Sharia vs Constitution
"Creeping Sharia" Americans have become increasingly wary of the term "Sharia law," Divine Law in Islam, associating it with terrorist groups who want to impose their governing style on other countries and viewing it as a threat to American society. Several right-wing senators have spoken up against it and commentators like Pamela Geller actively speaking up against it. Almost half the states in the U.S.. have proposed and considered laws that would prohibit Sharia (Aslan). The us of the term "creeping sharia" has become more and more common to describe Americans' fear that Muslims will impose their Sharia law on the U.S. Constitution. |
|
However, there is a gross misunderstanding of what Sharia Law actually is. This is largely due to the assumption that the governments of Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia reflect Sharia Law. In 2008, the New Jersey Tea Party held a discussion on Sharia Law and its compliance with the U.S. Constitution. The majority of the arguments used by Sharia Law skeptics are based on the laws in places like Saudi Arabia; they argue against Sharia Law by arguing against the rulings that women can not leave their homes without a male by their side or that they can't drive. Yet the rules used in these nations as codes of Sharia Law are often not compliant with the true Sharia and in reality, no Muslim country correctly applies Sharia Law, according to ("What is Sharia"). Thus this skews people's perceptions to think that only less religious or non-practicing Muslims can co-exist in a society with Americans, and that true Muslims who follow Sharia Law have the mindset that others must follow their way without a choice.
What is Sharia?
"Sharia refers to the way that God has advised Muslims to live, as documented in the Quran and exemplified in the practices of Prophet Muhammad. In other words, sharia can be understood as the Islamic recipe for living a good life. But of course, no one can taste a recipe. We can only taste the product of a chef's efforts to follow one. In addition, different chefs can follow the same recipe and still come up with quite varied results." - Asifa Quraishi Landish Like the Constitution, Sharia Law is a common law system -- meaning there is not one defined set of rules that are universally applicable as Sharia Law. This means that unlike civil law, for example, the French Napoleonic Code, there is not a mathematical code or book that sets the rules for societal function. -- it calls for the use of discretion in applying it. While there is a divine law set by God, the applications and understandings of these laws vary, which has led to various schools of jurisprudence following different fiqh, or interpretations of the Sharia. Islamic academic Tariq Ramadan explains Sharia Law as an "open system." What is ironic is that while many Americans worry that Muslims want to impose their Sharia on society, in accordance with Islamic values, Muslims are to respect the law of the country they live under and Sharia Law even encourages Muslims to do what is best for the nation as a whole, regardless of the religious backgrounds of its citizens. According to Ramadan, Sharia is not a "closed system coming to colonize, but an open system taking the good it finds everywhere." He explains that flexibility is a critical part of Sharia Law and that it tells Muslim to take and implement what is common amongst all. The problems that people assume arise from Sharia Law often do not have to do with the Law itself, but with the reading of those laws ("A Conversation with Tariq Ramadan"). Implementation of the laws We can actually see similarities in the way nations have acted upon both the U.S. Constitution and Sharia Law. Some of the arguments made by Sharia Law skeptics is that in Muslim countries, non-Muslims have limited freedoms compared to their Muslim counterparts. While Sharia Law calls for equality between Muslims and non-Muslims and despite the fact that Islamic law aimed to maintain a fair society between Muslims and non-Muslims alike, there are countries where non-Muslims do not have as much of a say and are restricted in their practice. This is one example of a people not implementing divine law appropriately. We have seen similar trends in the implementation of the U.S. Constitution. In many situations throughout history, non-citizens or even citizens from unfamiliar backgrounds are curbed their rights. During World War II, the Japanese were forced into internment camps, during the Cold War, those with affiliation to communist countries were unjustly incarcerated, and even in the 21st century, George W. Bush signed away the rights of non-citizens to trial by jury to allow for the sentencing of hundreds of Arabs to Guantanamo Bay by military tribunals (Cole). Just as there have been mistakes made in the application of the Sharia into real-world situations, the same is happening even in countries like the United States in regards to the Constitution. |
|