Osama bin Laden has threatened terror attacks on France for banning of the face veil, while Islamic extremists in Britain are threatening to kill women who do not wear a head scarf. From the stealth Jihad perpetrated by the Muslim Brotherhood to violent Jihad, Islamists have and continue to impose Sharia law on Western soil, becoming increasingly emboldened. Note Bin Laden’s warning to France:
If you unjustly thought that it is your right to prevent free Muslim women from wearing the face veil, is it not our right to expel your invading men and cut their necks?”
France is to be applauded for its stance. Westerners that will defend the rights of women to wear the veil and defend the right of Muslims to practice their faith in contradiction to Western values have provided the fertile soil for the seeds of creeping Sharia to grow.
Three years ago, Islamic law was officially adopted in Britain to oversee Muslim civil cases in Sharia courts which have continued to multiply, while Canada (in the province of Ontario) narrowly escaped it. Here’s how it almost happened, but failed: In 1991, Ontario changed its Arbitration Act to include faith-based arbitration to settle family disputes, such as divorce, inheritance and custody issues, outside the court system. CAIR-CAN was pleased and in 2004, released a statement that this was “a form of accommodating the needs of religious minorities within a multicultural society”.
Shortly after, the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice pushed the envelope by stating that it wanted this faith-based arbitration based on “Sharia Law.” The proposal was met with stiff resistance from women’s groups and the Muslim Canadian Congress, which put an end to this drive. The congress argued:
[S]haria is flawed because it does not view women as equal and therefore cannot provide equal justice to all parties in a dispute especially on issues of divorce, child custody and division of property.
Five months ago, Oklahoma passed a ballot initiative—70-30%– to forbid state courts from relying on Sharia in what was dubbed a “pre-emptive strike” by supporters. Yet Farhana Khera, executive director of Muslim Advocates, commented, “The Oklahoma ballot initiative struck us as silly and absurd — a proposed solution chasing a problem that doesn’t exist.” He added that the initiative “underscores the deep level of misunderstanding of Muslims and Islam in America.”