Answering 'Will Muslims impose Shariah?'

Muslims are not "imposing" sharia on the US, any more than the Catholic church is imposing its own laws. It is still respectful of tradition for women to cover their heads when entering a mosque, as it was for many years when entering a Catholic church (and still is in Orthodox churches).
Wearing a head scarf is not terrorism. Stabbing a taxi driver for being Muslim is terrorism.

"Give me a break. If people don't like the culture and values of the West, they can go somewhere else. Guests in your house don't rearrange the furniture."

Posted by: whm99

We're discussing citizens, in addition to guest workers, students, etc. There are citizens who are also Muslim. They're not "guests".

"Still, there is the tiny possibility that a group of American muslims, in sufficient numbers, could vote to impose some element of Sharia. Still, any law has to be constitutional, or it would be blocked by the courts. Hence, the chance of Sharia in America in the foreseeable future is scant."

Really? Really? Then please explain how Sanctuary Cities have been existing for a decade now please if that is true.

The realities are no different in relation to Muslims than they have been for a wide variety of American immigrant communities. In America religous observence is a private choice. But obedience to a common set of laws is a public duty. Participation in American culture requires both an acceptance of our common laws and of the right of all people to make their own choice of their religion. In practice, this reality can create a certain amount of tension for any of the many Americans who immigrated from countries where everyone was expected to worship a single religion and that religion was at least partly the source of the legal system.
In practice, it is also possible to have immigrant communities where people live somewhere between their root culture and full acceptance of American culture. Immigrants can make the choice to continue living in that kind of community and accept its traditions. But they can't violate American criminal laws and they will have to accomodate whatever the local laws are that regulate civil behavior and the education system.
These kind of issues have certainly caused tensions for many different ethnic communities in the past. But it is hard to see this kind of issue as either the root cause or a justification for the ugly prejudice that has surfaced among mainstream America in the controversy surrounding the World Trade Center monument.

Given Esposito's last point about working through the democratic process, I think that the Sharia issue is pretty much irrelevant at this point in America. There would be no significant support for it.

Now, what if through immigration, muslims became the majority in a certain jurisdiction? It is likely that the overwhelming majority of American muslims would not want Sharia in America. So, even if they were a majority, Sharia does not really appear to be in the cards.

Still, there is the tiny possibility that a group of American muslims, in sufficient numbers, could vote to impose some element of Sharia. Still, any law has to be constitutional, or it would be blocked by the courts. Hence, the chance of Sharia in America in the foreseeable future is scant.

Given Esposito's last point about working through the democratic process, I think that the Sharia issue is pretty much irrelevant at this point in America. There would be no significant support for it.

Now, what if through immigration, muslims became the majority in a certain jurisdiction? It is likely that the overwhelming majority of American muslims would not want Sharia in America. So, even if they were a majority, Sharia does not really appear to be in the cards.

Still, there is the tiny possibility that a group of American muslims, in sufficient numbers, could vote to impose some element of Sharia. Still, any law has to be constitutional, or it would be blocked by the courts. Hence, the chances of Sharia in America in the foreseeable future is scant.

Just a thought: Why all this opposition to non-existant and unlikely-ever-to-exist implementation of religiously-based Muslim Shariah law in the U.S., when 5 Catholic justices on the Supreme Court vote consistently to chip away at a woman's right to privacy in matters of reproduction, as their religion dictates? There is no place for any public policy issue to be decided on the grounds favored by any religion. The beliefs of many religious traditions, including mainstream Protestantism, non-Orthodox Judaism -- not to mention people who subscribe to no religion -- would tip the scale on the side of already-existing life, i.e. the pregnant woman. And yet our politics have been subjected for decades to the religious-based beliefs of an uncompromising minority on this issue. This is a much more real threat to the Constitution's guarantee of freedom from establishment of a particular religion than any phony fantasy about Shariah law in the U.S.

Too bad George W Bush inflamed the word Islam when he was in office. Fox News picked up on it and we arrive at where we are today.

Obama should have sent in Federal Troops to quell the disturbance around the proposed cultural center and to protect the property rights of the building owners.

These protesters are the same crowd that want to deny thier fellow American's health care. Pure hate!

It is doubtful that a code of conduct from 1,500 to 3,000 years ago would be very helpful in a modern America. It is by no means just Shariah law that would be in question. Biblical laws seem no less draconian.

Does anyone really believe that the many rules the Bible has for slavery should be applicable in 2010 in the United States? Few people would advocate killing disobedient children or those who work on the Sabbath. Stoning is not unique to Islam. It was all the rage in the Bible. Women caught in adulterous situations were a prime target.

It is almost embarrassing to think that anyone would seriously suggest running a nation using laws from religions that arose before people knew the earth was a sphere, realized it revolves around the sun, and thought the sun was a huge lump of coal.

Do we want to consciously choose to abandon the progress of millennia? There are probably some who see those times as "the good old days."

You don't get to blow up innocent people on purpose and not be evil. Along with that, chopping off people's limbs, stoning people to death, and that sort of thing also are evil activities.

Just because someone wants to claim that a magic dead guy told him these things were "acceptable" in any circumstances does not make them right about that. In fact, intentionally uncivilized behavior argues against the theology it claims to represent. No real divine being would be more stupid than less stupid, the same intent which people like to weasel around with argues against that quite well.

Here's another even more helpful link :

http://www.stopshariahnow.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=328&Itemid=149

A few paragraphs in it dawned on me that this is pure propaganda from start to finish.

Before you buy it all, hook, line and sinker take a look at this and start the journey toward the truth.

http://www.stopshariahnow.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=57&layout=blog&Itemid=60

Well there is only one way to stop Sharia, that is to impose strict separation of church and state. Of course the howls from the christians would be the most deafening, because they, more than muslims, are trying to impose their church doctrines on the rest of us.
So I am all for removing all religious laws and doctrines from the state, no more ten commandments, no more swearing on the bible, no more imposing their beliefs in any way upon the rest of us, no more churches spending their money to influence elections or votes. That way the muslims will not be able to say, but the christians are doing it. Then we will not have Sharia imposed upon us. At least then we can get rid of the christian 'sharia' that has been imposed on us.

if Christian or Judaic codes were enforced by a society literally, there would be a great deal of similarity between them and a society operated under sharia. however, judaism and christianity have, for a sizable amount of time, operated almost exclusively in largely secular societies. The advent of sizable muslim populations in secular societies is rather new, so it makes sense that while the vast majority will assimilate almost entirely into their secular society, some will turn for guidance to authorities in muslim theocracies, and critics of islam will cite particularly radical religious authorities as evidence of islam's incompatibility with secular western societies.

modernisation of islam got rather far before WWII when the middle east was dominated by british and french imperial interests (not claiming that this is necessarily good or bad). I imagine over the course of the next 50 or so years, radical islam will become marginalised to the point where it is only as powerful as militant fundamentalist christian and jewish sects, which is actually not very powerful at all.

Sally Quinn, being a liberal and such...
could you survive under sharia law...
check it out and let all of us know...
you took communion when you were not Catholic...
and they did nothing to you...
what would they do to you under Sharia law if you broke one of their laws...

When did our system mutate into one that permits religons of any stripe to dictate laws? It hasn't.

First of all, I doubt that Americans, who happen to belong to the Islamic faith, are any different in their attitudes or priorities, putting the cultural norms of America first, then religion second.

This whole "debate" is a false one, designed to gestate more anti-Muslim sentiment.

Let's hear instead, what big business is doing to create jobs here, for our unemployed citizens. Oh, that's right. They aren't doing a darn thing.

The Sharia is great for guys. It confers them child custody in divorce, a preferential share of any inheritance, and superior status in court testimony. Bigamy is nothing to fear. If the woman demands alimony, complains about beatings, or claims anything more than the dowry she brought into the marriage, the community can brand her an apostate or worse. Thus, guys will love to invoke Sharia standards to break with a spouse who troubles them and is of no more us after legal residency is obtained. A daughter can also be kept under better control, or done away with if she and some rascal offend (oh, woe) the family honor. Kin of the unwelcome and "accidentally" deceased suitor, unless a kafir, can also be placated with a sum or (if brothers survive) a gift car.

So, ladies, if your misbehaving "old goat" starts to bellow righteously about the need to apply Sharia, time to go out and hire yourself a Jewish lawyer.

Muslims in the west are to add to the diversity of the west like any other religious groups and other races. they are not there to change the West cultures and values as some people suggest.Read about the "New law "Fiqh" of muslim minorities in the West". Islam never changes any cultures in the past and will not do in the future. Indonesia does not become like Saudia Arabia when 90% of the population became muslims back in history. Indonesia is the largest muslim country. Albenia, as a muslim country, did not lose its cultures for Middle eastern cultures. Morocco, Egypt, Turkey,Senegal, Iran, Bangladish and others did not lose their cutlurs. They are all totally different cultures and races even though they are more than 90% muslims. This means that the number of muslims that are less than 5% in the West will never change its culture. Brief,Islam encourage integration. Read more about Islam and Know Better.

I think with this article the author stops being a Professor of Religious studies and becomes an apologist. Way to go!!!

Isn't it just f***ing infuriating when people refuse to buy your line of propaganda and be fooled and lulled into a false sense of security by your soothing lies? :D

Sigh - - Bottom Line:
Religion - the curse that blocks human peace, civilization and understanding.

Notwithstanding Mr Espositos double talk, below is a summary of what Muslims are planning for us:
"The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who choose to slack."
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/columnists/rdreher/stories/DN-dreher_09edi.ART.State.Edition1.4235f88.html

And below is the manual called "Omar Pact" they will use to humiliate us in addition to the exorbitant taxes called JIzya they shall levy on us to further impoverish us.
http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-kills-pact-of-umar.htm

On the one hand, Christians have been trying to hijack our Constitution for about 220 years, with limited success, often reversed. I find it difficult in the extreme to believe that Muslims will enjoy any greater success with "Sharia".

On the other hand, how many Christians actually read the Bible, particularly the Mosaic Law part? Stoning adulterers, executing disobedient children, hand and eye removal, all these things are part of the Judeo-Christian tradition. They are in the Bible, the "word of God", but we have abandoned those practices along with animal sacrifice.

Why do we ridicule Muslims for eating "kosher", but not Jews? Double standard, perhaps?

Muslims should not be able to impose Sharia on ANYONE is a free society, Muslim or not. People should be free to follow their religious beliefs or lack therof. If a declared Muslim does not follow Sharia, maybe Muslims can shun them like the Amish do, but nothing stronger than that. Muslim law cannot be allowed to over-ride the common law that applies to all in a civilized society.

As other writers here have already noted, Christianity does not do so well itself, when it comes to the Christian record of imposing Christian ideas on Non-Christian.

Sorry, but this writer's pretzel logic can't make 1400 years of Islam's horrible history magically go poof. From day one Muhammad demanded that Sharia be erected on all territory conquered by Muslims, and that means any way they can, by invasion or immigration. Muslims are still too small in numbers in the U.S. to have Muslim power, and all their power comes from the Muslim world, hence statements by Muslim spokesmen must be highly suspect of putting-on-over tactics. If they reach 10% of the pop. then the situation will change dramatically, as Muslims do what Muhammad ordered them to do, and take the gloves off, as seen in country after country thoughout history, sorry. Hence the real question is why permit more Muslim immigration to the U.S. unless and until Islam itself changes as evidenced by abolishing Sharia in all Muslim countries? Sharia isn't just some rules and regulations for Muslims, it proclaims superiority of Muslims over non-Muslims in all ways, trampling every right the U.S. has fought to gain for all people. To see it at its best, or actually worse, look at Saudi Arabia, where non-Muslims are threatened with death even for setting foot near the idols in Mecca, and being gay or a liberated woman is treated with death or jail, beatings and rape. This is abhorrent to American values, and like two scorpions in a bottle in this shrinking world, only one can remain, and it will be us, not them. When Muslims quit trying to change us and do the changing, we can consider opening the gates again, but the supremacist attitude of insisting on a mosque as near as they can get to Ground Zero show that Islam isn't anywhere near it. Try the Historyscoper's free online Islam history course the the fastest most accurate way to learn all the uncomfortable but true facts.

I think the mosque should be built. So called ground zero was an office building, it was never holy ground.
It was an international work place which means that people from several countries and faiths were murdered on that day. But, I guess only the white, American Christians count.
I do wish that people would not retaliate by calling the extremist Muslims names that relate to how they look, how they dress or how they chose to worship.
This lack of respect in discussion drives moderates into their ranks and gives the extremists reasons for hating the west.

Oh, and I'm fully aware how powerful and connected the Saudis (for instance) are and how Sharia-obsessed they are. But you know what? They've been trying to push that crapola all over the world for years including here in the USA and we're not buying it nor will we ever.

It's hilarious that chest-pounding, "USA #1!" conservatives are scared that sharia law could EVER take hold here and overwhelm our values. To think such a thing even remotely possible, you have to be truly ignorant.

Asshats riding around on donkeys in the mountains are going to transform the fundamental nature of our society? No wonder conservatives love their guns, they're scared of everything.

I see little difference between Sharia law and the Christian fundie fruitcakes trying to shove their bigotted belief system down my throat.

All religious zealots are the same.

NO ONE - Legal, religious, moral will impose anything on the US. WHY, seemingly being as stupid as you are to even bring this up, do you continue to make this FAKE issue an issue??

It is moronic a**hats like YOU that keep this hate meme alive...STOP IT TODAY.

You are trying to put the fearful at ease by giving the true and sophisticated meaning of Sharia, to educate the reader that Sharia is something other than what Americans think it is. I doubt this will work. You fail to address key points and misconceptions in this climate of fear about Islam. You touched briefly on the distinction between personal and civil/criminal requirements of Sharia, but could have expanded on where and how Islam intersects with a non-Muslim population.

In the minds of the Americans who want to stop mosques from being built and who are afraid of an encroaching Islam, Sharia law means stoning adulterers, chopping off hands of thieves, mistreating women, and imposing harsh restrictions on non-Muslims (or even killing them or driving them out). While you explain the real meaning of Sharia, you don't address what Americans think it is but it is not (namely, certain cultural practices some equate with Islam).

Related to that is the fact that these harsh practices are primarily cultural, not religious. These practices don't exist in all countries that are predominantly Muslim, and they don't exist in non-Muslim countries with Muslim populations, outside of the few cases of recent immigrants still following their home country's practices. How many second-generation Muslim immigrants murder their wives or sisters for dating outside the faith, for instance? (How many first generation immigrants do that, for that matter).

There is no mention of the predominantly Muslim countries that don't have cultural practices of punishment we find repugnant. Just as Serbian Christians didn't act like Virginia Baptists, Thai or Moroccan Muslims (for instance) will not act the same as Yemeni or Saudi Muslims.

Much of this fear is due to unfamiliarity. Remember how European Jews were feared, denigrated, scapegoated, and murdered because they had "strange" practices that set them apart from the Christian norms of the countries they lived in. They were accused of taking control over the finances of the country and running roughshod over the lives of the "good Christian folk".

Muslims are just the latest target of xenophobia. People, go talk to some Muslims if you have any in your community. Visit a mosque, talk to the imam. I'm not saying convert (I'm non-religious). Just familiarize yourself with the people, instead of becoming some bogus "expert" on Islam through your ingesting of right-wing nativist screeds.

By definition, no religious law is compatible with US law.

Anti-choice activists have killed many innocent people and Rabin was killed by an Israeli who claimed to be doing God's work, so perhaps the question should be posed differently. They say they answer to the law of God, not the laws of man. Sound familiar?

SRINAGAR: Sikhs in the Kashmir Valley have received anonymous letters from Islamic militants asking them to either embrace Islam and join the protests against civilian killings or pack up and leave the Valley. The 60,000-strong Sikh community is the single largest minority group in the Valley.

Read more: Embrace Islam or leave Valley, Sikhs threatened - India - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Embrace-Islam-or-leave-Valley-Sikhs-threatened/articleshow/6346853.cms#ixzz0xA0vrY25

ROBERTSOELL, Please cite your source for your claim that we are advocating for islamist rule in the United States? Otherwise, you are letting everyone know what a fool you are.

Two key perspectives are relevant. One, Muslims have a reputation (appropos or not) for not being truthful (due to Mohammed's Quranic encouragement in the context of war). Therefore, a certain paranoia has developed around both Muslims and those "warm" towards them due to exasperated fear at how to get to the truth. Second, liberal Christianity, which Obama has chosen, is decidedly agnostic about which "path" is the right one, basically claiming they're all good. What really matters to the liberal Christian is not Christ over Allah or Buddha but rather the golden rule over greed and oppression. Therefore, both Obama's choice of Christian church as well as both warmth toward Islam and descent from a Muslim creates a perfect storm of disbelief among true believer Christians; who see Muslims as hell bound Christ-rejecting possible liars and liberal Christians as hell bound heretic, miracle denying do-gooders. Either way, though Obama likes Jesus' teachings, his "brand" of Christianity is prone to not care if Christ really rose from the dead. Rather, what matters is that Christ was willing to sacrifice for truth and justice. So, it is logically consistent to be a liberal Christian and pro-Quran all at the same time. Hence, the question becomes whether or not Obama leans far enough that way, that he might as well just be a Muslim who appreciates Jesus teachings as opposed to a Christian who thinks Islam is just as "right" a religion as Christianity. Liberal Christianity would not be offended either way. Conservative Christianity calls both spiritual wickedness.

The day shariah will forcefully be imposed on the USA will mean the end to all liberties for jews, women and homosexuals. You must be completely insane not to realize this. I just can not understand the obsession of the political left with subjugating to islam.

I love how any time someone points out obvious flaws in Sharia--child brides of 7 years old, women as property, etc--some apologist jumps up and never addresses that, but always says "That's not what Sharia law is."
In the US, you can practice your religion if it does not violate the law. You can't marry a 7 year old, for instance. You cannot go about completely hidden in baggy clothes where your face is not visible.
Immigrant groups that did not choose to assimilate, like ultra-orthodox Jews, Mennonites etc. remain in small localized enclaves. They do not insist that the rest of the country do as they do. The Netherlands said they do not want their culture "Islamized" as did the Australians, who said, the immigrants have to adapt to us, not vv. France has said it, in desiring to keep its secular society, and Spain is on the same path. Islam is not just a religion; it has always lived in theocratic states, where it is both the government and the religion. It's not "just another" religion in that respect.

Muslims are required by their "religion of peace" to impose sharia if and when they can. If they don't, they are bad muslims. It is their duty to subjugate, convert or murder anyone who is not a muslim.

Frankly, I'm more concerned with fundamental Christians imposing their understanding of the universe on our laws and education system than Sharia.

'Will Muslims impose Shariah?'

You don't have to wonder like a dope about
this: Muslims have imposed Sharia everywhere
they are the majority population (except
where there are violent conflicts trying to
prevent it, as in the Southern Sudan).
[Exceptions like Egypt and Turkey are/were
military dictatorships which are under great
pressure from Islamist to impose Sharia.]

Just take the time to look at what's happening
in Thailand and Indonesia, where Islam is
a recent import: Read of the injustices, crimes,
and wrongs which Muslims are imposing on
non-Muslims as their numbers have taken
over the population. Soon those two countries
will look like Syria and Iraq. And that is the
way it has always been everywhere Islam
has become the majority religion, and that
is the way Islam will be everywhere it
becomes the majority religion. If that
happens here it will either be Sharia or
the Constitution, because the civil rights
which are such a second nature to us
that they seem to be as much ours as
the right to breathe... and all the other
"constitutional guarantees" we have come
to enjoy in this country are absolutely
incompatible with Sharia and and unheard
of anywhere where Sharia is the law of the
land. Look it up: The answer is obvious.

S D Rodrian
http://islamisbad.com

.

Reading Esposito is like reading Pat Robertson (on one of Pat's more lucid days of course).

The rhetoric is garbage and the truth is muddied. When will a Muslim spokesperson give us non-believers a real and honest assessment of Shari'a without the mumbo-jumbo? IF it is enlightened, IF it is holy, tell us how and why without obfuscation.

Christians have long the Bible to justify slavery, Jim Crow, and the genocide of non-Christians as well as of fellow Christians of the wrong sect.

And now these blowhard deviants are whining about another religion?

Is flip-flopping moral relativism a Christian virtue?

The laws in the country are made by congress. The congress is elected by the people. President is elected by people and signs the law. Any amendments in the constitution require supper majority in congress and 2/3rd of State have to ratify it.

Now if all that is fulfilled in favor of the Islamic Law, then there should be no argument, as it will be the will of the people. It is possible that this happens in the USA but not any time soon.

The question should not be theoretical. Show us actual proof of how Muslim majority nations behave in regard to law, to tolerance of other religions, to the rights of women. Theory is fine but can be twisted into any shape a writer wants to present. How Muslim majorities act is the expression of the culture of Islam, and, since they outbreed most others, a cautionary tale for democracies that import large numbers.

Mr. Espisito makes no sense. Muslims are still stoning to death people for minor infractions of its laws. I really don't like Eric Cantor, "..but come on!"

In America you are required to state "So Help you GOD" is what is stated in American's courts to acknowledge the telling of the truth. I would say we need to remove Christain religious ideology from our American legal system, as well as removal of all other religious ideolgies from our American justice system making it equally fair to all people, myself included a practicing Nichiren Buddhist that does not believe in YOUR GOD, but people instead.

"devout Jews can follow Jewish law and Christians follow their doctrines and laws and be at the same time fully American citizens"
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

This is not so clear to me. Certainly, obedient Roman Catholics cannot and do not accept the law of the US on women's right to choose and their control of their own bodies; the same is true of the extension of civil rights to homosexuals, the application of the death penalty, and more. One of the fundamental problems in the US is the RC attempt to force its "morality" on the rest of the nation. I do consider this a much more overt threat, a truly present danger, than the imposition of Sharia.

I honestly am not familiar with any such conflict between practicing Jews and the laws of the US though I am aware, from reading about the goings-on in Israel, that there are levels of strictness regarding adherence to Jewish law according to the sect. Fill me in.

Is the author insane? Shariah isn't religious law; it's a fell method of control that is not consistent with Western cultural, legal or social norms. It should be considered as illegal as it is repulsive.

The world has many places where islam and shariah law are the norm and assimilation by muslims is not an issue.

Muslims now living the West should consider moving to one of these cultural paradises instead of struggling to change western society so they can be comfortable.

For example, I understand that Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq and Afganistan are places where The Religion of Peace (tm) is the norm and people live in tolerant harmony, with freedom, equality, and justice for all.

Give me a break. If people don't like the culture and values of the West, they can go somewhere else. Guests in your house don't rearrange the furniture.

"Others, Some Muslims in the West in light of have also questioned, for different reasons, whether they could be both good Muslims and loyal citizens in of "foreign" non-Muslim states based on a Western secular laws?"
_________________________________________________________________

Does this newspaper have an Editor anymore? Somebody needs to proofread the above.

Amazing. Two out four posters on here read the article and still only hear the internal dialogue going on in their own heads. Some people hear and see nothing but the voices in their own heads.

Muslims like all immigrants beore them will be assimilated into our country. The problems and concerns about muslims have been said about every single religious or ethnic group that has immigrated into America. Every single one has been assimilated. Muslims will be assimilated as well. Absolutely guaranteed.

The charactoristics found in other Islamic countries have little to do with Islam or their ability to integrate into our society. They have more to do with tribal based societies. Once those tribal alliegiences fall away we find Islam is fully compatible with US laws and customs. It's not very difficult to see once you get past your own fear and apprehension.

The day sharia law is imposed in this country will be the day the final revolt starts.We just would never allow it ever,and I think I speak for most Americans. There are plenty of flights leaving for Saudi Arabia where they can bask in the strictness and public whipping and be-headings and raped women getting stoned to death and sadism that is the heart of their religion ,they are more than welcome to jump aboard any of those flights ,they won't be missed here, not even for a second.We're not welcome in their country and honestly we're all getting sick of them in ours. If they hurry they just might get to see some wayward criminal get his spine mutilated as his just reward.

The real question is whether or not Muslims can assimilate.

To answer that the Muslim concept of waqf has to be considered. Waqf has a benign sense in the meaning of social responsibility, thus the waqf takes care of mosques and is the administration for social services for members. But there is another concept of waqf and that is an unequivocal responsibility to keep lands that were under Islamic rule Muslim and to spread Islam for the benefit of mankind. Waqf explains the goal in many quarters of restoring the Caliphate not just in the Mediterranean but also the entire West and, preferably, the world.

I'm sure that not all Muslims are so extreme, but the fact that waqf plays such a strong role in Islamic thought is of concern. After all, it is the non-extremists who are trying to impose Sharia law in England, among other places, and who tried but failed in Ontario, Canada, for which the UN human rights panel denounced the city.

To a large extent the waqf viewpoints are no different than any other proselytizing religion. Certainly murder or convert, as has been said of Islamic history, is part of Christian history as well. Spanish Catholics, for example, were dreadful to native Americans when they arrived in this hemisphere, all in the name of religion. Protestants had their murderous moments; remember Cromwell. Maybe another reason why we fear Muslims is because we know what Western religions can do.

Have Americans worried about assimilating other new arrivals? Yes, of course. Consider the calumnies against Catholics and Jews: the former is taking over the world through the Pope, the latter is doing so economically.

The argument is still that of the balancing of church and state. Unfortunately, right now, religion has far too much influence in our country, but the shift is still part of the regular swing of the pendulum that occurs over time with socio-political issues. Could Muslims, via waqf and their prodigious rate of procreation, upset the balance? Possibly.

Should Muslims try to assimilate? Yes, and we should give them the chance, but we need to be wary and guard our political institutions vigilantly.

Hey, Christians have imposed biblical law all over the United States for centuries. The Blue laws of new England: No stores open on Sunday, No alcohol or tobacco sales, No dancing. These were religious impositions enforced by the government.

How about not choosing any of the dozens of religious belief systems and keeping the Government and Religion separate. Good enough for the Founding Fathers.

This article is again smacks of a sycophant, doing his job. How dare a community which is mainly immigrant and a minuscule minority have the audacity to demand that the greater society to bend over backwards to accommodate them. Not only that also demand that the entire legal structure be modified in order to incorporate the backwards and medieval legal structure. When even the majority community does not get to impose its own traditions in the civil and secular aspects of the life.

This coming from a community which in their own lands does not even countenance minorities. Whose laws are replete with their majority's religious traditions. So don't even think about SHARIA in USA. It is already a scourge in the 47 OIC countries. Those of the muslims who feel overly burdened by the secular law are welcome to board any of the flight flown by Saudia nd got their eternal Paradise that is Saudi Arabia.