Posted on Sep 24, 2014
Do you believe that Sharia Law is compatible with our Constitution?
32K
566
329
6
6
0
I want to know whether anyone believes that Islam in America demanding Sharia Law will work in America with our Constitution and Bill of Rights. With the growing Muslim population (both legally and illegally) and all of the special treatment they get regarding their religion as compared to any other in America are you worried about whether our Constitution will survive?
Posted in these groups: 
Constitution
Islam
Constitution Islam
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 92
2
2
0
Clearly Sharia is NOT even on the same track as our Constitution. Totally incompatible. That being said, the Affordable Care Act, the misnamed Patriot Act, and Social Security are also not congruent with the principles or anticipated scope of our Constitution.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Religious based laws (as opposed to laws that have clear material basis) are antithetical to a free republic. As an atheist I view religion, especially Abrahamic ones as toxic psychoses that should be treated as dangerous.
It wasn't atheists burning women at the stake or fighting the crusades, and it isn't the atheists beheading infidels. Those atrocities were done by the religious.
It wasn't atheists burning women at the stake or fighting the crusades, and it isn't the atheists beheading infidels. Those atrocities were done by the religious.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Sharia law and the Constitution are NOT compatible!!!! I have done some research and I found that the Muslim Holy book the Koran or Quran, began as a peaceful religion in Mecca. When the second part of the book was revealed, it was in Medina. Its that second revelation that turned it from a peaceful religion to a violent and intolerant religion. And that is about the time that Sharia law was enacted. Muslims claim that the Koran and sharia law are non-compromising and can not change. BS, it can to by the way people act and interpret it. We are 2000 years better educated and the Koran, Sharia law, the Torah, and the Bible are not absolute.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
As compatible as Jane Fonda and I. As oil and water. As Madeline Murrey and the Pope. Ahhh... you get it.
What Constitution? It has effectively been neutered by legal work arounds. It has been an illusion for a few years now. All of your rights can be removed with the stroke of a pen.
What Constitution? It has effectively been neutered by legal work arounds. It has been an illusion for a few years now. All of your rights can be removed with the stroke of a pen.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
PO1 Steven Kuhn,
As it stands now, no. Many of the "punishments" under Sharia Law would violate State laws in the areas where the Muslim population resides and quite possibly be interpreted as violations of Civil Rights Laws by the Federal Government.
I do not fret the Constitution. There are many who will stand and fight if our feedoms become infringed upon.
SFC Joseph M. Finck USA (Ret)
As it stands now, no. Many of the "punishments" under Sharia Law would violate State laws in the areas where the Muslim population resides and quite possibly be interpreted as violations of Civil Rights Laws by the Federal Government.
I do not fret the Constitution. There are many who will stand and fight if our feedoms become infringed upon.
SFC Joseph M. Finck USA (Ret)
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Clearly not. The constitution demands separation of church and state. Sharia law asserts that religion IS the state.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Sharia Law is not compatible with our Constitution or any part of our country. My belief is that if the Muslims want Sharia Law they should go back where they came from where it's already practiced.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Constitutionally speaking, it is illegal under any circumstance to allow a state religion of any kind here in the United States. It is also illegal to prevent the free exercise of religion. I have not been able to really check it out, but I believe the only time prohibitions exist is when certain religious practices are incompatible with existing civil law, such as offering a human sacrifice or blood atonement for a sin. Like ancient Jewish laws, Sharia demands literal death when certain religious laws are broken. We do not observe such laws here in the US because U.S. civil law recognizes death under those circumstances as murder, which demands capital punishment in some states, or a very long prison sentence.
(2)
(0)
SMSgt Kevin Connair
It violates all basic human rights. It is incompatible with individual liberty. See: http;//http://www.politicalislam.com
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
TSgt (Join to see), those things are not illegal, they are unconstitutional, i.e. no one goes to jail or gets fined if they happen, the courts just won't let it stand.
You are almost dead on when you say that the "only time prohibitions exist is when certain religious practices are incompatible with existing civil law." You are absolutely right to say "practices," vis a vis "beliefs," because only practices can be regulated by law. Regulations are not, however, confined to civil law. They extend also to criminal law.
One problem with the premise of this entire discussion is that the line between permissible religious practices and government regulation has been pushed back, allowing a great deal of religious practices to escape regulation (more accurately, religious belief operated as a vehicle to escape healthcare regulation and taxation). This is not a problem in theory. We don't want Congress or the Executive coming in to stop Mass or Sabbath prayers, and that means that Hare Krishnas get to do their thing and Santeria practitioners can sacrifice animals. It also means that government will probably be barred from stepping in to stop perceived infringements on certain women's rights in Muslim households, for example.
Religious freedom is a tricky proposition because it is all about finding a way to upset the fewest people.
You are almost dead on when you say that the "only time prohibitions exist is when certain religious practices are incompatible with existing civil law." You are absolutely right to say "practices," vis a vis "beliefs," because only practices can be regulated by law. Regulations are not, however, confined to civil law. They extend also to criminal law.
One problem with the premise of this entire discussion is that the line between permissible religious practices and government regulation has been pushed back, allowing a great deal of religious practices to escape regulation (more accurately, religious belief operated as a vehicle to escape healthcare regulation and taxation). This is not a problem in theory. We don't want Congress or the Executive coming in to stop Mass or Sabbath prayers, and that means that Hare Krishnas get to do their thing and Santeria practitioners can sacrifice animals. It also means that government will probably be barred from stepping in to stop perceived infringements on certain women's rights in Muslim households, for example.
Religious freedom is a tricky proposition because it is all about finding a way to upset the fewest people.
(3)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
@MAJ Ryan Kile -- Thanks for the clarification. What you said is what I was trying to say.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
PO1 Steven Kuhn to answer your question, no. Sharia Law does not allow for complete freedom of religion as our Constitution does, so it is not compatible on that basis alone.
However, I'm not sure that they get "special treatment" compared to any other religion. I have several Muslim friends, and they are simply good people. They were born in America, yet they often experience extreme prejudice at the hands of many of our fellow Americans who can't or won't distinguish between a normal Muslim and the radicals they see beheading people on television.
I am disheartened every time I see or hear of some of my ignorant countrymen and women talking about Muslims as if they are all radical terrorists or that they all want Sharia Law (not directed at you btw). The truth is that the vast majority of Muslims are normal people just like us. But back to my original point: I think it seems like they get "special" treatment because the media (and Americans in general) make a bigger deal about anything remotely controversial that happens involving a Muslim community in the United States.
Lastly, anyone that seriously thinks that the country is being taken over by Muslims or that there is a possibility of the United States being ruled by Sharia Law is out of their minds. With all due respect.
However, I'm not sure that they get "special treatment" compared to any other religion. I have several Muslim friends, and they are simply good people. They were born in America, yet they often experience extreme prejudice at the hands of many of our fellow Americans who can't or won't distinguish between a normal Muslim and the radicals they see beheading people on television.
I am disheartened every time I see or hear of some of my ignorant countrymen and women talking about Muslims as if they are all radical terrorists or that they all want Sharia Law (not directed at you btw). The truth is that the vast majority of Muslims are normal people just like us. But back to my original point: I think it seems like they get "special" treatment because the media (and Americans in general) make a bigger deal about anything remotely controversial that happens involving a Muslim community in the United States.
Lastly, anyone that seriously thinks that the country is being taken over by Muslims or that there is a possibility of the United States being ruled by Sharia Law is out of their minds. With all due respect.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
The inquisitions are NOT Christianity. The actions of those individuals, which were perpetrated several hundred years ago, are not the actions of those who love. While I do acknowledge those horrible actions occurred, I nevertheless denounce them as barbaric and evil, let alone NOT Christian in any fashion.
(2)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
Gerhard, that's kind of my point. Any of these religions is capable of this level of atrocity in service to their own brand of what "God demands". God's will has been used for any number of artocities in the past...we just happen to live in a time where most Christians have moved past that (probably because Christianity came to dominate the nations that overwhelmingly control most of the world, directly or indirectly).
Andres, you can claim it wasn't Christianity, or true Christianity, or your brand of Christianity, or modern Christianity. The bottom line is that it was a group of leaders who believed they were Christian, and strongly believed that what they were doing was supported by the bible, just as ISIS strongly believes what they are doing is supported by the Koran. All I'm saying is that there is not a wide gulf between any kind of religious extremists. The only reason we think such a difference exists is because there aren't enough Christian extremists to exert any kind of real force in the world, while there are plenty of radical Muslims out there willing to make a statement with a gun instead of a speech, book, or peaceful protest.
Andres, you can claim it wasn't Christianity, or true Christianity, or your brand of Christianity, or modern Christianity. The bottom line is that it was a group of leaders who believed they were Christian, and strongly believed that what they were doing was supported by the bible, just as ISIS strongly believes what they are doing is supported by the Koran. All I'm saying is that there is not a wide gulf between any kind of religious extremists. The only reason we think such a difference exists is because there aren't enough Christian extremists to exert any kind of real force in the world, while there are plenty of radical Muslims out there willing to make a statement with a gun instead of a speech, book, or peaceful protest.
(1)
(0)
SMSgt Kevin Connair
The "inquisition" was a tyrannical political action, not one driven by the religion. If you take sections of nearly any book or religious text out of context, you can misuse it. You need to explore the core teachings to truly understand that many of the world's great religions have failures because humans failed in the application of the altruistic roots of the religion. That is not the case for islam - peace is the exception, and it is never for "non-believers". Islam has been fighting (aggressively seeking conquest) everything and everyone since the "prophet" started it (over 1400 years ago). Here's the contrast: Look at the defining moments: the "prophet" started islam in part by killing anyone who disagreed with his tyrannical conquest plans, Christianity was started by Christ offering himself up to die to redeem mankind's sins. Self sacrifice and the ultimate expression of love vs. homicidal tyranny - no comparison. By the way: Islam is first and foremost a tyrannical political system with a religious veneer. It is absolutely incompatible with individual liberty. Christianity, and many of the worlds other great religions are not incompatible - that is how you can judge if something is truly a religion or a political system masquerading as a religion. See: http://www.politicalislam.com for further information.
(1)
(0)
SSG Gerhard S.
Cpt. Jason Williams though much of what you wrote is true I would contend that there IS a gulf of 800 years between the inquisition and the murderous barbery of Isis today. That IS a significant and indisputable fact.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
I find it highly incompatible with the constitution and our way of life. Now if they want to practice shira law in spirit i.e. not eating pork and being compelled to due the 5 pillars than have at it. But if the intent were to try to run a parallel judicial system based off this law than NO! I can't see where you have certain rights afforded to you in the US that would be allowed in such a kangaroo court. Sharia law allows for the murder of wives from their husbands in the name of family honor. The execution of apostates. Corporal punishment for minor infractions of the Koran.
I could go on and on. The Sharia law goes with the constitution like gasoline and water with a lit match.
No they should not get any special treatment on this matter other than what is consistent with the free practices of other religions.
I could go on and on. The Sharia law goes with the constitution like gasoline and water with a lit match.
No they should not get any special treatment on this matter other than what is consistent with the free practices of other religions.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google