A THREAT OF Shariah Law IN AMERICA?

A few days ago District Judge Mark Martin threw out an assault case brought against a Muslim who attacked an atheist. The incident occurred last October at the Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania Halloween parade. Atheist Ernie Perce was attacked by Muslim Talaag Elbayomy, because he was offended that Perce was dressed in a costume portraying the Prophet Mohammed.

 

According to the Harrisburg Patriot-News, Perce, a member of the “Parading Atheists of Central PA,” filed a complaint with police alleging that Elbayomy attacked him during the parade and inflicted bodily harm. Perce further told ABC 27 News, “he grabbed me, choked from the back, spun me around to try to get (my sign: ‘Muhammed of Islam’) off that was wrapped around my neck.”

Judge Martin threw out video evidence of the assault and dismissed the testimony of an eyewitness police officer. Citing a lack of admissible evidence, the Cumberland County judge dismissed the charges that were brought against the Muslim immigrant. The judge contended that the case represented one man’s word against the other and that the video was inadmissible.

Before dismissing the charges, the judge went on to scold Perce, the victim who was attacked and lectured him about the sensitivities of the Muslim culture. The judged alleged in court that the Muslim was obligated to attack the victim because of his culture and religion. According to a transcribed audio recording of Martin’s remarks posted on YouTube by the victim, which was later re-transcribed for clarity by the National Review Online,  the judge told the victim that “what you have done is you have completely trashed their essence, their being. They (Muslims) find it very, very, very offensive.”

Brigitte Gabriel, author of They Must Be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It, says the exonerated Muslim attacker was particularly pleased with the judge’s decision. According to Gabriel, “he was so proud; he said ‘I am setting a precedent because I want to teach my son a lesson that when you see something like this, you set the record straight and you behave violently’.” (One News Now – 03/01/2012.)

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, believes the judge’s “legal views seem grotesquely out of place.” Turley contends that this is an issue of “free speech…the touchstone of our culture.”

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel believes the judge’s decision is an indication of what may be coming to America if Sharia Law is used in our court systems. According to Staver, “this particular judge actually had the audacity to rule in favor of the attacker, saying that the attacker was compelled to attack this individual because it was an insult to Islam and the Prophet Muhammed.”

Staver’s fear was at the core of an amendment before Oklahoma voters in 2010. This amendment: “The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law.” At the ballots in November 2010, some 70% of Oklahomans voted in favor of the amendment. The law was challenged by Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma. He argued that the law violated his First Amendment rights – he won.

 

Oklahoma was attempting to be pro-active because of an earlier case in New Jersey where a woman was denied a restraining order from her husband. Following the testimony of an Imam regarding Islamic law, the judge refused to grant the order, because the woman’s husband’s behavior was consistent with their culture and religion. Early last year, in another case, a Florida judge ruled, “this case will proceed under Ecclesiastical Islamic law (Shariah Law), pursuant to the Qur’an.” In an upcoming commentary I will provide an in-depth answer to the question, what is Shariah Law?

For now we need to revisit the issue of appropriate ways to handle those who oppose our worldview. Nowhere in the New Testament is violence considered an option as we face opposition. It was Jesus who said, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you…” (Matthew 5:44). Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians clearly states, “For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world” (2 Corinthians 10:3-4).

Interestingly, it should be noted that next to the atheist portraying the Prophet Mohammed, was another atheist, portraying the Pope. Although very offensive to Christians, the display did not warrant an abusive attack – a passion for civility and the advice of Jesus in the face of opposition prompted a more desirable response.