Connect with us

Culture

Marxist Women Scream At Female Journalist For Warning Them About Sharia Law

Published

on

Michigan voters are gearing up to vote in their Primary on August 7, and one of the candidates running to become the next Governor of Michigan happens to be a Sharia compliant Muslim.

Abdul El Sayed is a Democrat Socialist gubernatorial candidate in Michigan. Although El-Sayed is currently third in the polls, the Democrats and their activists, including Linda Sarsour, Bernie Sanders, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have been vigorously campaigning for him.

WATCH:

Trending: Disgraced Former CIA Chief John Brennan: Biden White House Will Use Homeland Security to Crush Trump ‘Insurgency’

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

El-Sayed is not only a Sharia compliant Muslim, but he is a Democrat socialist running on a Marxist political platform as a self-proclaimed “justice Democrat”. Some of the campaign talking points El-Sayed is campaigning on include socialized healthcare, legalization of Marijuana, free college tuition, abortion, opposition to fossil fuels, pro-illegal immigration, and anti-Israel foreign policy. If elected Governor, El-Sayed has vowed to abolish ICE and make Michigan a Sanctuary state where illegal immigrants are protected from deportation and immune to the actions of law enforcement agencies.

El-Sayed practices Sharia law in his personal life, and has stated that his head touches the floor 34 times a day during his Islamic prayers. His wife, who is also pro-Sharia, wears a hijab and is often seen walking behind her husband. The fact that El-Sayed practices Sharia law means that the political talking points he has been campaigning on in Michigan are directly in contradiction with what he believes as a devout Muslim, specifically in regards to his position on Women’s Rights, something that is non-existent under Sharia.

Sayed, who is running on the Democrat ticket as a “Justice Democrat”, refused to answer questions about his personal practice of Sharia and how Islamic law contradicts key platform stances in the Democrat Party when he was confronted at a campaign event in Michigan last week.

After I questioned El-Sayed about Sharia, I was swarmed by a group of his Marxist female supporters who verbally attacked me over my questions and facts about Sharia.

Despite the fact that under Sharia women as viewed as property, sexually and physically abused, subjected to female genital mutilation, forced into arranged marriages, and can be honor killed and stoned to death if they are not modest enough or engage in pre-marital sex, the women who attended El-Sayed’s event remained adamant in defending the barbaric practice of Sharia in Michigan.

In fact, one Marxist woman who was screaming in my face said, “It’s their [Muslims] choice” to practice Sharia in the United States if the so wish.

But, in reality, Muslims do not have the right to practice Sharia Law in America, as there is no disputing the fact that Sharia Law is inherently and completely incompatible with the American values that are established within the United States Constitution.

Free Speech

Does the Arizona Constitution Provide Means for Lawmakers to Crack Down on Big Tech Censorship?

Does the Arizona Constitution provide protections from Big Tech?

Published

on

The Arizona Constitution provides stronger protections for freedom of speech than the First Amendment does, potentially providing legislative solutions to Big Tech censorship in the state at a moment where political censorship is more pervasive than ever.

Article 2 Section 6, Arizona Constitution states that “Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right. “

This differs greatly from the federal constitution in that it doesn’t limit the powers of a legislature to restrict freedom of speech. The US Constitution identifies “Congress” as the body it’s restricting from making a law abridging the freedom of speech.

The speech rights established by the Arizona Constitution are thus expressed positively; recognizing a right belonging to the people, as opposed to negating an infringement of said right.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Quite obviously, the Arizona Constitution was written in an 1910, an era in which the internet would’ve been just as inconceivable as it was in 1789.

In a 2019 Arizona Supreme Court case, the state’s highest court recognized in a 4-3 judgement that the Arizona Constitution provided greater protections than the federal constitution. The case recognized that violations of the First Amendment would represent de facto violations of the

It’s not outside the realm of possibility that the Arizona Attorney General, or state legislature, could hold Big Tech oligarchs to account for violating the Article 2 Section 6 rights of Arizona citizens- especially in a context the major platforms are collectively adjudicated to be acting as a trust in order to suppress competition and silence lawful speech.

Three Arizona legislators called upon Attorney General Mark Brnovich to begin an antitrust investigation into Big Tech oligarchs following the coordinated deplatforming operation against Parler, in which both Amazon and Apple colluded to restrict the free speech platform from the internet.

In an era where the overwhelming majority of free speech is communicated online, the censorious actions of Big Tech very plausibly represent an assault of the right of free expression guaranteed in the Arizona Constitution. Both chambers of Arizona’s legislature remain Republican, even as the state has become purple, and action against Big Tech censorship on the state level could become a real possibility in the coming years.


Follow me on Gab @WildmanAZ, Twitter @Wildman_AZ, and on Parler @Moorhead.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending