Posted on Sep 24, 2014
Do you believe that Sharia Law is compatible with our Constitution?
35.9K
566
320
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: 91
3
3
0
PO1 Steven Kuhn, the State of Alabama recently passed an amendment to the state constitution that prohibits foreign law being used to decide cases in Alabama courts and will be added to the Alabama Constitution. The amendment does not undermine the religious rights of Muslims or anyone else, but does prevent lawyers from arguing from Sharia law in an Alabama custody case, for example.
CPT Jack Durish, the State of Alabama did a preemptive strike.
CPT Jack Durish, the State of Alabama did a preemptive strike.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
The United States was founded upon the principles contained in both our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution and the Bill of Rights (1st 10 Amendments). We are granted the freedom of religion. We can chose to believe or not believe in a deity, worship or not worship, we have no National Church. This is contrary to Sharia Law, which dictates a religion and how to worship, and punishments for deviations. Though the Equal Rights Amendment never passed, in the United States all citizens, men, women, all races and all ethnicity's are equal in front of the law. This is contrary to Sharia Law. No Sharia Law can not exist in the United States as long as we preserve our Constitution. No Nation can be governed by multiple legal foundations and still remain one Nation.
(3)
(0)
SGT John Rice
Sir, you are utter correct. I have heard that both Sharia Law and Dhimmitude are mentioned in Obama's health car law. Personally I have not found this to be true, but it is a lot of reading and I could have missed any of the references. I hope that they are not. Both are totally anti the principles this country was founded on. I have over the last few years began to truly fear for our great nation. Sadly when you go to the polls to vote, you are voting for politicians who are probably telling you one thing while planning on doing the opposite.
(1)
(0)
PO1 Steven Kuhn
Dhimmitude (or the slave tax) was in the original draft for Obamacare but they replaced the wording as they were afraid Americans would catch on too early. I did not think anything would slip by our active duty and retired military and am very glad to see that y'all are able to acknowledge that this occurred during this administration.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Steven Kuhn
Islamic principles came from the Prophet Mohammed supposedly via the angel Gabriel. We all know Satan can appear as an angel of light. The Quran says there is no such thing as devils (even though Jesus cast them out....) so I believe that Islam is not of God.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
As has been stated several times here, Sharia law is not compatible with Constitutional law.
Someone recently asked me what I thought about my state's vote on a law banning Sharia law from being enforced. My answer was that by virtue of what Sharia law is, it is already banned, and that politicians are wasting time and money on something that has zero affect on us. It is only a ploy to garner votes.
Someone recently asked me what I thought about my state's vote on a law banning Sharia law from being enforced. My answer was that by virtue of what Sharia law is, it is already banned, and that politicians are wasting time and money on something that has zero affect on us. It is only a ploy to garner votes.
(3)
(0)
CPT Ray Doeksen
Yes, it is fear-mongering. There is one law of the land, and there should be no more worry of Sharia law being enforced than the rules of Pokemon becoming the law.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
Sharia law can mean two things. To many Muslims, it means simply living their lives in accordance with the Koran. To almost everyone else (including the remainder of Muslims) it means living under a society governed by Koranic law. I think it's important to look at both meanings independently.
If the former, how is that different from an individual saying they live according to the Bible? As long as they make no requirements on others to explicitly conform to their beliefs, there is little to worry about with this version of "sharia law."
If the latter, though, such is wholly incompatible not only with the Constitution, but with democracy itself and with freedom in general. A Government bound to religious edict is never going to be reconcilable with democratic and enlightenment ideals, and will always end up coercive and barbaric toward the governed populace. This is true whether it is Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or even Atheism. When the Government tells people what they may believe and subscribes what is appropriate based only on a set of beliefs, everyone loses.
If the former, how is that different from an individual saying they live according to the Bible? As long as they make no requirements on others to explicitly conform to their beliefs, there is little to worry about with this version of "sharia law."
If the latter, though, such is wholly incompatible not only with the Constitution, but with democracy itself and with freedom in general. A Government bound to religious edict is never going to be reconcilable with democratic and enlightenment ideals, and will always end up coercive and barbaric toward the governed populace. This is true whether it is Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or even Atheism. When the Government tells people what they may believe and subscribes what is appropriate based only on a set of beliefs, everyone loses.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I couldn't imagine two forms of law more juxtaposed. On appeal by Refah party in Turkey that was banned and dissolved by the Turkey government the European Court of Human Rights determined that "sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy" Refah's sharia-based notion of a "plurality of legal systems, grounded on religion" was ruled to contravene the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It was determined that it would "do away with the State's role as the guarantor of individual rights and freedoms" and "infringe the principle of non-discrimination between individuals as regards their enjoyment of public freedoms, which is one of the fundamental principles of democracy". Couldn't agree more.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
I must admit I am very angry over everyone who comes to the US trying to change our Constitution. Just this year here in Stafford, Texas the schools were told to no longer use "Christmas Vacation", just holiday or winter break. Come on now, us get serious, our country was conceived and built on our beliefs, not theirs.
(2)
(0)
SFC Collin McMillion
Let me say first though, we need a President who is not afraid of upsetting his friends and religious partners.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
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)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google