CNN
reported last Wednesday that “two Michigan doctors and a medical office
manager were indicted Wednesday by a Detroit grand jury in the first
federal female genital mutilation case in the United States.” In an
audacious move, Mary Chartier, the attorney for one of the doctors, Dr.
Fakhruddin Attar, is basing her defense upon “Islamophobia.”
Chartier said: “I do believe that the government does not fully
understand the religious practices of Dr. Attar and Dr. Attar’s
religion, and I think that’s why we are in this courthouse today, and
what we’ll be fighting over for the next few months.”
Indeed: the government is likely clueless as to the Islamic
justifications for female genital mutilation.
But the key point here is
that she is apparently basing her defense upon the Muslim identity of
the defendants. In this, Chartier is getting right to the heart of the
matter: apparently she intends to argue that female genital mutilation
(contrary to constantly repeated establishment media myth) is justified
in Islam, and that therefore Dr. Attar was just exercising his freedom
of religion.
If that is really what she intends to do, this will become a test
case for the spread of Sharia practices in the U.S.: either Muslims will
be allowed to violate existing U.S. laws under the rubric of the
freedom of religion, or they will be called upon to obey U.S. laws even
when those laws conflict with the teachings of Islam. If the court rules
for the latter, the U.S. will have a chance to continue to exist as a
free society. If the court rules for the former, it will be opening the
door to all manner of jihad activity and Sharia practices that violate
laws regarding equality of rights and equality of access to services,
and no one will be able to say a word against the spread of Sharia in
the U.S.
Chartier also said: “They have a religious belief to practice their
religion. And they are Muslims and they’re being under attack because of
it. I believe that they are being persecuted because of their religious
beliefs and I do not make that allegation lightly.”
No, they’re “being under attack” for mutilating girls’ genitals. But
Chartier is right: female genital mutilation is indeed sanctioned in
Islam. A manual of Islamic law certified by Cairo’s al-Azhar as
conforming to the “practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community”
says this: “Circumcision is obligatory (for every male and female) (by
cutting off the piece of skin on the glans of the penis of the male, but
circumcision of the female is by cutting out the bazr ‘clitoris’ [this
is called khufaadh ‘female circumcision’]).” —
‘Umdat al-Salik e4.3, translated by Mark Durie,
The Third Choice, p. 64
Why is it obligatory? Because Muhammad is held to have said so: “Abu
al- Malih ibn Usama’s father relates that the Prophet said:
‘Circumcision is a law for men and a preservation of honour for women.’”
— Ahmad Ibn Hanbal 5:75
“Narrated
Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah: A woman used to perform circumcision in
Medina. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her: ‘Do not cut
severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a
husband.’” — Abu Dawud 41:5251
“Do not cut severely,” but not “Do not cut.”
That’s why it is so common around the world. A Muslim cleric in Russia
said that “all women should be circumcised.” A Muslim cleric in India
likewise urged that it be done. A Muslim cleric in Australia
said that Islamic law permitted the practice. A leading U.S. Muslim jurist from the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA)
said it was an “honor” in Islam. A marabout — a Muslim holy man —
was arrested in France for having it done on his daughters.
In the UK, there were 5,500 cases of FGM in 2016 alone. It is commonly claimed to be an East African problem, but
93% of Muslim women in Malaysia have suffered this procedure, and it is common in
Indonesia. In one province in Iran,
60% of the women have suffered FGM.
It is certain to become increasingly common in the United States. And
if Mary Chartier succeeds, it will become legal, as a matter of freedom
of religion. That’s why this case bears close watching: it could
establish whether the freedom of religion overrides all obligation to
obey other American laws. And that would truly open the floodgates for
Sharia.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.
Posts
