Another reason a practicing MUSLIM could not adhere to both Sharia and the US Constitution is a direct confrontation over SLAVERY.
Yes, in our early history the US employed slaves, a left over from Colonial times that the founding fathers tolerated, while arguing and working from the beginning to abolish, even though some of them owned them. A civil war was fought, with one of the outcomes being an end of slavery in the United States. Sad part of history but true.
Sharia Law, the supreme law of ISLAM, to which all practicing Muslims must adhere, actually allows for Slavery, to this day. In 2003 in what one scholar called a “ominous and disturbing development” a high-level Saudi jurist, Shaykh Saleh Al-Fawzan, issued fatwa claiming “Slavery is a part of Islam. Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.” He attacked Muslim scholars who said otherwise maintaining they were “infidels” and “ignorant, not scholars.” At the time of the fatwa, al-Fawzan was a member of the Senior Council of Clerics, Saudi Arabia’s highest religious body, a member of the Council of Religious Edicts and Research, the Imam of Prince Mitaeb Mosque in Riyadh, and a professor at Imam Mohamed Bin Saud Islamic University, the main Wahhabi center of learning in the country.
Once again I ask, can a practicing Muslim, who must follow Sharia Law, including the laws allowing slavery, possibly be truthful to an oath of office requiring him or her to “Protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies….”? NO ~MadVeteran