Thread: Should Muslims be allowed to impose Islam on Americans?

First Published 2006-11-25, Last Updated 2006-11-25 11:42:05

Should Muslims be allowed to impose Islam on Americans?


Muslims and non-Muslims must not allow a few rotten apples to impose their thoughtless understanding of Islam on others, subvert free societies, distort Islamic teachings and undermine the hope for a harmonious relationship between America and its Muslims, says Muqtedar Khan.


Many Muslim cab drivers in Minneapolis are refusing to allow passengers carrying alcohol in their cabs, saying it is against the Islamic Shariah [law] to do so. More than half the taxi drivers on the airport are Muslims, and as soon as they got a majority, they have resorted to imposing their beliefs on others.

Imagine if you have just flown in from Baghdad after a long flight, you can’t wait to get home, reconnect with your family, and share a glass of some exotic alcoholic drink that you purchased on Dubai airport [a Muslim country] with your wife to celebrate your return home alive from Iraq. It is 2.00 AM but your reunion is delayed because cab after cab, driven by Muslims, refuses to take you home once they spot you carrying alcohol.

Sounds crazy, but sadly it is true. As a Muslim I am both ashamed and shocked at this strange conduct of my coreligionists. In principle Islam does not advocate imposition of Islamic values on others; there are several injunctions in Islamic sources which make this clear. To cite only two; “Let there be no compulsion in religion” [Quran: 2:256] and “To us shall be accounted our deeds, and to you, your deeds. Let there be no contention between us and you: God will bring us all together - for with Him is all journey’s end" [Quran, 42:15].

But when it comes to contemporary Muslims, we must always remember, there is always an ocean between what Islam teaches in principle and what Muslims practice in reality. Most Muslims will acknowledge this readily. I call it the ocean of ignorance.

Apparently, the cab drivers have provided the Metropolitan Airports Commission with a Fatwa dated June 06, 2006, from the Fatwa department of the local chapter of the Muslim American Society [MAS]. The fatwa proclaims that "Islamic jurisprudence" prohibits taxi drivers from carrying passengers with alcohol, "because it involves cooperating in sin according to Islam."

MAS, the organization behind this fitna [Arabic for contention and strife], is the American extention of the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, a close affiliate of Islamic Circle of North America. MAS hypocritically runs a public affairs department called “Freedom Foundation”. I guess it is seeking the freedom to infringe on the freedom of others.

To be fair to them, Islamic sources do forbid alcohol consumption unequivocally [Quran 2:219] and Prophet Muhammad, may peace and blessings be upon him, also forbid trade in alcohol [Bukhari 34:297, 8:449, 34:429], but all these sources forbid selling and trading alcohol. Extending this ban to giving rides to tired travelers carrying alcohol for personal consumption requires an irrational and politically motivated leap that smells of mischief. Moderates and Muslims of goodwill should not stand for such thinly veiled attempts to sow discord.

Most Muslim scholars and most Muslims of Minnesota will tell you that the fatwa is indeed without merit. And indeed many Muslim voices, yours truly included, have already condemned and ridiculed this position. Even in Saudi Arabia, which is usually the champion when it comes to extremely narrow, irrational and intolerant interpretations of Islam, non-Muslims are allowed to consume alcohol, and even carry them on flights.

The alcohol issue is not really the problem. It is just a tip of the ice berg. It raises a fundamental and critical issue, can Muslims who live in free and democratic societies, simultaneously demand freedom and tolerance for Islam while denying others the same. Can we and should we demand freedom to practice Islam and then turn around and use these same freedoms to impose anachronistic understandings of Islam on others.

What next? Will Muslim doctors working in ER refuse to administer to patients brought in from an accident site or with a heart attack because they have alcohol on their breath? Will Muslim doctors refuse to serve an HIV positive patient because he or she is gay? Will Muslim fire fighters refuse to save people who are caught in a fire in a place that sells alcohol? Will Muslim cops refuse to protect women who do not wear Hijab [head scarf]? Will Muslim teachers refuse to educate children because their mothers do not wear the veil? All of the above would entail supporting sin according to popular Muslim beliefs.

If the cab episode in Minnesota becomes a norm, and MAS could make it so. It claims that it is the biggest Muslim grass roots organization in America; can America then trust Muslims in any job where it is important to treat all people, Muslim and non-Muslim, sinner and Imam equally? Since 98% of Americans are non-Muslims, I am sure they routinely commit acts which according to Islam are sins, such as worshipping Jesus. Will Muslims stop doing business with them?

Can Muslims live with those who do not share their beliefs?

This is an important debate, especially for Muslim immigrants, who come to America with their religious baggage. Are we here to give our families a better life or are we here to convert America into an Afghanistan under the Taliban? Do we want to use American freedoms to learn about Islam and practice it in an intimidation free environment, or use it to spread the disease of religious intolerance? Will Muslim presence in America strengthen it or subvert it?

American Muslims have the opportunity to demonstrate that not only is Islam a religion for all times and all places but is not a threat or trial for others. We can prove that Muslims can live in harmony with non-Muslims and that the thesis of the clash of civilizations is bogus.

America, in spite of its faults, its limitations and even its sins and sinners, is easily the best place to live on earth. If you do not believe me, then ask the millions of Muslims desperate to leave their countries, their families, their societies to come to America.

The thing that is most precious about America is not its capitalist nature or its wealth, it is the first amendment. The ideal of freedom of religion and thought in America has allowed it to become a society that most people in the world aspire to emulate and live in. The principle of freedom of religion allows Muslims to practice Islam. In essence there can be no faith without freedom; it must therefore be guarded very jealously.

A vast majority of American Muslims are highly educated, enlightened and have for decades performed their jobs with dignity, integrity and excellence. Unlike the Fatwa department of MAS, they remember what the Quran really teaches:

Where Muslims are allowed to practice their religion and there is no one trying to drive them away from their homes, Muslims are required to deal kindly and justly with all non-Muslims [Quran 60:8]. Muslim scholars have a name for places like America – Dar-ul-Aman [house of peace].

We, and by we I mean all Americans, Muslims and non-Muslims must not allow, a few rotten apples, to impose their thoughtless understanding of Islam on others, subvert free societies, distort Islamic teachings and undermine the hope for a harmonious relationship between America and its Muslims.

At 2:00 AM in the morning, we cannot leave you hanging in the cold waiting to go home, it would be inhuman.

Dr. Muqtedar Khan is Assistant Professor at University of Delaware and a Senior Nonresident Fellow with the Saban Center at Brookings Institution. He is also a Fellow at the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center at Georgetown University. He is the author of American Muslims: Bridging Faith and Freedom [2002] and Islamic Democratic Discourse [2006]. His website is Ijtihad.org.
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=18483

Do you think a Christian cab driver would have been able to use this same argument for refusing to transport a passenger?

AMERICANS HAVE THE FREEDOM TO PRACTICE ANY RELIGION THEY WANT TO OR DO NOT WANT TO. WE ACCEPT SATAN WORSHIPS, WHY NOT ISLAM. IT IS NOT THE ISLAM RELIGION THAT IS THE PROBLEM IT IS HOW PEOPLE INTERPRET ISLAM. ISLAM DOES NOT TEACH ANYTHING THAT CHRISTIAN RELIGION DOES NOT. THEY BOTH TEACH VIOLENCE. THERE IS NOT RELIGION THAT HAS A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE THAN THE CATHOLIC RELIGION.

Originally Posted by dyehard39

AMERICANS HAVE THE FREEDOM TO PRACTICE ANY RELIGION THEY WANT TO OR DO NOT WANT TO. WE ACCEPT SATAN WORSHIPS, WHY NOT ISLAM. IT IS NOT THE ISLAM RELIGION THAT IS THE PROBLEM IT IS HOW PEOPLE INTERPRET ISLAM. ISLAM DOES NOT TEACH ANYTHING THAT CHRISTIAN RELIGION DOES NOT. THEY BOTH TEACH VIOLENCE. THERE IS NOT RELIGION THAT HAS A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE THAN THE CATHOLIC RELIGION.

DYE
no need to scream. My ears are now ringing so you can take it down a notch, ok?

The above article has NOTHING to do with PRACTICING religion. Read it again so that you can clarify the situation.

NO, the cab driver should not be driving a cab in the United States of America. He'd be better off in Saudi Arabia which practices en toto, Sharia law. We DO NOT. He offended a person of another RELIGION by demanding that his religion be upheld over another. He should have a job that doesn't INTERFERE with his religion.........LIKE THE REST OF US.

.

Amen Sis, none of us should let our religion interfer with out jobs. If it is that much of a deal then get another job where you feel more comfortable.

Originally Posted by nittygritty

Amen Sis, none of us should let our religion interfer with out jobs. If it is that much of a deal then get another job where you feel more comfortable.

Originally Posted by dyehard39

AMERICANS HAVE THE FREEDOM TO PRACTICE ANY RELIGION THEY WANT TO OR DO NOT WANT TO. WE ACCEPT SATAN WORSHIPS, WHY NOT ISLAM. IT IS NOT THE ISLAM RELIGION THAT IS THE PROBLEM IT IS HOW PEOPLE INTERPRET ISLAM. ISLAM DOES NOT TEACH ANYTHING THAT CHRISTIAN RELIGION DOES NOT. THEY BOTH TEACH VIOLENCE. THERE IS NOT RELIGION THAT HAS A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE THAN THE CATHOLIC RELIGION.

I think that you need to spend a little more time actually studying comparative theology and less time screaming.

I would also point out that Americans do not have, or at least historically have not had, the "freedom to practice any religion they want." Tenets of a number of religions have been rejected as contrary to the moral principles that underpin this nation and its laws. For example, polygamy cannot be practiced as a religious tenet, nor can the use of narcotics be justified by religious faith.

DYE
no need to scream. My ears are now ringing so you can take it down a notch, ok?

SORRY, ME KEYBOARD IS STUCK. I WILL REFRAIN FROM POSTING UNTIL I GET NEW KEYBOARD.

I would also point out that Americans do not have, or at least historically have not had, the "freedom to practice any religion they want." Tenets of a number of religions have been rejected as contrary to the moral principles that underpin this nation and its laws. For example, polygamy cannot be practiced as a religious tenet, nor can the use of narcotics be justified by religious faith.

[/quote]


What is Meant by Religious Rights
The Church in each place must be free to define the mission it believes it has received from God. Likewise, individual Christians and other believers must be free to practice their faith in whatever manner they believe necessary, commensurate with their not violating the same freedom of others. In addition, we affirm the understanding of religious freedom embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (194 and other international covenants. While some actions taken in the name of religious rights may be ambiguous and will have to be addressed on a case-by-case basis, we believe that religious rights include at least the following:
Every person has the right to determine his or her own faith and creed according to conscience.
Every person has the right to the privacy of his belief, to express his religious beliefs in worship, teaching, and practice, and to proclaim the implications of his beliefs for relationships in a social or political community. Every person has the right to associate with others and to organize with them for religious purposes.
Every religious organization, formed or maintained by action in accordance with the rights of individual persons, has the right to determine its policies and practices for the accomplishment of its chosen purposes, which implies the right:
to assemble for unhindered private or public worship
to formulate its own creed
to have an adequate ministry
to determine its conditions of membership
to give religious instruction to its youth, including preparation for ministry
to preach its message publicly
to receive into its membership those who desire to join it
to carry on social services and to engage in missionary activity both at home and abroad
to organize local congregations
to publish and circulate religious literature
to control the means necessary to its mission and to secure support for its work at home and abroad
to cooperate and to unite with other believers at home and abroad
to use the language of the people in worship and in religious instruction
to determine freely the qualifications for professional leadership of religious communities, freely naming their religious leaders at all levels and designating their work assignments.

http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/rights.html

Originally Posted by dyehard39

DYE
no need to scream. My ears are now ringing so you can take it down a notch, ok?

SORRY, ME KEYBOARD IS STUCK. I WILL REFRAIN FROM POSTING UNTIL I GET NEW KEYBOARD.

Thanx, lol.

Good to see you've got that keyboard unstuck
.