Tuesday, August 31, 2010


Saw Mayor Bloomberg bantering with Jon Stewart on television.

His Honor was making the case for the construction of the Islamic facility near ground zero.

He pointed out, quite accurately, that, if the folks who want to build it own the property and comply with all the building ordinances of the city, they have the same right to use their property as any other citizen.

Then he added that there are saloons and porn shops and all other kinds of land uses that some people don’t like in the neighborhood.

It’s a free country and hey, this is New York City. This is the Big Apple.

And so it is.

Being a lawyer and former judge, I am quick to stand up for the legal right of the owners of property to use it as they wish. Even if it’s unpopular. Even if it is intended to be confrontational.

But defending someone’s right to speak is not the same thing as agreeing with what they say.

And defending someone’s right to be confrontational is not tantamount to backing down or surrendering.

My concern about the proliferation of Islam in America goes to the heart of the philosophical differences between democracy and theocracy.

There was a time when Christian theocracy was prevalent. Indeed, one of the titles still held by Queen Elizabeth is “Defender of the Faith.”

In the middle ages there were ecclesiastical courts which functioned along side the English courts of common law.

The Roman Catholic Church still exercises law making powers, and convenes courts to enforce canon law.

The difference lies in the Islamic tradition of enforcement. Islamic or Shariah Law is not just enforced by education, moral persuasion and excommunication. It is enforced also by the sword. It asserts the right to decree the death penalty.

That, my friends, is the essence of sovereignty.

Sovereignty is the police power. The power of force. Ultimately the power of life and death.

In America, sovereignty is in the people. That’s why the second amendment gives us the right to bear arms.

That’s why our Constitutions, both state and national, divide the power to make, execute and interpret the laws among three separate branches of government.

So that no one man, nor any one group of men has the power of life and death.

The essence of the Islamic faith is doing the will of Allah. That’s a familiar idea to anyone who, as I did, learned in school that God made me to know Him to love Him and to serve Him.

But Christians gave up burning heretics at the stake centuries ago.

Islamic law still commands the death penalty for apostasy.

Judeo Christian civilization has long since learned to render to Ceasar the things that are Ceasar’s.

The concept of a sovereign civil government which respects religion, but is separate and neutral as to religious faith and discipline is the hallmark of western political thought.

That is worth fighting for.


  1. If the Imam of the place was demanding Sharia law in America, I would agree with you. He is not. He instead pointing out how Sharia and civil law in the US are similar, which is no shock, since Sharia and Christianity are not dissimilar, both being based on Torah. Many of the political teachings of Jesus have been enacted in modern civil society (as opposed to the moral teachings) and some of those teachings are in Sharia.

    The Imam is kind of a Jesus Seminar Muslim. He has phrases he believe are not authentic. Not much to fear from him on that point.

    This story has already pretty much died. It has no legs and will be forgotten as Earl approaches the East coast.

  2. Excellent article Judge, echoes my sentiments albeit in a more refined way. In the same way you recognize the property owner's right to utilize the property in the legal manner they desire, I focus on uncovering legal means to impede them.
    Islam is fundamentally an imperialistic political body, even though it has some characteristics of a religion. Islamization is a incremental process wherein the first "invaders" don't recognize their roles, and the disease lies dormant until it reaches a self sustaining strength. The first changes are internal repression of its own members forcing them into strict Sharia compliance, followed by other more dangerous and more seditious activities. The proper way to consider Islam is a seditious organization, history has shown that this is the case worldwide. Ignoring the history of this political body worldwide is equivalent to saying that cancer in the US will be different than cancer in the Middle East, Africa, Europe, and Asia it is the stuff of the truly foolish.

    The Imam is lying Michael, it's called taqiyya. The objective of Islam is the installation of Sharia Law worldwide, there is no similar Christian ambition. It would be hard to be more wrong or stubbornly ignorant of facts than you are.
    Just yesterday, Italy correctly declared that Islam is a non-religion and revoked their tax exempt status, I am procuring through my network of Christian Apostate Scholars articles in support of a similar ruling here. Doesn't feel all that dead to me Michael, feels like the little tremblers before the big one, something that should make sense to you.