Syariah: Myths vs. Realities

For many in the West today, “Syariah” is a word that stimulates fear– the fear of a middle ages legal system that releases oppressive penalties, fear of transfer of women, and minorities to second-class citizenship. There is also a fear of Muslims living as different neighborhoods who decline to incorporate with the rest of society. There is also a fear that Muslims will look to enforce Syariah in America and Europe.

During a survey conducted by the international media, it was found that over 80% of stories on Islam were negative. As a result, lots of have concerned think that there is a “clash of civilizations” between Islam and the West. There is also a triple danger– political, civilizational, and market– which is an additional reinforcing fear of a “Syariah creep.”

Terrorist attacks in Europe and North America, by those declaring motivation from ISIS more fuel fear of risk from within, especially that Muslims, both terrorist and mainstream, look for to enforce Syariah on the West. As recorded by companies such as the Center for American Development and islamophobianetwork.com, this fear was intentionally stirred in between 2001 and 2012 by 8 donors who gave out more than $57 million to promote the fear of Islam, Muslims, and Syariah, declaring that they were working to topple the United States Constitution and legal system and set up an extreme Islamic caliphate that will penalize and subordinate all non-Muslims.

The Bench Research study Center approximates that Muslims make up just about 1% of the United States population (3.3 million Muslims of all ages living in the United States in 2015). Even in Europe, Muslims presently make up just 6% of the population, having grown about one portion point per year, from 4% in 1990 to 6% in 2010.

Comparable to the market fear, the predicted risk of Islamization and the application of Syariah in the United States has also been based on myths. No Muslim or Muslim company has tried to carry out Syariah to change the Constitution or the American legal system.

Syariah is frequently– incorrectly– conflated with “Islamic law,” as it is carried out in specific nations today, usually mentioning those that most flagrantly break global needs of human rights. Many Muslims, for that reason, keep that Syariah, effectively specified and understood, promotes the values of excellent governance, the representative federal government, the public interest, social justice, human flexibilities and rights, and specific responsibility.

The volume of anti-Syariah expenses asks the concern of what, precisely, Syariah is, what it implies to Muslims and the different functions that Muslims desire it to play in the general public sphere.

In the past, Islamic law was established for Islamic empires and societies with Muslim bulk populations, not for Muslims living completely in non-Muslim societies.

Today, not just do some Muslims live as irreversible minorities in non-Muslim neighborhoods, but Muslims living in Muslim-majority nations also commonly acknowledge the need for fresh analyses that show brand-new understanding bases (such as advances in science and medication), fields of know-how (such as innovation), and even global barriers (such as environment change). Rather than a danger or blind adherence to the past, the objective of reformers and their advocates is to restore the initial function of Syariah: to serve as a source of assistance and security for followers, anywhere they live.