SHARIA IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Submitted by UNCLE VLADDI (Canada), Aug 18, 2016 at 17:44

Muslims DON'T share Western values at all – quite the opposite!

Islamic sharia "law" (crime) is the EXACT OPPOSITE of Western LAW.

Our LAW is based on the Golden Rule, which most simply defines all circumstantial, situational morality as

"Do Not Attack First."

So all is forbidden, unless and until very specifically agreed to.

This means our only real right is to not be attacked first, and our only real responsibility is to not attack (thereby innocent) others first.

Period.

It also therefore means we aren't allowed to do anything either TO, or FOR each other, without getting the others' express assent first.

And it applies at all levels of human social interaction, from the individual, family, clan, tribe, nation, state, empire and global (international) levels.

It's why even the largest group or gang of individual humans, "the state" isn't allowed to attack any of its real live human individual citizen component parts first, and so it's why we have an expectation of "Innocent Until Proven Guilty," and not – as criminal libertine "liberal" gangsters always seem to prefer, the exact opposite, or "Guilty Until Never Proven Innocent!"

From this social contract, the West establishes trust, and through that trust, economic progress, and Civilization.

Islam, being based on the exact opposite, where all is allowed except and until that which is very specifically disallowed, asserts it's always everyone's holy right and duty to attack everyone else first, to do whatever they can (might makes right!) TO others, as long as they can claim to be doing it FOR them (for their own good)!

From embracing this brazen rule of criminal chaos, they inflict distrust, economic stagnation, and savage barbarism on everyone.

CAPISCE?

;-)

Further, Islam is inherently a form of SEDITION - because it never agreed with the Christian notion of separating secular (road-paving, taxation) and religious realms (render unto Caesar) and went with "Render The World Unto Muhammad!"

So it doesn't believe in national sovereignty, preferring global theocracy ('ummah') ruled by the Caliphate government!

Islam is ONLY a crime syndicate, and the only "religious" part in it's where they say:

"God told us to commit these crimes!"

Muslims are never national citizens; they regard all national sovereignties as temporary, man-made false idols which must all be eventually destroyed and replaced with the one-world global muslim Ummah, to be ruled by their theocratic caliphate, and their duty is to wage offensive war to extort, enslave, and murder all the non-muslims.

Terrorism is an inherent, not an incidental, nor in any way a "radical," component of islam.

NO MUSLIMS ARE "PATRIOTS" OR NATIONALISTS OF ANY KIND!

No self-determined muslim believes in any sovereign national governments nor countries at all, ever!

Sharia is allegedly the perfect law of allah, based directly on the Qur'an!

So it always applies to all humans everywhere!

SO WHO NEEDS ANY – EVEN "ELECTED" – MAN-MADE GOVERNMENTS TO CREATE LAWS WHICH DIFFER FROM SHARIA?!

Recall the Ayatollah Khomeini's words during his 1980 speech in Qom, the Shi'ite spiritual hub:

"We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land burn. I say let this land [Iran] go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world."

So, since islam is a subversive anti-national and anti-legal entity, why on earth are any of its "muslim" members ever afforded any legal standing to promote their criminal treasonous sedition, before any of our courts of law?!

Shariah Law vs. the Constitution:

Article VI: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land

 Constitution: Article VI: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall
be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every
State shall be bound thereby"

 Shariah: "The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is
Allah." (a1.1, Umdat al-salik or The Reliance of the Traveller, commonly accepted work of
Shariah jurisprudence); "There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the
Sharia." (Seyed Qutb); "Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the
face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the
country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of
its own ideology and program." (Seyed Abul A'ala Maududi)

First Amendment: Freedom of religion

 Constitution: First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof "

 Shariah: "Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of
them and kill them wherever you find them." Quran 4:89 ; "Whoever changed his [Islamic]
religion, then kill him" Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:84:57. In historic and modern Shariah states,
Shariah law enforces dhimmi status (second-class citizen, apartheid-type laws) on non-
Muslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, building or
repairing churches, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells; if dhimmi laws
are violated in the Shariah State, penalties are those used for prisoners of war: death, slavery,
release or ransom.(o9.14, o11.0-o11.11, Umdat al-salik).

First Amendment: Freedom of speech

 Constitution: First Amendment: Congress shall not abridge "the freedom of speech."

 Shariah: Speech defaming Islam or Muhammad is considered "blasphemy" and is punishable
by death or imprisonment.

First Amendment: Freedom to dissent

 Constitution: First Amendment: "Congress cannot take away the right of the people "to
petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 Shariah: Non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility toward the Islamic state or give
comfort to those who disagree with Islamic government.

Second Amendment: Right to self-defense

 Constitution: Second Amendment: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not
be infringed."

 Shariah: Under historic and modern dhimmi laws, non-Muslims cannot possess swords,
firearms or weapons of any kind.

Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Amendments: Right to due process and fair trial

 Constitution: Fifth Amendment: "no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise
infamous crime... without due process of law." Sixth Amendment: guarantees a "public trial
by an impartial jury." Seventh Amendment: "the right of trial by jury shall be preserved."

 Shariah: Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari: Muhammad said, "No Muslim should be killed for killing
a Kafir (infidel)." Non-Muslims are prohibited from testifying against Muslims. A woman's
testimony is equal to half of a man's.

Eighth Amendment: No cruel and unusual punishment

 Constitution: Eighth Amendment: "nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

 Shariah: Under Shariah punishments are barbaric: "Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they
are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah." Quran
5:38; A raped woman is punished:"The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication –
flog each of them with a hundred stripes" (Sura 24:2).

Fourteenth Amendment: Right to equal protection and due process

 Constitution: Fourteenth Amendment: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

 Shariah: Under dhimmi laws enforced in modern Shariah states, Jews, Christians and other
non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims before the law. Under Shariah law, women, girls,
apostates, homosexuals and "blasphemers" are all denied equality under the law.

BOTTOM LINE:

Islam's Sharia is either compatible with our Western, morality-based law (in which case it is superfluous) or it is not (in which case it is illegal).

There is only one universally accepted version of sharia crime ('law') and that is the original, Haneefite version as recorded in The Hedaya and used by the Ottoman Empire to rule all of islam for centuries; all moslems in all their countries are very aware of its simple might-makes-right and us-versus-them tenets and strictures.

There is really only one Qur'an, one islam, and one sharia.

So, since islam is a subversive anti-national and anti-legal entity, why on earth are any of its "muslim" members ever afforded any legal standing to promote their criminal treasonous sedition, before any of our courts of law?!

Allowing foreign (sharia "law") courts to exist in your country is to enable those foreign governments to govern in your country; it's obviously TREASON.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".