerely believe that their church IS the church ordained by Christ and his Apostles, and that the Pope is Christ's Vicar on Earth --his ex cathedra pronouncements infallible -- offer at least the same potential threat of seeking to dominate the secular laws, which Gary fears from some Muslim organizations in the U.S.

I have made some quite pointed responses to these aspirations, and there certainly are such aspirations in some portions of Islam. Gary may or may not be accurate in his estimation of the danger, but the assertion doesn't make him a bigoted simpleton.

Just because many traditionally Muslim nations were subordinated to some variant of European colonialism, just because Christian missionaries made mostly futile attempts to win Muslims away from their faith, doesn't ipso facto mean that every Muslim movement is leading to the enlightened liberation of mankind.