shariah justice; a contradiction in terms

Vladtepes has decided to install a regular series on shariah. We felt it important to do so since there is some confusion surrounding the term itself;  it’s meaning, application, extension, foundation, history and narrative. Proponents of it in the west would have us believe it to be nothing more than a benign set of Islamic  judiciary laws dealing primarily with marriage and divorce, yet closer inspection reveals it’s all encompassing and immutable reality. Sharia must be understood in terms of it’s entirety and the far reaching implications and consequences it bears.

Shariah is the body of Islamic religious law, the legal framework by which all aspects of life are regulated based on Islamic principles of jurisprudence. It deals with all aspects of daily life; politics, economics, banking, contracts, family, sexuality, hygiene, and social issues. It is also the antithises of liberal secularism, a set of religiously pious and absurd constructs unparalelled in it’s opposition to democratic principle and fundamentals. The Muslim Brotherhood describes shariah as ” the real effective way out of all sufferings and problems”.

Patrick Poole of Frontpage magazine wrote in May 2006 of the discovery of the Muslim Brotherhood’s twenty-one year old document known as “The Project”. The contents clearly point to an intentional, long term and multi-pronged approach, a manifesto written to fulfill their desired plan of ‘cultural invasion’ to aid in the conquest of the west. The MBH established in 1928, is arguably one of the older organizations during modern times which has devoted itself in the re-radicalization process, with offshoot groups such as al-Qaeda and Hamas actively participating in jihad on it’s behalf. It clings to the credo: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Quran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope”. Keeping this in mind, their endorsement of sharia isn’t exactly the mark of sterling rationale or collective sanity but is an ever faithful testament to their dangerous mandate of supremacy and domination, shariah sanctioned of course.

In 2004, Canada had been tested in terms of the proposed adoption of Islamic law. Syed Mumtaz Ali, the lawyer and shariah advocate who sought it’s implementation gleefully stated ” every act of your life is to be governed by shariah. If you are not obeying the law, you are not a Muslim.” He was referring clearly to the laws of Islam and not of Canadian law. Although the proposal was smacked down due in large part to national and international objection and it’s inclusion as a parallel system rejected, his statement offered us a glimpse of shariah reality.  Islam is shariah and shariah is Islam.

Of those opposing the creeping implementation of shariah two groups immediately come to mind. The first, Women Against Shariah are of the view that Islamic law cannot be allowed to flourish in any way. By virtue of it’s inherent discrimination of non-Muslims, appalling record of human rights abuses and open violations of equality it (shariah) calls for immediate ridicule and eventual abandonment. Women Against Shariah’s description is succinct:

it is our position that shariah law imposes second class status on women and is incompatible with the standards of liberal western societies and the basic principles of human rights that include equality under the law and the protection of individual freedoms. The sharia code mandates the complete authority of men and women, including the control of their movement, education, marital options, clothing, bodies, place of residence and all other aspects of their existence. Further, it calls for the beating, punishment and murder of women who do not comply with shariah requirements.” Women Against Sharia’s mission is “to prevent and outlaw the imposition of shariah law in the United States for both Muslim and American women as either a parallel legal system or a replacement for existing laws”.

The second, Muslims Against Shariah, is an Islamic reform movement. This group strives to educate Muslims of the dangers presented by Islamic religious texts and the need for reform, to instruct non-Muslims of the differences between moderate Muslims and Islamists and to reinforce the truth that increasingly moderate Muslims are also the targets of Islamic terror. Both organizations are solid in their committments and provide numerous articles relaying the oppression and cruelty that accompany shariah. Both are also brave in their refusal to be coerced and dominated by a centuries old legal system unfit for the 21st century.

Writing for American Thinker, James Arlandson writes one of the best articles I have come across on shariah. “Top ten reasons why shariah is bad for all societies” is a must read for anyone wishing to understand this complex issue. His writing is thorough, with well documented articles, quotations from the Quran and hadith and classical legal opinion. Also included are supporting articles which examine the historical and literary context of each Quranic verse that is cited.

I do believe that shariah is bad for all societies. I also believe that to support Muslims who fully understand it’s horror is not only an act of compassion but one of absolute necessity. Shallow excuses of inaction will only lead to more gratuitous cruelty, stifling oppression, religious decadence and death in the name of Islam.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *