Posted on Sep 24, 2015
BEN CARSON's Comments relooked. Is Islam compatible with the Constitution of the United States?
25.7K
479
270
17
16
1
http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/sharia-law.html
Sharia Law which is the Law of Islam is complete counter indicative of the United States Constitution, SEE BELOW:
Sharia law is the law of Islam. The Sharia (also spelled Shariah or Shari'a) law is cast from the actions and words of Muhammad, which are called "Sunnah," and the Quran, which he authored.
The Sharia law itself cannot be altered, but the interpretation of the Sharia law, called "figh," by imams is given some leeway.
As a legal system, the Sharia law covers a very wide range of topics. While other legal codes deal primarily with public behavior, Sharia law covers public behavior, private behavior and private beliefs. Of all legal systems in the world today, Islam's Sharia law is the most intrusive and strict, especially against women.
According to the Sharia law:
• Theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand (above).
• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Muhammad is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah, the moon god of Islam is punishable by death.
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.
• Girls' clitoris should be cut (per Muhammad's words in Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• A woman can have 1 husband, but a man can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife but a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce.
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
• Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman.
• A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• A woman's testimony in court, allowed only in property cases, carries half the weight of a man's.
• A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
• A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).
• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
• Meat to be eaten must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - i.e., be Halal.
• Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.
Sharia Law which is the Law of Islam is complete counter indicative of the United States Constitution, SEE BELOW:
Sharia law is the law of Islam. The Sharia (also spelled Shariah or Shari'a) law is cast from the actions and words of Muhammad, which are called "Sunnah," and the Quran, which he authored.
The Sharia law itself cannot be altered, but the interpretation of the Sharia law, called "figh," by imams is given some leeway.
As a legal system, the Sharia law covers a very wide range of topics. While other legal codes deal primarily with public behavior, Sharia law covers public behavior, private behavior and private beliefs. Of all legal systems in the world today, Islam's Sharia law is the most intrusive and strict, especially against women.
According to the Sharia law:
• Theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand (above).
• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Muhammad is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah, the moon god of Islam is punishable by death.
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• A man can marry an infant girl and consummate the marriage when she is 9 years old.
• Girls' clitoris should be cut (per Muhammad's words in Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• A woman can have 1 husband, but a man can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife but a woman needs her husband's consent to divorce.
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
• Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape against a woman.
• A woman who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• A woman's testimony in court, allowed only in property cases, carries half the weight of a man's.
• A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
• A woman cannot drive a car, as it leads to fitnah (upheaval).
• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
• Meat to be eaten must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah - i.e., be Halal.
• Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.
Politics
Islam
Constitution
Law
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 58
18
18
0
Anyone that would embrace Sharia Law as a reasonable set of laws for free people either doesn't understand what freedom actually is or is disingenuous at best.
I have no issue with muslims practicing Sharia law in their countries. I think it is backward,abusive, restrictive, excessively harsh and based upon only religious leaders interpretation as to it's application so it is very arbitrary too.
Anyone that thinks this law is compatible with our Constitution is operating in a clue free environment.
We should not allow it to be practiced here even on a voluntary basis. It takes away rights from citizens that are unalienable (they cannot be given away). Also, women would be brow beaten into accepting/submitting to Sharia or else (it would not really be voluntary). It is the absolute worst set of laws for any freedom loving society and few, outside of devout muslims would want any part of it.
I have no issue with muslims practicing Sharia law in their countries. I think it is backward,abusive, restrictive, excessively harsh and based upon only religious leaders interpretation as to it's application so it is very arbitrary too.
Anyone that thinks this law is compatible with our Constitution is operating in a clue free environment.
We should not allow it to be practiced here even on a voluntary basis. It takes away rights from citizens that are unalienable (they cannot be given away). Also, women would be brow beaten into accepting/submitting to Sharia or else (it would not really be voluntary). It is the absolute worst set of laws for any freedom loving society and few, outside of devout muslims would want any part of it.
(18)
(0)
SrA Edward Vong
Cpl Jeff N.
Unfortunately Jeff, most "versions" of the "Sharia law" have been man made rather than what they believe the true meaning is. Generally those who actually believe in whatever is posted above is barbaric.
Here is somewhat of a better explanation.
Unfortunately Jeff, most "versions" of the "Sharia law" have been man made rather than what they believe the true meaning is. Generally those who actually believe in whatever is posted above is barbaric.
Here is somewhat of a better explanation.
Commonly asked questions regarding Sharia and Islam: How did Sharia start? What, nowadays, is the authoritative source of Sharia? What are the basic principles of Sharia? Adultery Murder Zinah (sexual offences) Is Sharia the same in all countries? Individual rights vs needs of society? Does Sharia make life easier or harder for the ordinary Muslim? Why has Sharia become a synonym for cruelty and lack of compassion? Sharia and dress Forced and...
(0)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
SrA Edward Vong . Eddie, the examples of Sharia I listed are how it is actually practiced in many/most Islamic nations. Maybe more or less severely in some vs others but that is how the "devout" practice the law. Your post is from someone attempting to put a positive spin on it while ignoring how it is actually practiced.
If islam can be practiced separately or outside of sharia law then I think it is compatible in many/most ways with our form of government. The devout will tell you the two are inseparable. Right now, the devout are on the move and are setting the pace for how the religion is being practiced and how it is perceived around the world.
If islam can be practiced separately or outside of sharia law then I think it is compatible in many/most ways with our form of government. The devout will tell you the two are inseparable. Right now, the devout are on the move and are setting the pace for how the religion is being practiced and how it is perceived around the world.
(4)
(0)
FN Randy Bohlke
SrA Edward Vong Dismembering people and killing people who don't believe in your god is against our law of the land so that would put Islam out of our Country.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
17
17
0
SSgt (Join to see)
She suffered abuse and Muslims have issued FATWAS to be murdered. But from aside from Hillary Democrats hate women... It is okay for Muslims to rape beause they are good at it.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
No answer to this I see! You are caught red-handed Capt Walter Miller This is what I am talking about but since this is politics then innocent people are fair game. The innocent deserve better. Don't you think?
(1)
(0)
SSgt Dave Dierking
Dr. Carson speaks softly with wisdom and convincing conviction. I have great respect for his accomplishments and strength of character.
(2)
(0)
16
16
0
CPT L S SGT Efaw (Mick) G. SFC Joseph Weber COL Ted Mc CPT Pedro Meza SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. CPT (Join to see) SSG Warren Swan SSG (Join to see)
No religious law is compatible with the US Constitution.
Generally speaking, someone of faith would be holding their faith above all else, however, an elected member still has a job to do whether they agree with it or not. This goes back to Kim Davis not granting marriage licenses because of her beliefs.
That being said, according to the Muslim "lore", Sharia law is man-made by the prophet based on how he interpreted the Quran. It was a combination of his interpretation and the culture which led to what it is today. As a former Muslim, I did not follow Sharia law, but my devotion was ultimately to my interpretation of the Quran.
No religious law is compatible with the US Constitution.
Generally speaking, someone of faith would be holding their faith above all else, however, an elected member still has a job to do whether they agree with it or not. This goes back to Kim Davis not granting marriage licenses because of her beliefs.
That being said, according to the Muslim "lore", Sharia law is man-made by the prophet based on how he interpreted the Quran. It was a combination of his interpretation and the culture which led to what it is today. As a former Muslim, I did not follow Sharia law, but my devotion was ultimately to my interpretation of the Quran.
(16)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
SGT Ben Keen - I admit to drinking Scotch in my old days, now its Rum and Tequila and Scotch, but not all at the same time, it all depends on what is left. In the 1970's Reservist could wear a short wig on top their long hair.
(3)
(0)
SrA Edward Vong
1SG Miles Bizzell
Agreed Miles. It doesn't take religion to tell us what we should and shouldn't do as far as overall being a good person.
Agreed Miles. It doesn't take religion to tell us what we should and shouldn't do as far as overall being a good person.
(1)
(0)
A1C Melissa Jackson
CPT L S-
You are absolutely ON POINT. It makes me slightly queasy when I hear these evangelicals howling to high heaven that our "founding fathers" were clear that this is to be a CHRISTIAN nation. They absolutely DID NOT. Jefferson was not the only one, either. Madison made comments to the point that religion should and WOULD be separate from all gov't functions. One of the early presidents- pierce? Adams? Can't remember- but he took his oath of office on a book of LAWS because he said that the religious element of using a bible came too close to being a pledge to support that document as opposed to the LAW of the nation.
The reason for this strong prohibition against government having its fingers in religious business is the make up of the colonies were largely escapees from European nations who used appalling methods to control people through religion. They wanted this nation to be free of that kind of influence, and to have a nation and laws based on REASON and LOGIC rather than religious dogma.
Now look around the world- Saudi Arabia, Packistan, and Yemen Fir three examples. These countries are run by clerics and are VERY religiously strict. They execute people for making unacceptable religious decisions, or in some cases for the slightest infraction of their religious laws. We are horrified by this here in the United States, but many of us are cheering and carrying on when these charlatain history revisionist politicians want to impose similar restrictions on all of us. These "religious restoration" laws that legalize discrimination, and the anti-bullying laws that allow exceptions for "religious" reasons (?!) are a prime examples of the way that this country is drifting in that direction.
By the way, I did not mention the three countries above because they are Muslim, but because they are in the news FREQUENTLY for the religious atrocities that happen there- probably further effort from the elites to whip up hatred and fear here in the good ol secular USA.
You are absolutely ON POINT. It makes me slightly queasy when I hear these evangelicals howling to high heaven that our "founding fathers" were clear that this is to be a CHRISTIAN nation. They absolutely DID NOT. Jefferson was not the only one, either. Madison made comments to the point that religion should and WOULD be separate from all gov't functions. One of the early presidents- pierce? Adams? Can't remember- but he took his oath of office on a book of LAWS because he said that the religious element of using a bible came too close to being a pledge to support that document as opposed to the LAW of the nation.
The reason for this strong prohibition against government having its fingers in religious business is the make up of the colonies were largely escapees from European nations who used appalling methods to control people through religion. They wanted this nation to be free of that kind of influence, and to have a nation and laws based on REASON and LOGIC rather than religious dogma.
Now look around the world- Saudi Arabia, Packistan, and Yemen Fir three examples. These countries are run by clerics and are VERY religiously strict. They execute people for making unacceptable religious decisions, or in some cases for the slightest infraction of their religious laws. We are horrified by this here in the United States, but many of us are cheering and carrying on when these charlatain history revisionist politicians want to impose similar restrictions on all of us. These "religious restoration" laws that legalize discrimination, and the anti-bullying laws that allow exceptions for "religious" reasons (?!) are a prime examples of the way that this country is drifting in that direction.
By the way, I did not mention the three countries above because they are Muslim, but because they are in the news FREQUENTLY for the religious atrocities that happen there- probably further effort from the elites to whip up hatred and fear here in the good ol secular USA.
(2)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
Stop with the anti-Christian hubris. I will NOT sit idly by and listen to this when there ARE Muslims terrorizing the world. This IS reality and it is happening today.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google