The Indiana legislature has decided what they term “the far-fetched fear of Sharia law” — a strict interpretation of Muslim law — overriding the U.S. or state constitution in Indiana courts is not a critical issue.
Trib-Star –– Last week (Dec. 2010), Rep. Bruce Borders, a Jasonville Republican, said he intended to file a bill in the Indiana House to prevent the recognition of Sharia law in Indiana courts. Borders said he was acting on an idea by state Sen. John Waterman, R-Shelburn.
The bill, Borders said, would proclaim “that Indiana does not recognize Sharia law, or Muslim law. What that boils down to is there is a push in some states to recognize Sharia law with its own court system, as opposed to a state constitution or the U.S. Constitution.”
The problem is, this isn’t a problem. It’s not a problem in Indiana. (HAH! Just wait) It’s not a problem anywhere in the United States, including Oklahoma, the state that apparently sparked Waterman’s interest. Last month, Oklahomans overwhelmingly approved an amendment to their constitution to prohibit state courts from considering international law or Islamic law when deciding cases. Weeks later, a lawsuit challenging the amendment — calling it an infringement under the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights — prompted a federal judge to block implementation of Oklahoma’s amendment.
The one unmistakable reality in this situation is that religious freedom is clearly protected under the Constitution. Muslims should not be singled out. (Yes, they should, Islam is not a legitimate religion) The paranoid political atmosphere helped drive the Oklahoma vote, with the amendment getting 70-percent approval. Indiana lawmakers should not get swept up in such a needless venture. Incoming House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, wisely imposed a 10-bill limit on House members to keep them focused on balancing the budget when the General Assembly gathers on Jan. 5. Borders’ bill would be nothing more than a distraction from that.
Terrorist Front Group CAIR used their usual thug tactics to threaten Indiana.
In a joint letter mailed recently to all members of the Indiana General Assembly, the Washington, D.C., and Chicago offices of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) wrote in part:
“As the General Assembly reconvenes for the coming year, we would like to reach out to you regarding a bill that Representative Bruce Borders has indicated he intends to introduce in the House of Representatives. Representative Borders’s bill is un-American to its core. The bill will divide Indiana residents rather than unite them. It will communicate to the nation and the world that Indiana unconstitutionally deprives religious minorities of the freedom to practice their faith. We are seeking your commitment not to allow Representative Borders’s bill to be considered by the House.
“What Representative Borders ominously calls ‘Sharia Law’ is nothing more than the religious traditions that Muslims use to guide the practice of their faith. Much like other faiths, these religious traditions inform individuals in everyday decisions involving marriage, business transactions and estate planning. Muslims are not seeking to impose their religious traditions onto the government. (Yes they are, and have said so publicly. See below*)
“Representative Borders’s proposed legislation attacks Indiana’s Muslim community by treating Islam’s religious traditions differently than those from other faiths. From probating wills to enforcing contracts, government agencies and courts often consider religion in their decisions. Treating Muslims differently is manifestly unconstitutional.”
* Let’s all remember that this (CAIR) is the organization whose current communications director, Ibrahim Hooper, told the Minneapolis Star Tribune in 1993 that he hoped America’s government would be Islamic sometime in the future,” Gabriel notes. “This is also the organization whose co-founder, Omar Ahmed, told two California newspapers in 1998 that he wanted the Quran to be the highest authority in America. CAIR Oklahoma saying that they’re suing because it’s discriminatory is absurd,” she decides. “State Question 755 protects non-Muslims and Muslims alike from the tyranny and discrimination of sharia law.”