Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed is the Democrat candidate in the 2026 election to represent Michigan the U.S. Senate.
On his campaign website one finds, in the “Money Out of Politics” section, a subsection titled “Civil Rights & Liberties.” This subsection boldly starts out: “Nobody is above our constitution.”[1]
This of course made me immediately think of my Muslim Oath Project,[2] in which, starting in December 2019, I sent four questions to Muslim political candidates and office holders. Each question required a choice between the U.S. Constitution/American Law or Islamic Doctrine. Of the 268 such candidates/office holders I have contacted to date, only 17 have expressed support for the U.S. Constitution/American Law over Islamic Doctrine; however, six of those 17 would not give me permission to mention their names. Would El-Sayed become the eighteenth to express support for the U.S. Constitution/American Law over Islamic Doctrine? His campaign page made it sound promising.
On August 7, 2026, I sent the following email to info@abdulforsenate.com, El-Sayed’s campaign email address:
Mr. El-Sayed,
I have written extensively about Islam (six books and numerous articles and brochures) and think it important that non-Muslims gain a better understanding of Islam. If you are elected to public office you will take an oath of office that includes swearing, or affirming, to support the United States Constitution. With that in mind, I am interested in your response, as a candidate who follows the religion of Islam, to the following questions:
No. 1: Will you go on record now and state that our 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech gives the right to anyone in the United States to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and will you also go on record now and state that you support and defend anyone’s right to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and that you condemn anyone who threatens death or physical harm to another person who is exercising that right?
No. 2: Our 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of religion in the United States. As part of that freedom, anyone in the United States has the right to join or leave any religion, or have no religion at all. Will you go on record now and state that you support and defend the idea that in the United States a Muslim has not only the freedom to leave Islam, but to do so without fear of physical harm, and will you also go on record now and state that you condemn anyone who threatens physical harm to a Muslim who is exercising that freedom?
No. 3: According to the words of Allah found in Koran 5:38 and the teachings of your prophet Muhammad, amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft. But our U.S. Constitution, which consists of man-made laws, has the 8th Amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment such as this. Do you agree with Allah and your prophet Muhammad that amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft in the United States, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting such punishments are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah and teaching of Muhammad?
No. 4: According to the words of Allah found in Koran 4:3, Muslim men are allowed, but not required, to be married to up to four wives. Being married to more than one wife in the United States is illegal according to our man-made bigamy laws. Do you agree with Allah that it is legal for a Muslim man in the United States to be married to more than one woman, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting bigamy are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah.
I look forward to your responses.
Stephen M. Kirby, PhD
I promptly received an automated email reply thanking me for reaching out, referring me to a “frequently asked questions” section, and pointing out that if my inquiry was not addressed there, one of El-Sayed’s “team members” would be in touch, “as necessary.”
El-Sayed’s team apparently felt it was not necessary. Having received no reply, on August 12 I sent another email to El-Sayed, using the “info” email address and adding another address he had listed, press@abdulforsenate.com. My email started out:
Mr. El-Sayed,
In your automated email response, dated August 7, 2026, you thanked me for reaching out and noted that if my inquiry was not addressed in the “frequently asked questions” section, one of your team members would “be in touch as necessary.” Since my four questions were not addressed in the FAQ section, and I have not yet heard from any of your team members, I am contacting you again and request your response to my questions…
I then repeated the information that had been in the first email, sent the second email, and quickly received the same automated response I had received to my first email. As of August 18th, I have not received any further responses.
One would have thought, given the statement on his website that “Nobody is above our constitution,” the response from El-Sayed would have been prompt and easy for each question: the U.S Constitution/American Law over Islamic Doctrine. But it was not. Why?
Perhaps the answer can be found in a statement El-Sayed made in 2009 when he used a “Shariah-compliant” “mortgage-alternative arrangement” to buy a condominium in Ann Arbor, MI:
“Ultimately, the question is,” Mr. El-Sayed, 24, said in an interview, “when I die and I stand before God and go through everything I did in my life, I don’t want to say I did it the easy way instead of the Shariah-compliant way. Not because of fear but because of obligation.”[3]
He was obliged to be “Shariah-compliant” in everything he did in his life. One cannot be “Shariah-compliant” and place our U.S. Constitution/American Law over Islamic Doctrine. Instead of becoming Number 18, Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed is now Number 269.
Dr. Stephen M. Kirby is the author of six books and numerous articles about Islam. His latest book is Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials.
[1] https://abdulforsenate.com/priority/money-out-of-politics/#h-civil-rights-amp-liberties
[2] https://www.liberato.us/muslim-oath-project.html
[3] Samuel G. Freedman, “A Hometown Bank Heeds a Call to Serve Its Islamic Clients,” The New York Times, March 6, 2009, https://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/us/07religion.html?searchResultPosition=1.
Westman says
In an application for a Rhodes Scholarship, El-Sayed wrote:
“My religion teaches that if one saves a life, she has saved all of humanity. I remember reading this verse with my father as a boy: “How great,” I thought, “would it be then to save a life every day?” Quick to share my thoughts with Baba, I told him that I wanted to be a doctor when I grew up. My father, a professor, thought for a moment, and reasoned, “Abdulrahman, wouldn’t it be better to learn why people die, and then teach everyone around you to save lives? Wouldn’t that save more lives?” His reasoning stuck; but so did mine.”
— https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_El-Sayed
“…And whoever saves one [a life] – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely…” — Quran 5:32
El-Sayed indicated this passage made the decision for his career choice. He definitely has a priority of Islamic interest over that of the United States but is likely to lose election by a small margin. Voters are waking up to the influence of Islam on current Muslim politicians.
somehistory says
If ‘saving one life saved all of humanity,’ then one life only would need to be saved.. and that would have happened long before this terrorist thug and his scummy lying slug son, were even born.
What it is , is an attempt at theft of Jesus’s sacrificial death; His life given to “save” all of mankind who wish to be “saved.”
muzzies don’t want to “save” anyone. They lust to murder as many as possible.
Westman says
We’ve visited this passage before at JW and determined it’s an attempted theft from Judaism to help shoehorn Islam (and its sock puppet) into previous mainstream religion.
Strangely, after a long history of bloodshed on infidels, who believed in those religions, they want the world to recognize them as a product of the same Diety. Insane logic.
Islam is a product of conquest, created to advance in poor lands by stealing the wealth of others, via making promises to young men for both earthly and outrageous eternal satisfaction of their appetites in exchange for their lives in battle.
somehistory says
“Judaism” provided the Messiah…Jesus fulfilled the300+ prophecies. It’s an attempted “theft” from Judaism and Christianity.
In islime, it’s a waste of words which mean nothing.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Like David Wood has often described, that one verse is the most abused verse of the qur’an. For starters, it explicitly talks about the “children of Israel” i.e. the Joooooooooos, and the very next verse talks about what happens to people who do create “mischief in the land”: cutting off their left hand & right feet
James Lincoln says
Westman,
And I am absolutely certain that you also know this following verse:
Quran 5:33 —
“Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon the earth to cause corruption is that they be killed or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off from opposite sides or be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world, and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment”
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Quran%205%3A33&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&lq=0&pq=quran%205%3A33&sc=2-10&sk=&cvid=DA644275625248AC83D6EC976B69DFD6
Winston 101 says
Yes indeed all my fellow Infidels and Kaffirs.
And just to be clear, the way you “wage war” against Muhammed and Allah is to not believe in them. How rude of us! It’s an insult to Big Mo and Allah! Oh the suffering!
That is how Islam defends their aggressive warring on all Infidel mankind.
It’s not their fault if we won’t believe. . . and force them to then have to kill us.
Westman says
Yes, it’s ugly and even worse, the murder and mayhem is applied to those who are NOT at war with Islam looted and enslaved from the time of Muhamnad – and now, continuing in Syria against Christians and Alawites.
Again, Islam is a bad parent whose children won’t correct the murderous behavior of their siblings because it is sanctioned in Islamic scriptures. Are they ,”Good men doing nothing”, or bad men secretly approving of the fundamentalists rampage upon Infidels?
somehistory says
The slug is trouble and only trouble. Up to no good, because islime has no good in any of it. It’s all lies and demonic filth.