“Clearly, Mr. Ellison is not the person to lead the DNC or any other organization committed to not discriminating based on gender identity or sexual orientation. . . . I’m shocked [the Human Rights Campaign] has been silent on the issue. A vote for Representative Ellison by any member of the DNC would be divisive and unconscionable, not to mention counterproductive to the immediate and necessary steps of rebuilding the Democratic Party.” —Vincent Tolliver, pulling the mask off Sharia Democrat Keith Ellison, in a move that got Tolliver booted from the race to become Chair of the Democratic National Committee (while Ellison was appointed Deputy Chair, after nearly winning)
What Is Sharia Law? Isn’t It Just a Religious Code?
Actually, Sharia Law is not like other mainstream religious codes. One major difference is that other religions only attempt to hold their own worshipers to their religious doctrines, whereas this is not true with the Sharia, which claims dominion over all human beings—whether they be Muslims or not. This means that all penalties for breaking the rules associated with Sharia Law are enforceable against unbelievers!
The Sharia is an intolerant and bigoted legal framework, most of whose rules are considered immoral by Jews and Christians alike—and even by irreligious Westerners who practice no religion at all. Sharia Law was devised by Muhammad, as Allah’s spokesman, to justify male Muslims in their wielding of absolute power over gay men, married women, sex slaves, biological daughters, and the female offspring of slaves. Unlike modern-day followers of mainstream Judaism and Christianity (who preach rejection of sin, but compassion for the sinner), doctrinaire Muslims promote intolerance for sin, often with maltreatment of the sinner—especially if that sinner is a Kafir (non-Muslim).
According to the Sharia, all gays may be battered and executed, all women may be beaten and raped, and all biological children may be genitally-mutilated or honor-killed; it is also true that children of Kafirs (non-Muslims) and sex slaves may be raped without consequence.
Sharia Muslims eagerly punish gays, due to Allah’s bidding in Koran 27:54-58, wherein Lot condemned his fellows, saying, “‘How could you commit such an abomination, publicly, while you see? You practice sex with the men, lustfully, instead of the women.’ . . . [and consequently Allah] showered them with a shower [of brimstone]. It was a miserable shower upon people who had been warned [but heeded not].”
Muhammad personally condemned gays in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 72, Hadith 774: “Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet cursed effeminate men, those men who are in the similitude [of women], and those women who assume the manners of men; and he said, ‘Turn them out of your houses.’ The Prophet turned out such-and-such man, and Umar turned out such-and-such woman.”
It is the role of a Muslim cleric, a mufti, to decide how a gay person is to be punished, and it is customary for the death penalty to be prescribed. The tendency, in carrying out the execution is to copy the actions of important Muslim leaders of the past. Abu Bakr, Muhammad’s father-in-law and the first Caliph after Muhammad’s death, burned a homosexual at the stake—likely choosing flames to mirror the fire-and-brimstone punishment from Koran 27: 54-57. Ali, Muhammad’s son-in-law and the fourth Caliph, preferred stoning, in line with the falling brimstone of the same precautionary tale, although in at least one instance Ali had a homosexual flung from the minaret of a mosque. This is why the custom of stoning gays and throwing them from high buildings is so prevalent today—or, alternately, hanging them from construction cranes as yet another form of Sharia execution by throwing gays from a high place. Sharia Democrats, now representing a large majority of the Democrat Party, do not protest this punishment of gays; on the contrary, they go along with it.
According to Koran 4:34, “Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some to excel others and because they spend out of their property [for the maintenance of women]; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen [covered parts of their body] as Allah has guarded; and as to those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.” Democrats, by supporting Islam, support wife-beating and the rules that go with it.
Most Muslims—and all doctrinaire Muslims—support Sharia Law and falsely accuse those who do not of being “Islamophobic,” “xenophobic,” or “racist.” And “moderate Muslims” tend to do whatever the violent orthodox Muslims command, since doing otherwise is to put their own lives at risk. This is because disagreeing with the tenets of Islam is considered apostasy—an act of leaving the religion which merits the death penalty.
The truth is that Democrats are supporting wife-beating, as well as the putting to death of those who convert out of Islam. If they did not, they would not have accepted Keith Ellison as a candidate for the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee, or his eventual appointment to the Number Two spot; they would have thrown him out of the race, rather than excluding Vincent Tolliver, whose sin was speaking out against Islam and all the immorality it entails. But why should this be surprising, in an age where a San Francisco jury acquitted a criminal alien for the murder of Kate Steinle? His guilt was not in doubt, as the murder was witnessed by many, and the murderer even confessed to the murder. Was this not the ultimate form of criminal abuse to a woman? The truth is that the men and women of heavily-Democratic San Francisco let this murdering misogynist walk. Only Democrats who hate women—Sharia-style—would acquit such a brutalizer of women—regardless of the politics surrounding the criminal’s status as an illegal.
According to Wikipedia, “An honor killing . . . or a shame killing is the homicide of a member of a family, due to the perpetrators’ belief that the victim has brought shame or dishonor upon the family, or has violated the principles of a community or a religion, usually for reasons such as refusing to enter an arranged marriage, being in a relationship that is disapproved by their family, having sex outside marriage, becoming the victim of rape, dressing in ways which are deemed inappropriate, engaging in non-heterosexual relations or renouncing a faith.”
And, according to WikiIslam, “In Islam, there is no punishment merely for the shame [brought] upon a family by their female relations, nor to restore family honor by killing them. There are, however, punishments for various types of Zina (unlawful sexual relations) in Islam. Zina includes both fornication (when they are unmarried), for which the punishment is flogging, and adultery (when they are married, but not to each other), for which the punishment is death by stoning.”
In Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, Hadith 64, the following verse is written—which affirms that no fatwa (a legal ruling by a mufti) is necessary in order to honor-kill an apostate (one who leaves the Islamic faith by rejecting its teachings): “Narrated Ali: ‘During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out of their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for who-ever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection.’” Dating a non-Muslim, even if there is no sex involved, is considered apostasy—an outright rejection of Islam. And the murder of one’s own children is not a punishable offense in Islam, according to the Sharia. Vigilantism, in line with the Sharia, is encouraged, thus honor-murders at the hands of family members are also encouraged. Democrats support the right to honor-murder one’s own children, or they could not support Sharia Law in America or anywhere else in the world.
Subjugating the Kafir by Rape
In Islam, women have no right to refuse Sharia-legal sex with Muslim men. And the rape of Kafir (non-Muslim) women is legal sex under Sharia Law. This is why Muslim men raped scores of women in Cologne and other German cities, during the 2015 New Year’s Eve celebrations.
The fighters of the Islamic State commit rape against any Kafir women they can capture, in line with Koran 4:24: “And all married women are forbidden unto you save those captives whom your right hands [which carry weaponry] possess.” And Muhammad forbids the act of pulling out the penis prior to ejaculation when raping a captive sex slave, according to Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Hadith 506: “Muslims captured some females and intended to have sexual relations with them without impregnating them. So they asked the Prophet about coitus interruptus. The Prophet said, ‘It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection.’”
It is known that one particular Islamic State fighter, before raping a 12-year-old Yazidi girl, “took the time to explain that what he was about to do was not a sin. Because the preteen girl practiced a religion other than Islam, the Quran not only gave him the right to rape her—it condoned and encouraged it, he insisted. . . . ‘I kept telling him it hurts—please stop,’ said the girl, whose body is so small an adult could circle her waist with two hands. ‘He told me that according to Islam he is allowed to rape an unbeliever. He said that by raping me, he is drawing closer to Allah,’ she said in an interview. . . . ‘Every time that he came to rape me, he would pray. . . . He kept telling me this is ibadah,’ she said, using a term from Islamic scripture meaning worship. ‘He said that raping me is his prayer to Allah.’” The preteen was “raped for days on end despite heavy bleeding,” according to a 34-year-old sex slave who told the rapist she was just a little girl: “No, She’s not a little girl. She’s a slave. And she knows exactly how to have sex,” the Muslim answered. “And having sex with her pleases Allah,” he said.
When Muslims shout “Allahu Akbar!” they are declaring, “Allah is greater!” (This is often mistranslated as “God is great!” rather than “Allah is greater!”) So, what does this mean? Greater than what? It literally means, “My god is greater than your god!” Without Allah’s being greater, there would be no justification for a holy war, no cause for forcing Kafirs to submit, and certainly no rhyme or reason to the Muslim enslavement and rape of Kafir women.
Democrats & Muslims Wish to Replace the Constitution
Sean Hannity aired a discussion regarding the preference of most American Muslims to replace the Constitution with Sharia Law.
This would not be of concern, if not for the fact that Islam is now fully supported by the Democrat Party. According to World News Daily, “With the patient planting of new enclaves, the process of establishing the parallel society and political system has begun. Those behind this process seem willing to master an understanding of the occupied country’s government and legal system, systematically dismantling it while building the framework for an Islamic theocracy as its replacement. Such a replacement, when complete, dogmatically declares a different kind of absolute than the self-evident Truths, which undergird the American Constitution.” Sharia Law prohibits the freedom of expression, since the allowance of such freedom would mean the freedom to criticize or question Islam—which is sheer apostasy under the Sharia. Indeed, Sharia Law is a form of totalitarian fascism—which is why it is referred to by many as “Islamo-fascism.”
William Wagner, a Christian law-school professor, writes as follows: “Islam is not merely a religion, the free exercise of which the Free Exercise Clause protects. It is also a religious government, the establishment of which the Establishment Clause prohibits. We see building blocks for incrementally establishing Islamic theocracy laid daily in the form of Sharia courts, Sharia financing, food regulation, government sanctioned prayer, etc. It is time to start thinking about the constitutional considerations of such actions. At the very least, legal and public policy strategies formulated to defend religious liberty must no longer presuppose a singular secular foe. Since Islam claims [that the] law, Islam, and the state are one, we must, whether in academia, the legislatures or the courts, focus some of our attention here. We must not be afraid to ask if any one of the official incremental efforts implementing the Sharia is respecting an establishment of a theocracy—and evaluate our litigation and policy strategies accordingly.”
A leader of this anti-gay, anti-woman movement—which is totally un-Constitutional, according to the Supremacy Clause — is the Muslim Brotherhood affiliate known as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a doctrinaire Muslim group that supports the establishment of Sharia Law—and thereby the oppression of gays and women—in America. On its website, CAIR lists the names of US Senators who are fully onboard with the anti-human-rights Sharia and the promotion of doctrinaire Islam in America. The list contains, but is not limited to, the following misguided souls: Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Sen. Christopher Murphy (D-CT), Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), and Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA).
A vote for any of the politicians mentioned above—indeed, a vote for any supporter of the Sharia—is a vote against fair treatment for gays, women, or children. All freedom-loving Americans vote for the Constitution, for the Supremacy Clause, and for the Equal Protection afforded all individuals under American Rule of Law. Voting for Sharia politicians, if you are gay or female, is the same thing as attempting to sign your own death warrant.