By John M. Rogitz

There has been a lot of back and forth in the blogosphere lately regarding the recently passed Oklahoma ballot measure that bans Oklahoma state courts from considering Islamic Sharia law when deciding cases.  The central issue most of the blogosphere has concentrated on is whether such a law conflicts with our Constitution’s right to freedom of religion.

That said, there’s one critical fact that both sides seem to have missed: This law does not affect anyone’s freedom of religion.

Oklahoma’s law has been analogized to laws that do in fact dictate what people can do according to their religious beliefs, such as France’s new law banning burqas.  By contrast, the Oklahoma law only limits what judges can do, not Muslims.  The law simply reinforces existing requirements that judges only consider laws under their jurisdiction.

Yet the Center for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) filed suit against Oklahoma last week immediately following the elections.  Then on Monday, a Federal judge issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Oklahoma law from going in to effect until CAIR’s suit can be fully heard on November 22, 2010.  CAIR subsequently hailed the judge’s decision as a victory for the First Amendment.

Since when does CAIR care about the First Amendment?  This is the same group that systematically attempts to stifle free speech when that speech allegedly disparages their “Religion of Peace.”  This is further proof that CAIR has no regard for our Constitution and only manipulates it to suit their own conveniences.

Maybe shedding some light on the origin of the Oklahoma law will provide some understanding.  A recent New Jersey trial court denied a Muslim woman’s request for a restraining order against her Moroccan husband, who asserted his right to rape her under Sharia law.  Because Sharia law requires a wife to “put out” at the husband’s will, the court sent her back home to her husband instead of issuing the restraining order.  An appellate court eventually overturned that decision and issued the order, but God only knows how many more times that poor woman was raped while the case sat on the appellate court’s docket waiting to be heard.

Being the opportunists that they are, Oklahoma took it upon themselves to make sure that no women were raped in their state while awaiting appellate review.  The Moroccan rapist situation didn’t happen in Oklahoma, but it did happen in America.  Can you blame them?

Let’s consider the opposite for a moment.  What would happen if courts were allowed to consider Sharia law?  Here’s just a sampling of the constitutional violations that would ensue.  Consideration of Sharia law by U.S. Courts would violate:

-                     The Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and inhumane punishment via stoning for adultery and amputation for theft.

-                     The right for gays to participate in homosexual acts that have already been held to be constitutionally protected by the Supreme Court.

-                     The First Amendment’s protection against establishment of religion (a different clause then the “free exercise” clause that CAIR sued under) by way of the fact that consideration of Sharia law by a court would itself was be an establishment of religion.

-                     The Fourteenth Amendment’s due process and equal protection guarantees to people of all creeds and races.

-                     The Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendment guarantees that all races and sexes be allowed to vote.

Wow.  I say we keep things the way they are.  What about you?

My point is this:  You can allow people to freely practice their religion while still prosecuting them for rape.  Rape is rape even if it’s perpetrated on your own wife.  The Oklahoma law thus allows Muslims to continue kneeling in the general direction of Mecca five times a day while preventing heinous crimes.  What’s wrong with that?

COPYRIGHT 2010 JOHN M. ROGITZ

By John M. Rogitz

With election season heating up and dismal assessments of our future being thrown about by both the left and the right, it helps to be reminded of the greatness of our nation and our profound ability to confront any crisis head-on, each time emerging stronger than we were before.  This will once again be demonstrated when we kick the Democrats out of power and subsequently emerge from this current economic crisis.

Enter Australian politician Nick Adams.

Mr. Adams wraps up a whirlwind public speaking tour of America this weekend.  Over the past month, Nick has spoken of his admiration for America to groups all across our nation.  He has spoken to church groups, lawyers, gymnasiums full of parents, executives at Walmart’s Alabama headquarters, and San Franciscan Tea Partiers, to name a few.

What makes Mr. Adams unique is that he is a foreigner with sense of pride in America that rivals most of President Obama’s administration.  As a conservative radio host, lieutenant mayor, author and public speaker from Australia, Nick’s praise of America is a thoughtful, welcomed voice to those of us tired of hearing our country disparaged by condescending media personalities and politicians.

While speaking at events across America, Nick has been providing copies of his book, America: The Greatest Good, to anyone in need of refreshment on America’s strength and greatness.  As Nick rightly asserts in his book, “What is good for America is good for the world.”

I’m sure Nick’s book will be met by detractors noting that every one likes to hear how great they are and that his book is therefore nothing new.  While it is indeed true that we do like to hear how great our nation is, Nick’s perspective as an outsider who celebrates Americana is long overdue, especially considering we just allowed a dictator into New York’s U.N. headquarters to declare the end of our reign as a superpower.

The best part about Nick’s book is that it is completely unashamed and unapologetic of America in all her greatness – from our patriotism to our consumerism to our religious fervor.  What’s more, Nick’s book incorporates some very politically incorrect yet true observations that I’m sure many of Red County’s readers will appreciate.

For instance, Nick takes a bite out of Canada and Mexico, as inadvertent as it may have been, when he observes that Americans don’t have the ongoing risk of foreign invasion experienced by many other nations because of whom our neighbors are.  I read that to mean we shouldn’t consider nations run by drug lords and nations that were former French colonies to be a threat.  I second that, Nick!

Nick also doesn’t pull any punches when it comes to the Muslim world.  In the last chapter of his book, he observes that, “It is unambiguously evident that their only strengths are making babies and hating the West.  They are unproductive, regressive, and stagnant in terms of innovation.”  That’s a manifestly true statement, but politically incorrect to the Nth degree.

It would be untruthful for me to say that I am completely objective in my support of Nick’s pro-American endeavors.  He’s a friend of mine and I want to see him do well.  But this is not being written as a favor to a friend.  This is being written because Nick is advancing ideals and values abroad that we Americans cherish at home and fight for overseas.

Nick’s book has one repeated message that I hope many of us bear in mind during this election season: America can overcome anything.  We overcame slavery, the Great Depression, Nazi Germany, and the Soviets.  Similarly, we’ll overcome the emerging “threat” to our supremacy that people perceive in China, health care “reform”, and the threat to our freedom and economic recovery advanced by the current administration.

So if you’re in the mood for a light, uplifting book to reinforce your pride in America and to counteract all the nonsense you’re going to be bombarded with during the next month, pick up Nick Adams’s book.  It may be just what you need right now.

COPYRIGHT 2010 JOHN M. ROGITZ

Read the rest…

By John M. Rogitz

There has been an increasing focus on the videotaping of abuses of police power lately.  In fact, this week Drudge linked to the Cato Institute’s new YouTube video called “Cops: On Camera”.  In case you missed it, the Cato Institute produced a mostly thoughtful eight minute video on why official police action should be recorded at all times.

Read the rest…

By John M. Rogitz

I’ll give Time writer Adam Cohen credit, he brought national attention to something that had escaped the MSM’s attention for two weeks. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a ruling on August 12 essentially affirming the government’s ability to come on to your property a night, affix a GPS device to your vehicle and then track you without any sort of warrant.

Read the rest…

By “Leonid”

The Left, in its insensate perpetual rage over the culture wars, might find less spittle on its lips if it laid down, took an aspirin, and reflected as to what the real issue is.

Read the rest…