By Greg Diaz
20 Dec., 2012
This is in response to an article that was posted in the PDN Opinion section on Dec. 13 titled "Sharia doesn't pose a threat."
Sharia could be described as an infallible law of God. It is best defined as a code of law derived from the Qur'an and the Sunnah. The Sunnah is a separate book with the teachings and examples of the prophet Mohammed. This doctrine is implemented all across Muslim countries in the Middle East and countries where Muslims are predominant.
To truly grasp the concept of Sharia, we must understand the religion. It has a base of three components. First, the spirituality of Islam, which is its religious faith.
Second is the political component. This is a thorough integration of the justice system and church. So thorough in fact, Muslim countries become governed by Islamic religious laws.
Thirdly is its military component, which is reflective in the pocket attacks towards democracy throughout the world (i.e., political unrest, protests, upheavals, terroristic attacks, wars and so forth).
Sharia law is in stark contrast to the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It does not recognize the freedom of speech, expression or assembly and is in the process of stifling these rights through a resolution in the United Nations introduced since 1999 called the "Anti Defamation to Religions" by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). This resolution was passed every year up to 2010. This sounds like a noble resolution, but what is the true motive or intent of this resolution?
When the State Department recognized the dire consequences to the freedom of expression and presented their concerns to the OIC, the OIC introduced resolution 1618. This resolution dropped the "Anti Defamation to Religions" phrase and focused on intolerance to negative stereotyping and incitement to religious discrimination or violence.
Still democracy was trumped and has to address their concerns through responsible, sensitive, and politically correct speeches, which devoid our ability to addressing key issues to threats in America at the UN level. It is evident that these resolutions are clamping down on free speech in a gradual and incremental process.
On a state and national level, the doors are quickly shutting on our First Amendment rights for the sake of appeasement to an ideology that demands such rights which they suppress. Our leaders have created an arena called political correctness along with the lack of media coverage on the truth of Sharia or Islamic Laws, I sense that we might be losing this battle through censorship.
Greg Diaz is a resident of Mangilao.
Paradoxically, except for some non-negotiable areas (gay rights and marriage, extramarital sex, unqualified freedom of speech, ultra vires legislative power of the consensual majority as well as the Head of State for example), the Western secular notions are more attuned to the Qur’anic message, that is, more Qur’an-compatible than those espoused by the Classical Islamic law. This is no window dressing or turning coat to appease the West.
More than a hundred years ago, the Egyptian scholar, Muhammad Abduh, wrote that the 19th century advancement of Europe commenced only after “Europe began to throw off their bondage and reform their condition, reordering the affairs of their life in a manner akin to the message of Islam, though oblivious of who their real guide and leader was. So were enunciated the fundamental principles of modern civilization….” .
Hasan al-Banna (1906-1949), the Egyptian scholar and Islamic activist who founded the Muslim Brotherhood extolled the merits the Western civilization as the epitome of the Qur’anic message . Shaykh Rifa‘a Rafi‘ al-Tahtawi (1801-1873), a traditional Al-Azhar scholar and an admirer of Western scientific advancement said upon his return from France that he “found (in France) true Islam but no Muslims, while in Egypt, he found many Muslims but no true Islam—meaning that in his view, the civic virtues embraced by French society embodied a more true representation of Islam than the Muslim societies of his time.” . Thus the Muslim countries who are aspiring to build people oriented democratic societies as in the West, may consider to take a Western model, but not like Turkey’s Kemal Ataturk (1881-1938) who had expunged the Islamic symbols (Arabic script, traditional dresses, hijab etc.) from the social and political fabric of the nation and replaced the Islamic Sharia Law of his country with Swiss and Italian based legal system. Today’s Muslim countries must not cut their intellectual moorings from Islam as it is inextricably ingrained in Muslim psyche.