Andrei Rublev reports that “The Islam Project,” a group ostensibly formed to address “fear and misunderstandings” about Islam after September 11, have moved quietly to their real agenda: marketing Shari’a to America’s most vulnerable citizens.

For Most Americans who regularly watch the news, the term “Sharia law” evokes gruesome images of beheadings, punitive amputations, and women being stoned to death. Muslims who do not approve of the cruelty and misogyny that is often associated with Sharia have two legitimate options for dissociating these practices from Islam. They can either reject Sharia law altogether (much like modern day Judaism no longer proscribes Mosiac law), or they can at least demand that the egregious human rights violations that are currently associated with Sharia be declared forever obsolete.

A high school teaching module prepared by the Council on Islamic Education titled “What is Sharia?” rejects the first option by describing Sharia as the “centerpiece and backbone” of Islam 1. It ignores the second option by failing to make any reference whatsoever to the barbarism and misogyny that is currently associated with Sharia law. Despite this appalling oversight, students are expected to explain significance of the five major schools of Islamic law, list the fields of knowledge required for a qualified Muslim jurist, and learn a total of no less than 21 legal terms. In an era when college professors are lamenting the lack of basic knowledge of modern-day high school graduates, it is amazing that anyone should remotely consider supplementing their social studies curricula with so much arcane minutia.

This particular module comprises only 1 out of 29 that the CIE has presented under the auspices of “The Islam Project,” which the Boston Herald describes as an educational and interfaith initiative designed to dovetail with the PBS documentary “Muhammad: The Legacy of a Prophet” 2, 3. Since the Sharia module avoids the issue of Sharia-related human rights abuses, one might expect these issues to be addressed in other modules like “Human Rights and Religious Tolerance in Islam and in the French and American Enlightenment Traditions.” Don’t hold your breath.

The “Human Rights” module draws “analogies” between Islam and the Enlightenment 4. Quotes from the Jefferson Memorial and the “Rights of Man” are chosen to represent the American and French traditions (Handouts 2 and 3). Quotes from the Quran and Hadith are used to represent the Islamic tradition (Handout 1). The Islamic quotes in Handout 1 are organized under three sections. They include “universal human rights, social justice, and religious tolerance.” The first two categories include passages that stress the importance of moderation, the weighing of good and bad deeds, charity, honesty, honoring one’s parents, respecting property rights, and repressing jealousy. The Enlightenment quotes from Handouts 2 and 3 address freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equality before the law, separation of powers, fair taxation, government accountability, and the government’s duty to respect the general will of the people.

In effect, the quotes in Handout 1 consist almost exclusively of guidelines for improving personal and social behavior. In contrast, the quotes in Handouts 2 and 3 outline safeguards for preventing tyranny (what most Americans recognize as “human rights”). This stark contrast should be obvious to any thoughtful adult. How will this register on the mind of a high school student? How will these students define human rights after being required to compare apples and oranges?