By The Right Scoop


I can’t believe people let him get away with butchering Sharia Law like this. I mean, just look where it’s been put into practice and you’ll see the exact opposite of what he describes. This is nothing more than a slow calculated assault on our constitution and it must be stopped.

UPDATE: I meant to write the Declaration of Independence earlier, but instead wrote ‘Constitution’. I have corrected.

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop

Trending Now

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie Castillo

    I need an emoticon for lol+head exploding for when he said Sharia promotes right to life.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/JJWAFS3CTAETTM6GCM4ZA7TNAU don c

    Are Imams taught to lie or does it just come naturally?

  • RyokTHEgod

    TRS, he isn’t butchering sharia law. He’s butchering the Constitution by comparing it to sharia.

  • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

    Well actually he is, but I get your point.

  • RyokTHEgod

    Is he butchering it or misrepresenting it?

  • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

    Given that he’s talking about Sharia, I choose the word ‘butchering’. Seems to fit.

  • Anonymous

    First, Rauf didn’t say Sharia was “like the Constitution” in this clip… he made the comparison to the Declaration of Independence… a very different document. John Boehnor made it clear that he confuses the two recently, when he said he was going to read from the former, then read from the latter. I thought all of you… with all the “history lessons” you get from Barton and Beck… would know the difference.

    Rauf also made it clear he was making his statement based upon the writings of a Muslim jurist 700 years ago, who encapsulated Sharia law in a series of 5 positions. the jurist wasn’t making the comparison, of course, since that was over 450 years before the Declaration. The comparison is what Rauf sees, and he’s entitled to see whatever he wants to. It’s no greater a right than you, or Beck, or Barton, or Obama, or I have any claim to. (BTW… wasn’t this guy sent on a trip around the Middle East by Bush-Cheney to explain America to the radical Muslims and try to calm the tensions between us?)

    What I’m wondering, though… is if this means the Imam thinks the archangel Gabriel dictated our Declaration of Independence to Thomas Jefferson, at the behest of God Almighty?

  • RyokTHEgod

    Fair enough.

  • Anonymous

    It actually does… but they also believe that by our actions, we can forfeit that right. In this, his comparison is not far-fetched at all. There are plenty who believe in a ban on abortion, but agree with the death penalty. I’ve read some posts from people on this site who appear to think that the entire religion of Islam should be exterminated… just because they’re Muslims.

    I’ve seen where that leads. We’ve been there.

  • Poptoy

    Sharia Law is just like the Constitution? BullS&%$. These idiots will say anything to get there way. I am not tolerant anymore. Enough of these people is enough. Take your Camel and head back to the desert. We don’t tell you what to do in the desert so don’t try to tell us what to do in the home of the FREE and the home of the BRAVE. GO AWAY.

  • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie Castillo

    Please compare the transgressions that forfeit the Muslim woman’s right to life vs the transgressions we, as Americans, would deem evil enough to allow the same consequence for the same person.

  • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie Castillo

    I just realized something relevant to this- Yesterday I remember Rush talking about this and making the case that they were attempting (with this mosque) to ‘paint radical muslims like peaceful muslims’ and not the other way around like the media seemed to imply that we were calling all muslims terrorists or radicals.

    What he is saying is making exactly the same point in comparing Sharia to American founding documents.

  • http://arttelles.com/stop-islamization-of-america/ Art Telles

    “I call America a shariah compliant state…”

    Is that so, Imam Rauf?

    Well, I call political Islam a terror inducing ideology… NOT a religion.

    And, Imam Rauf, America does NOT need shariah courts, does it… since America already has the U.S. constitution?

    America does NOT need 2 court systems as in England, right, Imam Rauf?

    Right.

    As a practitioner of taqiyya, Iman Rauf knows that (… at 8 sec.) “… what’s right with America and what’s right with Islam is very much in sync” is a non-sequitur because the issue is NOT what is RIGHT with shariah… the issue is what is WRONG with shariah.

    Hamas In Their Own Voices (2m. 55sec. … at 2m 38sec. – “death to America”)

    Art
    STOP! Islamization Of America

  • http://www.therightscoop.com/ therightscoop

    How silly.

    Why don’t you address the reality if Sharia Law? Why must you just accept what he says when reality is entirely different?

    Is there no absolute truth in your world?

  • carolyn

    Freedom of religion only if youre a muslim. Women’s rights?! Where?! What made me sick the most was the laughter at the end..

  • KeninMontana

    The Islamic jurist that Rauf refer’s to is Muhammad ibn Idris ash-Shafi`i ,Founder of what is viewed in the Muslim world as the most conservative school on Sharia law. The Shāfi‘ī school of thought stipulates authority to four sources of jurisprudence, also known as the Usul al-fiqh. In hierarchical order, the usul al-fiqh consist of: the Quran, the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad, ijmā’ (“consensus”), and qiyas (“analogy”). The “Five Rights” Rauf refers to only apply to Muslims and are not listed in anything like the Declaration or The Constitution.
    As for the reference to “Five”, In Islam there are “The Five Pillars of Islam”,They are:

    Sunni
    Shahadah;is a statement professing monotheism and accepting Muhammad as God’s messenger.”There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of God.”

    Salah;is the daily prayers Fajr,Dhuhr,Asr,Maghrib and Isha’s

    Zakat;obligatory alms

    Sawm (Siyam);Fasting,Ritual,For pennance,and ascetic

    Hajj;the pilgramige to Mecca

    Shia
    * Tawhid (monotheism)
    * Qiyamah (Day of Judgment)
    * Nubuwwah (Prophethood [prophets of Islam, Isa (Jesus), Jewish prophets, and other prophets])
    * Imamah (Leadership of the Twelve Imams)
    * Adl (Justice).

    In Sharia there are Five “classes”,these relate to Sharia Law as categories of compliance.
    Five positions or classes of Sharia
    1. Actions obligatory on Believers.
    2. Desirable or recommended (but not obligatory) actions.
    3. Indifferent actions.
    4. Objectionable, but not forbidden, actions.
    5. Prohibited actions.
    These are not rights,but an order to govern the everyday lives of Muslims.
    As for Rauf being sent to the middle east by the Bush administration, there is no mention of it in his bios including the site for the organization he founded and is now run by his wife ASMA (American Society for Muslim Advancement). You would think that some one in his position would want to publicize that role. As far as him believing Gabriel dictating the Declaration to Jefferson,I would not be at all surprised.

  • Anonymous

    These don’t appear to bear even a perfunctory resemblance to what Rauf was talking about. The similarity is only in the number 5.

  • Anonymous

    We are all mortals, limited in our comprehension. I don’t believe we can even conceive of anything pure enough to be considered truly absolute.

    As for the reality of Sharia law… I was trying to understand his remarks in the context in which he made them. It’s part of the search for common ground, which is the beginning of mutual respect, which is the beginning of peace.

  • Anonymous

    In fact, we have been telling them what to do in the desert, and what not to do… for at least the last half-century. Especially when it came to oil.

  • Anonymous

    But we have more than two court systems.

    We have Civil Courts. Criminal courts. Federal courts. State courts. Military courts. Tax courts. Bankruptcy courts. Maritime courts. US Court of Claims. The Senate can be convened as an Impeachment court. They all follow different rules and procedures.

    I don’t think we need another.

  • Anonymous

    Women do have certain rights under Islam. They have the right to be provided for by the males in their household. They can have their own property and wealth, and may not be required to use that for their support. There are others. A lot of the brutality they are subjected to comes not from Islam but from tribal rule.

  • Anonymous

    This goes beyond the scope of the statement I was replying to. Your statement implied that right to life doesn’t exist under Sharia. I was pointing out that it does… but they recognize that we can forfeit our right to life. It’s akin to the varied ways one could earn the death penalty under Mosaic Law, for offenses we would regard as only a minor civil matter. No comparison to today… but comparison wasn’t the issue.

  • http://twitter.com/SovereignSlave Bruce Hedrick

    He’s just about right with the Sheria compliant state

  • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie Castillo

    Where exactly (in the universe) does some form of the right to life not exist? In my opinion, the only reason to make the statement you made is to imply that they are comparable systems because, to my knowledge, there is no where in the world that doesn’t allow someone some form of a right to live- to a certain extent unless they forfeit it according to the laws of their culture. It would be like stating that people have the right to walk in Islam just like we have here. It is basically true, as it is everywhere, unless your intent is to make a point that they are comparable (to other systems).

    I’m being nit-picky, and a little bit of a jerk, but I found no sense in your stating the obvious, if that was your intent. By your standards, you can claim anything is similar to anything else because the magnitude of something is not relevant, but only the fact that the ‘something’ is present in any form, comparable or not.

  • Sandychaput

    THIS IS THE BIGGEST PILE OF CRAP I HAVE EVER HEARD. THEY CUT OFF ARMS, FEET, HANDS, NOESES OR WHATEVER THEY WANT TO DO TO A WOMAN. THIS IS
    THE SICKEST GROUP OF PEOPLE EVER! GET RID OF THEM AND THEIR LAWS OUT
    OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. WE ARE FED UP WITH THE FACT THAT SO MANY POLITICAL PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY AREN’T AWARE OF THE FACTS AND THE TRUTH. READ THE QUR’AN FOR YOURSELF AND TALK TO MUSLIMS THAT HAVE LEFT THE FAITH OF ISLAM. ITS A SICK WORPED RELIGION.

  • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie Castillo

    Are we so limited in comprehension that we are not even sure of the absolute existence of our consciousness? Is it an absolute truth that we need water and air for our bodies to live? Is it an absolute truth that we harm others by killing them? Although we are limited in our knowledge- I agree with that- there are certain absolutes that are relevant to our existence since, for all intents and purposes, we can know them to be absolutely true since their rules are bound by the same rules of our existence and hold true for this existence.

    Example: Uncertainty principle hypothetically allows for anything to happen in our universe and interpreted as a probability wave, BUT it does not mean it will happen within our lifetime or 1000 lifetimes. My TVs remote control can, according to physics, teleport from one side of the room to the other, but the likely hood is so low, that for our reality we can safely say that it is a law that the remote can not disappear and appear somewhere else. Or that if we drop something it will fall, but only according to probability- It may at one time fly up rather than fall- just because the possibility for something to occur exists, we should be realistic as to it’s probability and be rational since we are limited in our existence, but also certain truths hold long enough that we can exist. In 15 billion years, lots of things can happen- with existence and the constructs we may interpret as part of our existence….most of the rules (absolute truths) we know have held together for billions of years- long enough for us to safely call them absolute.

    As for the Sharia law and trying to understand his remarks. If you and I are having a conversation, but my intent is to subvert and then conquer you (or your land) then how truthful or how much trust can you put in my words given my goals? Can their be peace of my intentions are not peaceful and yours are?

  • Siena21

    First of all, if you don’t have a basic understanding of Sharia law or the Bill of Rights, you will not comprehend the offensive absurdity of the Imam’s statements. Sharia Law does not extend personal freedom or the pursuit of happiness to all. These are caste societies ruled by wealth and royalty. In other words, there is almost no opportunity to improve one’s place in life despite any desire to do so. The Islamic system of justice is neither, as it is dictated by religious doctrine and delivered by men who hold status in the community. Countries who practice Sharia Law regularly bury their women alive up to the neck, then beat or stone their heads until death prevails. These countries also circumcise their women which is nothing short of barbaric, and often leads to mutilation, infection and death. There is no freedom of religion. The liberty so many Americans are guaranteed in the Bill of Rights but choose to abuse rather than cherish, do not exist in any form under Sharia Law. As far as telling the Middle East what to do when it comes to their oil, if it wasn’t for their oil, they would have perished decades ago.

  • KeninMontana

    Precisely, ever hear of Al-taquiyya?

  • KeninMontana

    There was one more item I neglected to mention, In order to enjoy any “rights” under Sharia one must meet a particular criteria, one must be a Muslim.

    • Wanderer

      That depends on which school of the law is being followed. Over the centuries, some Muslim countries have allowed Christians to co-exist peacefully; some have made them second-class citizens; and some have brutally persecuted them.

      In addition, some schools of Sharia exempt non-Muslims from military service (on the grounds that only Muslims should defend a Muslim nation), while others have allowed them as volunteer units, and still others have allowed them to enter their armed forces normally.

      As with most things involving human beings, it’s always a lot more complicated than we’d like it to be. The Qu’ran is a collected work, written over the space of 22 years; depending on how things were going, Mohammed wrote either that “People of the Book” were to be respected, or that we should be taxed unmercifully, or that we should be put to the sword. Each school of sharia law considers a different part of the Qu’ran more important, so you get a lot of variation. (That’s before you even get into traditional (but not in the Qu’ran) items like the burqa…

      In that respect, sharia is actually more like the body of Christian ecclesiastic law during the Middle ages and Renaissance; it’s possible to justify almost anything if you choose the right verse.

    • Wanderer

      That depends on which school of the law is being followed. Over the centuries, some Muslim countries have allowed Christians to co-exist peacefully; some have made them second-class citizens; and some have brutally persecuted them.

      In addition, some schools of Sharia exempt non-Muslims from military service (on the grounds that only Muslims should defend a Muslim nation), while others have allowed them as volunteer units, and still others have allowed them to enter their armed forces normally.

      As with most things involving human beings, it’s always a lot more complicated than we’d like it to be. The Qu’ran is a collected work, written over the space of 22 years; depending on how things were going, Mohammed wrote either that “People of the Book” were to be respected, or that we should be taxed unmercifully, or that we should be put to the sword. Each school of sharia law considers a different part of the Qu’ran more important, so you get a lot of variation. (That’s before you even get into traditional (but not in the Qu’ran) items like the burqa…

      In that respect, sharia is actually more like the body of Christian ecclesiastic law during the Middle ages and Renaissance; it’s possible to justify almost anything if you choose the right verse.

  • http://arttelles.com/stop-islamization-of-america/ Art Telles

    But…?

    Forgive him…

    Don17000 doesn’t know what he’s talking about, so forgive him.

    He also doesn’t know what we are talking about, so forgive him.

    This is from The Sunday Times… the Times online.

    Art
    STOP! Islamization Of America

  • Anonymous

    When it comes to basic raw principles, I don’t think the magnitude is relevant, really.

    You ask where, in the universe, some form of the right to life does not exist? I have to ask if you’re talking about in today’s universe. Because there have been instances in the past where one group was most definitely told by another that their existence was merely being tolerated, but they did indeed NOT have any “right” to live. There may still be such instances today, but fortunately, it’s rare that such groups get to wield enough political power to put their preferences into practice. That doesn’t mean it won’t happen.

    At present, the closest I can come to it.. is the unborn, and the as yet unconceived.

  • Anonymous

    Example: Our own reality… is not an absolute certainty. Jews and Christians and Muslims and Buddhists and Hindus can be all be figments of God’s imagination, the way Terrans and Klingons and Romulans and Vulcans and Organians were all figments of Gene Roddenberry’s. We may not be any more real to God than all those were their creator, although we would certainly be just as real to each other. Increasingly, as I watch the political events unfold and look at the preposterous choices made by seemingly intelligent people in government and industry… I can’t help acknowledge the gnawing feeling that we may indeed all be living in somebody’s bad novel. This may be because I’m a writer, and I know how real characters can become. They develop wills of their own. Someone created as a small walk-on can take over the whole story. Those I once intended to kill off end up changing my mind about their fate… and then I understand how our prayers work to change things, when we are supposed to believe that God has already made up His mind.

    So, Is it an absolute truth that we need water and air for our bodies to live… it isn’t even an absolute truth to me that our bodies do live. Is it an absolute truth that we harm others by killing them? Not at all, because death would eventually claim them anyway, it’s just a matter of when, and what would their lives be like until then… and by killing them, we may be dong them a favor, saving them from unimaginably agonizing pain later.

  • Anonymous

    Sharia says nothing about circumcising women. Their rite of circumcision came from Abraham, who cirucmcised his sons, including his first-born son, Ishmael, who they believe was Mohommed’s direct ancestor. It comes from the Jewish rite, and there’s nothing in it about females. That is a tribal practice, which they were practicing long before Mohammed was born.

    As for the rest… that was the way among Catholics too, for the first thousand years or so. Their system was also based on castes, wealth and royalty, and royalty had the power of life and death at their whim. There was the nobility, the clergy, and the rest who had no more rights than serfs or peasants, and they had no rights, either.

  • Anonymous

    Apparently, this Times article is similar to what I was saying about Sharia in Kenya. It’s offered as an alternative for those who want it… not imposed on those who don’t.

    To me, it’s no more significant than allowing a couple of devout Jewish litigants to go before their rabbi to mediate their dispute. It takes some congestion out of the courts, and if the parties are agreed… who else’s business is it?

    For Muslims, it makes sense, since a secular court would likely order them to pay interest on a debt… which makes no sense to two Muslims, since one is not allowed to pay interest, and the other is not allowed to collect it. A Sharia court might use the same numbers to settle the case, but simply not call it a penalty, not interest.

  • Anonymous

    I have. It is meant as license to falsely state a conversion to protect one’s own life. Judaism has the same principle, leading to the Murano Jews, who pretended to convert to Catholicism but practiced their faith in secret. It is only permitted to protect one’s life.

    • Skykisser

      Al-Taqiyya allows any Muslim to lie cheat or steal and to renege on any agreement or treaty made with an infidel in the furtherance of Islam.

      Al-taqiyya and dissimulation are words used for a practice of
      Muslims blatantly lying to non-Muslims. Fundamental Muslims consider the act of Al-taqiyya or lying to non-Muslims to be a good work. This is very important when one remembers that, in Islam, salvation is determined by good works. This means that a Muslim lying to a non-Muslim is that Muslim
      doing a good work to earn salvation. It is almost equivalent to
      a Christian accepting Jesus as his savior.

      Allah sanctions anything in the furtherance of Islam.

      Qur’an 8:39 “So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam.” “Kill until Allah is ilah (god)”

    • Skykisser

      Al-Taqiyya allows any Muslim to lie cheat or steal and to renege on any agreement or treaty made with an infidel in the furtherance of Islam.

      Al-taqiyya and dissimulation are words used for a practice of
      Muslims blatantly lying to non-Muslims. Fundamental Muslims consider the act of Al-taqiyya or lying to non-Muslims to be a good work. This is very important when one remembers that, in Islam, salvation is determined by good works. This means that a Muslim lying to a non-Muslim is that Muslim
      doing a good work to earn salvation. It is almost equivalent to
      a Christian accepting Jesus as his savior.

      Allah sanctions anything in the furtherance of Islam.

      Qur’an 8:39 “So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam.” “Kill until Allah is ilah (god)”

  • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie Castillo

    I think that there will always be a government or some kind of structure that intends to regulate or control people and their lives- which would make magnitude the only important thing.

    The second is not really a disagreement but an opinion- The unborn, wrongfully, can be denied the right to life so I am acknowledging that they can be considered someone that doesn’t have the right to live by our culture.

  • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie Castillo

    It is an absolute truth as far as is relevant for us. That’s the point I was trying to make- As I’m typing I can run in circles as I forget how I was going to word something.-

    While things may not be ultimately true in the entire life-span of the universe or the soul- The truths right now are certainly true for this part of existence.

    The apple will fall ‘down’ from the tree. Without air/water, our bodies will die. While not proven true for all existence- they sure as hell are true now and will be for the foreseeable future.

    People can wonder philosophically about the ‘truth’ just as they can through religion, but there are truths that can’t be denied just because someone wants to view things as abstracts.

  • Anonymous

    Just realized, I forgot to respond to the second link… re: Texas,, as in USA.

    I’m not sure if your bringing this up now is part of the hysterical fear that Obama might be a closet Muslim. (As though that, if it were true, would be some kind of crime.) But the “Texas Islamic Court” is not actually a court, it’s more of an arbitration panel, and it was established long ago. Cases are resolved before them, but unhappy litigants can appeal the enforcement of arbitration decisions to the Texas court of appeals. Here is a link:

    http://www.2ndcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opinions/HTMLopinion.asp?OpinionID=14601

    The participants can sign a waiver and have their cases arbitrated according to Sharia, if they choose. Seems to me, this comes under the heading of Big Government getting out of their private lives when their told the people don’t want Government intervention.

    What’s your problem? I thought you were against unwanted government interference in people’s private lives, and that people should have the right to seek their own means of peacefully resolving disputes…

    But then, this is Texas. I’ve seen accounts of two Texas lawyers settling a dispute by one allowing the other to publicly punch him in the nose. And the judge approved it!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Van-Grungy/100000069253213 Van Grungy

    Don17000,

    I know you are a muslim taking direction from the OIC…

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com
    http://www.jihadwatch.org
    http://www.gatesofvienna.blogspot.com

    islam will end.. America needed to experience sharia for the people to support the removal of makkah from existence…

    islam cannot be perfect if there is no makkah and no borg cube…

    Don17000, you just got served…

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Van-Grungy/100000069253213 Van Grungy

    btw…

    sharia does not DISALLOW the clitoris cutting you call cultural…

    If clitoris cutting were disallowed under sharia, there would be no problem…

    Since sharia will never be changed because mo/allah created it perfect from the start, muslims will always mutilate their daughters because that’s just the way muslims roll…

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Van-Grungy/100000069253213 Van Grungy

    You can’t change that women are property under sharia…

    Don17000… You sir are fail…

  • KeninMontana

    Actually it is permitted if a Muslim is in fear of physical or mental harm or if they perceive a threat to Islam. This is a pretty broad allowance.

  • Anonymous

    No, all Muslims won’t always. Only those who have such in their tribal traditions. Also, it will be done by those who have it in their traditions who aren’t Muslims, just as it was done for countless generations before Mohammed founded Islam.

    They continue the practice because Sharia does not forbid it.

  • Anonymous

    You think just because I might defend a group, or their rights, it means I must be one of them? Is that what you think the American spirit is?

    Actually, I’m Jewish. But not only that, both sides of my family are Kahanim… meaning, of the priestly caste. But unlike other Jews today, I speak out in defense of the right of all people, and every one of them, to follow whatever religion they choose and to convert freely from one to another, and I care deeply that said right must be protected. And the times when it’s inconvenient to others, or offensive to others… are the times when it must be defended most of all, because that’s when it’s most likely to be attacked.

    I maintain that each person’s beliefs are nobody’s business but their own, and that our Constitution guarantees free practice thereof as long as, in so doing, they don’t break our laws or deprive any other adult of their rights.

    As for your statement that Islam will end… I don’t see how it can, since over a billion people believe in it and they are spread over a wide geographical diaspora. Judaism’s existence is far more precarious, and I don’t see that ending, either. We had far smaller numbers, but were also spread over a diaspora… and I believe it was that diaspora which saved us from extinction.

    I can see where Sharia might end one day. There are already, I’m sure, Muslims who drink alcohol, commit adultery, don’t pray 5 times a day… just as there are people in every faith who don’t follow every rule it has. But even if most Muslims abandoned the inconvenient requirements, I think Islam could survive that, just as Judaism survived many Jews abandoning the various provisions of the Mosaic Law as they became archaic and lost their relevance to contemporary life. There are Jews who don’t observe Shabbat or other holy days, who eat forbidden foods, who marry outside the religion. I know, because I’m one.

  • Anonymous

    I’m not sure what is meant by “a threat to Islam,” or if they even recognize such a thing is possible, let alone that telling a lie would somehow preserve Islam against such a threat.

    Islam, according to their belief, is greater than any individual, greater than any nation, greater than all the nations of the world. What kind of threat could possibly destroy it, that simply telling a lie could be enough to save it? All any lie could ever do, is save the life of individuals. Evil might be thwarted by lies… but I’m pretty sure they believe Islam would be protected by the truth, and by Allah.

    Just like Jews and Christians believe that their religion can be protected only by God and the Truth, but lying to an armed fanatic may be enough to save your own skin.

    But then, you would not be joining the honored ranks of the martyrs.

  • Anonymous

    I understood your point, Ozzie. But if something is limited to our plane of existence and reality… I can’t call it absolute. And of course, I can’t see if it extends to planes of reality and existence which I don’t know.

    In our reality, apples do fall down from trees, under normal circumstances. But it does depend on both the tree and the observer being on earth, and on what you’re calling “down.”

    Without air or water, our bodies will die… assuming they began in the “alive” state. (Meaning, take somebody who got shot… they died even though they had air and water. If you then take away the air and water… they won’t die again, nor be any more dead than they already were.

  • http://arttelles.com/stop-islamization-of-america/ Art Telles

    You’re not sure…?

    Ok.

    Your misunderstanding of the ideological battle is obvious.

    So… I’m movin’ on.

    Art
    STOP! Islamization Of America

  • Anonymous

    I’m not sure if this is just because of Obama, or if you were afraid of a Muslim plot to take over this country before you ever heard of him. (That is, an attempt to take over, not to be confused with 9/11 and the attacks before that, meant only to do harm. They were as effective as firing a shotgun at a cruising freight train. The only way it can destroy the train, is if those on board panic and override the safety rules in their reaction.)

  • voiceofreason

    You do realize you are completely misquoting what he actually says right? He is promoting Sharia that is based on actual Quranic laws, not the Hadith literature that extremist places like Saudi Arabia focus on. That’s why he discusses freedoms of religion that exist in the Quran but not in places like Saudi Arabia. Why do people insist on twisting people’s words to make them evil? Why not instead listen and try to understand what people are really saying?

  • voiceofreason

    You do realize you are completely misquoting what he actually says right? He is promoting Sharia that is based on actual Quranic laws, not the Hadith literature that extremist places like Saudi Arabia focus on. That’s why he discusses freedoms of religion that exist in the Quran but not in places like Saudi Arabia. Why do people insist on twisting people’s words to make them evil? Why not instead listen and try to understand what people are really saying?

  • http://www.facebook.com/willyborichardson Willy Richardson

    It’s very simple. He either doesn’t know what Sharia law is or he thinks we don’t.

    Sharia law is in conflict with our constitution, our laws, and all of the work we’ve done as a nation to protect and give freedoms to women.

    Example:

    An unmarried or divorced woman becomes pregnant as a result of a rape. Some Sharia courts do not recognize DNA testing or the evaluation of possible paternity by other blood tests. The case results in the alleged rapist is found not-guilty because his involvement cannot be proven. But if an unmarried woman becomes pregnant, she can be assumed to be guilty of extra-marital sexual activity and can be executed. If she claims that she was raped and is unable to prove her case, then she will probably receive severe punishment, possibly execution by stoning (depending on which country she lives in).

    Does this sound like the women’s rights we worked so hard to achieve? Does this sound constitutional? Does this match up with Imam Rauf’s words in the video?