@fujimura this needs a fisking.

>Shariah forbids compulsion. (Islamophobes hide this fact) There's no permission for govt to ever force Shariah—Shariah itself forbids it.

sharia is the compelled system of justice in numerous countries. and this is inconsistent with liberal definitions of religious law: the same people who say that blue laws are de facto "christian sharia" insist that countries with actual sharia that ban alcohol nationwide is "culture" not islamic law.

>Qur’an does not promote any specific form of Govt, but requires govt be based on adl or “absolute justice.” Not religion—justice.

It is impossible for the Muslim to conceptualize justice outside of the knowledge that Allah created the universe and commits no injustice, through this the nature of adl is understood, one of the 99 names of Allah is "Al-Adl." the basis of sharia law is the koran and the sunnah (study of the words and actions of muhammad) so I mean, come on

>So contrary to what #MarchAgainstSharia bigots say—Qur'an teaches separation of mosque & state. Muhammad(sa) himself proved this. When he was head of Medina State comprising Muslims & Jews[..]He didn't b/c Islam forbids theocracy. Plain & simple

He simply didn't have the power to compel this. Compare with how Medina is ruled in 2017.

>Shariah obliges Muslim loyalty to our nation of residence. Thus—American Muslims must adhere to US Constitution as Supreme law of land

Muslims (and Christians) are not compelled to obey laws that go against God's Law.

>The 1st Amendment to the Constitution protects freedom of worship. Banning Shariah = Banning Halacha & Canon. It is Unconstitutional

deceptively does not distinguish between personal obligations of sharia on the individual and legally compelled sharia, or sharia compelled on individuals through sharia mediation. within the context of "anti-sharia" no one has ever suggested that Muslims be prohibited from following their religious code personally except where it conflicts with the law or constitution.

>Let's be clear. There's not even 1 example of a “Shariah compliant” country today. They're draconian regimes bent on power—not justice.

simple no true scotsman argument. Pakistani scholars established Afghanistan to be the perfect Islamic state. There is ideology and there is identity. Will bring back up later.

>Likewise there's not 1 example of Muslims trying to enforce Shariah in USA. The drive to "ban Shariah" is lunacy

It's a waste of effort and unnecessarily divisive perhaps but as noted above, ideology popularity is a product of demography, in effect "anti-sharia" is an acknowledgement that as the population of Muslims in the United States increases, things Muslims believe will have more popularity, and thus more power.

>US History shows similar propaganda & bigotry against Jews, Mormons, Black Xtians, Native Americans, Italians, Irish, Chinese,& Japanese

Accidentally very relevant: are you talking about current liberal attacks on Mormons as being theocrats? Or the nationwide prejudice against the construction of Mormon temples that is never discussed but in scale puts opposition to mosques to shame? or historic attacks on Mormons back when Brigham Young was governor of the territory of Utah and later head of a Mormon shadow government of the territory? You are not special, and sometimes fear is justified and later whitewashed. 

bonus

https://shitposter.club/url/771794

The head of the Islamic State Abu-Bakr al-Baghdadi is far more credentialed than Qasim Rashid.