it says the crusade against sharia undermines american democracy, ignores our country s successful history of religious tolerance and assimilation and creates a dangerous divide between america and its fastest growing religious minority. the suggestion that sharia threatens american security is reminiscent of the accusation in 19th century europe that jewish religious law was seditouous. why would the new york times print this? because the new york times is an uber left organization and i think they enjoy the control of the people. clearly, sharia is in conflict of the constitution, just the freedom of speech, the most protected speech under the first amendment is blasphemy. it s blasphemy under the sharia and it s punishable by death in muslim countries, anybody who criticizes islam, what they do right now is punishable by
came out a couple of days ago and joins us live. good morning. there are dozens of states considering laws banning sharia law from their states. you have this guy writing in the new york times don t be afraid of it. well, the american people are right. the spread of sharia in the united states is the concern of my new book stop the islamization of america. the argument put forth by stern in the new york times, a pro sharia argument is an analogy between sharia law and jewish law. he did not address one tenant of the sharia law and he fails to mention that jewish law is voluntary. there s no compulsion in jewish law. there s no compulsion in cannon law and he doesn t address the fact that women are given half of a man s making that stuff up. or the oppression of nonmuslims under the sharia or the death penalty your honunder sharia. let me read the interpret.