Who’s Afraid of Sharia Law, Anyway?

By Ed Buckner | 17 August 2026
Letters to a Free Country

(Image by Jim Black from Pixabay)

I lack any profound understanding of Islam, though I find some of their public habits or principles quite appealing and I like and respect Muslim leaders like Paul Salahuddin Armstrong (the pic of him in the flyer above from this past May may or may not be recent—the one of me is decades out of date). More about Paul below.

And I agree with Keith Parsons (in his Letter last week) that the abuse of Islam by Texas legislators and government leaders is shameful, disgusting, and dangerous.

But I also do fear some versions of Islam, as reported not only by their right-wing Christian nationalist detractors but in at least some cases by Muslims themselves.

Real Tension?

Despite the tension between reported Islamic positions and those of a liberal democracy—real potential tension in some cases, as I see it—there is a straightforward, quintessentially American, way to resolve the tension for everyone. I met Paul Armstrong when he came to observe me in a debate in London. He was then, as he is now, a devout and consistent follower of Islam (as far as an observer from outside the faith can tell)—and an important leader of British Muslims. But he agreed with me—and not my Muslim opponent—in the debate. I was defending secularism.

Paul Armstrong is, I’m nearly certain, what I’d call a “moderate Muslim” or a “modern Muslim,” but, as is likely the case for Keith Parsons’ Muslim neighbors in Friendswood, TX, and his doctors, I would not be able to speak for him on many matters. (He is eminently able to speak/write for himself.) I know from his actions that he considers Jews, Christians, and atheists as brothers, as at least more or less equal citizens with equal rights. But what does he think of gay rights? I dunno. Is he fully committed to equal rights for women? I’d guess yes, but I have never discussed it with him. I seriously doubt that he’s a full on misogynist, but I don’t truly know.

But who gets to define the “real” Islam?

Articles of Faith of Islam?

Even a casual student of Islam like me knows that Muslims, or at least most of them, adhere to Five Pillars—https://www.metmuseum.org/learn/educators/curriculum-resources/art-of-the-islamic-world/unit-one/the-five-pillars-of-islam—that require adherents to believe and act, including charitably, but not apparently to impose action on non-adherents. And Muslims’ reputation for hospitality, including for strangers, is strong and admirable.

My friend and mentor, the late Paul Kurtz (1925-2012) stated at least once that he thought Islam needed to undergo its own reformation or modernization. But in the meantime what do orthodox or fundamentalist Muslims believe and do those beliefs make Muslims in America dangerous citizens?

Misogyny, Honor Killings, and Polygamy

Some Muslims reportedly insist that following the Quran means: men must be allowed four wives; society must accept forced child marriages; and that society must permit or encourage so-called honor killings of female relatives gone astray.

Anti-Gay Rights

The joke—from Bill Maher?—has it that if gay Pro-Palestinian protestors in America were suddenly dropped into some parts of the Middle East, their pronouns would then be “was” and “were.” I lack even superficial knowledge of Islamic dogma regarding homosexuality or gender roles/transgenderism, but I do know that recently a gay cruise ship was turned away from several ports in Islamic countries.

Religious Intolerance, Insistence on Blasphemy Laws, Harsh Treatment of Apostasy

However tolerant moderate Muslims are of non-believers, severe intolerance is sometimes the norm in Islam. Stories abound of vicious outcomes of violating blasphemy laws in Pakistan and elsewhere, including murders of people who drew images of Muhammed. And Islamic apostates who once believed but now dare to disavow the faith have been murdered and attacked, in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and the West—including Salman Rushdie in Western NY.

Hate and Kill the Jews—and Teach This to Muslim Children?

Undoubtedly not all, but seemingly many Middle Eastern Muslims—like those in Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood and those who support them—do not simply disagree with Jews or Israelis about religious truth. Full fledged commitment to hating and obliterating Jews and Israel seems to be required, as is passing this on to the next generation.

Israel an Oppressor/Colonial Power? Genocidal?

Partly because of—they might argue that causation is otherwise—their vicious hatred, many of these same Middle Easterners declare and seem to believe that Israel is an illegitimate colonial oppressor, one who must be opposed by any means—even using sadistic, terroristic violence like on 7 October 2023. And that Israel, even if maybe not all Jews, has engaged in genocide since then. Perhaps I cannot be an objective observer, but such beliefs seem to me to be patently absurd. And yes I’m aware of atrocities committed by West Bank settlers and some isolated statements from a few Israeli leaders, but none of that can reasonably be called genocide. And the claim seems clearly to be intentionally incendiary—designed to stir hatred. Thousands of words have been posted on the subject—and here’s a good site to see links to many of them.

Are the above beliefs, however true or absurd, articles of faith for Islam? That’s not up to me.

Articles of Faith of Secularism?

Suppress and Demonize Islam?

Is it a good idea for secular authorities—in Texas or anywhere else—to demonize or suppress Islam and Muslims and to exaggerate how likely sharia law is to be implemented? There is little chance that Muslims could succeed in getting sharia established, but does that mean secular authorities are wise to stir fears? I cannot see the point.
Persecute the Poor Christians?

It’s long been a claim, not support by any evidence I’ve ever seen, that Christians in the US are persecuted—I can only assume because of not being allowed to enforce their religious beliefs on non-Christians.

Attack Atheists? (Enact Blasphemy Laws)

Should secular authorities go after atheists and agnostics—seen by some religionists as a threat to their religion—and by others as the foundation for immoralty? I cannot see the threats nor any grounds for persecution by government. Even if somehow irreligious people are seen as immoral (makes no sense to me), it’s even harder to see how they (we) can lead religionists into immorality.

I have known a very few atheists who actually support outlawing religion, who want to use government to halt what those atheists see as irreparable harm done to society by religions. I disagree with them not merely as supporters of bad strategy nor because they fail to hold responsible liberal values, but because they are, in my view, intellectually mistaken.

First Amendment for the Win

1st not a Pro-Atheist Bit

American right-wing Christians have occasionally whined that separation of government and religion—following the First Amendment to the US Constitution—is pro-atheist (because it is allegedly anti-Christian). But the First requires governments to stay out of religious decisions for all citizens, whatever any of us believe or don’t about God, Allah, Jehovah, etc.

Liberal Values—the American Way

Liberal values—not as opposed to conservative values, just in firm support of the rights of individual citizens—on all matters of belief and opinion, are the very essence of American freedom. Immigrants to this nation and any politician seeking elective office all need to understand this.

Truth Matters

I noted above that there really need be no tension between sharia law/Islam and American culture, Christianity, or any other religion. Our First Amendment does not demand that Muslims become pro-Israel or pro-gay-rights or convert to some other religion. What it requires of Muslims, it requires as well of atheists, Jews, Christians, etc.: your belief is your business; everyone is protected in his liberty of conscience.

But you cannot use the power of government to help you persuade others of what you believe.

Unfortunately, some tension remains, because the First Amendment is not automatic. If everyone recognizes the crucial liberal value of liberty of conscience for everyone, First Amendment (American!) values hold. But without consensus, only the courts can enforce that.

And the courts do not inspire enough confidence these days,

Ed Buckner is an American atheist activist who served as president of the organization American Atheists from 2008 to 2010. He served as executive director for the Council for Secular Humanism from 2001 to 2003 and was once the Council’s southern director. He is the author (with Michael E. Buckner) of In Freedom We Trust: An Atheist Guide to Religious Liberty (Prometheus Books, 2012).

“Letter to a Free Country” by Ed Buckner (with Q&A)

Sharia Law is A Danger To Society

The ENTIRE History Of Islam And Muhammad In 68 Minutes

Be sure to ‘like’ us on Facebook

1 COMMENT

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here