[detbuch]

[QUOTE=spence; One thing I've noticed repeatedly is that you seem to place the responsibility for understanding completely on the other party, treating all Muslims as a gigantic monolithic block. You blame moderates for not speaking out more against violence, but have you ever raised an ear to see if any are talking? You blame all innocent Muslims for not doing more, instead of taking ownership for the fear that you alone have control of. It's like a fear of all guns rather than those people who would use them for violence. In this respect you're acting pretty Left wing.

People tend to be more uncomfortable with things they're not used to. In an effort for outreach many Imam's have Open Mosque Days. You should seek one out and go talk to people.

-spence[/QUOTE]

I have talked to two young Saudi Muslims who are here to study in our universities. They are very charming. One has the sentiments of a poet, the other is more into women and fast cars. What unites them is their love of their culture and religion. Neither approves of nor understands terrorists. Yet, both completely accept Shariah as being the only legitimate form of law. Though they enjoy the freedom of America, they totally accept the suppression of non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia. They don't see it as suppression. It is simply the will of God.

While I was listening to the Dennis Prager show, an American born Muslim from N.Y. called in to complain about Islamophobia and couldn't understand why we are afraid of loyal American Muslims. As the discussion progressed, Prager asked him if the U.S. population was predominantly Muslim, would he want us to be under Shariah law. After a brief pause, he said yes. I have heard sentiments from Muslim callers to talk shows that we would be better off if we had Shariah law.

Oklahoma has a proposal on the Nov. 2 ballot to prohibit Islamic law from being used in rulings of Oklahoma courts. Muneer Awad, executive director of the Oklahoma branch of the Council on American Islamic Relations opposes the ammendment.

I googled "do Muslims want Shariah law in the U.S?" and found, among many entries, a worldwide forum called Islamic Board which discusses all manner of Islamic related topics. Most of the members are Muslim, though there are non-Muslims--the latter often initiate controversial discussions. There were seven pages of discussion related to my search topic. It was a good 3 hour session of reading those and then browsing other topics. There was great unity of opinion on all topics, especially in response to non-Muslim members. There was a poll of members on whether they would choose democracy or Shariah law. At that point it was 42 for Shariah and 4 for democracy. There was a comment that "democracy is a man-made system, meaning rule by the people for the people. Thus it is contrary to Islam, because rule is for Alaah, the most high, the almighty, and it is not permissible to give legislative rights to any human being." There was a quotation from the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwahs that "the one who understands the true nature of the democratic system and ruling therein, then he nominates himself or someone else for election is approving this system, and is working with it, is in grave danger, because the democratic system is contrary to Islam . . ." The ruling goes on to have an exception--that if you involve with a system of democratic election in order to "be able to change the system to one that operates according to the Sharee'ah of Islam, and they are using this as a means to overcome the system of government" it would be acceptable to participate. Further "the Muslims in a country that is not governed according to Islamic Sharee'ah should do their utmost and strive as much as they can to bring about rule according to Islamic Sharee'ah . . . As for supporting one who calls for no implementation of Islamic Sharee'ah, that is not permissible, rather it may lead to kufr." Probably why the C.A.I.R. opposes the Oklahoma ammendment.

Another interesting thread on this forum is titled "what is a moderate Muslim?" Within the 4 page discussion, it is asked if it follows that persons who strictly follow the Qu'ran and the Sunnah are what, on the forum are called "good Muslims" are, actually, what non-Muslims refer to as Extremist or Radical Muslims. And if those who don't strictly follow the Qu'ran and the Sunnah and are called "bad Muslims" on the forum are what, in fact, non-Muslims refer to as moderate Muslims. One of the forum Muslims immediately responds that, yes, that would indeed follow, and that 99 percent of the muslims on the forum, and perhaps the world, would on that basis be viewed as extremist/fundamentalist/fanatical/overzealous Muslims.

There is on this forum a general consensus that Islam is both religion AND law. To quote one member, "Islam is a constitution, a covenant a way of life." There is also the opinion that "moderate Muslims" and "extremist Muslims" are phrases that have been invented by non-Muslims, and that there are only Muslims.