The passing of Oklahoma's absolutely bizarre Measure 755 (also known as the "Save Our State" Amendment) was largely overlooked in the post-election haze of progressive self-pity and fat, sweaty Tea Party celebrations. You may ask yourself: what, besides mind-numbing boredom, does Oklahoma need to be saved from?

The answer is shari‘a.

Measure 755 “forbids courts from considering or using Sharia Law” when issuing rulings, which has been a notorious problem in a state where Muslims make up—at most—.04% of the population. The authors of the measure argued that it was direly needed in order to confront the impending “onslaught” on Oklahoman values by, presumably, invading hordes of Islam-o-bots riding camels down the Oklahoma freeway, lopping off the heads of unbelievers.

You think?

Of particular concern to supporters was the, admittedly appalling, ruling by a New Jersey judge that a Moroccan immigrant had not committed marital rape because he believed that, within his religion, marriage implied consent. While outrage is justified, the assumption that the judge was therefore “applying shari‘a” is a rather wishful, and probably willful, misreading by the Islamophobes.

The judge did not exculpate the husband because shari‘a “allows for” marital rape; instead, he simply ruled that the husband “did not act with criminal intent” because the man believed his actions were within his religious rights. So the judge was acting solely within the confines of American law—though his decision was egregious and later overturned by the New Jersey appellate court. Ironically, enough, the judge was guilty of excepting a man from the application of state laws because his religious views conflicted with that law—a kind of decision many conservative Christians may themselves appreciate.

Nonetheless, the media campaign in support of the measure, which was funded most prominently by the anti-Muslim organization Act! For America, seized upon this decision as proof that evil, evil “Shari’a law” was almost certainly coming to Oklahoma unless it was stopped:




Act! For America was founded in order to “provide American citizens a means to be a collective voice for the democratic values of Western Civilization, such as the celebration of life and liberty, as opposed to the authoritarian values of radical Islam, such as the celebration of death, terror, and tyranny.” But, interestingly, it’s not just death, terror, and tyranny that concerns them. No, no. Among the various other grievances cited by Act! For America in their dis-informational PowerPoint on Islam is that, ostensibly because of Muslim dietary restrictions, “Bacon and eggs are becoming harder and harder to get at British university cafeterias.” Those. Bastards.

As noted lovers of bacon and eggs, and apparently feeling asphyxiated by the icy death grip of the 15,000 or so Muslims in their state, Oklahomans passed Measure 755 by an enormous margin of 70-30%.

By no means do I purport to be an expert on Islamic law, but Measure 755 reveals the unsurprising fact that Islamophobes know virtually nothing about shari‘a beyond the Disney movie Aladdin:




Poor Ali Ababwa. First he almost loses his hand, then he’s condemned by the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee for insisting that “they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face. It’s barbaric but, hey, it’s home.” Damn PC Police, man, and their making sure children aren't indoctrinated with vicious portrayals of an entire region.

In reality, shari‘a is not the application by the state of ancient and barbaric laws to modern situations, but is instead a process whereby jurists issue rulings based on their own reasoning, precedent, and holy texts. As Sherman Jackson explains, it is a set of competing discourses and approaches to the law that are constantly re-interpreted in light of new socio-cultural circumstances and is necessarily decentralized. Marital rape is not a concept familiar to Islamic jurisprudence (and was not in the West until the 1970s), but it could become one if Muslim jurists begin to deliberate on it.

As a result, shari‘a exists in an uneasy, if not untenable, relationship with the state. Wael Hallaq, the most important scholar of Islamic Law in the English-speaking world, argues that even in states like Iran, which presume to apply shari‘a, the vast majority of their laws are necessarily “Western in inspiration and content,” because the strict codification and enforcement of law is fundamentally at odds with the actual function of shari‘a.

So the notion of America (or any country) “under the rule of shari‘a” is the unrealizable dream of Islamists, and the unnecessary nightmare of Islamophobes. Haroon Moghul expresses amusement “that Oklahomans would consider this threat enough to pass a law, to head off (and I can’t believe this is the case) the looming Islamization of the West” and it is, on the one hand, riotously humorous. But it is also obviously a disturbing addition to what is beginning to feel like an unstoppable wave of anti-Muslim sentiment in the United States.

Share this post:

No Response to "O-o-o-oklahoma, Where Muslim Hordes Come Sweeping Down the Plain"

Post a Comment