“If Muslim groups can trigger government investigations due to commentary they find offensive, so, too, can conservative Christian or right-wing Jewish groups, or conservative or neoconservative groups, or any other political faction seeking to restrict and punish speech it dislikes.”

My issue is with Muslims who get caught up in non-muslim frames of reference to the detriment of the their deen. Which is why I limited my comments to the “its just words” mentality. Words matter to Muslims, the Quran is afterall “just words”. How many of us in advocating this free for of all free speech lose that last connection with our iman by forgeting to hate what is batil in our hearts, even if we can or should do no more?

How I think the Sharia should function here is not really relevant, it is what the ulema think that counts. They are the best ones to determine the “limits”. The Sharia should be our main point of reference in all things, and it is remarkably flexible. All one needs to do is look at a shining example of those who understand how to apply the Sharia like Sheikh Naeem Abdul Wali to get a proper understanding of what I mean. May Allah increase us in the benefit we derive from him and those like him. People who understand the problems we face in this society and look for solutions within the sacred framework that has been bequeathed to us instead of throwing it out and following the corruption of our diseased nafs with a few poorly understood ahadith to justify our whims. Not much between that way of doing things and joining the GIYC or whatever other bunch of letters you want to string together that are just different ways of spelling wahhabi.

And how does sharia affect how Canadian Muslims should respond to Mark Steyn? Can you point to any clear guidance, as opposed to the watered-down sharia of the chattering class Muslims?

We need to stop ennervating ourselves with the liberal ideology of “its just words” or whatever other permutation you care to make on it. It leads to us accepting things that should disgust us. Or worse, participating in them.

What really counts is our relationship with Allah, and a sure measure of that is our love for the Sharia. Not some watered down kaffir acceptable sharia so beloved among our chattering classes, but that which has been transmitted to us through an unbroken chain of salih people from the time of the Prophet.

Abdul Rahman, it’s still just words. Do you think the government should stop people saying careless or nasty words?

Had they recognised that their primary religious duty was to communicate their values (as opposed to manufacturing cultural relics of their home countries), and to do this in a culturally appropriate manner, imbecilic-theatre-critics-turned-bush-social-commentators like Steyn could not have entered mainstream discourse the way they have.

Or am I being too nasty?