Islamic Law and the United States Constitution
Written by Aaron Kopitz Friday, 28 September 2007 Monday September 24, Dawud Walid who is the Executive Director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MI) spoke in the Ontario room of the Cisler Center. He gave a presentation on the similarities and differences between Islamic Law also known as Sharia and that of the U.S. Constitution.
Invited by the Diversity Committee and Student Activities Mr. Walid was flown in from Detroit. He gave a hour presentation which then he opened up for questions. He started his speech with what Sharia really is. The first statement he makes to lead us into the topic is “ There is no codified, written Islamic law as there is one written U.S. Constitution”. He explains there are several different interpretations of it. In Sunni Islam or “The majority of Orthodoxy” there are four schools. With in these four schools Sharia has been applied in different ways due to geography, culture and time. In the Shiite branch of Islam there are three schools of thought and one called Nonlbadi. Mr. Walid points out that there are eight different and distinct schools of thought in Islamic Law and a rather new one which is practiced in the Saudi Arabian kingdom called Wahabi.
Since Mr. Walid cannot base his discussion off of one definite Sharia due to the diversity and complexity of its being he uses Al-Shatibi’s Philosophy of Islamic Law or “Objective of Islamic Law.” Mr. Walid compares this book to the Preamble in the U.S. Constitution. He says, “All Muslims who practice Islam are bound by Islamic law by a certain degree.” This includes all Muslims who live in a Muslim majority country or minority land. These basics of Sharia include worship, financial transactions, legal legislations and such things a judiciary punishment and rewards. All Muslims are bound to their actions of devotion to Allah.
There are three objectives in Sharia law on a governmental level. Necessities, requirements and beautification. The necessities of Islamic law is considered the broad preamble of Islamic Law which includes the protection of faith, life, posterity, property and protection of intellectual property. This is similar to the first amendment of the Constitution which is the freedom of religion, speech and the press.
Mr. Walid goes through Amendments and compares them to that of Sharia. He first states that Muslims believe that one significant difference between the Constitution and that of Sharia is that the Constitution was written by men where as the Qu’ran was written divinely through revelations and inspirations from Allah. He continues to explain that unlike the Constitution to be a jury member in an Islamic case one must be fluent in Arabic to interpret and decipher texts and verses of the Qu’ran to help develop their meaning and application in a case.
The presentation of Islamic Law was well received. Some evening classes attended the event to help further their understanding of Islamic culture and society. Mr. Walid was unable to stay in the Sault for a length in time due to it being Ramadan one of the busiest times of the year. When asked what he thought of Sault Sainte Marie, he said “well, I was here last year and didn’t get to see much and I haven’t even been here a day. Its a nice place.” Mr. Walid continues his struggle to bring better understanding between Islam and the West one speech at a time.
http://compass.lssu.edu/content/view/86/28/

This kind of seems like a pointless comparison on Mr. Walid's part, as Sharia law is based on strict religious views and the U.S. Constitution is not. Plus I am not seeing the objectives of Sharia Law being practiced on any basis in todays world. It seems like it is more a way of oppression, than a preotection of things stated in the article.

He seems to be describing Salafism, a varaition on Wahhabism in which modernity is accepted, but thet stick to the ancient ways. Full beard, dessert dress, and obvious indications of this bent.

A good article about Sharia Law.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/08/top_ten_reasons_why_sharia_is.html

There are nine different schools of thought in the Islamic Law. I would say, it is too complicated to make any sense out of it and impossible to say it is similar to our first amendment. Homosexuals have no chance of life with the Islamic law. If you disagree with their leaders you have no chance. When one sect destroys a mosque of the other sect, it is just fine in their way of life. They will not tolerate other religions and other ways of thinking. They go against American values and everything we stand for. Personnally, I would rather have Godzilla living next door.

Fankhauser,

Yes, the things they think are vital just leave me wondering. You go over it, and over it to get it stright. Then, two weeks later you think "That can't be right. " And you go over it AGAIN .At this juncture why should anyone care if Ali, Mohammed's son-in -law, is the rightful heir to Islam or Abu Bakr Mohammed's advisor and companion?

Yet they kill each other over this today.

Then we still have to sort out the Shiite sects and the Sunni sects, where Salafists and the Sufi fdir in , how they are affected by Wahhabism , who, irt appears, are willing to kill everyone. And that 12th Imam, where IS he hidden?

PLUS, Mohammed was illiterate , so how did he kow if his Suras were correctly recorded.......ah well, on and on.