SHOULD MUSLIMS BE ALLOWED TO IMPOSE ISLAM ON AMERICANS?
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.
Dr. Muqtedar Khan is Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at University of Delaware. He is also a Nonresident Senior Fellow of the Saban Center at Brookings Institution and a Fellow at the Prince Alwaleed Center at Georgetown University. His website is www.ijtihad.org.
SHOULD MUSLIMS BE ALLOWED TO IMPOSE ISLAM ON AMERICANS?"
Many thanks to Mr. Khan for raising this issue in a manner that is understandable to most Americans.
As Mr. Khan points out in his example of returning home with an exotic liquor, or more seriously a heart attack victim with alcohol on his breath, one can also question whether Moslem cab-drivers would be able to drive drunks home from bars under the terms or the fatwa forbidding moslems to work for people who drink.
I am not qualified to comment on the Islamic scholarship Mr. Khan presents, but I am concerned about not offending the consciences of people living around me.
In order to break this down into terms that I think are humane and that respect religious scruples, let me confine my remarks to the example of an inebriated bar guest who calls a cab to get home from a night of hard drinking.
It is hard to see how anyone, irregardless of religious background can morally justify a person who sits at a bar and deliberately drinks himself into oblivion. One can easily summon an attitude of moral disapproval for a party that provides the opportunity for an inexperienced drinker to become accidentally inebriated in public as well.
Nevertheless, bars, restaurants and other establishments that sell liquor, wine or beer furnish these beverages as an enhancement of meals, a social ritual and in some cases for the enjoyment of the taste or the beverages themselves. Although many abuse the hospitality of the establishments and some few even advertise the sale of intoxicants, drunkenness remains socially unacceptable and many establishments should not to be seen as purveyors of wanton behavior.
So we are back to our bar patron who has tied one on. When the cab driver arrives, he will inevitably believe that this is an unsavory customer. The man could puke, he could give false directions to his destination or decide he wants to visit someone who would not welcome him, or he could fall into a deep sleep that would require a lot of effort from the cabbie to disembark him. There are many non-religious reasons for a cabbie to refuse a ride to such a man. Yet there is a social and almost a moral expectation that the cabbie will take such a fare.
Why? The reason that the cabbie is expected to take such a fare is that leaving him to his own devices can so easily cause harm. The man may drunkenly collide with a pedestrian or another vehicle, or he may find some other way to cause problems. When the cabbie takes such a fare he implicitly takes custody of a helpless, (and possibly very objectionable) man and renders aid.
Now whether a Moslem is a taxi-driver taking a fare home from the airport or a physician treating a patient in the ER isn't he taking a helpless person under his care?
I find it difficult to believe that believers in a powerful and compassionate supreme being would not rise to such an occasion.
Robert Chapman
Lansing, NY
by
rob Chapman (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments)
on Friday, November 24, 2006 at 10:57:30 AM
In re-reading my comment on Dr. Khan's article above, I noticed that I repeatedly referred to him as Mr. Khan. This was an error, with no disrepect intended. I apologize to Dr. Khan for my oversight.
Robert Chapman
Lansing, NY
by
rob Chapman (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 10 comments)
on Friday, November 24, 2006 at 11:08:03 AM
SHOULD MUSLIMS BE ALLOWED TO IMPOSE ISLAM ON AMERICANS?"
What has happened to our country..where is that freedom of religion or from religion..? I do not think any religion has the right to impose their will on me or any one against their will,..nor any other wacko fanatic, carrying a banner for some idiotic personal notion..if Muslims want to live in this country and practice their religion, they are free to do that, an awful lot of our soldiers died, all around the world, to give them that right, they disrespect this country and those men and women who died, when they do not live by our Constitution, ..and what it means to be a "free" country..(and that goes for Baptists, Evangelicals, Methodists, Seven Day Adventists, Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Catholics, Wiccas or any other religion....wouldn't hurt for Bush and a few in Congress to study the Constitution and what it means...instead of wiping their a**ses on it..!) If they can't live by it, honor it and protect it, as intended, as they swore they would..they should not be allowed to live in this country or hold office..! I truly believe not honoring and abiding by the Constitution, should be declared Treason and a grave danger to our National Security. Those who would spit on the Constitution, the very foundation of our country, should be punished to the highest extent of the law.
by
Susan Nelsen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 175 comments)
on Friday, November 24, 2006 at 11:20:44 PM
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. This is not really about Muslims. It is about the erosion of the separation of church and state. Many religions have tried to trample on it for the past 6 years. Well, come to think of it, it started with the "Moral Majority" during the 80's. Some of us have been angry about this issue for quite some time now. Sorry if it seems otherwise.
by
SwampWitch (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 38 comments)
on Saturday, November 25, 2006 at 6:43:06 PM
And what is more, should the Rothschilds and their tribe be allowed to inflict their wars and their impoverishing commercial activities on us via our politicians who are - as we see - almost uniformly bribed by them for that purpose?
And their acquisition of all our industries, and their globalizing of our work, and brainwashing of our people via the media and of our children via education publishing, and their infiltration and their domination of our administration, and their flooding of all our counrties with immigrants and . . . You name it.
Well, should they?
by
amazin (26 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 342 comments)
on Saturday, November 25, 2006 at 2:49:43 AM
Patience America. If an independant cabdriver bypasses a passenger he loses the fare. If he works for a company and their revenues are affected he loses his job. If a doctor refuses to treat a patient he loses his license, they are issued by the state and not by any religion. If a firefighter refuses an order he loses his job. If local, state or federal laws are violated by a religious practise the interest of the greater body prevails. All these redresses may take time to work out but they will. In the meantime, put the bottle in the pocket of your overcoat, into your briefcase or purse and hail that cab!
by
Jane Knisely (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Saturday, November 25, 2006 at 4:35:48 AM
A loss of license is not all that would and should happen to a doctor who refuses to treat someone which could result in the person death. The way I see it, the doc comes in to see the patient in the little ER bed and notices he is drunk and refuses to treat him. Well, then another doc has to be found. If the person is having a heart attack, the person could die in the mean time. Muslims will have to accept our laws. Wheter they are cab drivers or doctors
by
SwampWitch (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 38 comments)
on Saturday, November 25, 2006 at 5:30:24 AM
With the struggle we having keeping a separation of church and state with fundamentalists Christians, it is even more imperative that we stick to those principles now that some aggressive Muslim groups are trying to impose their religious beliefs on our populace, I had little patience for this sort of thing form other religious groups in the US, and I will not have any more Patience with Muslims. I have had it up to my eyeballs with religious groups trying to legislate their brand of morality with banning of gay marriage to attempt to ban abortion with out a health exception as well as a danger of death exception. This action by the taxi drivers i just another example in the disdain some people's of religion disdain our constitution
by
SwampWitch (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 38 comments)
on Saturday, November 25, 2006 at 5:14:10 AM
A muslim has a right to not want to transport haram materials. If I had a friend staying with me who was a drinker, I'd still be within my rights to refuse to allow him to have alcohol in the house. By transporting the alcohol, there is an implication that you condone the drinking of alcohol. A muslim is well within their right to stand by their own convictions. There is nothing wrong with it. There are other cabbies that will take the travelers and they will learn to schedule a pickup ahead of time with a company that has little or no problem with transporting alcohol. Where are we in this world when we're boo-hooing about some affluent person who is traveling back from Kuwait with an exotic alcoholic beverage? If we allow these people to be wronged...where are we as a society? Will cabbies start refusing to give rides to people who have melted butter on their breath (the tell-tale sign of having eaten shellfish, dontcha know)? The horror...get over yourselves.
by
Kevin Huxford (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Saturday, November 25, 2006 at 9:47:47 PM
I agree with Bob, if they can not do their job with bringing their religion into it, they should find another job. I am living in a middle east country right now, and since I am in their country, honor their beliefs, even though they are not mine. In this country there are a lot of Ex-pats that are not Muslim, should we try and tell our host country that we will not accept their beliefs, such as ramadan, No. Of course as an outsider you can not become a citizen of this country, and I assure you, if you transgress to far on their religious beliefs, you will be out of here so fast you wouldn't know what had happened. I suggest everytime this should happen, that individual report that driver to the taxi authority, maybe their license can be pulled. Or maybe that driver can be sued for discriminating against your civil rights,Yep that is the route to go.
by
Freebird (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Saturday, December 2, 2006 at 1:40:26 AM
