Wyoming Weighs Bill That Would Ban Sharia Law

Wyoming recently became the latest state to preemptively address the supposed "creeping threat" of Islam and Sharia law by proposing legislation that would forbid its tenets from being considered in the state's legal system.

According to the Billings Gazette, State Rep. Gerald Gay (R) proposed the constitutional amendment "as a 'pre-emptive strike' to ensure judges don't rely on Shariah [sic] in cases involving, for example, arranged marriages, 'honor killings' or usury cases."

Oklahoma dealt with a similar measure last year, a prohibition of Sharia that was passed through a ballot amendment in November, but soon thereafter blocked by a federal judge.

Texas is also in the midst of drafting a proposal with the same intent. Texas State Rep. Leo Berman (R) has put forth legislation reading: "A court of this state may not enforce, consider, or apply any religious or cultural law."

As Talking Points Memo points out, one study placed the number of Muslims in Wyoming at a mere 263. In a state with about 540,000 residents, that constitutes roughly five-hundredths of a percent of the population.

Comments

[bkerensa]

05:22 AM on 03/02/2011

Why not lets ban all freedom of religion right? Its not like our country was founded on the principle of being able to freely express your religion and practice it.

[Doug Sandlin]

10:33 PM on 01/28/2011

Maybe there is something to be worried about ....

OR (only about 100,000 times more likely) ...

.... maybe some (literal) Punjabi Punks are having some fun at the expense of the Shariasteria of some Americans ....

In any case, I give you ................

Sharia Law In The U.S.A. by The Kaminas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrypdueIJew

They're a leading Islamic Punk band .... Taqwacore, "in the vernacular".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTkaqHhmpws&feature=related

You know, the actual Muslim Punk movement, based on the book/movie The Taqwacores
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaNZizoWefA&feature=fvst

... a movie I'm looking forward to seeing (as in: if you click on one link in this comment, click on the one just above.)

[HappyMarsden]

12:43 PM on 02/08/2011

"conservati­­ve viewpoints get censored, even if they don't violate the stated policies"

I'll definitely vouch for that, as over the years, I've seen it happen here too many times to count. Just having the wrong opinion can get you wiped.

[HANNAH TYLER]

02:37 PM on 01/27/2011

part 3

Any sound minded person will see the utter ignorance of your comment. A peaceful group of people that comprise 1 percent of the population do not count as colonizers. And you are missing the fact that of this 1 percent many are American citizens living in the nation of their birth. How are THEY colonizers? Your arguments lack substance, sound logic and intellectual honesty.

[The Knocker]

02:37 AM on 01/28/2011

F&F Hanna. Wise respond. Jan and Manny has a long history of writing anti-Islamic comments. They are not interesting a dialogue of mutual respect and understanding. They will wear u down Hanna. Good luck anyway.

[The Knocker]

02:57 AM on 01/28/2011

Wise respond. Jan and Manny has a long history of writing anti-Islam­ic comments. They are not interestin­g a dialogue of mutual respect and understand­ing. They will wear u down Hanna. Good luck anyway. F&F

[HANNAH TYLER]

02:36 PM on 01/27/2011

part 2

However, it is interesting to note that many Copts protested because they felt the government was not an active combatant against these attacks, and MANY MUSLIMS joined them. Muslims went out and used their own bodies as human shields so that their Christians neighbors could worship freely!
These same rogue groups that terrorize Christians in the ME also do not hesitate to kill other MUSLIMS who don't see things the way they do. In fact, more Muslims are the targets of terrorism than Christians. In general, Muslims view Christians and Jews as cousins and as members of a broader religious community rooted in the same history. Our religion endows them with great respect and Muslims and Christians are neighbors, friends and allies all over the world. I’m sorry that the literature and news you choose to indoctrinate yourself with paints a much different picture.

Nothing in what I said had anything to do with colonization. When I used the phrase “migration in the name of religion” I meant it in the same context of what Hijra ACTUALLY represented, leaving the familiar comforts of one’s homeland to pursue a new life in a place where he or she is free to practice the religion of his or her choice. In doing this, Muslims are given the opportunity to show the beauty of their religion to people who may not be familiar with it.

[Jan Allen McDaniel]

11:13 AM on 01/28/2011

Repost:

The effect of Hijra:

Book 019, Number 4366:
It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

Book 019, Number 4363:
“You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle”
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/019.smt.html#019.4363

You may or may not accept the guidance of these ahadith. I am opposed to all American Muslims who do, as should any American citizen.

[HANNAH TYLER]

02:36 PM on 01/27/2011

Part 1

@ Jan

Your responses illustrate that you have absolutely no knowledge of Sharia law and lack even the most BASIC understanding of how it is formed/ reformed/ operates. Sharia law is not a collection of laws that exist universally and that were handed down straight from God to man. Different societies will have different versions of "sharia" based on their own understandings of how the Quran and teachings of the prophet should be interpreted. And have you ever lived in or visited a Muslim country? Have you ever known or spoken to a person from these countries? Many of them, even Christians I know that are from the region (including Palestinian Christians who live peacefully and in solidarity with Muslim Palestinians), do not feel that they are persecuted. Religious persecution is a reality in many places in the world (including Muslim majority countries) and it is always a travesty. I deplore oppression and intolerance, as most Muslims do. The bombings in Egypt were disgusting and were certainly carried out by radical Muslims who imagined attacks by Christians on the Muslim community and then tried to justify their hatred and bigotry under religious pretences. These bombings were not carried out officially by the Egyptian government or by your average Egyptian citizen. You act as though persecution of religious minorities is a government sanctioned endeavor.

[Manny Peddy]

04:07 PM on 01/27/2011

You act as though persecutio­n of religious minorities is a government sanctioned endeavor.
====

In many cases it is. And if not in principle, at least in practice. And it is also sanctioned by many clerics in many places. I seem to remember something about a Blasphemy Law or two in Pakistan...

[quorthon]

02:09 PM on 01/27/2011

"Banning Sharia Law" is but a metonymical stand-in for "if you're not white and Protestant, stay away." How many Muslims are planning on moving to Wyoming, anyway?

[Manny Peddy]

04:08 PM on 01/27/2011

Nope. It is saying "if you want to live in peace with your neighbors and live and let live and abide by US laws, you are welcome. If not, go somewhere else".

[King Banhammer]

04:56 PM on 01/27/2011

Already covered by the Constitution and existing laws. Why repeat it at taxpayer cost?

[Puncastle]

01:43 AM on 01/28/2011

Nope, it is saying that it is okay for Catholics to follow Canon Law and okay for Jews to eat Kosher food, but if you are a Muslim, you are not granted the same protections and freedoms.

[firstcougar1]

01:32 PM on 01/27/2011

I am not concerned that Sharia law will be implemented in the US. What I am afraid of is the religious right trying to insert their beliefs into our US Constitution. I am not afraid of a randam international terrorist as much as the home grown terrorists like Timothy McVeigh. What a waste of taxpayer money to spend even one minute on these discussions.

[Moderate Independent]

01:25 PM on 01/27/2011

All religions should be equally scrutinized and minimalized in our current system of laws. If the ten commandments had to go from the walls of a judge, then all other religious symbols, laws, and interpretations should be thrown out the window. No exceptions.

[King Banhammer]

02:19 PM on 01/27/2011

Right, but no one felt the need to separately make a body of law to say "the ten commandments do not belong here." There was no Christian exclusion written into local law. It was all a function of the already extant body of law in the Constitution.

Which is why this feels like a waste of time.

[ZiloRS]

01:09 PM on 01/27/2011

Americans are scared of anything they think isn't American enough. (In this case, Christian enough)

[LameDuckHunting]

12:59 PM on 01/27/2011

Yeah, I'm sure the Muslims are making serious inroads in Wyoming. The state only has enough people to warrant 1congressperson and we generously allow them 2 senators...............

[Jan Allen McDaniel]

12:47 PM on 01/27/2011

For those who say no Muslims are calling for Sharia law, these quotes are from Imam Rauf's book about Islam and America with Kindle locations:


1584-92 No community of people can function, let alone pursue happiness, unless and until it achieves a high degree of unanimity on what is right and what is wrong in human affairs, and no such unanimity is possible unless the community agrees on a moral obligation arising from a permanent, absolute moral law.
-----
174-79 There is little doubt today that the rise of religious fundamentalisms represented the reaction of religion against the antireligious secular modernism that peaked in the mid-twentieth century.

------------
4364-69 The unfinished business of the United States is religious; it is the question of how to express a religious impulse more fully while doing it within the guidelines set forth in the Constitution. The answers of secular humanism no longer seem adequate even to the many who tried hard to be faithful to them
---------

311 The Muslim world still perceives that the West distrusts religious voices and will not brook their presence in the discourse on building the good society. Muslims believe that America needs to reestablish its original understanding of the First Amendment, which balances the separation of church and state with freedom of religion by allowing all religions equal standing and by honoring the role of religion in building the good society. […]

This is a clear call for state support of all religious courts. Unacceptable.

[King Banhammer]

02:20 PM on 01/27/2011

What I said was "no credible movement with political capital to make it happen exists in the USA at this time."

This remains true.

[Jan Allen McDaniel]

02:32 PM on 01/27/2011

And I say a bad thing is better dealt with while small.

[Doug Sandlin]

08:04 PM on 01/27/2011

"This is a clear call for state support of all religious courts. Unacceptab­le. "

How so?

How does anything you quoted imply "state support for all religious courts"?

I really don't understand.

What I also don't understand is: you seem to be working really hard to find statements from Imam Rauf's book that can appear to say something other than the overall book actually says (as in: it seems you're cherry-picking statements that could appear to support your assertions).

What's up with that?

[Jan Allen McDaniel]

05:44 AM on 01/28/2011

Intelligent people of good will frequently disagree on the meaning of a text, especially when the author is purposefully ambiguous for tactical reasons.

That's what's up, Doug.

I would celebrate any influential Muslim coming out in candid opposition to the outdated interpretation of the Koran that is present Sharia law. Rauf is not doing that. He is fishing for people like you who are willing to compromise between Sharia and American law. Just a little bit. Just voluntary. Just civil matters.

I want us to go the other way--stripping all religious "courts" of any official recognition whatever. Rauf wants America to be less secular, I want it to be more secular.

What's up with you, a secular person, supporting a move to give official recognition to any religion?

[Nebris]

12:15 PM on 01/27/2011

Political grandstanding and fear mongering. Sharia would not pass even the most basic Constitutional test.

[LameDuckHunting]

01:00 PM on 01/27/2011

Spot on! Showboating at its worst....................

[Manny Peddy]

04:23 PM on 01/27/2011

I wonder what happened in Europe then....

[Doug Sandlin]

08:18 PM on 01/27/2011

Implementation of Sharia within the parameters of the existing system, seems like:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7234870.stm

Rumors of the Queen's impending dhimmi status have been greatly exaggerated, it would seem.

[Sinister Minister]

11:40 AM on 01/27/2011

State Rep. Gerald Gay (R) proposed the constitutional amendment "as a 'pre-emptive strike' to ensure judges don't rely on Shariah [sic] in cases involving, for example, arranged marriages, 'honor killings' or usury cases."

Wow, I was not aware that Wyoming didn't have laws against child abuse, prostitution, murder and fraud. If they did would it be necessary to write laws specifically to disallow these behaviors when they apply to certain people?

Perhaps he should introduce legislation for a leash law for elephants too while he's at it.

[HANNAH TYLER]

01:43 PM on 01/27/2011

In addition, honor killings and arranged marriages are not part of Islam or Islamic law. So, Rep. Gay's statement is ignorant and irrelevant to concerns about Sharia.

[Jan Allen McDaniel]

09:42 AM on 01/28/2011

If that is true, please explain this:

Umdat al salik:


"Who is Subject to Retaliation for Injurious Crimes"

"o1.2 The following are not subject to retaliation:

[...]

(4) a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring"...

And this:



m4.0 A SUITABLE MATCH (KAFA’A)
[...]
m4.2 The following are not suitable matches for one another:

(1) a non-Arab man for an Arab woman (O: because of the hadith that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said,
“Allah has chosen the Arabs above others”); [...]

[...]
m4.4 When the father or father’s father see that the best advantage is to be served by marrying a young boy (or girl) to someone, they may do so, though they are not entitled to marry the child to someone with a physical defect (dis: m7) that legally permits annulment of the marriage.
[...]

The point is that marriage of menstruating girl children is allowed by Islamic law although it is sometimes moderated by civil law in Muslim countries

[Scott Berfield]

11:32 AM on 01/27/2011

Religious law from any religion has no real legal standing now. These laws are meaningless. I really don't understand the level of fear and paranoia continually expressed (and fanned) by the right. It seems to me that the people who show the least faith in this nation and its people are the folks who think that everything is falling down around us, the barbarians are at the gates, and the people are too stupid to be able to resist.