The brutality of shari’ah law embraces quite a number of laws and punishments that are contrary to long-held western ideas of justice and dignity of the human person. Nonetheless, the foundation for shari’ah in the west is already being laid and solidified. The shari’ah concept is totally incompatible with the basic concept of the United States citizenship and national loyalty and is fundamentally inconsistent with United States laws and the constitutional guarantees inherent in them.
This can easily be seen in comparing the fundamental rights guaranteed to United States sovereign citizens with very limited human rights recognized by shari’ah states. The United States and the west, at large, define human rights broadly and extend them to all human beings regardless of sex, religion, or creed. In stark brutal contrast, shai’ah defines human rights narrowly and limits them to muslims and qualifies them to be in complete conformity with shari’ah.
Specifically, the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution set forth a non-exhaustive list of rights and liberties that are guaranteed to all Americans in what is known as the Bill of Rights. Among these are the freedoms of speech and religion, the right to due process of law, and protection from cruel and unusual punishment.
Similarly, the Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the United Nations famous list of rights, exhibits a similar theme, beginning with an unequivocal acknowledgment of “the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family. The declaration goes on to emulate, inter alia, the rights to “Life, Liberty, and Security, of person,” freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; and rights to effective remedies under the law, and equal treatment or punishment; and rights to effective remedies under the law, and equal protection under the law.
These rights, liberties, and freedoms are guaranteed to all persons of all races, ethnicities, religions, and sexes simply by virtue of a person’s status as a human being who is endowed with “inherent dignity” and “inalienable rights.”
All fifty seven member states of the organization of the Islamic conference (OIC), however, disregard the aforementioned definition of human rights, which does not declare human rights to be “inherent” or “inalienable.” The Cairo declaration on human rights, which was submitted by the OIC on behalf of it’s member states to the world conference on human rights in 1993, affirms only some human rights, which are qualified both in scope and application. The Cairo declaration declares that all… “rights and freedoms are subject to the Islamic shari’ah and that the “Islamic shari’ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any [human rights]. As such, calling the Cairo declaration on human rights is a misnomer, for it does not declare the rights of humans at all, but rather sets forth the rights of only some humans or more specifically, humans who adhere to islam. HMMPH!
This fundamental difference in understanding human rights manifests itself explicitly in the incompatibility of the civil and criminal laws of shari’ah with those of the United States. Thus it is imperative that Americans are made abundantly clear about the crystal clear, fundamental differences between the Christian inspired Constitution along with the Bill of Rights and the dictates and the numerous bigoted aspects of shari’ah law.
America, time is fast running out for the possibility of restoring our great, but very troubled republic turned mob ruled democracy. The problems are massive, to say the very least, but not insurmountable. That is if only we are willing to once again adopt and adhere to the blessed principles that helped make America the one time envy of the world.
Many thanks to the American Center for Law and Justice for their assistance