Articles

Alta

OKLAHOMA CITY – A Muslim of Oklahoma filed a complaint in federal jordan shoes on Thursday to a constitutional state amendment by an overwhelming majority of voters that would prohibit state courts in light of international law or Islamic law in deciding cases to block approval. The measure, which was 70 percent of the vote in Tuesday’s election, was one of many on the ballot in Oklahoma, which critics said was trying to make the Conservatives and the government go further to the right .

The lawsuit, filed in District Court U. S. Oklahoma City seeks a Air Jordan Retro temporary order recycling and command, the election results certified by the power of the State Election Commission on November 9. Among other things, raises the claim to the extent of the Oklahoma Constitution to vote in “a permanent condemnation” of Islam by isolating special restrictions imposed by blocking the Islamic law known as Sharia.

“We have a handful of politicians who have advocated a change in our bulletin of State and then took a campaign well planned and well-financed disinformation and fear,” said Munir Awad, who filed the complaint and is Chairman of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma. “We have certain inalienable rights, and these rights are not taken from me by a political campaign.” Approximately 20,000 to 30,000 Muslims live in Oklahoma, said Awad. Legal experts have also challenged the measure.

Joseph Thai, a professor at the University of Oklahoma College of Law, said the measure vote is “an answer looking for a problem.” He said he knows of no other state that approved similar measures. “There is no credible threat to go beyond the law, or Sharia legal system,” Thai said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. He said, the courts consider international law when deciding issues in connection with a federal contract, a contract of enterprise or of a will, that international law contains. Thai said the ballot measure “raises thorny church-state issues as well” and could even influence the ability of a state judge to keep the Ten Commandments.

“The Ten Commandments, of course, is international law. It did not originate in Oklahoma or the United States,” said Thai. The measure will take effect January 1 go. Its author, Rep. Rex Duncan, R-Sand Springs, said it was not intended to attack the Muslims, but activist judges to rely on international law and Islamic law to prevent, if the decision on the legal cases. “Represents the threat of activist judges, is clear,” said Duncan.

“He should not what is the law in France or another European country.” Duncan described the measure as a “preemptive strike” in Oklahoma, where he says activist judges not an imminent problem. But some judges elsewhere, including the U. S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, believe that the courts should turn to the right of other countries for advice, though some cases the decision, he said. Ginsburg told a meeting of international lawyers in Washington in July that U.S. judges can learn from their foreign counterparts when examined after possible solutions, “trying questions.”

“The only people who are victims of these are activist judges, “said Duncan, who created in 2007 rejected the Quran as a gift by a Board of Governor Brad Henry, explaining that” most of Oklahoma, not, however, support the idea of ​​killing women and innocent children in the name of ideology. ” A resident of Oklahoma said he was on Tuesday, because chaos can occur if judges were allowed to be claimed on international laws and religious in their courts. “Any private organization could come and say the judge according to our rules and regulations of the rule and cancel state laws,” said Oklahoma City attorney Jerry Fent.

About the Author

A resident said he was in Oklahoma on Tuesday, because chaos can occur if judges were allowed to international law and religious in their courts.

exit

ATLANTA, Georgia, U.S., Jul 18, 2011 (IPS) – Faith leaders in the U.S. representing 25 million citizens
have expressed outrage about the case of Youcef Nadarkhani, an
Iranian man who faces the death penalty if he refuses to
recant his Christian faith.

Calling themselves Christian Leaders for a Nuclear Free Iran, the
faith leaders sent letters regarding the matter on Jul. 8 to U.S.
President Barack Obama, members of Congress, and foreign ambassadors
and heads of state. The letter also called on Iran to refrain from
developing nuclear weapons.

Nadarkhani is charged with apostasy, the act of a person formally
disaffiliating themselves from, or renouncing, a religion.

However, “because apostasy is not mentioned in Iran’s penal code, and
apostasy is not considered a crime, then the court has to consider
Mr. Nadarkhani’s case in the context of [the crime] ‘insulting the
Prophet of Islam’,” Nadarkhani’s attorney, Mohammad Ali Dadkhah, said
in a statement to the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran
(ICHRI).

“In this respect, since my client has not made any insults, he can
tell the same to the court,” he said.

So is there a way to convert one’s religion without insulting the
Prophet?

“Under these legal systems, there’s no way to convert, if you’re
Muslim, and changing faith from one to another, even if you became an
atheist,” Jordan Sekulow, director of international operations at the
American Center for Law and Justice, told IPS.

“If you became Muslim, that wouldn’t be a criminal case. It would be
a celebration,” he said.

Dadhkah had told ICHRI that on Jun. 27, Nadarkhani’s death sentence
was overturned by the Supreme Court in Qom and was on hold until
Nadarkhani repents.

But according to a copy of the verdict obtained by Christian
Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), the death sentence was not actually
overturned. The verdict asks the lower court in Rasht to reexamine
procedural flaws in the case.

The Supreme Court in Iran has “ultimately given local judges a free
hand to decide whether to release, execute or retry Mr. Nadarkhani in
October,” according to CSW.

“In this ruling it has been stipulated that in case Nadarkhani does
not repent, his case file would
once again be sent back to the lower court in Rasht. In a way, a
complete overturning of the apostasy verdict depends on Nadarkhani’s
repentance,” Dadkhah said.

The Iranian government has also charged Dadhkah himself with crimes.
He faces 10 years in prison and suspension of his law license for
“actions and propaganda against the Islamic regime”.

Nadarkhani may have an easier time appealing his case in the lower
court if he repents his faith in Christianity, and Iranian officials
are reportedly pressuring him to do so.

One issue the court may be looking at is whether Nadarkhani was a
“true Muslim” at the time of his conversion to Christianity.

The Nadarkhani case is considered somewhat shocking even to those
familiar with the politics of the Middle East. “What is happening in
some strict Islamic law-based countries like Pakistan, they have an
apostasy law on the books. But they have a mob rule setting. People
lose their life because they storm the jail,” Sekulow said.

“There’s a difference between what happens in Pakistan, where there’s
a mob and no justice,” and this case, he said.

“This hasn’t happened since 1990. No one’s been executed by the
government for changing their faith. I think the fact they haven’t
done it since 1990 is because they know the world reaction is, it’s
outrageous,” he said.

“Anti-conversion laws are implemented throughout Islamic law in
various ways. For example, in Egypt, the Constitution seems benign,
but Article Two of the Constitution says Islam is the religion, and
nothing in the Constitution shall conflict with Islam,” Sekulow
noted.

“I think we’re at a point where the world doesn’t accept denying
religious freedom as a cultural norm,” he added.

Victoria Nuland, spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State, said
in a Jul. 6 statement, “We are dismayed over reports that the Iranian
courts are requiring Youcef Nadarkhani to recant his Christian faith
or face the death penalty for apostasy – a charge based on his
religious beliefs.”

“While Iran’s leaders hypocritically claim to promote tolerance, they
continue to detain, imprison, harass, and abuse those who simply wish
to worship the faith of their choosing,” Nuland said.

“We join the international community in continuing to call on the
Iranian government to respect the fundamental rights of all its
citizens and uphold its international commitments to protect them,”
she said.

Nadarkhani, 32, was born to Muslim parents but converted to
Christianity at the age of 19. He was the pastor for a congregation
of about 400 Christians in Rasht.

Nadarkhani was arrested in October 2009 while trying to register his
church, which is part of the nationwide Church of Iran.

On Aug. 23, 2010, Nadarkhani’s apostasy death sentence was upheld by
Branch Eleven of the Appeals Court of Gilan Province.

Nadarkhani is currently being held in Rasht Prison.

“He is one of 300 Christians who have been arrested in last year.
Some have been released. There’s been a significant crackdown on
Christians in the last year,” David Yeghnazar, U.S. director of Elam,
an organisation which supports Iranian Christians, told IPS.

Yeghnazar believes the crackdown is in part due to anti-Western
sentiments in Iran, but points out Christianity began as an Eastern
religion.

“If you’re born in a Muslim family, the expectation is you have to
remain in a Muslim family or remain as a Muslim. We call on the
government… in Iran, to honour the meaning and the intention of the
U.N. Charter… which they signed up to,” he said. “Certainly this
case is a clear example of how they’re contravening that charter.”

“We believe in the basic human rights of every person to follow their
convictions whether they choose to be a Jew, a Christian, a Bahai, or
a Muslim,” he said, predicting that the Iranian government’s efforts
may backfire.

“If they follow through, I think, to many Iranians, contrary to the
goal of the Iranian regime, he might be seen as a martyr,” Yeghnazar
said.

(END)

GOP Presidential hopeful Herman Cain is taking his efforts to win Republican votes by disparaging Muslims to the level of performance art.

Cain reiterated his opposition to a mosque in Murfreesboro, Tennessee yesterday on Fox News Sunday. Cain insisted that Islam is different from other religions because “fact Islam is both a religion and a set of laws, Sharia law.”

CAIN: They could say that. Chris, lets go back to the fundamental issue that the people are basically saying they’re objecting to. They’re objecting to the fact Islam is both a religion and a set of laws, Sharia law. That’s the difference between any one of our other traditional religions where it’s just about religious purposes. The people in the community know best, and I happen to side with the people in Murfreesboro.

WALLACE: You’re saying any community, if they want to ban a mosque?

CAIN: Yes. They have a right to do that. That’s not discriminating based upon religion.

Cain’s ignorance on the subject of religion and constitutional law is so vast it’s hard to know where to begin. For one thing, Islam is hardly the only religion to have its own laws — based on Cain’s arguments, Jews Catholics and Anglicans among others would also not qualify for religious protection under the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects the free exercise of religion, it does not sanction discrimination based on the religious prejudices of a given moment.

There is no one static set of precepts Muslims agree upon that Cain can refer to as “sharia law.” Sharia is a set of Islamic principles whose application varies based on interpretation. Ironically, by implying otherwise, Cain is insisting that the most draconian interpretations of sharia are the “real” ones, Cain is supporting the religious arguments of Islamic extremists. Cain argues that it’s not “discriminating against based upon religion” for a community to ban a mosque, which is absurd on its face. Cain is saying it’s not discrimination to discriminate.

The most pathetic part of Cain’s argument however, is his insistence that “the people in the community know best.” Most people in Tennessee support or are indifferent
to the mosque, only 28 percent of those polled last year opposed it. But even if the community were overwhelmingly opposed to the mosque, that wouldn’t justify discriminating against Muslims, anymore than popular support for segregation in the 1960s American South would have justified discriminating against blacks. Cain recently opined
that President Barack Obama isn’t a “strong black man” like Martin Luther King Jr. Does Cain truly believe that the MLK Jr, who referred to Islam
as one of the world’s “great religions” and fought his entire life against the idea that “local control” somehow trumps the fundamental rights of individual minorities, would have supported a ban on mosques?

It was the first President of the United States however, who said that America gives to “to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance.” Those words were more aspiration than fact when George Washington, himself a slaveowner, wrote them. But today, they are among the most basic principles any presidential candidate must uphold. Cain doesn’t even appear to want to uphold them.

US
religious leaders condemn
Islamophobia
(Sep 9, ’10)

Why
don’t Americans like Muslims?
(Aug 17,
’10)

AGENDA | Sunday, July 17, 2011 | Email | Print | | Back  

Not a perfect portrait
July 16, 2011   9:11:39 PM

India: A Portrait
Author: Patrick French
Publisher: Allen Lane
Price: Rs 699

Patrick French has a few hits and a lot of misses in this book, write Prafull Goradia and KR Phanda

The higher the hope the greater is the despair. We expected to know all about India through Patrick French’s latest book, India: A Portrait. He has come down heavily on Jawaharlal Nehru for the tardy progress of India’s economy. Nehru, however, perpetrated the initial harm with his Left-leaning ideology, which was fashionable in those times. One wonders why the later governments didn’t change their socialistic policies once the mistakes became starkly apparent in the late 1960s and the 1970s. Mrs Indira Gandhi, instead of doing any thing constructive, merely nationalised the industries to consolidate her power.

For a self-portrait of India, one expected some emphasis by the author on the continuing Hindu-Muslim divide despite the concession of 30 per cent of the country’s territory for the formation of a separate homeland for less than 25 percent of its Muslim population in 1947. After the enchanted Liberty or Death, French’s first book, one would have expected this biography to be a continuum of why Muslims are feeling lost while Hindus are being deprived in their own country.

The present book is a sequel to the earlier work that dealt with the struggle of Indians to free themselves from British rule. In the words of the author: “In India, I have tried to write about the country both from the inside and from the outside — or from a distance. Information passes through three different prisms. The first is political, the second economic and the third social.”

Each of three sections — Rashtra or nation, Lakshmi or wealth, Samaj or society — seeks to answer the question: Why is India like it is today? In this book, individual stories, calamities, aspirations and triumphs of many people are at the heart of the matter, says the author. Each section, in turn, is divided into chapters which focus on certain selected areas relevant to the subject under discussion.

Each section stands on an independent footing. It can be read individually depending on the interest of the reader. Going through the volume, a few points emerge. One, Muslims in India had a raw deal after Independence. Two, Hindus are a collection of diverse people, and not a nation. Hindu leaders, particularly those who speak for the nation, are communalists or fundamentalists!

On page 348 of the book, the author says: “The greatest threat facing Indian Muslims was… poverty.” Many a Muslim intellectual whom the author met are said to have claimed that their coreligionists constitute India’s most backward community in all respects and they should be given special treatment as is available to the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes. Muslims forget that quota is like a handicap given to weaker players. Dalits and Adivasis were denied opportunities for centuries accorded to the upper Hindu castes. Since Muslims ruled large tracts of the country for centuries in the last millennium, the Muslim elite were themselves responsible for the backwardness of a section of the community. Despite being a dominant player for most of the last millennium, if Muslims are backward or less educated today, the blame must be borne by the privileged of the community.

Syed Shahabuddin, a former IFS officer and a leading intellectual, once said that given a choice between identity and development, a momin would choose the former. Furthermore, Indian Muslims had demanded a separate homeland in 1940 and got one in 1947. No one asked Muslims to stay back once they had achieved their darul Islam. The Islamic brotherhood believes in the equality of all Muslims before Allah. One instrument of redistribution and welfare is the wakf or the properties handed over to Allah for the benefit of the poor. At present these wakfs are reported to be the largest urban landlord in India. Then, why are Muslims backward and less educated? Is it because the wakf properties are being misused by vested interests? Or, is it that the ulema are discouraging the Muslim youth from pursuing secular studies?

As for the Uniform Civil Code, the author quotes views of several Muslim scholars. Qasim Rasool of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board said: “Our laws are based on the Quran and the Sunnah. Nobody can touch those laws. Everything there is eternal. To say that there should be a Uniform Civil Code is like saying that there should be a uniform religion.” In view of the above statement, it is not possible to agree with French’s observation: “The thrust of Muslim intellectual life in India since the 19th century had been towards modernity.” In reality, Islam and modernity are a contradiction in terms.

On the issue of Kashmir, the author writes: “After India and Pakistan went to war for the first time in 1947-48, it would have been logical to partition Kashmir into its constituent parts, with the Muslim areas going to Pakistan and Buddhist Ladakh and Hindu Jammu going to India.” But wouldn’t any attempt to give Kashmir to Pakistan have justified the two-nation theory?

The author points out how, after Independence, history textbooks were distorted. “In school textbooks controversial realities had for many years been replaced by harmonious stories of a united and syncretic subcontinental past.” Romila Thapar’s Medieval India played down the acts of desecration by early Muslim invaders. Nehru, too, can be charged of negationism in his book, The Discovery of India. This book, according to French, is an elegant combination of history and propaganda.

French’s book, in short, is a combination of fresh and worn-out ideas cobbled together.

Read it with an open mind and you will enjoy it.

---

Email | Print | Rate: 12345

---