THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume XI, Issue # 168, August 6, 2009
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
WHY SHARIAH MUST BE OPPOSED
By Dr. Daniel Pipes
WHY SHARIAH SHOULD NOT BECOME AN ACCEPTED PART OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN MODERN WESTERN SOCIETIES:
THE INNATE IMPERIALISM OF ISLAMIC LAW -- ISLAMISTS' ASPIRATION TO APPLY ISLAMIC LAW TO ALL PERSONS,
MUSLIMS & NON-MUSLIMS ALIKE -- ADHERENTS OF MILITANT ISLAM SEEKING TO IMPOSE THEIR RELIGIOUS & CULTURAL
BELIEFS ON NON-MUSLIMS -- ISLAMIST LAWFARE AGAINST THE WEST -- ISLAMIST INFILTRATION & SUBVERSION OF
WESTERN SOCIETIES
FULL STORY:
Those of us who argue against Shariah are sometimes asked why Islamic law poses a problem, when modern Western
societies, long ago, accommodated Halakha, or Jewish law. In fact, this was one of the main talking points of those
who, in 2005, argued that Shariah should become an accepted part of dispute resolution in Ontario, Canada.
The answer is easy: a fundamental difference separates the two. Islam is a missionizing religion, Judaism is not.
Islamists aspire to apply Islamic law to everyone, while observant Jews seek only to live by Jewish law themselves.
Two very recent examples from the United Kingdom demonstrate the innate imperialism of Islamic law.
The first concerns Queens Care Centre, an old-age home and day-care provider for the elderly in the coal town of
Maltby, 40 miles east of Manchester. At present, according to the Daily Telegraph, not one of its 37 staff or 40
residents is Muslim. Although the home's management asserts a respect for its residents' "religious and cultural
beliefs," QCC's owner since 1994, Zulfikar Ali Khan, on his own, decided this year to switch the home's meat
purchases to a halal butcher.
His stealthy decision meant pensioners at QCC could no longer eat their bacon and eggs, bangers and mash, ham
sandwiches, bacon sandwiches, pork pies, bacon butties, or sausage rolls. The switch prompted widespread anger.
The relative of one resident called it "a disgrace."
They went on to say:
"The old people who are in the home and in their final
years deserve better. … [I]t's shocking that they should
be deprived of the food they like on the whim of this
man."
A staff member opined that it's "quite wrong that someone should impose their religious and cultural beliefs on others
like this."
Queried about his decision, Khan, lamely replied he ordered halal meat for the sake of (nonexistent) Muslim staff. Then
he backtracked: "We will be ordering all types of meat" and went so far as to agree that religious beliefs should not be
imposed on others. His retreat did not convince one former QCC staffer, who suspected that Khan "intended to serve
only halal meat at the home, but has had to think again because of the row."
A second example of imposing Shariah on non-Muslims comes from southeast England. The Avon and Somerset
Police Force, which patrols the cities of Bristol and Bath, as well as surrounding areas, has just issued hijabs to female
officers. The hijabs, distributed at the initiative of two Muslim groups and costing £13 apiece, come complete with the
Constabulary's emblem.
Now, issuing hijabs as part of uniforms in Great Britain is nothing new. The London Police led the way in 2001, followed
by other police forces, at least one fire brigade, and even the furniture chain Ikea. What sets the Avon and Somerset
hijabs apart from these others is their being intended not just for pious Muslim female staff but also for non-Muslim
staff, in particular for their use upon entering mosques.
[Rashad Azami of the Bath Islamic Society finds it "highly pleasing" that the Constabulary took this step. One of the
seven non-Muslim officers to receive a hijab of her very own, Assistant Chief Constable Jackie Roberts, calls it "a very
positive addition to the uniform and one which I'm sure will be a welcome item for many of our officers."
[Dhimmitude is the term Bat Ye'or coined to describe subservience to Shariah by non-Muslims. Assistant Chief
Constable Roberts' enthusiasm for the hijab might be called "advanced dhimmitude."]
"Hijab bullies" -- as David J. Rusin of Islamist Watch calls them -- who coerce non-Muslim females to cover up
are just one stripe of Islamist imposing Shar'i ways on the West. Other Islamists focus on impeding the uncensored
discussion of such topics as Muhammad and the Koran or Islamist institutions or terrorist financing; still others
exert to bring taxpayer-funded schools, hospitals, and jails into conformity with Islamic law, not to speak of taxi cabs
and municipal swimming pools. Their efforts don't always succeed, but, in the aggregate, they are rapidly shifting the
premises of Western, and especially British, life.
Returning to pork: both Islam and Judaism abominate the flesh of pigs, so this prohibition offers a direct and revealing
comparison of the two religions. Simply put, Jews accept that non-Jews eat pork, but Muslims take offense and try to
impede pork consumption. That, in brief, explains why Western accommodations to Halakha have no relevance for
dealing with Shariah. And why Shariah as public policy must be opposed.
© Daniel Pipes 2009
Originally Published in the National Post, August 5, 2009
Republished with the Permission of Daniel Pipes
Reprinted from the Daniel Pipes Mailing List, August 5, 2009
Article URL: http://www.danielpipes.org/article/7493/why-shariah-must-be-opposed
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Lawfare -- The Use of Law as a Weapon in War & Politics:
Islamist Lawfare & the "Legal" Jihad Against America & the West
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
Middle East -- Arabs, Arab States,
& Their Middle Eastern Neighbors
American Foreign Policy -- The Middle East
International Politics & World Disorder:
War, Peace, & Geopolitics in the Real World:
Foreign Affairs & U.S. National Security
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
Counterterrorism & U.S. National Security
U.S. National Security Strategy
Dr. Daniel Pipes, a Ph.D. in Islamic History (Harvard University, 1978), is the Founder and Director of the Middle East Forum,
the Founder of Campus Watch, a signatory of the Project for the New American Century, a former board member of the U.S.
Institute of Peace, a former adjunct scholar at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Golden Circle supporter of the
U.S. Committee for a Free Lebanon, a former member of the U.S. Department of Defense Special Task Force on Terrorism and
Technology, and a former lecturer at the U.S. Naval War College, Harvard University, the University of Chicago, and the
University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Pipes was the Director of the Foreign Policy Research Institute from 1986 to 1993.
Author or co-author of eighteen books, Dr. Pipes is a regular columnist for Front Page Magazine, the New York
Sun, and the Jerusalem Post. His analyses of world trends and of forces and developments in the Middle East
have appeared in numerous North American newspapers, including the Washington Post, the New York Times,
and the Wall Street Journal. He frequently appears on American network television, as well as at universities and
think tanks, to discuss the Middle East, Islam, and the Islamist threat to the U.S.A. and the West. He also has appeared on
BBC and Al Jazeera, and has lectured in approximately twenty-five countries.
Dr. Pipes is a Polish-American Jew whose parents fled Poland in 1939, immigrated to the U.S.A., and assimilated well into
American society and culture. His father is Richard Pipes, an American historian specializing in Russian and Soviet history
and serving as Professor of History at Harvard University from 1950 until his retirement in 1996. During the Cold War, the
worldview of Richard Pipes was strongly anti-Soviet and anti-Communist.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume XI, 2009
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity