From My Perspective - - -
Sooner or Later should be thought of as a question. Is an event or occurrence about to happen “now” or sometime in the “future” or not at all? While we go about our regular tasks, and keep up with the busyness of our lives, there are those whose thoughts are elsewhere, on much larger goals and purposes. To illustrate, on September 2nd, 3011, an Op-Ed piece appeared in the New York Times titled, “Don’t Fear Islamic Law in America” written by Eliyahu Stern. It is connected to a statement by the publication: “New York Times Supports Sharia Law in USA.”
The article makes the following statements and assertions: “More than a dozen American states are considering outlawing aspects of Shariah law. Some of these efforts would curtail Muslims from settling disputes over dietary laws and marriage through religious arbitration, while others would go even further in stigmatizing Islamic life: a bill recently passed by the Tennessee General Assembly equates Shariah with a set of rules that promote “the destruction of the national existence of the United States. Supporters of these bills contend that such measures are needed to protect the country against homegrown terrorism and safeguard its Judeo-Christian values. The Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has said that ‘Shariah is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States and in the world as we know it.’ This is exactly wrong. The crusade against Shariah undermines American democracy, ignores our country’s successful history of religious tolerance and assimilation, and creates a dangerous divide between America and its fastest-growing religious minority. The suggestion that Shariah threatens American security is disturbingly reminiscent of the accusation, in 19th-century Europe, that Jewish religious law was seditious. In 1807, Napoleon convened an assembly of rabbinic authorities to address the question of whether Jewish law prevented Jewish people from being loyal citizens of the republic…”
The article makes the following statements and assertions: “More than a dozen American states are considering outlawing aspects of Shariah law. Some of these efforts would curtail Muslims from settling disputes over dietary laws and marriage through religious arbitration, while others would go even further in stigmatizing Islamic life: a bill recently passed by the Tennessee General Assembly equates Shariah with a set of rules that promote “the destruction of the national existence of the United States. Supporters of these bills contend that such measures are needed to protect the country against homegrown terrorism and safeguard its Judeo-Christian values. The Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has said that ‘Shariah is a mortal threat to the survival of freedom in the United States and in the world as we know it.’ This is exactly wrong. The crusade against Shariah undermines American democracy, ignores our country’s successful history of religious tolerance and assimilation, and creates a dangerous divide between America and its fastest-growing religious minority. The suggestion that Shariah threatens American security is disturbingly reminiscent of the accusation, in 19th-century Europe, that Jewish religious law was seditious. In 1807, Napoleon convened an assembly of rabbinic authorities to address the question of whether Jewish law prevented Jewish people from being loyal citizens of the republic…”
In a nation where the assumed posture has become, and the hew and cry remains constant that there must be the maintenance of “the separation of Church and State.” In a nation that has disallowed Prayer and Bible Reading in Government Schools; the posting of the Ten Commandments in the Court House; the banning of the singing of Christmas Carols at any Government Social gathering; and the removal of The Crèche (Nativity Scene) from the public squares – how can Sharia gain recognition and be championed as being acceptable? In lieu of what is disallowed in our nation, the origin and meaning of Sharia is: the Code of Law derived from the Koran and from the teachings and example of Mohammed; Shariah is only applicable to Muslims; under Islamic Law, there is no separation of church and state.” As a nation, are we willing to abandon our Christian Heritage?
The Eternal God has been very explicit in terms of His Unchanging Word. (a) Deuteronomy 5:6-7, “ I am the Lord your God who brought you out of…bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me.” (b) Deuteronomy 6:12-14, “…take care lest you forget the Lord…It is the Lord your God you shall fear. Him you shall serve…You shall not go after other gods…” (c) Romans 1:20-25, “…although they knew God, they did not honor him as God…Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images…Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts…because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…” (d) II Kings 17:34-36, “They do not fear the Lord, and they do not follow the statutes… The Lord made a covenant with them and commanded them, "You shall not fear other gods or bow yourselves to them or serve them or sacrifice to them, but you shall fear the Lord, who brought you out of the land of Egypt with great power and with an outstretched arm.” We need to Honor the Lord and Lift Up His Name always! Sooner or Later we may lose our freedom to do so. While we still can, we should urgently implement Hebrews 3:13, “…exhort one another every day, as long as it is called today, that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.”Consider these things with me!
1 comment:
It seems to me that those who would like Shariah used in public courtrooms really want to use the state as a "hired gun" for the enforcement of these laws. If Shariah law were only used in Islamic courts, the party who was to be punished under that law would feel free to file a criminal complaint against whoever was tasked with enforcing the judgement. The state as the enforcement agent is beyond the law--the law is what it says it is (to far too great an extent).
Post a Comment