I am a firm believer that Muslim-Americans need to be involved politically and communally in all levels of U.S. society. They cannot compromise their religion, and their faith should be used as a guiding principle.

For Muslims, there is no compartmentalization of religion. It permeates all aspects of life. Every action, when preformed for good, is an act of worship. It would be silly for a Muslim to think that they can ignore their faith in the realm of politics.

The idea that faith can be used to guide decisions isn't too big of a stretch. Many people base their actions on what they deem to be moral or just. The sources of these codes are varied. As Muslims, we try to follow God's divine law, which is called sharia, derived from various sources.

But should executive or judicial decisions be influenced by one's personal religious faith? This is a matter of great debate, brought forth by religious conservatives, who feel that the United States needs to ascribe to a moral code, preferably biblically based.

Opponents are quick to point out the constitutional separation of church and state, while proponents argue that the U.S. law finds its basis in religion. As the mainstream debate rages on with Christians, the answer for Muslims isn't clear-cut, either.

One of Islam's greatest strengths is its diversity of opinion. For more than a thousand years, scholarly debates have shaped the jurisprudence of Islam, all within a basic framework of worshipping one God and following the example of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

The fluid nature of these opinions has led to various rulings. On the most basic level, it's not a matter of whether faith, specifically Islam, should play a role in politics, but whether it's even permissible for Muslims to live in non-Muslim lands.

The ultimate authority and fealty that Muslims ascribe to is God. Muslims cannot put any man, concept or thing on a higher pedestal.

Therefore, we cannot live in a society that prevents us from worshipping in the manner that we learned from the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

Fortunately, our country is a strong proponent of religious freedom, and does not restrict the worship of any religious group.

I, like millions of other Muslim-Americans, believe that living in the United States is more than just permitted and, because of our civil liberties, is an ideal place to reside.

The U.S. Constitution is a manmade document. This poses a problem to some Islamic perspectives, believing that you cannot put manmade law above divine law. Therefore, in their eyes, it is impossible for a Muslim to be in a judiciary or an executive position where she or he is forced to implement or enforce constitutional law.

This in no way implies that a country's laws don't apply to Muslims living in non-Muslim lands.

In fact, it has been the overwhelming consensus of Muslim scholars throughout history that not only must they follow the law of the land, provided it does not force them to be religiously unlawful, but in some cases they have more civic obligations than their counterparts residing in a Muslim state.

But, the previous Islamic opinion stems from the basis that U.S. constitutional law is incompatible with fiqh, or Islamic law. In actuality, the two share many similarities. Both guarantee freedom of worship, protect the individual rights of people and are living codes, which are amended and expanded as conditions change.

Also, while Islamic law is explicit about civil laws such as marriage and inheritance, these only apply to Muslims, and not to non-Muslims in Muslim lands. The law is silent about other civil laws.

There also isn't anything in Islamic law regarding speed limits and such, because administrative law is open to interpretation.

In the United States, it's permissible and encouraged for Muslims to strive for executive and judiciary positions, especially if they are implementing law which is for the common good and compatible with Islamic law.

But there are cases where Islamic law comes in conflict with common law. In those cases, one scholarly ruling is that the Muslim must follow the common law, and that he does not transgress in doing so, because he is faced with an unavoidable institutional constraint.

To prevent these conflicts, Muslims need to work within the legal framework that the United States provides to affect change, so that these common laws, which Muslims view as unjust, are reconciled. This is accomplished by voting, running for office and other civic duties.

This isn't a bad thing. It's the same action taken by every political advocacy group out there. It's just democracy in action, and there's nothing wrong with voting based on what you believe is right and just.

[Reach columnist Zakariya Dehlawi at opinion@thedaily.washington.edu.]