“Scalia law” is inferior to Sharia, the religious law of Islam? That’s what Columbia University Professor Marc Lamont Hill appears to be asserting on Twitter this morning.
Or perhaps he is simply saying that Justice Antonin Scalia is more worrisome than Sharia:
@kickassia my point was the opposite. I'm saying we're often panicking about the wrong things.
— Marc Lamont Hill (@marclamonthill) March 6, 2013
Here are just a few examples of Sharia law enforcement:
- “Muslim patrols” target drinkers and gays in London
- ‘Wear a headscarf or we will kill you’
- “Islamists in control of northern Mali said they forced a man and a woman into two holes and stoned them to death for committing adultery.”
- “A teenage Muslim girl was stoned to death under ‘Sharia law’ after taking part in a beauty contest in Ukraine.”
- Sharia in action in Mali: Islamic supremacists “cut off my hand with a knife”
- Somali man’s hand cut off as punishment for theft
- Senior Cleric for U.S. Muslim Group: Islamic Punishment for Apostasy Is Death
Basic civil rights — freedom of religion, freedom of speech — are non-existent in Sharia-compliant countries such as Saudi Arabia.
If Hill truly prefers Sharia law to “Scalia law,” he must consider civil rights to be unimportant indeed.
@marclamonthill I don't see Scalia advocating the stoning of adulterers or cutting the hands off thieves.
— Dan Floyd (@westpatravel) March 6, 2013
Neither do we.