与世俗主义所声称的相反，相互竞争的道德观无法在同一个法律体系之内调和。例如：堕胎。

Contrary to what secularism claims, competing moral visions cannot be reconciled within one legal system. Example: Abortion.

我与许多自认为正统、“传统”的穆斯林交谈过。他们接受这样一种公认的教法立场：受孕120天之后，除非威胁到母亲的生命，终止妊娠等同于谋杀。但这些人却同时支持女性绝对的“选择权”。这两种立场如何协调？

I have talked to many Muslims who consider themselves orthodox and “traditional” believers who accept the consensus fiqh position that 120 days after conception, barring threat to the mother’s life, termination of pregnancy is tantamount to murder. But those same Muslims will support a woman’s absolute “right to choose.” How is that reconcilable?

根据伊斯兰教法（fiqh）的论断，其依据是一个本体论事实：灵魂被吹入胎儿的时间点，即受孕后的第120天（另一些学者认为是第40天）。这一事实不会因母亲是穆斯林还是卡菲尔（非信士）而有所不同。无论母亲信仰如何，受孕后120天，灵魂都会被吹入胎儿的身体之中。这意味着，即使母亲不是穆斯林，120天之后的堕胎仍然是对灵魂的不义夺取，即谋杀。那么，接受这一本体论事实的穆斯林，为何仍会支持女性无条件的“选择权”呢？

The fiqh is based on an ontological fact, namely the point at which the soul is breathed into a fetus, i.e., 120 days after conception (or 40 days according to other opinions). That fact does not vary based on whether the mother is Muslim or kafir. Whether Muslim or not, 120 days after conception, there will be a soul breathed into the fetus’ body. This means that even if the mother is non-Muslim, abortion after 120 days is still the unjust taking of a soul, i.e., murder. So how could Muslims who accept the ontological fact nonetheless support a woman’s unconditional “right to choose”?

这些穆斯林在支持谋杀,这一点毫无疑问。谋杀也不是可以“关起门来”进行的“个人选择”。此外,没有任何伊斯兰学者主张,在穆斯林统治下的多信仰政体中,禁止谋杀的沙里亚规定只适用于穆斯林,而不能施加于非穆斯林的“少数群体”。换言之,现代穆斯林用来为支持自由主义、非伊斯兰政治立场辩护的种种策略,在堕胎问题上全部彻底失效。穆斯林若要支持妇女无条件终止妊娠的权利,唯一的途径就是拒绝学者的共识以及支撑该共识的启示中的明确证据。显然,一些异端分子对此毫不在意。就政治而言,穆斯林领袖也选择了“中立”的立场,尽管这一情境的伊斯兰伦理判断是清楚的。仅在美国,每年就有近100万例堕胎被记录在案。为了避免被贴上“宗教原教旨主义”的标签,不被与宗教右翼混为一谈,这些穆斯林宁可在泛滥的杀戮面前保持沉默。而这些人,往往也是那些在讲坛上滔滔不绝地讲述伊斯兰如何废除了蒙昧时代活埋女婴陋习的人。但因为短视、缺乏见识的政治算计,他们对今天我们周围正在发生的活埋女儿乃至儿子的行为却保持沉默。马沙安拉,多么“先知般”的态度,多么热衷于“社会正义”。

These Muslims are supporting murder and there are no two ways about it. Murder is also not a “personal choice” that can validly occur “behind closed doors.” Furthermore no Islamic scholar ever held that, in a multi-faith polity under Muslim rule, the Shar`i prohibition of murder only applied to Muslims and could not be enforced upon a non-Muslim “minority.” In other words, all the usual strategies modernist Muslims today use to justify supporting liberal, un-Islamic political positions spectacularly fail in the case of abortion. The only way a woman’s unconditional right to terminate pregnancy can be supported by Muslims is if they reject scholarly consensus and the clear indicants in revelation that support that consensus. Obviously some deviants have no problem with that. As far as the politics go, Muslim leaders have also opted to take a “neutral” stance despite the fact that the Islamic morality of the situation is clear. Every year, nearly 1 million abortions are documented in the US alone. In order to avoid the label of “religious fundamentalism” and being lumped in with the religious right, these Muslim prefer to stay silent in the face of rampant murder. Often, these are the same people who will wax poetic from the minbar about how Islam abolished the pre Islamic practice of burying daughters. But because of myopic, ill-informed political calculations, they stay silent about the burying of daughters AND sons happening today all around us. MashaAllah, how “prophetic.” How dedicated to “social justice.”