The ongoing scrutiny of sharia law currently underway in Texas is a positive development—including for exposing how ignorant many Americans continue to be of Islam.
Take, for example, the artificial distinctions Americans make between Islam and sharia: the former is seen as “just another religion,” welcome in the United States—a nation that prides itself on religious freedom; the latter is seen as some strange, antiquated law code, loosely but not necessarily connected to Islam, something upheld only by “radical” or “extreme” Muslims, who represent a minority among the faithful.
In reality (and as more fully explained here) Islam and sharia are inextricably linked; they are two sides of one coin. Islam is the descriptive name of the religion; sharia is its prescriptive application. An observant, practicing, or pious Muslim is by definition a sharia adherent Muslim.
Sadly, this distinction-without-a-difference fallacy distorting how Americans understand Islam represents just one of many blinds spots.
A more important—because more fundamental—blind spot concerns the Oath of Allegiance all naturalized citizens of the United States are required to take. Most Americans take it for granted that this Oath poses no difficulties for, and can be easily taken by, Muslims.
But is that true? In what follows, we go through the Oath of Allegiance, line by line, comparing its demands on Muslims seeking to be U.S. citizens, with sharia’s demands on Muslims seeking to be, well, Muslims—they who surrender to the will of Allah.
The Oath that Muslims, like all naturalized U.S. citizens, must take, begins as follows:
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen.
This opening pledge directly contravenes one of Islam’s most cardinal rules: Muslims must always be loyal to—and only to—fellow Muslims: this includes Muslim individuals, groups, entities, and nations—in a word, the umma. This Arabic word meaning “nation” refers to the supranational Islamic nation that transcends national identities, borders, and languages.
Many are the Koran verses and hadith that support this position. Koran 5:55 simply affirms to Muslims that “Your only friends and allies are Allah, his Messenger [Muhammad], and fellow believers.”
The Oath continues:
I hereby declare, on oath … that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.
Thus, after affirming their renunciation of any former allegiances, Muslims are required to pledge their “allegiance” and “support”—in a word, their loyalty, to the U.S. and its secular laws—and to protect the same against “all enemies,” including “foreign” ones, such as fellow Muslims.
Once again, this entire pledge completely contravenes some of Islam’s most core teachings: far from being allowed to pledge allegiance to any non-Muslim person, entity, or country, Muslims are actually required, whenever circumstances are favorable, to wage war (jihad) on and subjugate all non-Muslims, including by cooperating with foreign Muslims (who, as seen, are the only true brothers of Muslims, even if they are of different races, nations, and languages).
Again, many are the Koran verses that support this divisive doctrine. Koran 5:51 warns Muslims against “taking the Jews and Christians as friends and allies … whoever among you takes them for friends and allies, he is surely one of them.” In other words, any Muslim who befriends or allies with any American becomes an infidel—an enemy of Islam.
Koran 3:28, 4:89, 4:144, 5:54, 6:40, 9:23 all promote the same religious tribalism; 58:22 goes so far as to state that true Muslims do not befriend non-Muslims — “even if they be their fathers, sons, brothers, or kin.” (Fun fact: according to Islamic exegesis, several of these verses were “revealed” to justify and praise some of Muhammad’s closest companions for renouncing and even slaughtering their own non-Muslim relatives as a show of their loyalty to Allah and the believers: one slew his father, another his brother, a third—Abu Bakr, the first caliph—tried to slay his son, and Omar, the second caliph, slaughtered several relatives.
Nor is it enough to reject non-Muslims; the Koran calls on Muslims to hate all non-Muslims, based on the example of the “prophet Ibrahim” (Genesis’s Abraham), who broke away from his fellow tribesmen with the following words and rationale: “We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us — until you believe in Allah alone” (Koran 60:4).
From here, one can understand why a well-respected cleric insists that, while Muslim men are permitted to marry and sexually enjoy Christian and Jewish women (ahl al-kitab), they must also hate—and show that they hate—these infidel women (watch video here).
For obvious reasons, most Muslims rarely publicize or even admit to this hateful teaching before non-Muslims. The Islamic State is an exception. In an article titled “Why We Hate You & Why We Fight You,” the Islamic State honestly informed the West that “We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers.”
How, then, can an observant Muslim take the Oath of Allegiance to America?
The answer is simple: despite its draconian reputation, sharia offers Muslims any number of dispensations against the infidel, including the freedom to lie as needed.
Raymond Ibrahim
Photo: ChatGPT
To read more articles by Raymond Ibrahim, click here.
