Oklahoma Voters Say No To Sharia


It’s been buried in all of the Election Day reporting, but the voters of Oklahoma did something on Tuesday worthy of note. By a substantial margin, they approved a measure prohibiting judges from considering international law or sharia (Islamic law) when deciding cases. About 70 percent of voters Tuesday were in favor of this measure.

The purpose of the measure is to direct judges to exclusively use state and federal law to guide their judicial decisionmaking. The sponsor of the measure called it a “pre-emptive strike” designed to close the door on activist judges who use  international law or sharia law in legislating from the bench.

Now there are some legitimate concerns with this measure, to the extent that it could be construed as prohibiting courts in Oklahoma from adjudicating multinational commercial disputes where the law of a non-U.S. jurisdiction or a treaty is directly applicable. International companies would not want to invest in Oklahoma  if they knew their agreements and international business transactions would not be enforced in accordance with their terms in the Oklahoma courts.

Moreover, an international treaty ratified by the United States Senate is the law of the land under our Constitution.

However, the main opposition to the measure is not based on such practical grounds. It is based on spurious ideological grounds.

Predictably, some members of the Muslim community are in an uproar, calling the question an attack on Islam and threatening to challenge it in court. In fact, the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, also known as CAIR-OK, is hosting a news conference today to announce the filing of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the measure.

CAIR-OK Executive Director Muneer Awad said politicians used fear-mongering and misinformation to scare Oklahomans into voting for the measure, which he claimed was in direct conflict with the U.S. Constitution.

Actually, Mr. Awad has it backwards. It is sharia law that is in direct conflict with the U.S. Constitution.

First, Sharia law at its core does not regard non-Muslims as equal citizens, but rather as dhimmis who are to be tolerated and protected under Islamic rule so long as they play by Islamic rules. Thus, Islamic law grants many privileges only to Muslims, and discriminates against non-believers.

Indeed, the Koran commands Muslims to

[F]ight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book [Christians and Jews], until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Sharia also subjects women to male domination.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Blogplay
  • Ping.fm
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Sphinn
  • PDF