Should Muslims, or Shouldn't we Participate in American Politics?

Muslims and the U.S. Constitution

The following distinctions need to be made concerning Muslims and the U.S. Constitution:

Can Muslims live in the United States without obeying U.S. Laws?

Can they refuse to pay U.S. taxes, even if the taxes are not remotely Islamic?

Can Muslims become U.S. citizens without vowing allegiance to the unIslamic U.S. Constitution?

Can Muslims insist that their tax money not be used in wars against Muslim countries abroad?

Since Muslims in America cannot long endure without obeying U.S. laws, should they not try to influence the process of making those laws?

Selecting, voting for, monitoring and evaluating the President, members of Congress, the judiciary, the local schoolboards, etc. constitutes part of the process of influencing the making of the laws, and not merely obeying laws, which are not the laws of Allah and is undeniably haram.

Even those militant Muslim opponents of Muslims voting in U.S. elections must obey U.S. laws, but impotently take no part in changing and/or making the laws.

The Third domain is not merely Muslims voting but also Muslims running for office.

This would be a process of Muslim empowerment to change the wrong in the law.
If elected, Muslims would not only be more directly affecting the making of the laws; but
The Muslims would also be influencing the implementation of the laws and their enforcement.
Overtime the judicial and legal system of the United States would become more sensitized to the Muslim experience and related issues.

4. If Muslims cannot be voters in the United States, can they be elected officials, lawyers, friends of the court, jurors or legal consultants? If we concede that Muslims may become attorneys in the United States, and run for elected offices why shouldn't Muslims become voters also?

If it is haram to vote in a U.S. election, is it also haram to be trained as an expert in U.S. law and practice it?
Is a Muslim-American lawyer who is devoting his or her time defending Muslim clients committing a haram act?

The central underlying issue is that Muslim-Americans must recognize that they have to not only obey all the laws of the United States, most of which have nothing to do with the Shari'aa, but Muslim citizens of the United States of America can and should take full advantage of the many rights not accorded them in any “Muslim country” to influence the making of the laws and their implementation, so as to be more sensitive to the multi-cultural and multi-religious nature of the population of the United States.

What we have here is a complex balance between law-making (the legislature), law interpretation (the judiciary), law implementation (the executive). Running for office and voting are part of the process of choosing who makes the laws, who interprets them, and who implements them. The logic of this legal process is intertwined with the logic of the electoral process. Whether Muslims vote or don't vote they will be represented by an elected official who will speak for them and be their voice in the governing body of each city, county, state and the federal government.

These representatives, not chosen by us will chose a spokeserson to sit on the Security Council of the United Nations and make decisions for us that impact our brothers and sisters world-wide. Is this better than voicing our own choice of who speaks for us and what they say?