From: matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Noriega Trial Implications
Summary: Sometimes Islamic law is more just, and sometimes it isn't.
Keywords: FEMINISMUS DELENDUS EST
Date: 14 Apr 92 16:51:08 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.

In article <1992Apr14.020626.25502@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> 
jwoodman@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jonathan A Woodman) writes:

>In article  matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) writes:

>>In article jokiniem@cs.Helsinki.FI (Jari Jokiniemi) writes:

>>>In article  matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) writes:

>>>>			If Noriega was, as the jury found, engaged in
>>>>poisoning American kids with drugs, the fact that he was a head of state
>>>>ought not to have protected him from being brought to Justice.
>>>>[Matt Rosenblatt]

>>>Then it should be quite OK for any fundamentalist muslim country to
>>>kidnap any american in the territory of the USA and bring him to that
>>>muslim state to be convicted by the islamic law.
>>>[Jari Jokiniemi]                    ^^^^^^^^^^^

>>I wrote about Justice, and Jari Jokiniemi responds with a statement
>>about Islamic law.  Are we supposed to believe that the two are
>>equivalent?  [Matt Rosenblatt]

>When you write about "Justice" you equate it with US law, since you claim
>that Noriage was brought to "justice", i.e. a federal courtroom.
>[Jonathan Woodman]

"Justice," here, means that it is wrong to send drugs into the United
States to poison our kids, that no Panamanian court was going to try
or punish Mr. Noriega for doing so, and that bringing him to a Federal
courtroom in the U. S. *has* tried him and punished him.  Had he smuggled
drugs into Iran, and had the Iranians got hold of him and tried him
under Islamic law for doing so, that too would have been Justice.

>Are we supposed to believe that US law and justice are any more equivalent
>than islamic law and justice?  [Jonathan Woodman]

"Right" and "wrong" exist independently of any particular system of
positive law.  There are plenty of areas, especially where it concerns
the family as the basic building block of society, where "US law and 
justice" are off track compared to Islamic (with a capital "I") law 
and justice.

However, the example of Islamic law and justice so far discussed in
this thread of articles has been the _fatwa_ condemning Salman Rushdie
to death for having insulted the name of the Prophet Muhammad (Allah's
blessing and peace be upon him and his companions!).  This is an area
where any interpretation of Islamic law that permits such a _fatwa_ 
is out of line with "the Law of Nature and of Nature's G-d" that the
Declaration of Independence makes so much of.  Consider:

Moses, according to #7 of Maimonides's 13 Principles, 

    "was the father of the prophets -- both those who preceded
     him and those who followed him."

This makes Moses a greater prophet than the Prophet Muhammad (Allah's
blessing and peace be upon him and his companions!).  Yet when Miriam 
and Aaron "spoke against Moses," the only punishment was that Miriam was 
turned "leprous, as white as snow," and "shut up outside the camp for 
seven days, and after that she shall be brought in again."  Numbers 12.
If there is no death penalty even for speaking against the "father of the
prophets," a _fatwa_ of death for speaking against another prophet cannot
be just.  Even if Mr. Rushdie had written and published his trash inside
Iran itself, it would be unjust to condemn him to death for it.  To do so
would be to violate "the Law of Nature and of Nature's G-d."

					-- Matt Rosenblatt
                                        (matt@amsaa.brl.mil)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TRUTH     JUSTICE     FREEDOM     YIDDISHKEIT     IVY     THE AMERICAN WAY