Earlier, I shared this post, Man Rapes Partner in Front of Their Children After She Refuses Abortion Demand http://amplify.com/u/9m3h, below is a related story about a Muslim man who under Islam and Sharia law, said it was his religious right to rape his wife.
The Real Impact of Sharia Law in America:
Does Sharia law allow a husband to rape his wife, even in America? A New Jersey trial judge thought so. In a recently overturned case, a “trial judge found as a fact that defendant committed conduct that constituted a sexual assault” but did not hold the defendant liable because the defendant believed he was exercising his rights over the victim. Fortunately, a New Jersey appellate court reversed the trial judge. But make no mistake about it: this is no isolated incident. We will see more cases here in the United States where others attempt to impose Sharia law, under the guise of First Amendment protections, as a defense against crimes and other civil violations.
In S.D. v. M.J.R., the plaintiff, a Moroccan Muslim woman, lived with her Moroccan Muslim husband in New Jersey. She was repeatedly beaten and raped by her husband over the course of several weeks. While the plaintiff was being treated for her injuries at a hospital, a police detective interviewed her and took photographs of her injuries. Those photographs depicted injuries to plaintiff’s breasts, thighs and arm, bruised lips, eyes and right check. Further investigation established there were blood stains on the pillow and sheets of plaintiff’s bed.
The wife sought a permanent restraining order, and a New Jersey trial judge held a hearing in order to decide whether to issue the order. Evidence at trial established, among other things, that the husband told his wife, “You must do whatever I tell you to do. I want to hurt your flesh” and “this is according to our religion. You are my wife, I c[an] do anything to you.” The police detective testified about her findings, and some of the photographs were entered into evidence.
The defendant’s Imam testified that a wife must comply with her husband’s sexual demands and he refused to answer whether, under Islamic law, a husband must stop his sexual advances on his wife if she says “no.”
The trial judge found that most of the criminal acts were indeed proved, but nonetheless denied the permanent retraining order. This judge held that the defendant could not be held responsible for the violent sexual assaults of his wife because he did not have the specific intent to sexually assault his wife, and because his actions were “consistent with his [religious] practices.” In other words, the judge refused to issue the permanent restraining order because under Sharia law, this Muslim husband had a “right” to rape his wife.
Besides the fact that the ruling is wrong as a legal matter, and offensive beyond words, it goes to the heart of the controversy about the insidious spread of Sharia law—the goal of radical Islamic extremists. Fortunately, the New Jersey appellate court refused to tolerate the trial judge’s “mistaken” and unsustainable decision. The appellate court chastised the trial judge’s ruling, holding among other things that he held an “unnecessarily dismissive view of defendant’s acts of domestic violence,” and that his views of the facts in the case “may have been colored by his perception that…they were culturally acceptable and thus not actionable – -a view we soundly reject.” Although appellate courts typically defer to findings of fact by trial judges, under the circumstances, this appellate court correctly refused to do so, and reversed the trial court and ordered the permanent restraining order to issue.
The truth is that imposition of Sharia law in the United States, especially when mixed with a perverted sense of political correctness, poses a danger to civil society. Just last year, a Muslim man in Buffalo, New York beheaded his wife in what appeared to be an honor killing, again using his faith to justify his actions. It is doubtful that the domestic violence and rape in this recently overturned case will be the last Americans see of Sharia being impermissibly used to justify brutal acts on our soil. As former Assistant Secretary of Defense Frank Gaffneywrote recently:
Sharia is no less toxic when it comes to the sorts of democratic government and civil liberties guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. According to this legal code of Saudi Arabia and Iran, only Allah can make laws, and only a theocrat can properly administer them, ultimately on a global basis.
Shockingly, a trial judge in New Jersey ruled in his favor rather than issuing the wife a restraining order. This is an example of what Muslim's who come to America and migrate into other countries expect. In addition, Honor killings, spousal abuse and rape are occurring in more countries with a greater Muslim population, including the UK.
Amina Said (L), 18, and her sister Sarah, 17, were shot dead by their father Yaser at their home in Irving, Texas, in January 2008. Said was upset by his daughters' "Western ways" and was assisted in the killing by his wife, the girls' mother. The victims of honor killings are largely teenage daughters or young women. Unlike ordinary domestic violence, honor killings often involve multiple family members as perpetrators.
Some who defend 'honor killings' say it is part of the culture,not Islam that allows for honor killings;however why doesn't the Islamic government do more to prevent this abuse against women? Probably because the Koran and Sharia law dictate what laws the government enforces and dictate that rape,honor killings and other abuses are allowed. In the United States many cases of domestic abuse occur, but they are not attributed to honor killings because they are done by non-Muslims and not done according to the Islamic culture and laws. The difference between domestic abuse and what occurs in Muslim cultures&families is that American culture and society have rights and laws to protect people from such crimes. Those who commit honor killings and abuse their children or wives under Islam are doing it because it is their culture and their religion.
A study on honor killings and it's comparison with domestic abuse is explained in this report from the Middle East Forum:
Families that kill for honor will threaten girls and women if they refuse to cover their hair, their faces, or their bodies or act as their family's domestic servant; wear makeup or Western clothing; choose friends from another religion; date; seek to obtain an advanced education; refuse an arranged marriage; seek a divorce from a violent husband; marry against their parents' wishes; or behave in ways that are considered too independent, which might mean anything from driving a car to spending time or living away from home or family. Fundamentalists of many religions may expect their women to meet some but not all of these expectations. But when women refuse to do so, Jews, Christians, and Buddhists are far more likely to shun rather than murder them. Muslims, however, do kill for honor, as do, to a lesser extent, Hindus and Sikhs.
The biggest difference between domestic abuse in Western society and honor killings and abuse in Muslim families and societies are described in the report as:
A number of honor killings in the United States, Canada, and Europe occur. These cases show the killings to be primarily a Muslim-on-Muslim crime. (See Table 2 and Table 3.) The victims are largely teenage daughters or young women. Wives are victims but to a lesser extent. And, unlike most Western domestic violence, honor killings are carefully planned. The perpetrator's family may warn the victim repeatedly over a period of years that she will be killed if she dishonors her family by refusing to veil, rebuffing an arranged marriage, or becoming too Westernized. Most important, only honor killings involve multiple family members. Fathers, mothers, brothers, male cousins, uncles, and sometimes even grandfathers commit the murder, but mothers and sisters may lobby for the killing. Some mothers collaborate in the murder in a hands-on way and may assist in the getaway. In some cases, taxi drivers, neighbors, and mosque members prevent the targeted woman from fleeing, report her whereabouts to her family, and subsequently conspire to thwart police investigations. Very old relatives or minors may be chosen to conduct the murder in order to limit jail time if caught.
Rather than assimilate with the laws,culture and societal expectations of Western society, many Muslim's expect to be catered to or decry racism and religious freedom. Thankfully the appeals court overturned this ruling;since rape and domestic violence is against the law in our society. If the Muslim's want to come to our country as citizens or foreign students, etc they must assimilate to our laws and our society regardless of religion. This is another reason many oppose the development of mosques across the country and especially in New York near Ground Zero. Many fear that as the number of mosques increase, the number of Muslim's who believe in this culture&follow these laws,Sharia law, will begin to influence our laws& change the way our society lives.
We are a nation of Constitutional laws and a free country;nobody is anyone's property to do with what they want. We have protections against abuse and murder of animals, women, children, men and anyone who might suffer at the hands of another. However, under Islam they follow the Koran literally and many Muslim's strictly adhere to Sharia law, which rules how men and women co-exist;making women less worthy in society.
States like Oklahoma have begun passing laws to oppose the implementation of Sharia law because it violates everything that makes America the land of the free and violates our Constitution. Unless we speak out against it and the increase in appeasement to Muslim's our society is at risk of losing those freedoms, all in the name of political correctness and appeasement.
blog comments powered by Disqus