US: Judge considers that a Muslim can abuse his wife, because “his actions were consistent with his religious practices”

Husband beating his wife

Image via Wikipedia

This is worrying: this is no Islamist lunatic who says Sharia Law should be implemented in the US and that every woman should wear a burqa. No, this is a judge that considers that, above US law, there is another one: Sharia Law. At least, the ruling was overturned on appeal.

In S.D. v. M.J.R., the plaintiff, a Moroccan Muslim woman, lived with her Moroccan Muslim husband in New Jersey. She was repeatedly beaten and raped by her husband over the course of several weeks. While the plaintiff was being treated for her injuries at a hospital, a police detective interviewed her and took photographs of her injuries. Those photographs depicted injuries to plaintiff’s breasts, thighs and arm, bruised lips, eyes and right check. Further investigation established there were blood stains on the pillow and sheets of plaintiff’s bed.

The wife sought a permanent restraining order, and a New Jersey trial judge held a hearing in order to decide whether to issue the order. Evidence at trial established, among other things, that the husband told his wife, “You must do whatever I tell you to do. I want to hurt your flesh” and “this is according to our religion. You are my wife, I c[an] do anything to you.” The police detective testified about her findings, and some of the photographs were entered into evidence.

The defendant’s Imam testified that a wife must comply with her husband’s sexual demands and he refused to answer whether, under Islamic law, a husband must stop his sexual advances on his wife if she says “no.”

The trial judge found that most of the criminal acts were indeed proved, but nonetheless denied the permanent retraining order. This judge held that the defendant could not be held responsible for the violent sexual assaults of his wife because he did not have the specific intent to sexually assault his wife, and because his actions were “consistent with his [religious] practices.In other words, the judge refused to issue the permanent restraining order because under Sharia law, this Muslim husband had a “right” to rape his wife.

via The Real Impact of Sharia Law in America.

Advertisements

Canada: mosque supports stoning, amputations

The skyline of Etobicoke, centered around the ...

Image via Wikipedia

The Khalid Bin Al Walid Mosque is located on Bethridge Rd. in Etobicoke, near the neighborhood now known as “Little Somalia” and serves that community. I live in Etobicoke, so does Mayor Ford, in fact I grew up here. I attended high school at what was then known as Keiller MacKay Collegiate. The old neighborhood sure has changed.

So what has unfettered immigration and the lie of multiculturalism brought to our fair city? Read this document entitled “Violations of Islam” published on the Khalid Mosque web site and judge for yourself.

Here are a some highlights.

(b) To say that enforcing the punishments prescribed by Allah, such as cutting off the hand of a thief or stoning an adulterer, is not suitable in this day and age.

Supporting and aiding polytheists against the Muslims. 

My Favourite; To believe…”that lslam is the cause of the backwardness of Muslims.”

More here.

K aka Kel has left here a video about this mosque.

Islamic countries: Poll shows growing majority favor Sharia Law, more Islam in public life

A majority of Muslims around the world welcome a significant role for Islam in their countries’ political life, according to a new poll from the Pew Research Center, but have mixed feelings toward militant religious groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

According to the survey, majorities in Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan and Nigeria would favor changing the current laws to allow stoning as a punishment for adultery, hand amputation for theft and death for those who convert from Islam to another religion. About 85% of Pakistani Muslims said they would support a law segregating men and women in the workplace.

Indonesia, Egypt, Nigeria and Jordan were among the most enthusiastic, with more than three-quarters of Muslims polled in those countries reporting positive views of Islam’s influence in politics: either that Islam had a large role in politics, and that was a good thing, or that it played a small role, and that was bad.

Turkish Muslims were the most conflicted, with just more than half reporting positive views of Islam’s influence in politics. Turkey has struggled in recent years to balance a secular political system with an increasingly fervent Muslim population.

Many Muslims described an ongoing struggle in their country between fundamentalists and modernizers, especially those who may have felt threatened by the rising tides of conservatism. Among those respondents who identified a struggle, most tended to side with the modernizers. This was especially true in Lebanon and Turkey, where 84% and 74%, respectively, identified themselves as modernizers as opposed to fundamentalists.

In Egypt and Nigeria, however, most people were pulling in the other direction. According to the poll, 59% in Egypt and 58% in Nigeria who said there was a struggle identified with the fundamentalists.

via MUSLIM WORLD: Poll shows majority want Islam in politics; feelings mixed on Hamas, Hezbollah | Babylon & Beyond | Los Angeles Times.

Afghanistan: Trial of convert to Christianity will be held next Sunday

This is an update of this story:

An Afghan national, in prison since May because of his religion, will be put on tried this Sunday. However, he has been denied legal counsel. Local sources say no one knows what charges will be laid against him when he goes before a judge.

The authorities arrested Said Musa, 45, on 31 May, a day after a local station, Noorin TV, broadcast images of Christians praying after being baptised. This was followed by a wave of arrests against Christians in what local sources describe as a manhunt. Apparently, Said Musa is the only Christian to go on trial.

Leaving Islam for another religion is a capital offence under Afghanistan’s Islamic law, despite the fact that the Taliban lost power in 2001.

In June, the authorities forced Musa to abjure his Christian faith publicly, on television, but still kept him in prison without informing him of the charges against him.

In prison, Musa said he was a follower of Jesus, local sources report.

Last month, Musa was able to get a letter out, addressed to the world’s Churches, to US President Barack Obama and the chiefs of NATO forces in Afghanistan.

In it, he wrote that he was “physically and verbally abused” by his captors and other prisoners at Ouliat Prison in Kabul.

He alluded to the lack of justice he faced, saying that the prosecutor had given the judge a false report about him and had demanded a bribe.

Local Christians, human rights observers and religious freedom monitors fear that Musa might be made an example to show that Sharia rules in Afghanistan rather than international agreements.

via AFGHANISTAN Afghan Christian to go to trial on Sunday for his faith – Asia News.

Well, if that’s the case, what are we waiting to give Afghanistan back to the Taliban? I really hate them, but it the things are just the same, why are we spending so much lives, money and effort there?

PAKISTAN: Your signature to save Asia Bibi and Pakistan

At our reader’s request, AsiaNews has decided to launch an international petition to be sent to President Asif Zardari to save the life of Asia Bibi, who was sentenced to hanging for blasphemy. AsiaNews is also asking President Zardari to cancel or change the unjust blasphemy law, which kills many innocent victims and destroys coexistence in the country. We are asking you o support this initiative by sending a message to the following email:

salviamoasiabibi at asianews dot it

Or you can send a message directly to the Pakistani President:

publicmail at president dot gov dot pk

via PAKISTAN Your signature to save Asia Bibi and Pakistan – Asia News.

The letter can be like this one:

Dear Sir:

I’m aware of the sentence condemning Christian woman Asia Bibi to death by hanging after she allegedly blasphemed against the prophet. Considering that she is not a Muslim, that the sentence constitute an abuse of Human Rights and that she is the mother of three minors, I ask you to free her.

I also ask you to repeal the “Blasphemy Law” that kills  peaceful people who contribute so much to society, just because their beliefs are different from the rest.

Regards,

Background: Christian woman sentenced to death for blasphemy.

US: Sharia Law being de facto applied?

Is the United States today a de facto shariah state? A close look at recent events points to some alarming conclusions about the tenets of shariah law taking hold in our once-proud constitutional republic and the unwitting, unequal application of existing U.S. laws. The result is that when it comes to religious expression, Muslims now enjoy more freedom of religion and speech under our Bill of Rights than non-Muslims. Equal protection under the laws of our country holds for Muslims far better than for non-Muslims. Several recent examples illustrate this point.

…We are witnessing a transformation of American society in which Islam enjoys a privileged place among the country’s religions. The sensitivities of the country’s 3 to 5 million Muslims are considered above those of non-Muslims. Non-Muslims even assist sensitive Muslims in the weeding out of potentially offensive statements or actions that could be remotely critical of Islam or Muslims. Since 9/11, Americans have been well-trained not to talk about Islam and terrorism or to use the word “jihad.” Publicly criticizing, voicing concern about, or even expressing fear about Muslim behavior or activities is forbidden. While other religions may be freely criticized, lampooned in cartoons, and denigrated by artwork, Islam is sacred, supreme, and beyond reproach.

Every effort is made in the United States to accommodate Muslims and engage them in interfaith dialogue and community affairs. Muslims may pray openly in public — on city streets and in airport terminals. Many U.S. government departments hold Iftar dinners to celebrate the end of Ramadan. The Ground Zero mosque will be built over the ashes of 9/11 victims, but the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church that was destroyed by Muslims will not. Non-Muslims enjoy no such privileges or special treatment in Muslim countries. They may not visit Mecca nor build churches or synagogues. U.S. forces stationed in Saudi Arabia are prohibited from wearing visible religious symbols.

The foregoing examples, not exhaustive by any means, point to the fact that we are living under a de facto shariah law system in the United States today that has compromised the freedoms we have enjoyed under our Constitution — freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. Now, we no longer enjoy equal protection under the law. Our uniquely American virtues of tolerance and freedom have worked against us to produce intolerance and oppression. This has led to the stealthy introduction of shariah law and a climate in which criticisms of Mohammed and Islam are no longer possible without serious repercussions.

via Read it all.

US: Muslim Sues Oklahoma Over Shariah Ban

A Muslim activist in Oklahoma City filed a lawsuit Thursday challenging a voter-approved measure that bars Oklahoma state judges from considering Shariah, the Islamic religious code based on the Koran and the Prophet Mohammed‘s teachings, in formulating rulings.

State Question 755, which passed Tuesday with 70% of the vote, declares “the legal precepts of other nations or cultures” off-limits to Oklahoma courts. “Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia Law,” it reads.

The suit, filed by Muneer Awad, director of the state chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, asks the federal district court to block officials from certifying the referendum. Mr. Awad says the measure violates the First Amendment, which protects “free exercise” of religion and prohibits official “establishment of religion.” A hearing was set for Monday.

The complaint alleges Oklahoma has singled out Islam for “profound stigma,” consigning Muslims such as Mr. Awad “to an ineffectual position within the political community.”

Oklahoma’s Legislature voted overwhelmingly to place the Save Our State Amendment before voters. A co-sponsor, state Sen. Anthony Sykes, denied it sought to stigmatize Muslims. “We’re not trying to send any sort of message here,” said Mr. Sykes, a Republican.

Rather, he said, Oklahomans wanted to insulate their judiciary from un-American influences. While no Oklahoma court ever has cited Shariah law, “we are on a slippery slope,” he said.

Democratic Sen. Richard Lerblance, one of two state senators to vote against the measure, called it “a scare tactic.”

They call it ‘Save Our State.’ I don’t know what we’re saving it from,” he said. “We have yet to have any court do anything based on Shariah law.”

via Muslim Sues Oklahoma Over Shariah Ban – WSJ.com.

Why wait till there are cases?

I don’t think that just for “singling out one religion” this measure is unconstitutional. While some (but not a tiny minority, you just have to look at the numbers: 40% in Britain, for example) Muslims want to substitute State Law with Sharia Law, as the secular law is incompatible “with Allah’s decree”. Isn’t that illegal?

Background:
US: Sharia Law may be banned in Oklahoma.
Oklahoma voters pas ban on Sharia Law.