Essay On Sharia Vs. Constitution

The recent argument about the compatibility of Sharia and the U.S constitution has sparked a debate that will not be ending any time soon. While both sources of Law are meant for maintenance of law and order in the society, they possess some inherent characteristics that make them different from each on several fronts. From a critical analysis of the two sources, one realizes there are features of the Sharia law that are essentially conflicting with aspects of the U.S constitution. Fundamentally, all the amendments that are contained in the US Constitution demonstrate the differences that exist between the two sources of law especially on the issue of freedom of expression, the right to dissent and the right to a fair trial among other aspects.

According to the First Amendment to the U.S Constitution, there should be no law that purports to restrict freedom of religion. Not even the Congress, which is among the most powerful institution in the US, can decide on what religious laws to implement. In other words, the US Constitution recognizes the importance of freedom of worship and does not endeavor to curtail such rights as provided in the First Amendment. On the contrary, Sharia does not give room for freedom of religion as the other source of law. In fact, Sharia issues a serious warning to all those who do not abide by the beliefs, ideologies, and aspirations of the Islamic region. According to Sharia Law, those who fail to acknowledge Islamic religion did not deserve to be given chances to live. Rather, it calls for the killing of all those who do not observe the Islamic faith. In most states, which strictly observe Sharia Law, members of other religions who are not Muslims are accorded second-class status. To some extent, the non-Muslims are even prohibited from carrying out their religious activities in the public. Even building and repair of churches in the Sharia states is considered illegal and can attract huge penalties such as slavery and sometimes-even death. The difference between the two sources of law is very clear as one establishes the freedom of worship while the other requires the citizens to observe only one religion failure to which they face the full wrath of the