Tweet
First, a string of apologies. I hate dragging in a whole comment thread from another site (and one I don't even read, except that the article turned up in one of my RSS feeds), but though I've seen the claim made before, it's the only place I can find for it. I hate that, in doing so, I'm also showing how badly I've done in that conversation. I hate that it has to be an article that's not even about that topic, but only what comes up in *part* of a long comment thread. I hate that I'm basically asking people *here* to explain the reasoning of people *there* who you most likely don't agree with in the first place. I *especially* hate that, yet again, people have made apparently-preposterous claims at me, and then when I ask for a rationale, don't provide one and then claim they have done so and aren't going to waste their time anymore. (I could put that as whole other thread in "Things I Hate;" it happens often enough.) I also hate not knowing which section of Fratching this best fits in; I even tried searching both "gay marriage" and "sharia" to see where other topics on those subjects landed, only to see that they're all over the place. But here goes.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44234 if that helps, but I'll explain the gist, as I see it, here. Basically, it's claimed that allowing gay marriage would lead to the imposition of Sharia law in the United States.
How does one follow from the other, I asked. And got, more or less, two answers:
*Because activist judges will do whatever they want (besides disagreeing with both the statement and the premises it's based in, I don't see how that's related to the availability of civil marriages licenses for gay couples, especially when it's in the context of possible *legislative* action), and
*Because (wording near enough to a direct quote) liberals bend over backwards to let Muslims do things they'd never allow of Christians, and liberals also want LGB rights. (Again, with no explanation of what the first half of that even means, nor why it's apparently not possible to agree about one thing without the other, nor... well, so many problems I can't even express them all.)
I'm not really asking for anyone to take up their claims and defend them. Not exactly... aside from venting, what I'm really hoping for is some sort of explanation of why 1) some people think legal implementation of Sharia is even a remotely credible threat in the United States, and 2) allowing same-sex couples to marry would cause it. Yes, I've thought of the answer "some people are idiots," but that's not much of an explanation.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44234 if that helps, but I'll explain the gist, as I see it, here. Basically, it's claimed that allowing gay marriage would lead to the imposition of Sharia law in the United States.
How does one follow from the other, I asked. And got, more or less, two answers:
*Because activist judges will do whatever they want (besides disagreeing with both the statement and the premises it's based in, I don't see how that's related to the availability of civil marriages licenses for gay couples, especially when it's in the context of possible *legislative* action), and
*Because (wording near enough to a direct quote) liberals bend over backwards to let Muslims do things they'd never allow of Christians, and liberals also want LGB rights. (Again, with no explanation of what the first half of that even means, nor why it's apparently not possible to agree about one thing without the other, nor... well, so many problems I can't even express them all.)
I'm not really asking for anyone to take up their claims and defend them. Not exactly... aside from venting, what I'm really hoping for is some sort of explanation of why 1) some people think legal implementation of Sharia is even a remotely credible threat in the United States, and 2) allowing same-sex couples to marry would cause it. Yes, I've thought of the answer "some people are idiots," but that's not much of an explanation.
What? Seriously? I... 
Comment