Michigan physician and U.S. Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed is rightly catching flak for one odious comparison he made in a recent interview with journalist Jesse Watters. But a second, less reported one, was no less ridiculous.
The first, of course, was his response to Watters’s question about whether he supported the transgender agenda. On this subject, El-Sayed’s party is in the thrall of its most radical constituents. Even though clear majorities of Americans across party lines oppose sex-reassignment surgeries and chemical experiments for minors and oppose participation in women’s sports by biological males, El-Sayed knows he has to hew to the foursquare trans doctrine.
Thus, when asked if he supported the mutilation of boys’ genitals in the name of “gender-affirming care,” he turned the challenge on his questioner, shooting back, “Are you circumcised?” Watters’s flustered reaction allowed El-Sayed to posture as if he had dropped the mic with a brilliant and unanswerable counter: “Okay, so you should probably want to move on.”
(No, circumcision—which is performed on babies as a Jewish religious rite today just as it was on Our Lord, and also on some gentile babies for perceived health reasons—is not the sinful act of mutilation, which destroys or damages the function of a bodily member.)
For obvious reasons, this exchange has gotten a lot of air. But at another point in the interview, El-Sayed offered another howler. When Watters asked El-Sayed, who is Muslim, about his past expressions of support for Sharia law in the United States, he replied,
Do you know what canon law is, Jesse? … canon law is the name for Christian law… Nobody is trying to push Sharia law on anyone else. Just like I hope nobody is trying to push canon law on anybody else, because we live in an America where you should have the freedom of your religion.
Did Watters know what canon law is? Even most Catholics couldn’t give an adequate definition, so probably not. It’s even less likely that El-Sayed knows—or cares, beyond making a false equivalence to advance a talking point.
To many viewers it might have seemed, however, that El-Sayed was actually making a strong point. Why are we only talking about Muslims imposing their law? Christians have a “law,” too. I just hope they won’t impose it on society just like we don’t want Muslims to impose theirs. Coming from El-Sayed, there’s both a gotcha element (Christians have been promoting their secret law all this time!) and a winsome plea for pluralistic tolerance.
Are the two laws comparable? Or are they as dissimilar as castration and circumcision?
Sharia is a broad term for codes of Muslim conduct, derived from the Quran, the example of Mohammed, and Islamic religious and legal tradition. There is no single expression of Sharia’s rules, which are filtered through different Muslim schools of jurisprudence, but they generally encompass a wide swath of human life: prayer and religious observance, marriage and family, legal rights and contracts, finance, diet, dress, myriad moral matters, and more.
In many countries that are predominantly Muslim, Sharia is deeply embedded into civil and criminal law, with its prescriptions, judgments, and punishments serving a governing function. In light of this, Sharia has become a flashpoint of controversy in certain Western nations where Muslim-dense locales experience conflict between local law enforcement, based on liberal Western values, and neighborhood Muslim councils dispensing gray-market Sharia judgments that often contradict those values.
The majority of these hot spots are in Europe, but as Islam grows in certain regions of the United States, there has been talk of measures to prevent that kind of “parallel justice” from taking root here. This was the context of El-Sayed’s defense of Sharia and Watters’s line of questioning.
Canon law, although in a few ways perhaps superficially similar enough to Sharia for a quick name-drop on cable TV, is radically different in many more ways that matter.
It is not “the name for Christian law” as El-Sayed claimed. First, because it is virtually unknown in Christian groups outside of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, whereas variants of Sharia operate throughout the Muslim world.
Moreover, because calling it “Christian law” implies that, like Sharia, it covers many or most areas of Christian life and society. It does not. Canon law is inherently ecclesial and thus inherently limited. Its laws, or canons, regulate how the institutional Church governs itself: how dioceses, parishes, and Catholic associations are organized and operate, the ecclesial rights and obligations of the faithful according to their state in life, fine print related to the niceties of religious education and sacramental celebration, especially the sacrament of matrimony, and lots of eye-glazing procedural verbiage that most Catholics will never have to know.
Unlike Sharia, Catholic canon law is not about superimposing a full spectrum of doctrinal and moral teaching onto the everyday life of religious adherents. It is more like a thick binder of organizational bylaws.
Canon law’s jurisdiction is as limited as its scope. Where Sharia can expand to fill large roles in a state’s civil and criminal courts, canon law stays in its lane. Majority-Catholic countries don’t ban meat on Fridays (though they might have organic traditions of Friday abstinence). The Catholic immigrants who packed America’s urban ghettos in the early twentieth century didn’t go around granting back-alley annulments once they had the numbers.
That El-Sayed’s first thought would go to a “canon law” that gets “pushed” on people says as much about his Sharia mindset as it does about his ignorance. Don’t be bullied by his phony whataboutism.
Todd Aglialoro is director of publishing for Catholic Answers Press. This article has been cross-posted with the author’s permission from Catholic Answers.
Wellington says
No it is not and only fools or liars aver otherwise.
PRCS USN (ret) says
Plenty of both.
Patton says
So much for “three Abrahamic faiths” and Bush 43 horrid misnomer a “religion of peace”. These scum bags do not belong among civilized human being and in particular NOT in America
please says
individuals like el-Said and his ilk, depend on the ignorance of their audience to influence and persuade
and FTI
https://thequrancourses.com/our-blog/do-muslims-circumcise#The_importance_of_circumcision_in_Islam
Circumcision has been practiced for thousands of years, and it has been mentioned in many ancient texts, including the Bible and the Qur’an. In Islam, circumcision is seen as a sign of faith and an important rite of passage for boys. It is typically performed on boys between the ages of seven and thirteen, and it is often seen as a way to mark the transition from childhood to adulthood.
The origins of circumcision in Islam are not clear, but it is thought to have been introduced to the Muslim community by the Prophet Muhammad. According to some accounts, Muhammad was born circumcised, and he instructed his followers to follow his example. In other accounts, Muhammad is said to have received a revelation from God that circumcision was a requirement for all Muslims.
gravenimage says
Apologia for female genital mutilation. Not in the civilized world–try again.
Wellington says
+1.
ploome says
I wrote the above comment….wonder how “please” got there?
gravenimage says
Did you write it on your phone, ploome? I imagine that typing “pl” might just change it to “please”.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
I think that male circumcision should be done voluntarily by adults themselves, once they are no longer minors and can make an informed decision themselves, as adults
⮞ Infants are in no position to make that decision, and adults shouldn’t make it for them. It’s no different from if an adult decided to give his child a tattoo, much less approve a “gender-transition” operation
⮞ Also, infants are never under anesthesia when that happens, and are subjected to that moment of excruciating pain. It’s cruel and would be a lot more humane if that infant were to grow up, then decide to be a practicing Jew or Christian and then choose to have the circumcision
somehistory says
If I had been born male, and anyone asked me that, I’d say that’s none of your business. It wouldn’t ‘fluster’ nor make me unable to respond. It clearly is none of the goon’s business to know whether about Mr. Watters.
Furthermore, not all Christians are Catholics. Many *sects* of Christianity have only the Bible as “law.”
There is no Christian “law” outside of the Bible. some religious leaders have thought up stuff for their congregations and put them down as their creed, but this is not the ‘Law” for Christians.
For example: some say alcohol is prohibited; but others go by the fact Jesus drank wine and shared it with His Apostles. He also turned water into wine as His first miracle.
Some decide that their congregation will not have certain jobs, or engage in certain celebrations
Some forbid divorce; others don’t..
But these are not found in *all* groups of Christians.
Jesus said what is Law for Christians which all Christians are commanded to follow.
And Christians are not trying to force Jesus’ commandments upon others. whereas, everywhere muzzies are in large numbers, or can count on their government to support the terror, the forcing of their unlawful code goes on daily, to the death of millions.
Mr. Watters should listen to Mr. Spencer before he does another interview. And he should remember to do as Prosecutors do or LE when interviewing witnesses or defendants. “I’ll ask the questions here,” should be his model.
Canada Strong says
How can people saying these things be legal? Respect of all religions is freedom of religion. You have to respect my religion now. Even in United Kingdom you are not allowed to speak or burn against a religion like that. It’s not fair and a lot of people will become angry. UK really respects all the religions and not America. Because government should protect religions. Hate speech is not free speech. Misinformation is also not free speech. And mockery of religious people is not free speech. Contradictions. How can you have freedom of religion but you misinform about a religion. Even if you lied in court, you are committing a criminal action. So it should be investigated when it’s done on the internet to create false accusations. Show me where in the Islamic world Christians are mocked or bibles are burned? I would like to move to America to Texas but freedom of religion must be stronger. America is strong because it has lots of money. And people who came had much larger expectation for how their religion will be protected. If you protect us more we Canadians will come and take our talents there. But like this? No thanks. I hope to come and vote for Kamala Harris. Because even MAGA is not happy with this guy who attacked the world. What did we Canadians do?
gravenimage says
The claim that no one should be aloowed to criticize horrors like child marriage, sex slavery, wife beating, and the mass slaugher of unbelivers is just grotesque.
How is this “hate speech”? And how is exposing the savagery of Islam “misinformation”?
And no–no one has to respect *any* religion. Besides, Islam calls for the oppression and murder of all those of other faiths–how is this respect for all religions?
Then, Christians–and Hindus, and Buddhists, and all other non-Muslims–are regularly mocked, oppressed, and murdered by Muslims. And Islam regularly lies about other faiths–lies about Judaism and Christianity are in the Qur’an itself.
somehistory says
g, all of the muzzie scuzzy arrogance is in the one line, ” You have to respect my religion now”
Not only do I not “respect” it, I disrespect it in every way and with every word I can. It’s slime, evil slime.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Somehistory. I don’t think that “Canada Strong” has anything to do with Canada at all–save that he may be part of the Islamic invasion there.
And his use of “strong” is perverse–after the 9/11 attacks “New York strong” was often used to denote resiliance after the attacks–whereas he likely wants to see more of the same.
somehistory says
Please, stay home. That’s my Freedom of Speech.
And in America, we are free to say we *hate* this or that and it is still legal free speech; no crime has been committed.
I won’t waste my time and freedoms to tell you how we know you know Christians are “mocked” and “murdered” by muzzies all of the globe.
Take your lies someplace else.
ploome says
Islam is a violent CULT….
not a religion
Wellington says
Once you start to distinguish free speech from hate speech it is only a question of time before free speech is no more. Also, who is to determine what hate speech is? You want Muslims to determine this? The government? Marxists? Neo-Nazis?
gravenimage says
Spot on. And funny that the savagey of Islam is *never* deemed hate speech.
Beans says
I don’t understand what your problem is other than you’re an elbows up weakling. America isn’t going to change for you like you’re a VIP inventor or something.
What are you supposed to be? A pro Islam Christian who wants to do what exactly? I am not computing this comment. You simply come and you go to church. Nobody burns books here, you are completely brainwashed by your Carney media. You have to make up some story to attack our freedom of religion. The UK is nowhere near where we are in religious freedom.
And if you’re voting for Kamala, please just stay over there. Elbows down.
gravenimage says
Canon Law Is Not Christian Sharia
………………………………………………
No, it’s not. And El Sayed is lying; lots of Muslims want to impose Shari’ah law in the West. In the US itself a Pew Poll shows that over half of Muslims in America want to impose Shari’ah law here.
Nienie says
Just one addition to your article, please:
This guy is NOT a physician. He completed medical school; and M. D.; but not a residency to continue study, and supervised practice of procedures and treatments for license.
Lisa Tea says
Sharia Law – courtesy of Answering Islam web site
• Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands (Quran 5:38).
• Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
• Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
• Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death (see Allah moon god).
• A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death (see Compulsion).
• A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
• A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
• Homosexuality is punishable by death, but sodomizing boys is fine (see Islam & Sex).
• Girls’ clitoris should be cut (Muhammad’s words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
• Girls can be sodomized until and vaginally raped after 8 years of age (see Islam & Sex).
• A woman or girl who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
• Testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove rape of a female (Quran 24:13).
• A woman or girl who alleges rape without producing 4 male witnesses is guilty of adultery.
• A woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death (see “Islamophobia”).
• A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed by marrying his victim.
• Muslim men have sexual rights to any woman/girl not wearing the Hijab (see Taharrush).
• A woman can have 1 husband, who can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad can have more.
• A man can beat his wife for insubordination (see Quran 4:34 and Religion of Peace).
• A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a wife needs her husband’s consent to divorce.
• A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
• A woman’s testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man.
• A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits (see Mathematics in Quran).
• A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
• Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah – i.e., be “Halal.” *
• Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.
* Halal meat has the Shahada spoken over the animal as it is slaughtered. – “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger.” Lost my appetite.