From this article in the Washington Post and according to Chairman of the Cordoba Initiative
Feisal Abdul Rauf, Chairman of the Cordoba Initiative and author of What's Right With Islam Is What's Right With America:
...Islamic law is about God's law, and it is not that far from what we read in the Declaration of Independence about "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God." Islamic law is about God's law, and it is not that far from what we read in the Declaration of Independence about "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God." The Declaration says "men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights; that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."Modesty? That's in the Declaration of Independence and promotes the general welfare?
...The principles behind American secular law are similar to shariah law -- that we protect life, liberty and property, that we provide for the common welfare, that we maintain a certain amount of modesty. What Muslims want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Quran or the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad....
...The religious imperative is about justice and fairness....
There is one kernel of truth in the above tripe:
What Muslims want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Quran or the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad.Is that one truthful statement enough to allow for most people not well versed in Islam to recognize that the rest is pure propaganda?
The complete article with comments is HERE. Registration is required to comment.
Read the bio of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf HERE.
HERE is the home page of the Cordoba Initiative.
10 comments:
The Declaration of Independence (DOI) protects from arbitrary authority. The Koran is the opposite.
Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I have sworn upon the alter of God eternal hostility against every from of tyranny over the mind of man." He actually rewrote the New Testament and took out the miracles to make Jesus a secular philosopher. His is not the language of the Koran.
We did have collectivized morals in the revolutionary era. But they were oriented towards the sustainability of our republic, liberty and independence. We were anti-Catholic because top-down religion seemed to hostile to such ideals.
It is absurd to suggest that Thomas Jefferson or any other Founding Father would have thought Sharia law a good thing. After all, they were 'revolutionaries.'
Always On Watch,
You wrote,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is one kernel of truth in the above tripe:
What Muslims want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Quran or the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad.
Is that one truthful statement enough to allow for most people not well versed in Islam to recognize that the rest is pure propaganda?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's hope so, this would certainly give me pause, even if I read it before nine eleven, before I knew anything about Islamic theology. Imagine if a Christian author wrote, "What Christians want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Bible or the words of Jesus, In the new testament?"
Culturist John,
Here's a quote from one of America's founding fathers, from an earlier article here on The Infidel Bloggers Alliance, thanks to Always On Watch.
Quote,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“In the seventh century of the Christian era a wandering Arab, of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combing the powers of transcendent genius with the preternatural energy of a fanatic and the fraudulent spirit of an imposter, proclaimed himself as a messenger from heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth.
“Adopting, from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God, he connected indissolubly with it the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war as part of his religion against all the rest of mankind. The essence of his doctrine was violence and lust; to exalt the brutal over the spiritual part of human nature.
“Between these two religions, thus contrasted in the characters, a war of more than twelve hundred years has already raged. That war is yet flagrant; nor can it cease but by the extincture of that imposture, which has been permitted by Providence to prolong the degeneracy of man. While the merciless and dissolute are encouraged to furnish motives to human action, there never can be peace on earth and good will toward men. The hand of Ishmael will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him.”
— John Quincy Adams, 1830-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source
In my conversations about shari'a law with various people, I try to be as lucid as possible and stick to the facts. So far, people respond with horror or disgust as shari'a law is indeed contrary to American principles.
Shari'a loving Moslems know that shari'a is the antithesis of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. So what we're going to see more and more now is a pr campaign to whitewash shari'a law.
But here's a real problem: most people simply can't wrap their minds around the fact that anyone living in the 21st Century would want shari'a law.
I neglected to post this portion of the WaPo article:
This week's question: How would you respond to radical Muslim clerics in northwest Pakistan -- now under Islamic law -- who are calling for expansion of Islamic law across the entire federal republic of Pakistan? Should any nation be governed by religious rules or authorities?So, we're encouraged by Feisal Abdul Rauf to "understand" that Pakistan could become subject to shari'a law?
It seems to me that he's advocating an Islamic theocracy and trying to say that such is in keeping with America's founding documents. And most people really want to believe that because the truth is so horrible to contemplate!
John,
It is absurd to suggest that Thomas Jefferson or any other Founding Father would have thought Sharia law a good thing.Of course it is absurd!
But a lot of Americans want to believe that it is not absurd.
Always On Watch,
I'm not even sure that most Americans know what Sharia law is.
One thing we can do, when people call for Sharia, is to educate people about What Sharia actually is. Another is to point out, when the Islamists themselves inadvertently let us know what they wouldn't want us to know.
Like what you quoted Feisal Abdul Rauf as saying.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What Muslims want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Quran or the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Think about it, he just admitted that Sharia trumps secular laws in his mind. Again, imagine if a Christian author wrote, "What Christians want is to ensure that their secular laws are not in conflict with the Bible or the words of Jesus, In the new testament?" There would be a firestorm.
My post, Sharia in the Hood, is meant to be an elementary, yet startling look at what Sharia is about.
As you say, most people do not realize just how inhumane and "unfree" sharia law is. We would be forced to literally shred our constitution.
Morons braying that Jefferson et al and the Quran/Shariah are actually close, self identify as having no clue about america.
The Constitution makes Shariah IMPOSSIBLE.
Attempts to impose religious law would, if not declared illegal under the constitution, cause instantaneous civil war.
Armed, civil war. Without quarter.
If these morons don't recognize that, they need to go somewhere else
Epaminondas,
If they're cultural Jihadists they may realize that to impose religious law would, if not declared illegal under the constitution, would cause instantaneous civil war. They may fully understand that under the American Constitution Sharia would be forbidden, but they may think that they can get around it by trickery, or by strength in numbers by out breeding us like they're doing in Europe. Either way, threats to our liberty must always be taken seriously, and this is a threat to our liberty.
Post a Comment