New York Times Makes The Case For Worldwide Shariah Law

I gotta admit something here. I thought there was nothing on Earth that the New York Times could do to shock me anymore. Well, I was wrong. Yesterday, the New York Times ran this article , entitled, " Why Shariah?"
Now, you really need to read the entire piece, but it is long (over 6 pages) as it is an essay derived from the upcoming book by Noah Feldman.
Let me just start out with this from the article:

In some sense, the outrage about according a degree of official status to Shariah in a Western country should come as no surprise. No legal system has ever had worse press. To many, the word “Shariah” conjures horrors of hands cut off, adulterers stoned and women oppressed. By contrast, who today remembers that the much-loved English common law called for execution as punishment for hundreds of crimes, including theft of any object worth five shillings or more?

Got that? The NYT is making the claim that Shariah Law is the "victim" of bad press and us white Westerners have had a much worse system in place in the past! I kid you not, this article is FULL of this bullshit. You won't believe this next statement:

In fact, for most of its history, Islamic law offered the most liberal and humane legal principles available anywhere in the world. Today, when we invoke the harsh punishments prescribed by Shariah for a handful of offenses, we rarely acknowledge the high standards of proof necessary for their implementation.

This article is six pages of the NYT justifying Shariah Law. It is, in my view, the most disgusting piece of journalism ever put up on The Grey Lady's pages. This is one of the signs of the onslaught of Islamofascism into the United States of America. It is the beginning of preparing us for acceptance of the Caliphate.

I have refused to post to NYT articles in the past and many times over the years bloggers have asked for boycotts of the New York Times for an array of atrocious behavior but this article is, in my view, an attack on the Constitution of the United States of America. It borders on treason and it is venomous to our way of life and freedom.

I have excerpted below more of the article, read it if you have a strong stomach.

Why Shariah?

How is it that what so many Westerners see as the most unappealing and premodern aspect of Islam is, to many Muslims, the vibrant, attractive core of a global movement of Islamic revival? The explanation surely must go beyond the oversimplified assumption that Muslims want to use Shariah to reverse feminism and control women — especially since large numbers of women support the Islamists in general and the ideal of Shariah in particular.

To understand Shariah’s deep appeal, we need to ask a crucial question that is rarely addressed in the West: What, in fact, is the system of Islamic law? In his lifetime, the Prophet Muhammad was both the religious and the political leader of the community of Muslim believers. His revelation, the Koran, contained some laws, pertaining especially to ritual matters and inheritance; but it was not primarily a legal book and did not include a lengthy legal code of the kind that can be found in parts of the Hebrew Bible

The modern incarnation of Shariah is nostalgic in its invocation of the rule of law but forward-looking in how it seeks to bring this result about.

Can Shariah provide the necessary resources for such a rethinking of the judicial role? In its essence, Shariah aspires to be a law that applies equally to every human, great or small, ruler or ruled. No one is above it, and everyone at all times is bound by it.

Still, with all its risks and dangers, the Islamists’ aspiration to renew old ideas of the rule of law while coming to terms with contemporary circumstances is bold and noble — and may represent a path to just and legitimate government in much of the Muslim world.