by
There is nothing new about America’s conflicts with Islam. That aggressive theocratic system has been at war with America almost since the U.S. was born.
Islam is not a religion in the sense that Western Civilization understands the word. Islam is a fusion of social, political, and theological authority. It is antithetical to our constitution and, in practice, has been militarily hostile to America since our nation’s inception.
The only English word that comes close to describing Islam is “Theocracy,” a system of government that fuses religion and autocracy, but even this falls short of the mark. In the words of Dr. Peter Hammond from his book, Slavery, Terrorism and Islam,
Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.
This synthesis brings observant Muslims into direct conflict with the United States Constitution’s Amendment I, Amendment VI, Amendment XIV, Amendment XIX, and several other clauses.
Sharia law is ecclesiastical law, and in Muslim society, it is administered by religious courts headed by Muslim clerics. The Western institution most like this arrangement was the now-defunct Spanish Inquisition, which has a deservedly black reputation.
The authority that Sharia claims stands in opposition to civil and criminal courts in every American jurisdiction. For example, across America, it is illegal to behead your wife for adultery. However, it is sanctioned under Sharia law, as is stoning, and countries under Sharia governance apply this rule.
Likewise, in America, homosexuality is not punished by death. In fact, it is no longer punished in any way. However, in areas where fundamentalist Sharia Law operates, homosexuals, when discovered, are routinely hanged or thrown off tall buildings.
Islam has three core religious texts: the Koran, which many Westerners are aware of even if they haven’t studied it; the Haditha, containing Islam’s collected traditions; and the Sirah, containing Mohamed’s collected biographies.
The latter two collections are significantly larger and more complete in scope than the Koran itself. They answer all questions within Islam that the Koran doesn’t address.
The Haditha are not a single body of text. There are several competing versions authored by different Islamic scholars. The two most respected in order of authority are Sahi al-Bukhari and Sahih al-Muslim. The Sirah, like the Haditha, has several competing accounts of Mohamed’s life. The oldest known is Sirat Rasūl Allāh by Ibn Ishaq. All versions are derived solely from oral traditions.
There is a growing body of intellectual and academic challenges to the accuracy and veracity of the Muslim texts, very similar to the challenges raised a century or two ago in those same quarters against Jesus Christ’s existence and the Christian narrative. Unlike the Christian narrative, which has largely been supported by recent archeological discoveries, numerous archeological finds contradict the Muslim narrative.
However, for purposes of this discussion, the truth or falsehood of Islam’s narrative is irrelevant. The mere fact that many hundreds of millions believe and follow these texts is all that matters. Their beliefs and actions are informed by the three texts above and by the ways Muslim clerics interpret them.