CDZ What do American Muslims want?

[alpine]

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?

Muslims in the US are in fact pretty diverse.

And there is a good reason for that; because it is mostly the people who were running away from the oppression in muslim countries were coming to this country, as a last resort. The majority of the muslims in the USA are those people. Iranians for instance, they despise mullah more than anybody else could.

This situation is very different in European countries.

If you compare the voting results of the American muslims, and European muslims in their home country elections, you will see this difference very clearly.

So; US doing "relatively" good...

But;
Diversity brings any type of everything.
Some mosques in this country scare even some of the muslims of this country...

I've been living next door to a Muslim family for the past decade and they seem to be pretty normal people to me.

I think your neighbor was one of those who wouldn't want to go to a sharia court


As far as the muslims who are looking for the "guidance" of a sharia court are concerned, I just would like to remind them; do they like how secular law overwrites their sharia law?

Maybe should be the same, back there... where they came from...

I am just saying, when I get the opportunity... and enjoy saying it too...

 

[Asclepias]

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?

Muslims in the US are in fact pretty diverse.

And there is a good reason for that; because it is mostly the people who were running away from the oppression in muslim countries were coming to this country, as a last resort. The majority of the muslims in the USA are those people. Iranians for instance, they despise mullah more than anybody else could.

This situation is very different in European countries.

If you compare the voting results of the American muslims, and European muslims in their home country elections, you will see this difference very clearly.

So; US doing "relatively" good...

But;
Diversity brings any type of everything.
Some mosques in this country scare even some of the muslims of this country...

I've been living next door to a Muslim family for the past decade and they seem to be pretty normal people to me.

I think your neighbor was one of those who wouldn't want to go to a sharia court


As far as the muslims who are looking for the "guidance" of a sharia court are concerned, I just would like to remind them; do they like how secular law overwrites their sharia law?

Maybe should be the same, back there... where they came from...

I am just saying, when I get the opportunity... and enjoy saying it too...

I'll ask him tomorrow and see what he says.

 

[alpine]

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?

Muslims in the US are in fact pretty diverse.

And there is a good reason for that; because it is mostly the people who were running away from the oppression in muslim countries were coming to this country, as a last resort. The majority of the muslims in the USA are those people. Iranians for instance, they despise mullah more than anybody else could.

This situation is very different in European countries.

If you compare the voting results of the American muslims, and European muslims in their home country elections, you will see this difference very clearly.

So; US doing "relatively" good...

But;
Diversity brings any type of everything.
Some mosques in this country scare even some of the muslims of this country...

I've been living next door to a Muslim family for the past decade and they seem to be pretty normal people to me.

I think your neighbor was one of those who wouldn't want to go to a sharia court


As far as the muslims who are looking for the "guidance" of a sharia court are concerned, I just would like to remind them; do they like how secular law overwrites their sharia law?

Maybe should be the same, back there... where they came from...

I am just saying, when I get the opportunity... and enjoy saying it too...

I'll ask him tomorrow and see what he says.

Do you know what country he is from?

 

[320 Years of History]

I'm not sure just what to make of your post....I think your thesis got lost somewhere between your brain and the keyboard, largely because the post, though not as discursive as some I've seen on the forum, seems to talk around your central point instead of directly to it, as well as I sensed that it presents opposing ideas, thus making it hard to tell which you actually mean to espouse and advocate...That said, I think I have some idea of what you mean...I'm going to respond to some of the post and at the end, I'll posit what I think may be central point. Let me know if I got it right.

Though I've responded with regard to specific passages you wrote, please note that there is a fair amount of overlap between some of the ideas; thus they don't necessarily apply solely to the passage they immediately follow. I've attempted to organize my remarks so they are thematically coherent as a whole as well as being topically germane with regard to the specifically cited passages. The "colored" callouts, however, refer to the noted text only.

By drawing these comparisons between various Religious codes you are actually hurting the proposition that there is nothing especially "weird or unusual" going in Islam.. Because the DIFFERENCE IS --- The Sharia Law gets incorporated in the fabric of daily life in Arab cultures..

The idea of any ostensibly God given precepts being incorporated into or given comity with secular law isn't at all foreign to Americans, not in concept and not in practice. "Thou shalt not kill" is clearly a "God given" law, assuming one believes in God and what the Bible says he's said. On the other hand, Americans, Christians and non-Christians alike, are equally familiar with Divine instructions that they daily ignore. One such example is the Golden Rule, which in Matthew 7:12 is given to us in a context that specifically has Jews as the audience and in Luke 6:31, which is given with an assumed Gentile audience.

There is not a single Western culture where a Jewish man is prohibited from re-marrying his ex-wife or [where his wife is required to] divorce him for sexual transgressions. However -- the similar Sharia practice is ENSHRINED in many many places.

In America -- this is [a] matter between individuals and their RELIGIOUS authority. NEVER a matter of law. And the difference is I've never been aware of a Jewish movement to FORCE secular authorities to recognize their religious authorities to impose "laws" contrary to Civil codes.

Note:
Please let me know if my "correction" in brackets of your sentence is correct. The following remarks/questions with regard to the quoted passage assume it is.


Laws, secular and theologically derived, all have as their aims:

1. Provide a structure for the creation and management of a society -- That is to say, the underlying premise of laws is that if everyone adheres to the laws, the society guided by those laws will indeed be a peaceful one.
2. The establishment of a hierarchy that determines who, in various situations, gets to make and arbitrate the law.

Some systems, such as modern secular laws in the West attempt to extract the theological element from the letter of its laws while retaining the religious spirit that inspired it. A fine illustration of this is found in the arguments and legislation around several social topics, not the least among them the gay marriage and abortion. Indeed, that the very notion of marriage seems as much secular (property driven) as religious (sanctity of the pair bond). Moreover, marriage related laws, adultery prohibitions being one example, strike me as being as much about property as about piety.

Red:
Can you give some examples of what specific practice (divorce? -- is that what you mean, or do you mean that and other practices?), the practice's nature and extent, and where these many places are?

Blue:
To the extent that in citing sexual transgressions and given that this discussion deals with Muslims and Sharia Law, I presume that part of what you have in mind is adultery and the laws pertaining to convicted adulterers. In light of that, why did you neglect/opt not to copy-paste the brief discussion on Sharia and adultery from the very same article you referenced? That section relevantly to this thread's line of discussion re: Sharia Law is as follows:

Does Shariah really prescribe harsh punishments like stoning adulterers?

Yes, but many of these punishments have been taken out of context, abrogated, or require a near-impossible level of evidence to be carried out. For someone to be convicted of adultery, for example, there must be four witnesses to the act, which is rare. The Quran also prescribes amputating the hands of thieves, but (and this is often forgotten or unmentioned) not if the thief has repented.

Other Shariah scholars say such a punishment system can only be instituted in a society of high moral standards and where everyone’s needs are met (thereby obviating the urge to steal or commit other crimes). In such a society, the thinking goes, corporal punishments would be rarely needed.

That said, corporal punishments have been used by Islamic militant groups in places like Afghanistan, Somalia, and Syria, and governments in Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Aceh state in Indonesia and elsewhere.​

The facts noted in that section are quite relevant for they give perspective to the nature of the outcry against Sharia Law obtaining comity in courtrooms as well as to the just how anomalous are the extreme/corporal punishments to which they object.

And while this is RARE in America for Muslims, it's been kicked out there as a proposal on a few occasions..

All this outcry is more something to talk about, rhetoric, than something to be concerned about, reality. I mean let's face it...If there are fundamental/militant Muslims in the U.S. who are of a mind and have the will and wherewithal to exact corporal punishment in accordance with Sharia Law, do you think they'd show up in a courtroom arguing (asking) for permission to do so? I sure don't. I am far more confident that they'd do what they want to do and hope not to get caught by the cops.

Now the actors in such an event may, upon appearing in court to answer for their deed, incorporate into their defense or, if found guilty, statements prior to sentencing, one or several notions of Sharia Law; however, that even isn't unfamiliar to Americans. It's merely that we aren't familiar with such pleas being made from an Islamic context; moreover, most Americans aren't familiar with Islam at all. Lastly, of course, there is the uniquely American dilemma derived from the difference between how we'd like to conceive the meaning of "peer" and who is indeed another's peer.

Let's take a look at some of the preceding ideas:

• Pleas for comity that we might be familiar with:
  • An accused bigamist in court pleas for leniency or pleads not guilty to bigamy based on his/her Mormon or Islamic faith's teachings/beliefs. (As I wrote that sentence, a thought came to mind...Will You Be Denied U.S. Citizenship Based on Polygamy, Bigamy, or Multiple Marriages? | Nolo.com. U.S. bigamy and polygamy laws seem to me clearly at odds with one's freedom of religious practice rights.)
  • A court clerk denies to males or two females a marriage licence because s/he says that doing so violates their dogmatic sensibilities. In response to their denying the licence, the clerk is taken to court and charged with failing to uphold "some law" or other (the specific charge is irrelevant). The court may rule in his/her favor or in favor of the couple.
  • A pro-life advocate shoots and kills a doctor who performs abortions because s/he (the shooter) believes the doctor is a murderer and seeks in court to be viewed not as a vigilante, but as a protector of innocent life on the basis of one or several religious tenets s/he espouses.
• Unfamiliarity with Islam
  • The nature of the plea for comity is no different than that of Muslims seeking the same thing, but using Islamic dogma as their basis rather than non-Islamic dogma. Furthermore, it's well within the court's discretion -- a jury or a judge -- to consider the religious factors as exculpatory to greater or lesser degrees when determining guilt/innocence and the nature/term of sentence if the defendant is found guilty.
    
    Who among us hasn't encountered a situation wherein (assuming we had the authority to do so) we didn't grant comity to what we considered extenuating circumstances? There are plenty of instances in which everyone thinks and acts roughly as follows: "Yes, well, I can see she 'did it,' but she was 'raised in barn' and is 'dumber than the day is long,' so I'm not going to be so harsh in levying a penalty."
    
    As go American Muslims, their Muslimness and whatever that entails is merely an extenuating circumstance. Most of us non-Muslim Americans don't understand a damn thing about Islam. We understand what we understand, most often the idea of faith and state being separate, except when we want the state to reflect the precepts of our faith, which historically, in the main, has been Christianity.
    
    Well, we aren't a Christian nation, but the Holy See is. That notwithstanding, just as Christians no sooner care to have our actions "measured" from the point of view of Islam, preferring instead to have our actions and intentions assessed within a Christian or secular context, the same principle applies to Muslims. Which, naturally brings us back to the Golden Rule....
• What is a peer?
  • We have in the U.S. the idea that one should be judged by one's peers, and a peer is, if nothing else, someone who is like oneself. In our nation that doesn't have formally defined ranks within the society, we live daily with the fiction that we are all equal. Well, in terms of the rights we are due, we are. In terms of understanding the motivations, desires and so on of one another, there is little that's equal among members of different identity groups, and Lord knows, we've seemingly got as many identity groups are there are stars in the sky.
    
    Now this may seem strange to you, but to my mind, we should revise our legal system so that criminal trial juries are chosen after an initial plea and general line of defense has been announced. I care to here delve into the details of that beyond the following. If, say, one is a Jew and part of one's defense will derive from one's theological beliefs, then at least seven, but not all, of one's jurors should be Jewish because Jews will understand better than anyone else what the defendant is "getting at" with the Jewish teachings portion of his/her defense.
    
    Sure, as a non-Jew, I can likely achieve an intellectually robust understanding of the concepts presented in the defense, but I won't ever be able to relate them to what it means to live those concepts. Admittedly, that's not going to apply to all concepts of Jewishness, but for those that it does, I just never will "get it." In that regard, I'm not a peer of the Jew who might be on trial. I'm their equal in every way, except in terms of understanding "where they are coming from."
    
    Similarly, I wouldn't care to sit in judgment of an accused whose background is radically different from my own. Nor would I care to be judged by folks whose backgrounds are very different from my own. I'm okay with being among the minority of dissimilar folks, but the idea that I'd have to pass judgment on someone whom I really have no way to understand seems very unfair to both me and the accused.
    
    It seems much the same to me re: Muslims. I think at the very least, we owe to a Muslim on trial the same basic degree of comity that I've described re: a Jew above. I would apply the same principle to blacks, gays, whites, Christians, animists, Atheists, etc. if that person is going to raise their identity group affiliation as part of their defense.

Really don't NEED to become a religious scholar to see where the REAL PROBLEM exists. THIS ---- is the center of the storm in America about sharia law.....

Sharia Law In The USA 101: A Guide To What It Is And Why States Want To Ban It

(RNS) North Carolina lawmakers on Wednesday (July 24) approved a bill to prohibit judges from considering “foreign laws” in their decisions, but nearly everyone agrees that “foreign laws” really means Shariah, or Islamic law.

North Carolina now joins six other states — Oklahoma, Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, South Dakota, and Tennessee — to pass a “foreign laws” bill. A similar bill passed in Missouri, but Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed it, citing threats to international adoptions.

Green:
Okay, I have to be frank here...The above section of your post struck me as incredibly disingenuous and as a gross misrepresentation of both the letter and spirit of the article you cited. Your snipping and pasting left out much of what that article said as well as failing to include what the theme of the article is.

When I read what you've pasted in black bold text (readers will need to click back to the quoted post for I've truncated it solely for brevity's sake), I got one set of meanings and tone. When I read the actual article, I got a very different one. Indeed, the tone, theme and timbre are so different that I find myself questioning your polemical integrity.

So what's really happening in these threads is that folks you call "right-wingers" are actually taking the side of KEEPING govt in America secular. So hit them up on hypocrisy -- but don't try to tell the ISSUE does not exist because "all religions" do it..

So this is where I finally thought I may understand what you are saying (trying to say) with your post. Are you attempting to argue that "right wingers" aim to keep religious considerations out of the law in the U.S. and that they want to do so with regard to all religions, not just Islam?

If that is the point you've sought to make with that post, I have to ask you this.

• xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  
• Surely you don't think that conservatives propone and propose many of the stances and legislation they do based on principles other than faith-based ones?
• Did the very existence of the Evangelical movement in the U.S. escape your purview?
• Has not come to your attention that Ted Cruz spent the majority of his campaign attempting to assure voters that he would incorporate his theology into his policy making?

 

[Mudda]

And who would those be? I haven't seen anyone here 'support Sharia'.

 

[Mudda]

I think it's important to recognize that the US is not Britain, for one - and that Muslims in the US come from different cultural backgrounds than many in the UK, where the majority is from Pakistan. Culture makes a big difference.

Yes -- we have many educated people from places like Iran who came here to ESCAPE this sort of thing.

Why people want to sell them down the river by giving Islamists the tool of oppression they seek is downright mystifying.

I think this where you are off base.

I know a educated people from Iran....in fact, I work with some of them. And, they are trying to find ways to stay in OUR country, because they don't get along with the Mullahs (no surprise). But despite that, they are STILL Muslims.

I disagree with your claim that ANYONE wants to "sell them down the river". This thread is melding a bit with the "regressive left thread" so I'm not sure which place to post things. Maybe both.

Instead of looking at it from a view point of complete condemnation vs complete denial (the other side) - what is there in the middle that is workable? You have religious people who want to be able to PRACTICE their religion in a way that INCLUDES the rights and equalities we value here. We should be SUPPORTING that.

No part of Sharia is nor will ever be compatible with a civilized society. Anytime sharia is used, women get screwed. It's that simple.

 

[Mudda]

What do American Muslims want? Well, if they don't want sharia then they aren't real Muslims, are they? It's like a Christian who rejects the 10 commandments, well, that person isn't even a Christian to start with if they start rejecting core dogma.

 

[elektra]

Flat out Elektra - are you trolling by deliberately misrepresenting what people say? This is the CDZ and we have some decent discussion happening. Are you going to participate or troll by parsing posts?

There is living by Sharia, and there is wanting Sharia to be the law of the land - two different things.

What are your thoughts on American Muslims - do you think they want Sharia to be the law of the land or do you think they want the Constitution to govern our land?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

First and foremost there is Sharia law, not Sharia, you should state Sharia Law if you wish to be accurate.

You and two others went on and on about sharia law and kosher food drawing the comparison that Muslims dietary habits is Sharia Law.

Semantics, living by Sharia Law is the law of the land for devout Muslims, it governs every aspect of their life, including eating, which you pointed out to me.

You state there is no evidence that Muslims wish to live by Sharia Law, you their diet is Sharia Law, as Coyote points out. That is evidence, that they are living at least one part of their life by Sharia Law which Coyote hammered into me with multiple posts.

I can use your posts Coyote to show that you have provided multiple examples and explanations of how Muslims are using Sharia law. Need I ignore what you state in your OP and act as if you have not stated such?

What do American Muslims want?[/URL

is an entire code of rules for living, civil matters along with a penal code.

Why did you bring this up Coyote? You followed all the posts about Kosher Law, and followed up with this, why?

What do American Muslims want?
So...kosher should be illegal?

Coyote, you are more than implying, you are stating Sharia law governs food.
What do American Muslims want?
Kosher is part of halakah, Jewish religious law. Are you saying if Jews want to use religious law, like some muslims use sharia, to settle civil matters, they have no business being in the US?

You made it clear, Sharia Law covers food.
What do American Muslims want?
At which point I brought up kosher laws and you indicated you don't seem to understand exactly what Halakah or for that matter, Sharia is.

Both Sharia and Halakah cover a huge range of rules most of which involve civil affairs. There is also a penal code for major crimes (in both) with a certain penchant for stoning misbehavers. The degree to which a country or individual follows or interprets Sharia varies widely.

Halakah includes kosher dietary laws.
Sharia includes halal dietary laws.

Those are just some of the aspects of Sharia and Halakah. Now, do you have a problem with Jewish men living by Halakah in their private lives?

Should kosher and halal be made illegal? Should their adherents be forced to leave the country?

 

[elektra]

Sharia Law, as I have said, it should not be allowed in the USA, and a whole bunch of people took offense, stating that Muslims could not marry and divorce without Sharia law, nor could they even eat food, as in just as Kosher food is governed by Jewish laws, Sharia Law defines what Muslims must eat.

But the more I read about Sharia Law, it is apparent that a Muslim can live within his faith without abiding by one aspect of Sharia Law. Muslims can completely ignore Sharia Law!

Sharia Law is not a mandate for Muslims. So those Muslims who want Sharia Law, who live by Sharia Law, do not understand their own religion.

Is Sharia Law Truly Islamic? - Aslan Media

The fact remains that Sharia Law is a human construct, fabricated by politicians in partnership with religious Mullahs of the day for their own authoritarian political control.

A fact not often taught to Muslims is that Sharia Law did not exist during Prophet Muhammad’s life, nor did he create one. After all, the Quran is supposed to be the complete book. But look what we’ve done; the Quran and the Hadith now share equal billing!

Can you cite a single instance - in the United States - in which anyone other than Muslims has been affected by Sharia law? Take your time.

9/11? The terrorists believed they were acting according to Sharia Law.

Here is one example, the mother of the boyfriend of a muslim girl was ran over by the girl's muslim father.

Muslim Man Guilty of 'Honor Killing' in Daughter's Death

An Iraqi immigrant was found guilty of second degree murder today for running over his daughter, a crime motivated, prosecutors said, by the Arizona Muslim man's belief that the 20-year-old woman had Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, was also convicted of aggravated assault, because the mother of his daughter's boyfriend was also injured when he ran down the two women with his Jeep Cherokee in a suburban Phoenix parking lot in the October 2009 incident.

9/11 was an act of terrorism, not Sharia. Your second example was murder, plain and simple.

They believed is was in accordance of Sharia Law.

I've never read anything that said they based their actions on sharia or that it was blessed by any sort of religious edict or fatwa.

Murder yes, according to our system of beliefs and values, according to our education.

The murder was committed by a Muslim, who lived his life according to Sharia Law, he was from Iraq, where he lived under Sharia Law in an Islamic society. His perception of what and why he did it is not based our values or beliefs, they are based upon how he lived, under Sharia law.

He was basing his actions on his cultural beliefs...there actually isn't anything about "honor killing" in Sharia.

Cultural beliefs are, Sharia.

I must go back to Coyote's post #368, where Coyote explains what Sharia is and gives a linked source which I will quote from, as Coyote quoted from.
What do American Muslims want?

Shariah Law: The Five Things Every Non-Muslim (and Muslim) Should Know

Shariah is comprised of five main branches: adab (behavior, morals and manners),ibadah (ritual worship), i’tiqadat (beliefs), mu’amalat (transactions and contracts) and‘uqubat (punishments). These branches combine to create a society based on justice, pluralism and equity for every member of that society. Furthermore, Shariah forbids that it be imposed on any unwilling person. Islam’s founder, Prophet Muhammad, demonstrated that Shariah may only be applied if people willingly apply it to themselves—never through forced government implementation.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?

Muslims in the US are in fact pretty diverse.

And there is a good reason for that; because it is mostly the people who were running away from the oppression in muslim countries were coming to this country, as a last resort. The majority of the muslims in the USA are those people. Iranians for instance, they despise mullah more than anybody else could.

This situation is very different in European countries.

If you compare the voting results of the American muslims, and European muslims in their home country elections, you will see this difference very clearly.

So; US doing "relatively" good...

But;
Diversity brings any type of everything.
Some mosques in this country scare even some of the muslims of this country...

Yep.


.....and that is one of the reasons we need to be VERY careful about this whole issue of sharia, for even as Muslims in this country are diverse and fewer are fundamentalist than elsewhere, if allowed without extreme vetting and oversight, sharia will only lead to their being less diverse and more fundamentalist in the future.

Also, if people are using our current Muslim population to encourage more immigration, the net result will end up shifting the balance towards more fundamentalism.

There has been a selection process involved over the years when it comes to Muslims, as we have imported the best and the brightest for the most part. Opening the gates to the great, unwashed masses as it were , and a different story will be revealed.

 

[elektra]

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?

Muslims in the US are in fact pretty diverse.

And there is a good reason for that; because it is mostly the people who were running away from the oppression in muslim countries were coming to this country, as a last resort. The majority of the muslims in the USA are those people. Iranians for instance, they despise mullah more than anybody else could.

This situation is very different in European countries.

If you compare the voting results of the American muslims, and European muslims in their home country elections, you will see this difference very clearly.

So; US doing "relatively" good...

But;
Diversity brings any type of everything.
Some mosques in this country scare even some of the muslims of this country...

Yep.


.....and that is one of the reasons we need to be VERY careful about this whole issue of sharia, for even as Muslims in this country are diverse and fewer are fundamentalist than elsewhere, if allowed without extreme vetting and oversight, sharia will only lead to their being less diverse and more fundamentalist in the future.

Also, if people are using our current Muslim population to encourage more immigration, the net result will end up shifting the balance towards more fundamentalism.

There has been a selection process involved over the years when it comes to Muslims, as we have imported the best and the brightest for the most part. Opening the gates to the great, unwashed masses as it were , and a different story will be revealed.

I have friends in communities that have new Muslim Immigrants, they say they are mostly illiterate.

I do not understand how you state we, "import the best and the brightest". That to me suggests we actively seek the best Muslims? Everything about our immigration policy that I know seems to contradict what you stated.

Just curious if you could explain.

 

[Arianrhod]

I have friends in communities that have new Muslim Immigrants, they say they are mostly illiterate.

Well, if your friends say it, it must be true. I can say you worship pagan gods because of your username. Does that make it true?

When your friends say "illiterate," what do they mean, exactly? That their Muslim neighbors may not be fluent in English? How many languages do your friends speak? And if they don't speak Arabic or Farsi, how are they assessing this "illiteracy"? Extensive research in the Muslim community? Interviews?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

[Tilly]

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?

Muslims in the US are in fact pretty diverse.

And there is a good reason for that; because it is mostly the people who were running away from the oppression in muslim countries were coming to this country, as a last resort. The majority of the muslims in the USA are those people. Iranians for instance, they despise mullah more than anybody else could.

This situation is very different in European countries.

If you compare the voting results of the American muslims, and European muslims in their home country elections, you will see this difference very clearly.

So; US doing "relatively" good...

But;
Diversity brings any type of everything.
Some mosques in this country scare even some of the muslims of this country...

Yep.


.....and that is one of the reasons we need to be VERY careful about this whole issue of sharia, for even as Muslims in this country are diverse and fewer are fundamentalist than elsewhere, if allowed without extreme vetting and oversight, sharia will only lead to their being less diverse and more fundamentalist in the future.

Also, if people are using our current Muslim population to encourage more immigration, the net result will end up shifting the balance towards more fundamentalism.

There has been a selection process involved over the years when it comes to Muslims, as we have imported the best and the brightest for the most part. Opening the gates to the great, unwashed masses as it were , and a different story will be revealed.

I have friends in communities that have new Muslim Immigrants, they say they are mostly illiterate.

I do not understand how you state we, "import the best and the brightest". That to me suggests we actively seek the best Muslims? Everything about our immigration policy that I know seems to contradict what you stated.

Just curious if you could explain.

About 25% of female Muslims in the UK speak little or no English. Having come from patriarchal societies, some of the men do not want their wives or mothers speaking English and integrating or understanding their rights etc. Attempts to address this issue are met with cries from the left and from Muslims themselves as 'stigmatising' and islamophobic. Sigh.

 

[Arianrhod]

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?

Muslims in the US are in fact pretty diverse.

And there is a good reason for that; because it is mostly the people who were running away from the oppression in muslim countries were coming to this country, as a last resort. The majority of the muslims in the USA are those people. Iranians for instance, they despise mullah more than anybody else could.

This situation is very different in European countries.

If you compare the voting results of the American muslims, and European muslims in their home country elections, you will see this difference very clearly.

So; US doing "relatively" good...

But;
Diversity brings any type of everything.
Some mosques in this country scare even some of the muslims of this country...

Yep.


.....and that is one of the reasons we need to be VERY careful about this whole issue of sharia, for even as Muslims in this country are diverse and fewer are fundamentalist than elsewhere, if allowed without extreme vetting and oversight, sharia will only lead to their being less diverse and more fundamentalist in the future.

Also, if people are using our current Muslim population to encourage more immigration, the net result will end up shifting the balance towards more fundamentalism.

There has been a selection process involved over the years when it comes to Muslims, as we have imported the best and the brightest for the most part. Opening the gates to the great, unwashed masses as it were , and a different story will be revealed.

I have friends in communities that have new Muslim Immigrants, they say they are mostly illiterate.

I do not understand how you state we, "import the best and the brightest". That to me suggests we actively seek the best Muslims? Everything about our immigration policy that I know seems to contradict what you stated.

Just curious if you could explain.

About 25% of female Muslims in the UK speak little or no English. Having come from patriarchal societies, some of the men do not want their wives or mothers speaking English and integrating or understanding their rights etc. Attempts to address this issue are met with cries from the left and from Muslims themselves as 'stigmatising' and islamophobic. Sigh.

Can you define what you mean by "attempts to address the issue" and provide evidence that "the left" would have a negative reaction to them?

 

[Coyote]

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?

Muslims in the US are in fact pretty diverse.

And there is a good reason for that; because it is mostly the people who were running away from the oppression in muslim countries were coming to this country, as a last resort. The majority of the muslims in the USA are those people. Iranians for instance, they despise mullah more than anybody else could.

This situation is very different in European countries.

If you compare the voting results of the American muslims, and European muslims in their home country elections, you will see this difference very clearly.

So; US doing "relatively" good...

But;
Diversity brings any type of everything.
Some mosques in this country scare even some of the muslims of this country...

Yep.


.....and that is one of the reasons we need to be VERY careful about this whole issue of sharia, for even as Muslims in this country are diverse and fewer are fundamentalist than elsewhere, if allowed without extreme vetting and oversight, sharia will only lead to their being less diverse and more fundamentalist in the future.

Also, if people are using our current Muslim population to encourage more immigration, the net result will end up shifting the balance towards more fundamentalism.

There has been a selection process involved over the years when it comes to Muslims, as we have imported the best and the brightest for the most part. Opening the gates to the great, unwashed masses as it were , and a different story will be revealed.

I think there are two sides to the immigration issue - the culture of those coming in, and the ability/willingness of the country accepting them to help them integrate. I think that is more important than "fundamentalism" in and of itself. I remember reading something, that lot of the immigrants coming into Europe come from former "colonies" and sometimes you have almost an entire village transplanting itself. Some of these people are poor and uneducated, they ghettoize themselves, but that process is also fed by a cultural unwillingness to fully accept them as "French" or "English". Another thing I read that feeds into lack of integration in some of these communities is they import their own Imams from their former homes and those Imams are just as backwards in terms of progressive thinking, and they promote that as well as preventing integration that a more progressive Imam might help with.

This is something we in the US, and Canada don't have a problem with. I think part of it is in who comes here, like you say we get the more educated, but that doesn't apply to refugees. I just think our culture does a better job integrating. Refugees have sponsors often that help them, they get manage to get jobs and there is no legacy of colonialism to overcome. Much of this comes from the COMMUNITY level, not top down government.

When people feel a part of a community, have a vested interest in it, are employed, getting their children educated, they feel they belong and not just tolerated.

One example that comes to mind involves swimming, excercise and Muslim women from those countries where they are heavily clothed. Muslim women from those societies have a higher than average rate of heart disease, diabetes, etc because it is extremely difficult to exercise in a burka. Likewise, very few know how to swim because their religion forbids them from showing any skin to non-family males. We can condemn that as backwards but that isn't going to do anything to help them NOW. What you can do is what one city in Minnesota (I think) did. The area has many many lakes, and drowning accident rates are high, particularly so in the Somali immigrant community. The Police Department partnered with the local YMCA and created after hour swimming lessons for women and girls only (not just Somali, but any), no men. It was very successful. It helped the girls gain social confidence in their new environment, sparked friendships and taught them a very valuable life saving skill. It was also very criticized as "promoting Sharia" etc etc. But, in my opinion - if you want to change attitudes, the best way to do so is by finding means to integrate them into the community first - not by taking measures that encourage social isolation.

Every European country is different, so it's hard to know what actually goes on to facilitate integration and, like one article noted - they are more likely to have huge enclaves of immigrants from the same culture, who are very poor and with very high rates of unemployment. When you add youth and testosterone and poor future prospects - it's not a good mix. Sweden seems to be doing a better job of it then some: A Swedish Town's Newest Residents Settle In And Make A New Start

I'm generally supportive of immigration - if someone is willing to WORK and take advantage of an opportunity, I support them, but that doesn't mean unlimited or unvetted. A country needs to be able help with the assimilation process and if too many at one time can overburden the system.

Still...you know, you have to think - the great unwashed masses that came over at the turn of the century - poor, illiterate, desperate people from Ireland, Russia, Eastern Europe, Poland, China, Japan, Cuba, Italy, Lebanon, Syria - lived and died in immigrant ghettos - yet, after several generations there was no difference between them and any other Americans. You had the same concerns and rhetoric, and there was crime and violence at times but it worked out and we're still here and the better for it.

 

[320 Years of History]

I have friends in communities that have new Muslim Immigrants, they say they are mostly illiterate.

...Well, now, isn't that a well founded basis for understanding all manners of things pertaining to a group of people comprised of over one billion individuals. Puh-lease. Moreover, to what extent must we willingly suspend our disbelief to imagine that you can accurately tell whether your friends are literate enough to tell whether those Muslims whom they've met are indeed illiterate? I'm betting it's escaped you and your friends that literacy occurs in multiple languages and that possessing but a "Dick and Jane" adroitness with English -- something we've already established you haven't achieved -- does not constitute illiteracy. In how many of them are you literate? Are you as literate in several as are those Muslims of whom your friends spoke?

Lots of Muslims (comparatively speaking) come and go in my own neighborhood. A couple times a year, we chat. Neither they nor I need dictionaries and translation devices to keep up with the conversation, and I don't speak Hindi, Arabic or Azerbaijani. There's even a memorial sculpture of Lebanese immigrant in my neighborhood, although he was theologically more feral than fundamentalist.

I have no idea why the Gibran memorial is in my 'hood, perhaps it has something to do with the Lebanese Embassy's proximity? I really can't say...I can only say I notice "Muslim looking" people visiting the memorial.

Literally right on the edge of my neighborhood, but strictly in the adjacent one is a big ol' mosque.

In undergrad and grad school, I developed close acquaintanceships with five Turks, one Syrian, two Indonesians, one Libyan, and two Emiratis, all of whom are Muslim, along with scores of WASP Americans, a half dozen Brits, and a Frenchman. I've maintained contact with all those people, visited some of them in their countries and forged successful, "win-win" business initiatives with a few of them to implement process improvement for their companies (ones they own) which include shipping, manufacturing and oil and real estate development; all Muslim are owned. Without the relationships I developed with my Muslim and European classmates, I would surely not have ever been able to forge for myself the international business consulting career I did. I've managed to have precisely the career I wanted and without Muslims, that'd never have come to fruition, of it were to have done, it'd would have only with vastly more difficulty.

....I do not understand how you state we, "import the best and the brightest". That to me suggests we actively seek the best Muslims?

I've also hired Muslims, mostly from India, to work in my firm, and actually worked directly with a few of them. Some of them work in the U.S. Others work on our projects in the PRC, India, and the U.K. They are all very literate individuals who understand the difference in meaning between singular and plural nouns in multiple languages (see first two paragraphs here). They all have master's degrees. They all have traveled to multiple countries and worked/lived there for at least six months.

Lastly, from time to time, I get in a taxi or have a driver who is Muslim, usually someone from Pakistan.


What is the point of all that? In spite of all of the direct and extended contact I've had with Muslims, I am in no position to remark generally on Muslim immigrants or Muslims as an ethnic identity group, and I know that, so I don't, at least not pejoratively, for even now, Mother's admonishment to say something nice or keep mum remains among the best pieces of advice I've ever received.

Though there may only be six degrees of separation between everyone on the planet, the key, in this context, to that axiom is the significance of the separation not the smallness of the six degrees. Unless your friends are actively involved in something akin to the Arab League or something, their anecdotal observations about Muslims, like the ones I can offer, are yet irrelevant with regard to Muslims other than the ones whom they specifically met.

 

[Coyote]

Folks, please remember - no putting down other posters in CDZ...some of you cut the line pretty close.

 

[Coyote]

What do American Muslims want? Well, if they don't want sharia then they aren't real Muslims, are they? It's like a Christian who rejects the 10 commandments, well, that person isn't even a Christian to start with if they start rejecting core dogma.

The equivalent to "core dogma" or the Ten Commandments isn't Sharia - which would be better compared to Halakah. It would be the Five Pillars I'm thinking.

 

[Coyote]

Sharia Law, as I have said, it should not be allowed in the USA, and a whole bunch of people took offense, stating that Muslims could not marry and divorce without Sharia law, nor could they even eat food, as in just as Kosher food is governed by Jewish laws, Sharia Law defines what Muslims must eat.

But the more I read about Sharia Law, it is apparent that a Muslim can live within his faith without abiding by one aspect of Sharia Law. Muslims can completely ignore Sharia Law!

Sharia Law is not a mandate for Muslims. So those Muslims who want Sharia Law, who live by Sharia Law, do not understand their own religion.

Is Sharia Law Truly Islamic? - Aslan Media

The fact remains that Sharia Law is a human construct, fabricated by politicians in partnership with religious Mullahs of the day for their own authoritarian political control.

A fact not often taught to Muslims is that Sharia Law did not exist during Prophet Muhammad’s life, nor did he create one. After all, the Quran is supposed to be the complete book. But look what we’ve done; the Quran and the Hadith now share equal billing!

Can you cite a single instance - in the United States - in which anyone other than Muslims has been affected by Sharia law? Take your time.

9/11? The terrorists believed they were acting according to Sharia Law.

Here is one example, the mother of the boyfriend of a muslim girl was ran over by the girl's muslim father.

Muslim Man Guilty of 'Honor Killing' in Daughter's Death

An Iraqi immigrant was found guilty of second degree murder today for running over his daughter, a crime motivated, prosecutors said, by the Arizona Muslim man's belief that the 20-year-old woman had Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, was also convicted of aggravated assault, because the mother of his daughter's boyfriend was also injured when he ran down the two women with his Jeep Cherokee in a suburban Phoenix parking lot in the October 2009 incident.

9/11 was an act of terrorism, not Sharia. Your second example was murder, plain and simple.

They believed is was in accordance of Sharia Law.

I've never read anything that said they based their actions on sharia or that it was blessed by any sort of religious edict or fatwa.

Murder yes, according to our system of beliefs and values, according to our education.

The murder was committed by a Muslim, who lived his life according to Sharia Law, he was from Iraq, where he lived under Sharia Law in an Islamic society. His perception of what and why he did it is not based our values or beliefs, they are based upon how he lived, under Sharia law.

He was basing his actions on his cultural beliefs...there actually isn't anything about "honor killing" in Sharia.

Cultural beliefs are, Sharia.

I must go back to Coyote's post #368, where Coyote explains what Sharia is and gives a linked source which I will quote from, as Coyote quoted from.
What do American Muslims want?

Shariah Law: The Five Things Every Non-Muslim (and Muslim) Should Know

Shariah is comprised of five main branches: adab (behavior, morals and manners),ibadah (ritual worship), i’tiqadat (beliefs), mu’amalat (transactions and contracts) and‘uqubat (punishments). These branches combine to create a society based on justice, pluralism and equity for every member of that society. Furthermore, Shariah forbids that it be imposed on any unwilling person. Islam’s founder, Prophet Muhammad, demonstrated that Shariah may only be applied if people willingly apply it to themselves—never through forced government implementation.

So you're saying Sharia is a choice for Muslims - I agree. But doesn't that rather apply to all the various religious codes of conduct that came about long after the deaths of their initiators?

The other aspect to the issue though, is religious freedom - we to allow other religions to use their religious code to solve certain situations, but single out Islam for special treatment? It seems to me that a simple, workable solution that would also provide protection to the individual is to give none of it the force of law with a secular courts ruling.

 

[Coyote]

You state there is no evidence that Muslims wish to live by Sharia Law, you their diet is Sharia Law, as Coyote points out. That is evidence, that they are living at least one part of their life by Sharia Law which Coyote hammered into me with multiple posts.

You keep misrepresenting what I said which there is no evidence Muslims wish to have Sharia as the law of the land, ie overrule the Constitution.

Here is where I first stated it - in the OP, Post #1:

There are a lot of conflicting claims made about the American Muslim community, and a lot of it, in my opinion, follows a conspiracy theory type logic - particularly those involving some groups hidden agenda to take over America/the world etc and destroy the Constitution. Often there is little solid evidence to support it, just fear-mongering and a certain intellectual lazyness that refuses to look at complex issues for what they are: complex.

The most disturbing of these views is the claim that a majority of American Muslims want Sharia to be the law of the land (overruling the Constitution) and that subsequently, American Muslims represent a "fifth column", an attitude similar to attitudes towards Japanese Americans during WW2. This attitude culminates in expressions such as Muslims can't be patriotic Americans, Muslims will socially explode once they reach a "critical mass" and start demanding Sharia, etc.

The points I'd like to look at are:
What do Muslims in AMERICA want?
Are they any different than other religious groups in America?
What does this say about Muslim immigration in America vs other countries?