Why did I laugh when I read this? A blogger at Truthdig expressed this in response to Chris Hayes's remarkable piece about imprisonment of Muslims after secret trials, an intended consequence of the post-9/11 anti-Islamist legislation, legislation that appears to have many unintended consequences, at least from a Constitutional point of view. Some editorials have asked, for example, if the suspension of habeas corpus for the first time since Lincoln wasn't, in practical effect, a declaration of a police state. Is it possible that some citizens of some Muslim countries enjoy more freedom than we do?
It is beyond doubt that some Muslim countries, if strictly adhering to Sharia law, certainly have their citizens fooled. Else, why is being a flirty woman a relatively minor offense in some countries (I suspect Turkey, for example), while the same amorous-seeming conduct can be a capital offense in others? Now that a few brave women have driven autos in Saudi Arabia, one might wonder if the old Scotch bottle story may have been an urban myth. You know, the kid comes home from Harvard and dad is sorely upset customs found Scotch whisky in his suitcases. Sharia guiding his refusal of mercy, the King has his own son's head divorced from his body by application of the National Razor. Is all that just a fantasy I had once, perhaps while watching Lawrence of Arabia for the ninth time. That the urban legend above is hoary only shows how long the demonization of Sharia has been going on.
Actually, the irony of my amusement was in the fact that the blogger worried about Sharia when it is Christian law that haunts some of my nightmares. She might not mind it that Pat Robertson would insist on stocks for not going to Sunday services; at least we do not have to worry about stoning, the Jewish population of the U.S. being relatively small. (Each religion has its own share of irrational beliefs, even Mormons with their magic girdles.) Tony Perkins would run for the Senate and, upon election, slavishly adhere to his agenda of ridding the nation of all people who are different than he is: people who are not white, not male, not evangelical, not gay, not lesbian, not Oriental, not Mexican-American, not foreign -- the "not's" are virtually endless, subject to the whims of The Priesthood. Atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers will be subject to reparative therapy, constantly reminded that even Blaise Pascal found belief the better part of valor.
The point is simply this: if a Mike Huckabee were elected president, we would be in deep do-do. Huckabee told the media he wanted "to see to it the Constitution is interpreted by biblical principles." Can you even imagine having a chief executive and supreme commander of the armed forces with a mentality like that? They can only be expected to cafeteria shop the O.T. for such things as laws against women and homosexuals, ignoring completely the parts about never shaving your beard and keeping Holy the shabat -- from Friday night through Saturday. Mired in the muddle of dispersions that is dogma, the evangelical theocrats will never be able to see the fallacies in their presentist argument for applying "God's" thousands-year-old laws to the 21st century.
How strange it is that I recall seeing public stocks for the first time near Plymouth Rock when I was a wee lad of about ten. I put myself into them to pose for a Kodak snapshot. To think that those stocks were used for just such theocratic purposes in the 17th century by some of the first arrivals on our shore. It is said that 90% of all scientific advancements in history occurred in the 20th century. The stocks were used in law for public humiliation of freethinkers over three hundred years ago. Before the movies, cars, rocket ships, computers, DNA, microbes, quantum theory, &c. infinitum! Yet here ware stuck in 17th century religious bigotry.
What really makes me sick is the thought of cutting the foreskin off tiny baby boys...or worse, a clitorectomy on young girls while they scream to stop...human right? or left?...makes no difference what you wear or what you use when you do it. You cannot claim the insanity defense after you addict yourself. Every decision you make when you are sane or insane brings a consequence. You chose to either perpetuate shame or honor. Your choice. Choose to be an honorable pain in the ass.