SHARIA LAW TYPE B

Australia is heading towards a type of Sharia Law. A controversial statement I know, but allow me to explain. First what is Sharia Law. Secondly, what precisely do I mean by Sharia law type B? Thirdly, what can we do to prevent it?

First, what is Sharia Law?

Sharia or Islamic law are the religious laws derived from precepts both from the Quran and the Hadith. The Hadith are detailed human scholarly interpretations of the Quran (what the Talmud is to the Torah) which were collated roughly two centuries after Muhammad’s death, contributing to the bulk of what is known as Sharia law. Sharia rulings fall into one of five categories, known as the five decisions, which are; 1) what is compulsory, obligatory, 2) what is recommended, 3) what is neutral, not involving God’s judgement, 4) what is disliked or reprehensible, and 5) what is forbidden.

Because the Hadith are interpretations of the Quran there are various divisions in the Islamic community itself whether Sharia is compatible with democracy, freedom of thought, women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, banking and human rights. With regards to human rights the Islamic world addressed their shocking record in the Cairo Declaration which was officially adopted by all countries that are part of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) by the year 2000. Best attempts aside there emerged three alarming problems with the Cairo Declaration.

First. Although the Quran itself encourages freedom of expression without recourse, the Cairo Declaration, which seeks to uphold human rights, stipulates that according to Sharia Law no one can speak negatively about Islam, which is, as already mentioned, based largely on the Hadith. Therefore Sharia Law goes against its own scripture, suppressing a basic human right by suppressing freedom of speech.

Second. Even though the Cairo Declaration stipulates laws in support of human rights they are nonetheless flagrantly ignored and rejected when the rulers feel they are under threat, of which there have been countless examples in the world of governments that have done so. The root of this problem lies in Islam’s rejection of the idea that God would ever condescend, as in the Christian perspective of Jesus Christ suffering for the sake of the world. They argue it would violate God’s dignity, while missing that it is precisely because of this reason that Western nations, having had their constitutions built upon the Bible, treat their citizens better. Knowing God is among his people fosters respect for one another more than a God who is aloof.

Thirdly, and most importantly, Sharia Law tries to force out from their societies what it deems ‘reprehensible’, so that they don’t have to see and hear it. In so doing Sharia Law puts the emphasis on restricting the ‘speaker’, with little to no interest in restricting themselves the ‘hearers’. In a true democratic as well as a true Christian and Islamic culture, everyone has and should have the choice to either listen, understand, civilly engage, challenge, rebuff, disagree or even just to walk away. In so doing we exercise our free will to choose away what be believe to be the evil in the world. Sharia has no interest in these options and would prefer these voices counter to their beliefs, be beheaded.

What’s this got to do with Australia? As seen in the news of late, Australian Law is teetering on capitulation as it’s coming under increasing pressure to restrict what religious bodies can or cannot say, and leading the charge are the hostile proponents of the LGBTQ movement, unaware that what they are embracing, is the spirit of Sharia Law.

Sharia Law Type LGBTQ.

Their movement is all about the freedom of expression and diversity but they become easily offended when religious groups express their beliefs and their conscience. Their objection is that religion discriminates against their sexual preferences, while their hostilities discriminates against religion. Although neither is satisfied it is not Christianity that objects to their sexuality but God Himself. More so they miss the point that God objects to anything that is placed as our highest good above Him, more so for our own good than His.

What is the solution to preventing Sharia Law type B?

There are three things we can do.

One. Uphold freedom of religion at all costs.

The universal declaration of human rights article 18 protects the freedom of religion, which includes the freedom of speech and of conscience. I include Atheism, the sovereign over LGBTQ as a religion because it relies on faith. In fact there is no such thing as the absence of religion. We all worship something. Religion is a person’s identity, a moral compass so that a person can decide what’s right and what’s wrong. What if someone’s religion decides that it is morally right to kill another? Then it means that religion will destroy a society. Many say that religion have caused all the wars in the world, which is a popular myth but untrue. According to Philip Axelrod’s Encyclopedia of wars since antiquity only 7% had religious motivation, and of that 7% Christianity made up only a fraction. No guesses which religion takes the lion’s share. All decisions, as do all religions, either lead to life or death (Deuteronomy 30:15). All have a right to life. To think otherwise reveals such a person or system as blatantly from the Devil.

Two. Keep the public square open at all costs.

Restricting religion, restricts a person’s freedom. Restricting religious speech, restricts freedom. Restriction does not create unity in society but unrest. Therefore, for the sake of a society’s peace we are, till judgement day, compelled to respect multiple faiths in our world.

I read recently that the #metoo campaign backfired in places and the example is that Jeffrey Rush won his court battle. In the aftermath the question was asked why men and women don’t talk more about their boundaries before running straight to the courts? Yes we need to talk more, we need to get comfortable in environments where offence is given deliberately and unintentionally. Harvard business review posted and article in which it says that without conflict, there is no creativity. And without creativity we stop becoming human. Sharia Law Type B.

By keeping the public square open for business we keep conversations open so that we may help each find the gateway to salvation. The government’s role is not to try and rewrite the Bible or the Quran, but to uphold the rule of law, in other words prevent people who dislike each other from not killing each other.

Three. Be more like Jesus Christ.

Jesus the Son of God is always a very relevant example for every age. He said many things which were offensive to his hearers, such as, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into heaven, or that divorce was a sign of a hard heart. And so too his endorsement of the apostle Paul’s mission who delivered uncompromising words against same sex sexuality.

How did he answer the tough questions of his day? Most popularly he employed similes, stories and illustrations. In this way he allowed the Holy Spirit to convict. The similes didn’t offend, but for those who understood responded with conviction. Sometimes Jesus didn’t answer at all, as per Pontius Pilates interrogation. Other times he asked a question, with the proviso that if they don’t answer him satisfactorily first, he too would not. But Jesus was also not afraid to condemn in the strongest possible terms as he did the Hypocrites who were staggering towards slaughter.

The best example of a counter-cultural voice is Jesus who challenged our measurement for justice by inverting it, turning it in towards itself. In other words; if you’re saying something’s wrong for me, is it also wrong for you? If you say that I cannot prove there is a God, can you prove there isn’t? If you say that Christianity vilifies unbelievers, can you say that atheism doesn’t vilify christians? Jesus introduced Christianity as the world’s first and only ‘thinking religion.’

A friend of mine once asked me why I persist in this discourse. From his question I suspected he preferred me to temper my conversations by numbing it with the sedative neutrality of secularity. For me this is not showing love to my fellow man because what most do not know is how much is at stake. There is a heaven, and soberingly there is a very real place of torment – and life is all but an interview with the Almighty. Therefore freedom of religion in an age of grace is necessary, so we can show others the gate to eternal live, before it’s forever shut.