E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
/
Dawud Walid, executive director of the Michigan Chapter of Council on American-Islamic Relations prays in Foley Square in New York on Nov. 18. Walid was part of a rally against heavy-handed surveillance of the New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania Muslim communities by police and the CIA. Profiling by law enforcers is just one facet of a civil rights battle being waged by American Muslims.
In a decision that Muslim legal advocates celebrated as a major win, a federal appeals court on Tuesday agreed with a lower court that blocked an Oklahoma law that would have barred state courts from considering or using Shariah law — the Islamic code of conduct.
The law would likely dampen similar legislation proposed in at least 20 U.S. states over the last couple of years, said Noah Feldman, professor of law at Harvard University.
The decision "should have a good, positive, desirable chilling effect," said Feldman. “It should tell people in those jurisdictions that (similar laws) almost all will be judged unconstitutional.”
In the November 2010 election, Oklahomans voted overwhelmingly for referendum SQ 755 — described by its author, Rep. Rex Duncan, as "a preemptive strike against Sharia Law coming to Oklahoma."
The amendment stated that: “The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law."
Muslim challenged law
A lawsuit filed two days after the election by Oklahoma resident Muneer Awad, a Muslim, charged that the law violated his First Amendment rights. In addition to stigmatizing him and other Muslims, Awad argued, the amendment would invalidate his last will and testament, which made reference to Islamic writings.
A federal judge in Oklahoma agreed that the amendment was most likely unconstitutional and granted a permanent injunction preventing its implementation until a final determination could be made.
On Tuesday, a judge for the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, Colo., agreed with the lower court and upheld the injunction — rejecting an appeal by the state of Oklahoma.
"Because the amendment discriminates among religions, it is 'suspect,'" the higher court ruled, "and 'we apply strict scrutiny in adjudging its constitutionality.'"
The case returns to Oklahoma for a final determination, but the circuit court decision was met with enthusiasm by Muslim civil rights advocates.
"The decision today is an extremely strong signal that the Oklahoma anti-Muslim amendment will be stricken," said Gadeir Abbas, staff attorney for the Council on American Islamic Relations, who wrote the lawsuit.
“It’s not as if the 10th circuit is a bastion of left-wing activism,” he said. “This is coming from a very conservative court … It is unequivocal that there are really serious, very clear violations of the constitution that this amendment poses.”
Problem doesn't exist, lawyer says
Although Islam’s detractors suggest that "creeping sharia," left unchecked, will undermine U.S. freedoms, Feldman says that these laws play on fears of a problem that does not exist.
"The Constitution of the United States, and the constitution of every state -- that is 51 constitutions -- already make it illegal to implement Islamic law,” said Feldman. “Just as Jewish law can’t be the law of the United States, and canon law can’t be the law of the United States, shariah law can’t be the law of the United States."
"It’s like a law that says we absolutely ban alligators on the South Pole," he said.
On one hand, the court can consider the Islamic passage referred to by plaintiff Awad in his last will and testament, as a means of ascertaining his wishes.
On the other hand, if his wishes somehow run afoul of U.S. laws — regardless of his personal wishes — then the court will rule them a violation of law.
The final disposition of the case remains uncertain, but this decision strongly suggests the Oklahoma law ultimately will be defeated.
Most lawyers will see the 10th Circuit Court ruling as a "dog bites man story, not the other way around" Feldman said, showing that "the constitution works the way it is supposed to."
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
Sharia Law can only apply to Muslims. You don't hear about a non-Catholic suing the Catholic Church for discrimination because they were denied Holy Communion. Religions should be able to practice their own rules and laws for their members -- unless they run contrary to the Constitution.
Yep, I can see it coming now......
"Honor killing" is OK with Islamic law......so will the "killer" be ignored in our Justice system if the "killer"'s defense Islamic lawyer says he did it because he is protected by Islamic/Sharia law ?
Sure, let them "practice" their religion, rules, and laws......"unless they run contrary to the Constitution".
For your information Texas..Sharia law does in fact run counter to our constitution. Child marriage, child rape, honor killings, and the list goes on....this is the friggin' USA...like or not we ARE built on Judeo/Christian tradition. The very foundation of western civilization is based on judeo/christian traditions regardless of claims about 1 Amendment rights....
We are NOT built on a Judeo Christian tradition.,,. thank god for that,,, you really dont know what you are taking about...
Ido....maybe you didn't read the article, or you just don't understand UNITED STATES law....murder (i.e. honor killing) is currently illegal. It doesn't matter if someone claims Sharia law or Martian law...U.S. law superceedes everything else.
@C-1664563
Please elaborate.
ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION. it is a way of life from which death is the only allowable escape... by Sharia Law.
The Muslim Agenda is to take over the world and institute their form of life in all it's elements, eliminating all who stand in their way, then subjugating the rest... Mohammed is the False Prophet and Islam the False Religion spoken of in Revelation... Islam Is A Lie...
WAKE UP WORLD
No. Religious rules don't override laws that apply to everyone. We don't allow human sacrifice, no matter how sincerely someone might believe in it. Killing will never be excused on religious grounds.
But in areas where there is no conflict between religious beliefs and The Law, as in the stated case of the Last Will, there is no reason why the courts could not take religious beliefs into consideration.
The irony is that the same Constitutional Amendment that will override this law also precludes Sharia "law" from being applied to anyone who does not desire it, and certainly prohibits Sharia from taking precedence over the Common Law.
I don't like Sharia Law. It's discriminatory, and punitive. That said, our system is not that much better in many cases. Let's take the plank out of our own eye before trying to take the speck out of our neighbor's.
In any case, the courts need only "consider" this law, when applied to Muslims. If they wish to live under it, that's their affair, but I hope they aren't surprised when a reasonable court discards Sharia in favor of more mainstream American laws. If you live here, you are bound by our laws when actions are deemed criminal.
If I were a woman, I would take comfort in the judge's ability to make his own choices in these matters, and if anyone thinks this is going to open the door to honor killings or other reprehensible acts going unpunished under U.S. law, you are happily mistaken.
Mark, your comments have no basis in U.S. law. Anything that anyone wants to call a religion is a religion. You have to jump through some hoops to get tax exempt status, but that doesn't stop anyone from, say, declaring poodle worship, a religion. That's what freedom of religion is. What you seem to believe in is curtailing anything that doesn't agree with your religion. As such, it is an un-American viewpoint.
God. There are some truly sick people in this post. Maybe you bigots should move to Oklahoma? This is why we have a constitution - to protect people's freedoms from conservative bigots!
The people of Oklahoma have spoken! Oh thats right the peoples voice don't count anymore.
Funny how all the people raving about the dangers of Sharia don't know the first thing about it. That said, Mark, all religions have the same agenda - pacify the masses, use them for your labor and your wars and take their money.
The people of Oklahoma have spoken! Oh thats right the peoples voice don't count anymore.
States DO NOT have the ultimate power to make laws. We fought a war over that in the 1860s
Listening to people argue about who's religion is better or what their religion says over that one is like listening to two kids argue about which superhero would win in a superhero fight.
Hint...don't waste your time arguing about make-believe.
Just a bit of perspective. We're talking about Oklahoma, where more than three in four high school students cannot tell you who was the nation's first President. No, it was not Jefferson Davis.
Sharia law does not trump U.S. criminal law. Period.
Freedom is as much a responsibility as it is a right. In order to be free, we must respect the freedom of others as well as defend our own. Any religion is an abomination when it attempts to subvert the rights of others. The attempt to keep out ideas that are foreign but not subversive violates the very rights it purports to be defending. Muslim does not equal extremist. That cannot be said for some Christian sects just as much as it cannot be said for some Muslims, Jews, etc. Ignorance is the bigger enemy and those who spew hate obviously suffer from it.
Be careful what you wish for, Oklahoma. You just might get it.
There are five "pillars" to Islam. Giving to the poor, charity; prayer; fasting; pilgrimage; and acknowledging Mohammad's relationship to Allah. None of these are against the U.S. Common Law. Murder (honor killing), plural marriage, child rape or mutilation, are all against our Common Law. When different cultures come to our country they can keep aspects of their culture as long as it doesn't violate our Common Law. Warren Jeffs, had some problems with our laws and was arrested, I remember certain Christian sects that would burn so called witches at the stake, no longer tolerated by the way. I believe cultural, religious, racial, and national diversity is one of the main strengths of America, long may she reign!!
No religion supersedes Constitutional individual rights. No law may violate those rights. The government may not establish religion over you, nor prohibit you from the free exercise thereof. So long as your free exercise of your faith does not infringe upon anyone elses individual Constitutional rights, you should be free to practice as you wish. If you attempt to use free exercise as an excuse to trample upon the rights of others, then you win up in violation of their rights and then it is appropriate for the law to protect you from them. This is not a difficult concept.
Maybe Mr. Walid should STAY in Michigan and hold a meeting with U.S. Islamic Leaders and tell them to cough up ANYONE who is planning attacks on the U.S. to local law enforcement officials.
Now, that would be a start to eliminate American Muslims idea(s) of "profiling".
What is being missed by many is that the courts today side with money...individual rights mean little anymore. Our own constitution means little to the courts..they change the laws to suit what they want..not what is writen.
The reason so many states are trying to implement these types of laws because they are afraid that some overly religious type will sue for discrimination when their religious law states an act is perfectly legal under their law and they should not only not be prosecuted for the crime but instead they should be rewarded and the family of and /or victim should pay as well. (don't even try to tell me there isn't a lawyer somewhere that would take this case all the way to the supreme court) They'll declare that American law violates their rights or some such nonsense and given the nature of the american legal system, I can see this not only happening, the lawyer will insist that all his fees and court costs should be covered by either the victim or the taxpayers. If the language of the law did not include the line "Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law." it might have not been struck down so easily, it is because it mentioned religious law specifically that it failed. The other problem is so many religious types (ie: the ones that adhere to religious laws) think and fervently believe that their law takes precedence over all other laws made by mere men. Not only that, they fervently believe that YOU (by you I mean everyone everywhere) should also be subject to their laws.
“The Constitution of the United States, and the constitution of every state -- that is 51 constitutions -- already make it illegal to implement Islamic law,” said Feldman. “Just as Jewish law can’t be the law of the United States, and canon law can’t be the law of the United States, sharia law can’t be the law of the United States.”
It would appear that the celebrations by Muslim leaders was premature. All the Oklahoma law did was repeat what the Constitution already says, without reference to any religious precepts, including Islamic ones.
Much ado about nothing.
On the surface it does seem scary. The problem here is delivery"the anti Muslim ammendment"? That is like saying the anti Christian,or Jewish ammendment,do you seriously think any supreme court would allow this into law. Not hardly.
Not if they truly believe in the constitution.
This talk of sharia slipping into our daily laws is years old(it has been used already in cases)It is funny to me the people who only know now are so worried ie (they could of cared less yesterday.)lol of something that has been going on for awhile. I do not foresee judges using sharia,in any other manner but to accomodate a Muslims beleifs,if it applies it applies if it does not it does not.
This issue has came alot further than I thought it would, the thought of judges doling out Sharia,is a pretty ludicrous,and worrisome thought. I would not worry to much,but it does merit keeping our eyes on it.
One example http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/03/florida-circuit-court-judge-allows-case-to-proceed-under-islamic-law.html
ivan: If you are refering to the Citizens United case, in that case the SCOTUS actually expanded the rights every individual has to give them to groups of individuals, i.e. corporations, partnerships, unions and so called "super pacs", which as groups of individuals, acquire the rights of the the people who make them up so that they are in effect, just like people, so..... Corporations are people.
An individual "speaks" when they support a proposition or candidate, so a lot of money from a group of people in support of a candidate or idea speaks very loudly. The GOP is finding that they might "change the laws to suit what they want" however, our current President found out very quickly what the new rules are and now we will defeat them by those same rules. Karma is a very nasty mistress.
I don't know if it's funny or sad to think of all the conservative politicians in Oklahoma who are going to use ignorance and fear to get elected by saying Sharia law is now the law of the land.
Charlie-1915998 "States DO NOT have the ultimate power to make laws. We fought a war over that in the 1860s"
Do you REALLY think the Civil War took away all States Rights? Where did you go to school?
While states cannot pass laws that conflict with the Constitution or with constitutional Federal laws, they certainly DO have the right to pass laws within their own jurisdiction. If Oklahoma would have omitted the specific reference to Sharia Law, it would not have caused a stir.
Just as a reference for those who claim our country is founded on Judeo-Christian principles....
If that were so, we'd likely find such references in the founding document of our country... the Constitution of the United States. A simple word search reveals NO mention of "God" and 1 mention of the word "religion" which is found not in the body of the document itself but in the 1st Amendment to the Constitution regarding no law respecting the establishment thereof. In short, they didn't make a reference to God or religion is the original document and seemed, in the 1st Amendment, to be ordering us NOT to put forth religion.
Where you CAN find a reference to God is in the Declaration of Independence. You'll find 1 reference to "Nature's God" and 1 reference to "their Creator". What is implied by "Nature's God" as opposed to something akin to "man's God", which they certainly could have used, can only be guessed at. I freely admit that the reference to a "Creator" can only be referring to that entity or process which created us. The question being... was that man or evolution?
End of references to God, religion and Creator in the two most important documents in our history. Barely a mention. It sure doesn't sound like they were putting forth the concept of following Christian rules of living. It sounds like they were forming a country that allowed for ALL possibilities of beliefs, lifestyles, and opportunities.
DonInPhnx - You forgot to also mention that the Declaration of Independence is not an official US document like the Constitution is, so our founding fathers didn't mention God on purpose when it came to their official business. That conscious omission says a lot about their intent.
David walker, how inane your post is, your first paragraph tells us all of your arrogance and inability to think.
I wonder who really typed in the last line of post 1.16, it surely wasn't you, was it??
Someone forgot to tell Oklahoma that we already outlawed Sharia law in the Establishment Clause.
Sharia Law or Santa Claus Law, the ONLY laws here in AMERICA are the laws of our Constitution, and the Laws written into effect on federal levels.
For anyone that believes States cant write laws, try this, for YEARS Maine had a Drunk Driving law of .08,while the rest of the country was higher, Are you saying all the people convicted should have their records cleared and fines returned?
What about States that enact Dry laws? or states that legalize prostitution and gambling?
State can absolutely make their own laws, practically none of the laws on the books are covered in the Constitution, but the constitution covers the Justice of all laws. NO other law can go above, beside, under, around, or against the Constitutions Justice Dept. You live in America, you follow Americas laws, not some other set that happen to look better to you.
Radical 1 - I thought it was funny one time when I was in Kentucky right after San Francisco enacted the rules regarding no smoking in bars. This guy there said..."I would never move to San Francisco. They legislate the hell out of everything. You can't even smoke in a bar there." I said..."You realize that this is a dry county...almost a dry state for that matter right, so you can't even drink in one here!?!"
This being the United States of America, the Constitution and each States constitution is/are the LAW OF THE LAND. If any of those religion wants to apply their cultural believes, religion law, then they should go back to their home country. If one kills, regardless of his/her religion, cultural believe, the law of the United States applies. The Unites States can not apply ruling based on every individual defense every cultural/reigion claim. We didn't invite them to come here, they welcome to stay, respect our rules and laws, we not going to adapt or change to their culture/religious beliefs. What and how you do in home country is then, adapt to our ways of life, enjoy the freedom and stop whining, and if they can't adapt , respect and unwilling, they can always use their greatest freedom granted; that's the right to leave. , I'm sure that there will be people to wave them good bye, nice knowing you, so long don't come back. at sunset.
I think you defending sick religious practices is pretty sick. Maybe bigots like you should consider moving to Saudi Arabia and cutting off some hands and heads and getting your 72 virgins in the process.
teabagger knows about as much about sharia law as he does about constitutional law .... NOTHING!
As long as I'm living in America, I have no intention of following or tolerating any Sharia law. If any of these Islamist wannabes want to live under Sharia law, I suggest they move to the mideast.
David Walker "Just a bit of perspective. We're talking about Oklahoma, where more than three in four high school students cannot tell you who was the nation's first President."
Here's a further comment from the article on 77% of Oklahoma students not knowing who the first President was;
"It’s easy to bash the study results, but I don’t think this is only a problem in Oklahoma. I imagine if you conducted similar polls across the nation, the results would be much the same."
So why the animosity against the good people of Oklahoma?
CAVSCOUT ... the people may never vote for or approve anything that runs counter to the U.S. Constitution. Voters could decide that all people of a certain color, or religion, or stature, or anything else would be denied the right to vote, or the right to open bank accounts, or any other silly thing, but the people's voice can never supersede the Constitution. That's what people who actually understand history and government know. It is only the ignorant who choose not to change their unfortunate state of ignorance who would know that.
This is America, just like many European countries, people know the difference between church and state. they dont mix and mangle. Also, we arn't a 3rd world country.
if they miss thier native countries law, they should prob MOVE back.
religion is practiced differently, its like athiest dont exist, its like christians dont exist, its like buddist dont exist. BUT NO! muslim qualities should be practiced by all, by forcing the law on people.
All right, everybody, ...relax!
The issue will turn out to be as simple as this: Muslims can have all the Sharia law they want. However, neither Sharia law nor any other type of law will be allowed to take precedence over America Civil Law.
also im a liberal
both sides, liberal or conservatives should stop blaming each other over this
its immature and obnoxious
its ok in other posts if its related, BUT THIS ARTICLE IS INRELEVENT!
sockurmouth "THIS ARTICLE IS INRELEVENT!"
And so was the Oklahoma law.
Much ado about nothing.
I love the people claiming the 5 pillars of Islam forgetting the haddith (the Qur'an version of the New Testament) and the specificity of how an infidel either HAS to be converted or killed. In addition the haddith states that any true Muslim can do anything to "blend in" to a nation of non-believers until they can be overpowered, either physically or politically.
Love you people that feel its necessary to defend a belief system that would be completely intolerable of your liberal viewpoints and how you, if any, would be the first to be discarded if they had any political power. Just visit the Islamic ghettos in France or Great Britain where even the federal laws are rarely enforced because law enforcement officers are afraid to set foot there....
I think it's very interesting that many conservatives don't believe we should have some crimes classified as "hate crimes", saying that we should just enforce the laws currently in place, while the same conservatives believe we should have these silly laws outlawing Sharia law. Here's how it works: our laws and our Constitution are in effect. If Sharia law conflicts with our laws, our laws are enforced. Where is the problem?
@ don in phoenix.... don't forget the "no religous test clause" of the constitution. no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
shouldn't the republicans be focusing on jobs?
I've had it with these people, I said i would not be prejudice but then some things happened, I said i would not discriminate but some more things happened. This is AMERICA if you dont like our rules then dont coming here. If you don't like the way we do things, then don't come here. If you don't like our religion, way our women act, the way we treat people, the way we opporate, or the way most of us don't like you. THEN DON"T COME HERE>
You live in Oklahoma, you live by Oklahoma law, not Sharia Law. In this country there is one law, and that law is written in the constitution. It doesn't matter if your Muslim, Christian, or Jewish. We all live by the same law. We are free to practice our own religion. Yes. But there is no other law that can take precedence over the constitutional law.
This is why I think that most people don't want to hear about, see anything about it or have some brainwashed muhammad following medieval imam being allowed to practice this, all when hiding behind the falsehood that they are actually peaceful deep down. They are a barbaric cult (not all Muslims, but those who demand sharia law). The same people in on this thread that cry about America "torturing" terror suspects are defending this type of behavior. Take a look, and then search out your own. This is modern day, not 200 or 500 years ago.
Marlow; that fifth pillar, the one about muhammads relationship to allah? Yeah, that's the one that is never dug into. That's the one that lets his followers know that he received the word from allah and the followers of allah must act in this way. The people that practice this are pieces of garbage. If you condone it you are too. People aren't necessarily fed up in about the law. People are fed up with Americans defending sharia which is responsible for things like this...and worse. But I'm not muslim so how could I possibly understand? I agree with libs on one level; muhammads mother should have had an abortion. I could illustrate a whole lot more but for now copy and paste it and then defend it, please show your true colors and defend it. Yeah, but we're unreasonable. You libs are just going to let people continue to negatively exploit the freedoms this nation has to offer until the freedoms aren't really there anymore.
I find it telling that people who are worried about Sharia Law being instituted into American law see it as some practice brought into the country by foreigners/immigrants, when in fact Muslims have been natural born citizens of the US nearly since the founding of the country and there is no history at all of American Muslims clamoring for Sharia law to be used here as a preferred system of justice.
The whole argument is a product of ignorance and a cover for bias against Muslims in general.
PMSNBC didn't let me paste it. So please, if you've got the balls to defend it search "Sharia Law (Mirror)" on Youtube and then defend it.
@Riley Amen. You nailed it. Nobody ever talks about that part of that book. Everyone just listens to the men in the masks and hears; "no, no, no, we are a peaceful people". What a tragic joke...more blind liberalism.
God, there are some truly sick people in this post. Maybe you bigots should move to Oklahoma? This is why we have a constitution - to protect people's freedoms from conservative bigots!
This is a collection of reactions to what each thinks this means. In essence there was no victory to opponents to the Oklahoma Constitution amendment. Points made were that correct procedure was not followed in drafting, presenting and ballot explaining of the action.
Secondly the court decided that the plaintiff's complaint deserves court consideration, thus the injunction can stand while the arguments proceed through the courts. That gives no credit to either side, simply says it should be heard in court.
One thing politicians must do is hire lawyers who are familiar with Constitutional law to insure that what they propose is written in a manner to avoid such objections. No law can be used or considered in our courts that has any provision that is contrary to our Federal and/or State law or is contrary to the rights guarenteed by the Consitution of the United States of America would have been much clearer and more effective.
Politicians too often do things for political reasons and either don't really care about the outcome or don't know enough to get it done right.
So far this is much ado about nothing on both sides.
Mommy, why are the angry young men screaming about sharia law? Just never you mind those young men, they haven't had a reasonable thought all their lives so we can't expect them to think now.
The USA is safe from sharia law, jewish law, christian law, south seas cannible law, Antartica penquin law. We have a constitution that it appears none of the complainers have read.
STFU
No Culheath, it's not a product of ignorance. Torturous death takes place within their laws and that might not be on the surface of Sharia but it's certainly part of it and it's practiced, and it's brutal, and it's ignorant that anyone with any inelegance actually defends it. I have no idea how "they" recruit so many islamic women to write books, go on interviews and break free from the violence to inform us about what's going on. "They" must be really good at propaganda. The tragic part is that so many blind people never listen.
Are you honestly going to tell me that the women I've heard tell their stories and the women who have written books on the brutality that they've endured were just making crap up? How about the ones who have been blinded with burning metal rods, or have had their faces permanently and severely disfigured, or who have been sterilized by extremely violent measures. Or the children who's arms are broke or hands are cut off, or are whipped to a bloody pulp for stealing or being "inappropriate" in some way to allah's law? What about them? Are you going to defend their punishments? It's documented to be part of Sharia law. Not Sharia law in Iran, not Sharia law in Pakistan, but sharia law period. It doesn't matter what they say, it matters what they do and this is what they do as part of Sharia. Screw these radical people and the muhammad train they rode in on.
Histrionics play much better than rationalism.
Nothing to worry about. The world is going to end in just over 11 months.
Looks like OK is afraid of Islam. No other reason for trying to make a law like this because the underlying principles of our law system forbid much of the controversial stuff that takes place in Sharia Law. Practicing SL in America does not mean you can surreptitiously avoid murder laws if you kill someone.
This is what the melting pot is all about; allowing different cultures, laws, ideologies, and religions to be mixed into our ways of doing things while removing the stuff that does not fit and also changing our own underlying society in the process to adapt to the customs and traditions that are incorporated when we absorb another culture; kind of like the Borg, except less eradication more assimilation.
Ignorance is believing that tolerance for a premise that would find you intolerable is acceptable because its a greater good. Bigotry is just a title that you label those of us who have deeper insight into a faith that would gleefully eradicate you and your liberal beliefs, womens and gay rights, womens right to vote, abortion rights, females rights to education of any kind....you know what, maybe you leftists should get what you wish for and experience things firsthand.
This is going to be like Britain all over again. Thank you liberals for stating your cause about muslims being peaceful; and that is why our country will continue to go downhill. Still think I was kidding when I said for you to read that article:The myth of a peaceful, moderate Muslim. It's on the internet, go read it. Here's a little excerpt in case you forgot.
This is the United States of America. We have Federal and State laws and regardless of ones religion or none at all we all live under the same laws in our country. If Muslims what Sharia law move to a country that is a Theocracy. If you practice honor killing that's a crime of murder and no law should exempt anyone. If you beat your wife, that's a crime. And men, you can only marry one woman.
Just commenting on earlier posts. Contrary to popular misconception, there are plenty of "liberal" Americans the demonstrate and reveal their own hatred, shortcomings and bigotry as much as those on the "conservative" side of things. The liberal bigot approaches life as "what's the big deal and sure as hell I can" while the conservative bigot sees it as "you've crossed the line and no one should be going there."
very true
Mom" Dad" they're trying to ruin the country again,
Why are we wasting time and money on this MO"O"O"OM.
This is a conspiracy by the media lobbyists. They are concerned that public hand choppings, beheadings, and stoning of adulterers will draw too big of a market share, and their crappy reality TV shows will tank. GO SHARIA!!
ROY WILSON-336103 says that:
Here's a further comment from the article on 77% of Oklahoma students not knowing who the first President was;
"It’s easy to bash the study results, but I don’t think this is only a problem in Oklahoma. I imagine if you conducted similar polls across the nation, the results would be much the same."
So why the animosity against the good people of Oklahoma?
Well, yes--that's so. But, then, the article you are quoting from is posted on a site titled "Rightly Concerned" (there's a play there on the word "rightly"), which is trying to downplay the point that an extremely conservative state which claims to worship the Founding Fathers and the Constitution and the US doesn't know much about the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, and the way that the US runs.
That is, the whole goal of the fellow was to try and suggest that the poll wasn't important--so, go figure, he says that other states would have the same result.
In fact, the test which was given was the test that is given to immigrants when they want to become citizens. About 90% of immigrants pass it on the first try--only 3% of Oklahoma high school students (who theoretically had recently taken a class in US government--it's required) could pass.
If you look it up, you will actually find that Oklahoma (like Arizona) consistently performs significantly below the national average while Massachusetts consistently scores above. No--we don't find that all across the US, high school students are quite as uninformed about the US government as they are in Oklahoma and Arizona. What would really have been interesting is if they had included the answers that the students actually gave--as I will bet their answer to "What is the supreme law of the land" would have been "the Bible."
Try not citing an article which is commenting on a study--that you can find someone whose opinion coincides with your own only proves that there is someone who agrees with you, not that the point is correct. This was a study commissioned by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, which is a conservative public policy research institution. They found the results pretty disturbing, and were specifically concerned about Oklahoma and how history is taught (badly).
Watch the video The 3rd Jihad online. Frightening what islamic extremists admit to planning. And the video is made by a non-extreme muslim. Watch it.
Wow, who would have ever guessed that the potential of the practice of Sharia Law within the Muslim community in Oklahoma would prove to be such an overwhelming threat to average Oklahoma citizens.
Let's just all hope that Oklahoma's legislative efforts to implement other much needed new laws to ban objects falling up, outlaw streams running uphill and prohibit the Sun from rising in the West, do not meet with similar legal obstacles!
;)
Some
of your statements show both an ignorance of the U.S. Constitution, Federal and
State law, and the relationships with them towards religion.
Now for you who want to state that religion was never mentioned in the
constitution, you are correct, but I would strongly advise you to get some
books from the library of Congress and see what our founding fathers had to say
about faith and how it affects our nation. The reason there is a separation is
simple, at the time of the constitution being written the southern Baptist were
trying to impose their faith upon everyone (or at least the moral values in
it), to come to a compromise the founding fathers put in a separation of church
and state, not a cut off of the two, they were meant to work together, but no
faith was to be sanctioned by the federal government. (Look at the writings of
John Quincy Adams, and George Washington along with Benjamin Franklin), but it
was also Franklin that stated when God is taken out of the Government then the
Government is doomed to fail; why, because the lack of morals (as we can see
today) would bring the downfall of our country.
But with these comments being stated, I would also suggest that some of you rather
then jump to conclusions take up a English translation of the Koran (unless you
wish to learn Arabic) and actually read it. I am a Christian, but before I was
qualified to make judgments’ or statements about a faith I always felt I should
learn from it first hand and not through hearsay. I for one can tell you that
there is nowhere in the Koran that gives the right to honor killing, nor does
it support terrorism and the killing of innocent ones (in fact it speaks out
rather harshly against it. The treatment of women is not from the Koran but
from customs that were in the areas before Islam spread to them. So am I
stating that I am a follower of Islam, no, I find it does not meet with my
faith view as being a Christian in its teaching of Yeshua, or the Christ. But
to blame one billion people for the acts of less than .01% is stupid, and has
no more merit then for the Muslims to blame us for the the crazy church in
Florida that burned the Koran. Maybe we should accept more, ask the Muslims to
turn their backs and give up the violators of their faith in theirs faiths name
and we will get much farther ahead than calling them all terrorists.
You can take this any way you can, but this is just the meek opinion of one humble
follower of the Christ that still believes that there are redeeming qualities
in all men, if we took the time to look at that instead of tearing them apart
to find something wrong, maybe we might get along better. But with this being
stated, the ones that want to kill us and resort to violence against us, sadly
they understand nothing less themselves, so I believe the only way to deal with
them is not to educate them but to exterminate them.
Much ado about nothing? I beg to disagree.
What people seem to forget is that certain politicians made this anti-Sharia law as a part of their platform. Assuming they weren't total idiots, they knew full well that it wouldn't stand up against a Constitutional challenge. So why did they do it? Pretty simple, to con dumb asses out of their votes. And there are at least a handful of these jokers now serving in Congress because of this ridiculous and unconstitutional platform attracting votes.
Members of the Religious Reich are constantly going on about how our government is founded on Christian principles. Could someone please show me where the Bible speaks of limited government, representative government, rights, constitutions, freedom of the press, letters are marque and reprisal, habeas corpus, jury trials, and due process? And then explain why the Treaty of Tripoli, passed unanimously by the Senate and signed by President John Adams, says that the United States was not founded on the Christian religion.
It's a damn shame that this new law, which would make something illegal which has always been illegal in the United States upon the adoption of the Constitution, is being shot down like this. Just because Sharia Law, which is a set of religious laws, which would already be illegal because of the First Amendment stating that the state can pass no laws which would infringe upon a person's religious freedom, making this particularly religious code of laws illegal, doesn't mean that it wouldn't magically be legal without this new law.
I'm very concerned about the fate of the anti-murder bill I'm sending to Congress, which states that you can't murder people. If my bill isn't passed, people might murder someone else, and it would be legal.
I'm not a Muslim, and as such, I don't even particularly care much for their religion, but for Gawd's sake... in America, you're supposed to let people of different religions live and let live, and all of this is is a thumb in the eye to Muslim Americans. I'd say we should expect better from Oklahoma, but I guess maybe we shouldn't. After all, remember when that Muslim guy blew up the federal building there?... Oh, that guy was a Christian? Hmmmmm.......
The constitution of the United Stated States says that government can not interfere with what people choose to worship but no where does it give religion a tax free status. Why am I forced to support, with my tax, religion that I do not believe in. This should be heard by our supreme court. I believe that tax free religion is an infringment on my rights. It forces me to support something I do not believe.
Bobl-1819708 - 100% correct. Why should we let religions be tax exempt...remove that and budget problem solved.
tBenton - You should look up Jefferson's true views on freedom of religion. He didn't mean it for christians only nor that America was for christians only. A couple of quotes from Jefferson to that end:
"...to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahomedan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination."
and a quote of his from the Treaty of Tripoli..."the government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion, as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen."
Its basically an anti-religious law and the court is right.
The same court would easily rule that masks (veils) should not be worn in public, not for religious reasons, but because it hides identity.
What people don't allow is any religious interpretation that infringes on the rights of another. Obviously, not all Sharia laws do. But just like killing your son in the name of God is illegal, even if someone was a Christian, it would be just as illegal if someone was a Muslim. It has nothing to do with religion.
And stupid thus defines the Oklahoma law. You don't write laws that make religions unconstitutional. You write laws that make sense, and interpretations of religion that make no sense, like acting on moron interpretations of Sharia law, are therefore made illegal.
I really get tired of the fear, hate and lies of the Right. I wonder what they would be like if their religion didn't hold them at bay. Oh that's right, it doesn't hold them at bay. It's their justification. For just about any thing hateful, fearful, or lie they perpetrate on the rest of us.
F'ing morons. I hope your Christ comes for you soon. That way the rest of us can get on with real things. Like living. Being happy. Progressing as a species. You know, all the things that you and your religion hate.
I don't hate Christians. I'm just real tired of their bull@!$%#.
More nonsense that's dragged out like an Orsen Wells radio broadcast. Stir the public up against something that's obviously not an issue to anyone using more than 5 brain cells, then have some holier-than-thou politicians jump in with an epic plan to save us all from it. All of it smoke and mirrors that grabs votes.
As for the gentlemen claiming that we don't use any law but our own, that's not entirely correct. Many of the States have based their laws on different sources. New York uses many things from Dutch colonial law. California and a few other western States use portions of Spanish common law, while Louisiana uniquely uses portions of the Napoleonic Code.
I feel for you George from Wa. State. Do you know what "the Right" would be like if their religion didn't hold them at bay? We would all be like you.
For the rest of you, if it wasn't a big deal that they were trying to implement any kind of Sharia anything into law, and that the US Constitution trumps it nomatter what, then why is there any talk about putting Sharia into law? If somebody wants to live their life like that, go ahead. This is the USA who prides ourselves on letting people practice religious freedom.
It seems ominous to me that we devote so much time taking God and church out of schools and public functions, and start allowing Islam in its place.
Good lord, how are we ever going to save ourselves from the non threat of Shariah law if we don't have an anti Shariah law on the books???????
I mean our country is doomed to be totally converted to Muslim rule and mosques will pop up like mushrooms within minutes if we don't get SOME kind of law on the books that outlaw laws that we don't like, especially laws that brown ones listen to and make!!!
ass-kissing libtard knows all about sharia law since they can't seem to get their tongue out of Ahmadinejad ass_hole.
The above says it all. Neither Sharia Law, nor that of any other religion or nation on Earth has any standing in U.S. criminal courts. So, for those screaming that "honor killings" or enforced wearings of head coverings by women is coming, please get a grip.
If somebody in Oklahoma commits an honor killing tomorrow and is brought to trial with sufficient evidence of his guilt, then adherence to Sharia Law will be no defense. But under this misguided, and now discarded law, it might not even be admissible by the prosecution to provide a motive.
lib tarded, speaking "tongue in cheek", so to speak, the above image seems to appear in your posts a great deal. Is this some inner fantasy of yours, creeping out of your subconscious?
Well, if it is, it at least shows a great deal more mental activity than one would expect from the intellectual content of your posts.
very impressed.
Did Muslims blow up the Oklahoma building? NO
Did Muslims put anthrax in the mail? NO
Did Muslims shoot Dr. Tiller? NO
Did Muslims advocate that blacks weren't people? NO
Are the Muslims in this country the reason this country has to have a hate crimes law? NO
Maybe the wack jobs in Oklahoma should take a good look at their own religion and the violence it has caused right here in the U.S.A.
Okay, first, why are you all just now freaking out about this??? You do all realize Muslims have been here since the beginning of the country, right? Perhaps because we now consider propaganda news????
This is so simple, it's actually terrifying that some of you don't get it. Here's my favorite...
No, "honor killing" won't be okay. If you actually read the article you would've seen the part where they say EXCEPT IF IT BREAKS CRIMINAL/CIVIL LAW. This is the same reason those Christian nutjobs who beat their children to death, because they don't want to spare the rod, still go to jail.
I mean, this is 1st Amendment, middle school level, civics, here people. Remember this...
Well let me make it even easier for you all. Every thing before the comma in the above quote ensures that "Sharia Law" is never going to usurp the Constitution and everything after the comma means that, unless someone's faith comes into conflict with either the Federal or State Constitution, the government stays out of it. This is part of why you'll never overturn Roe v Wade, and that DOMA WILL eventually be overturned. I mean really, "Sharia Law"??? It's Christianity that gets shoved down our throats and our legislatures, or at least they attempt to. Well it doesn't matter if it's Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buhddism, Rastafarianism, Paganism... It's none of the government's business. This is why right wing people are so freaking hypocritical and ridiculous when they claim to be about Constitutionally limited government, because you're all about the government being all up in your business depending on what religion or race you are.
I'll post it one more time, because it's one of the few things a Republican has said lately that doesn't wreak of crazy...
riley --
Haddith is not only NOT one of the 5 pillars of Islam, it is not only NOT the Qur'anic version of the New Testament, but was in fact FORBIDDEN by the Qur'an AND the Prophet.
Anyone who follows haddith is not a true Muslim. That would be most, just as most Christians don't follow the New Testament. Which is a good thing for women, since any woman who claims to be a Christian needs to first shut up and second obey her husband as her lord.
You can compare haddith to the New Testament in that it hates women and is full of superstitious nonsense, but you certainly can't claim it is part of the Qur'an.
Mike Davis-433554, you're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
american-2051576, the above was fine, the below isn't:
You're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
lib tarded, you had just gotten off suspension. Right back. You're suspended for a week for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
For God's sake. do we really need a Sharia law ban?? I mean, just because a Muslim representative comes up to swear an oath on his religion's holy scripture does not threaten America's secular government more than when a Christian representative does it with the Bible. And don't state constitutions already separate church and state?? I think that is enough. To support that is one thing, but to lay a whole amendment against Sharia Law is anti-American. Americans don't like being ruled by priests or rabbis or imams, but this practically condemns Sharia Law. Maybe had they kept specifics out of it I could live with it, but specifically mentioning Sharia Law screwed them up. No more bans like this; please, America. We have enough problems. Don't spark another domestic controversy.
And no, I'm not a Muslim. I'm an American tired of Islamophobia in the so-called "land of the free."
Gee teabagger, I could have sworn that the first amendment was one of those Judeo/Christian traditions you were talking about. I think it's weird that Catholics didn't eat meat on Friday all the time I was growing up. I couldn't be a Mormon, I like my coffee too much. Today's youth would have a big problem with the Jewish anti-tattoo stance. The bible, both old and new testaments (to get that full Judeo/Christian tradition you love) has some pretty weird ideas about who can be killed by who, and why. Yet it never (though it probably should have) occurred to me to have laws passed. All of that weirder religious stuff is already against the law
Like the article said, “It’s like a law that says we absolutely ban alligators on the South Pole,”
This law has no other purpose than to thumb their noses at hard-working, moral, tax-paying, home-loving Muslims. People who never did anything to anybody and are being persecuted for the actions of a radical minority. I'm Jewish, and I don't want to be judged by the actions of the people who blew up the King David Hotel. Do Catholics want to have to live down the crusades? Is there a religion anywhere that can bear up under being judged by the actions of its fanatics?
This law is spiteful, racist and beneath Constitution loving Americans. I'm willing to give Oklahoma the benfit of the doubt and allow that they really didn't put a lot of thought into this one.
The reason why this became an issue in the first place was because there are some activist judges that have taken Sharia and laws of other countries into consideration for their decisions. Basically, they were saying "F--- our State and Federal Constitutions." OK simply didn't want this to happen in theirs. Their mistake was in being too specific. Using Sharia law as a specific example in the amendment made it unconstitutional.
you named your self quite aptly. This is your POV which is totally unsubstantiated.
What judges? Were you in their chambers listening to the thoughts inside their heads? How do you know what they were considering? If you have these magic powers ot climb into other people's heads, why don't you just change their thoughts instead of writing to newsvine?
Count Ablis,
Before you use the argument of Tripili, I would suggest you do more research and see what Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams had to say about it. Washington never seen it, he was out of office before it got back to the U.S., so do not try to bring him into the argument. If you truly wish to look further into this look at this post and follow his links to the accual writtings of our founding fathers and not the liberal press.
http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=125
Well whatever - when will we stand up and shout the truth that Mohammad and the goat-humpers were/are pedophiles who desire only to economically rape those around them and now the world.
I would rather fight than allow Islam to get a strong hold on America. Go back to the desert.
You better watch what you say soon. Under sheria law you would be executed. You head would be cut off and feed to goats. Just think ,with sheria you'll be allowed to beat your wife if she misbehaves or kill her if she brings disgrace to your family.(being sarcastic). Pretty soon it will be all over the whole country and the muslims didn't even have to fire a shot. We taken the ten commandments out of public view and soon it will be replaced with this crap.
Not without a war. I fought for 2 years on foreign soil against these people and will have no problem fighting them here at home either.
thorendan - talk about coming across as a religious bigot and a massively misinformed individual.
Actual observant Muslims don't want to 'take over the world' anymore than evangelical extremist Christians do.
In America, we make room for those who come and are different. This includes religions. However, no religion - not even Christianity or Islam are supposed to be allowed to force it's way into our laws.
When the Courts and our Constitution work properly, there is no chance religious laws can inject themselves into our legal system. You can relax - 'muslim' isn't going to take over America.
Yeah; right.
Thorendan and the rest of the Cow humpers here that live in the Midwest....GROW UP!!!! Racism, hate and Violence will get you nowhere in the 21st century
Yes...No hate of bigotry in your comments are there...You are exactly what you claim to be against.
Caution...Your hate is showing!!!!!
Nice try FormerMarine SGT: But I don't recall, any religion besides Islam who condones the use of honor killing and then has the US back them up on it. Why don't you admit the truth? You're really a muslim.
There are Christian sects that want to kill Gays and Lesbians. We currently have the largest skin head movement in the world. Luckily the U.S. has laws that aren't based on religion. This is why laws against Sharia law are useless and are only bigoted.
Can we just legalize pot already, Oklahoma desperately needs it.
Does anyone remember watching the television about almost 11 years ago in about the middle of September, of these so called "peaceful people", Dancing in the streets, cheering and singing. Men, women, and children alike, celebrating the biggest attack on our country. These weren't "extremest". There is no such thing. You can categorize these people all you want. But it still doesn't change the fact that they all want the same thing. These were your everyday common Islamic people. They do not care about our country. They do not care about us. They do not care about our laws. They want to see us obliterated off the face of the earth. They will act like they love us. They will act like us. Just to blend in. They will have one little law changed or add stipulations to it and continue to add stipulations to it until they can dismantle it, our constitution, and take this country away from us. They have done it before using similar methods. They have been doing this to us for years and as well as to other countries. People that think federal law trumps all are naive. We are not guaranteed these rights and freedoms because of our federal laws. We are privileged with these rights because our ancestors fought for them. We should continue to do the same even now. We are so comfortable as Americans that we think we are invulnerable to what they can do to us. But they have already hit us before. What is to stop them from doing it again and in a different way? Why not twist our laws from the inside out and destroy us that way? All it takes is for us to do nothing. Call me a bigot, a racist, I don't care. I just remember what I saw those many years ago on television and woke up and realized that these are the people we are going to be at war with for the rest of our lives. So take it for what you will. Those that defend them will be the first to be discarded.
Mike,
Good thing they weren't Americans, huh? They also hate us in a lot of Christian countries too. Also, please provide sources and citations for your information. Asserting something doesn't make it true, you know.
You've met and discussed the philosophies of Islam with every Muslim in the world? That's incredible. If not, please tell us how you know this?
I know, just like they want to tell us what we can do with our bodies, in our bedrooms, and who is allowed to contract with who, all based on their religion, regardless of our right to privacy or freedom from said religion... Oh wait, those are Christians.
Yes, people do think that. Probably because in that Constitution you keep ranting about we have something called the Supremacy Clause and the 14th Amendment. And don't even give me that crap about the 10th Amendment. That was when the Bill of Rights didn't apply to the states. In fact, there hasn't been a 10th Amendment issue in front of the SCOTUS since the '60's when they tried to use it to stop desegregation.
A little thing we call the 1st Amendment. I'll make it real simple for you...
Every thing before the comma in the above quote ensures that "Sharia Law" is never going to usurp the Constitution and everything after the comma means that, unless someone's faith comes into conflict with either the Federal or State Constitution, the government stays out of it.
I think calling you disgustingly ignorant would be more apt.
Cut it out, Patriot20. You're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
...
Mike Lopez E318, don't encourage #1 violations.
I do not desire to ecumenical or tolerant. I believe Mohammad is a false prophet who stole his 'religion' and took the money of an old hag in order to get ahead in life.
Many people believe that Christianity is the same.
Your opinion isn't the only one that exists, room must be made for all, not just you.
Your opinion is just as valid as that of anyone else. It's just that you have no right to impose it upon anyone else and no one has any right to impose theirs upon you. That is what the Constitution is all about.
Whatever you want to say, more power to you. No one has the right to stop you in this country. I don't agree with you, and I rather think you are an idiot looking for an argument, but again that's -my- opinion.
Christianity is just as wacky. Some of the stuff in Leviticus is ridiculous. Thorendan, if I catch you working on the sabbath can me and some of my friends come over and stone you to death? Just wondering.
thorendan-Awesome!!!!!!!!!1
4, 5 deleted, Noneyabusiness-2291315 copypasting scriptures without attribution or blockquoting. Perhaps their earlier suspension should have been a ban.
Yeah,people aren't going to read it AND you'll just have atheists pissing blood.The REAL American people better watch out or the future will be a dismal place.Remember the founding fathers
Considering the tenets the founding fathers laid down I think they would be pleased. As should all 'REAL' Americans. This decision upholds the founding ideals of our country.
I want a second opinion. What do you mean this decision upholds the founding ideals of our country? I see many lies on your premise. For starters, this country stole the land form native Americans, commited genocide and now the owners of this land, including Mexicans are not treated, nor created equal. Second, when the founding fathers stated that all men are created equal, they clearly meant white men only, not even women were treated, nor created equal. It's nice to see history as you perceive it, but there is not an iota of truth on that perception. I though I should set the record straight and stop dreaming. Don't tell me that the fou8nding fathers stated that it's O.K. to torture, kill a million plus innocent civilians for oil? You can have your rosy picture, but I don't see the truth there. Wake up!
One block at a time this matter wont stop here, they will find ways to manipulate the constitution, it just takes time and structure. we already have our legal base what do we want to add their laws to it for if they need to run their own show under religious guidelines they already have that, if its not satisfactory they can go home.
This is why the Supreme Court needs to define what a religion consists of as a basis for being designated as a bona fide religion in America. If this is not done anyone can start a religion making the most outlandish customs and precepts as a part of that religion. An old Indian religion had as its basic tenet the cutting of throats and it was recognized in India as a legitimate religion for hundreds of years. Would the Supreme Court allow this religion to florish in America. A religion should be defined as spiritually uplifting, tolerant of other religions, non-violent, apolitical and voluntary in its conversion efforts. Islam has none of these attributes. It practices suicide by its members to achieve its aims, it openly states that all who do not believe in it are infidels and not worthy of life, it believes in the policy of, as it states Jihad or holy war, it believes that it is or should be the primary foundation of the governing principals of all people, in other words a theocratic government. Under the Constitution of the United States of America, the tenet that each person is free to worship as he chooses is contrary to the so called Islamic religion for the aforementioned reasons. It does not qualify as a religion by all commonsense standards but more as a political entity and is thus not afforded the protection of freedom of religion.
Uh, I think they draw the line at murder. Last time I checked, it was STILL illegal to burn witches at the stake and that had not a thing to do with Islam!
Well then, I guess that leaves Christianity out!
N.C. Thorton ~ under your specific guidelines, Christianity would fail to be recognized as a religion. Was that your intention, or do you have a different perception of Christianity?
Oklahoma.
I lived in Oklahoma for a (very) short time. The day after I moved there I was talking to a native and he told me -- and I quote, so don't hold me responsible for the words -- "I like Oklahoma because the n-iggers know their place here." Tulsa, Oklahoma. Yes, indeed.
Needless to say, I immediately started making plans to leave.
Oh bother, here we go with the "founding father's wanted this to be a Christian country" crap...
Thomas Jefferson coined the term "Separation of Church and State" in order to explain the purpose of the Establishment Clause. Since than, that clause has held the same meaning as that quote. You're argument is the same as debating whether we should say we have six of something, or half a dozen of something.
But to make it even clearer...
James Madison...
"Strongly guarded is the separation of religion and government in the Consitution."
"Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."
Ben Franklin...
"I have found Christian dogma to be unintelligible."
Thomas Jefferson...
"I contemplate with solemn reverance the act of the American people which declared that their legislature 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof' thus building a wall of separation between church and state."
And, my personal favorite, from the Treaty of Tripoli, written by John Adams, and ratified by congress...
"The United States was, in no sense, founded on the Christian religion."
To answer your question... Banning a Nativity scene outside a court house, in NO WAY, infringes on your free practice thereof. You're more than welcome to post Nativity scenes all over your private property, be it residential or business. However, since the court is government property, ran by the government, owned by the government, paid for by the government, and cared for by the government...
And don't even give me that 10th Amendment, Mike Huckabee, crap. The 14th amendment applied the Bill of Rights to the states. Ergo, the 1st amendment to the states. Argument that the 10th gives the states the right to name a religion would of been valid in, oh 1860 or earlier. In fact, the 14th basically makes the 10th almost null and void. An issue regarding the 10th hasn't even come before SCOTUS since the '60's when they tried to use it to stop desegregation.
7 deleted, nick the greek. posting 'SCREW THE MUSLIMS!' Keep it to yourself. You're suspended for a week for violating #1 of the Code of Honor. Don't smear everyone in a religion. [Feel free to criticize the religion itself, obviously, but this is a middle finger to like 1.5 billion folks, which is pretty damn bad for discussion.]
You got it right, Sarah. The Founding Fathers may have been Christian, and some may have preferred our nation to be a Christian nation, but that doesn't mean that we have to abide by their wishes. I am tired of people chanting "The Founding Fathers this" and "Constitution that." The Founding Fathers ARE NOT GODS. They were not perfect. Some had (or may have had) prejudices against Jews, blacks, and/or women. Some were hypocrites. And they created an IMPERFECT Constitution that needed fixing. Does that mean that we should not honor these people for their sacrifices?? Absolutely not. Nor does it imply that the Constitution is meaningless. But both are imperfect. The Constitution had to be amended to ensure the rights of minorities and women. The Founding Fathers represented the America of the 18th century, not of modern-day America. Back then, the majority of Americans where white and Protestant, and the only people with voting rights were property-owning white men. Indians were viewed as savages, and were massacred, all under the pretense of white superiority. Blacks were either enslaved or subjugated; as were women, poor white males, Indians, Jews, Catholics, immigrants, etc. Things change. and so must our interpretation of the Founding Fathers and of the Constitution. We cannot maintain a strict perspective of the Constitution; if we had, we could have never created Social Security, reduced poverty, established safety nets for the poor, defeat the Axis powers in WWII, or even grow into the economic powerhouse that we are today. And the Founding Fathers were not gods, they were wealthy yet ordinary men who had their flaws, yet joined together to unify a nation so recently forged from patriotism and bloodshed.
Muslims are not savages. I know a Muslim girl and she is a nice and sweet young woman. I have not read the Quran, but I know enough about Islam to know that it is not a hating religion. I have Muslim friends who reject the extremism that their coreligionists show. Muslims are a peaceful, moral, law-abiding people. Religion in itself does not promote violence or intolerance; it is the interpretation of that religion that can create chaos and spark violence and hatred. Had we never overcome the prejudices against Jews, we may have never gained the aid of Albert Einstein, a scientific genius who helped expand our knowledge of the Universe and allowed us to defeat Japan without having millions of people-young American soldiers and innocent Japanese citizens-be massacred. Had we never resisted the discrimination against Catholics, we would have never experienced the last few years of an America I have come to love under the presidency of one of the best presidents in our history: John F. Kennedy. Had we never overcome prejudice against minorities, we would have never benefited from American geniuses like George W. Carver, Cesar Chavez, Martin Luther King, etc. Some may not have enriched our nation economically, but have allowed us to justify the fact that we are a nation that defends the rights of ALL people. Yet we must do more things in order to solidify our nation's stance on equality for all is to allow gays (who are Americans just like us, just a little different) to marry and to stop the discrimination in our nation against Hispanics, the elderly, and especially Muslims.
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator certain Unalienable Rights; the Rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
That is one of the most favorite quotes in all of American history, and I would do everything in my power if I were president to protect those rights. All Americans must do the same, and protect their Muslim neighbors from the negative stereotypes that haunt modern society.
Next up on the Oklahoma legislature's list of important bills to consider, an attempt to stamp out the creeping advancement of Pastafarianism. Now there's a noodly threat!
Don't give them any ideas! lol
Don't let them take away our Noodly Overlord!
The OK legislators deserve 50 lashes with a wet noodle.
Cthulhu would back any law blocking the Pastapharian's way of life.
CTHULHU 2012, for an end to our nations problems!!!!
Then they have options.... to join in the laws of the country THEY choose to live in, or LEAVE. Like any other dangerous religious cult that has been out there...hey didn't let David Koresh start creating legislation for the Branch Davidians, and even Jones knew to leave the country to exercise his own form of cultist law on his "followers"---even the unwilling ones.
I believe Sharia law is the norm in Saudi (tho a gentler form), some areas of Pakistan, UAE, Afghanistan, and Iran. There's plenty of places for Muslims to go where it would be more suitable to their ways of belief. Do they really think we're going to allow them to force women to marry their brothers-in-law if the husband dies? Do they really think we're going to allow them to punish people by stoning or hanging for committing fornication?
Any Muslims want to shoot back at me, knock yourself out....I already am the product of what happens when a group moves into my country and takes over, steals my way of life and religion, and uses brute force to train my children to their ways....because I am a Native of this country. So I guess if you don't like our laws....get out. Or assimilate.
Adela,
I think you missed what EarlyOut was saying.
Pastafarian
Ideological movement that arose in Italian restaurants in the 1960’s in the Little Italy region of New York City. Believers are known as Pastafarians, or Pastas. Most early believers were either dope-smoking Bob Marley fans with the munchies or of Jamaican descent, Rastafarians and learned to love and eat Italian food. A spleef, Chianti, some reggae music and fresh lasagna are considered to be the top practice of the mindset.
The Pastafari movement encompasses themes such as the spiritual use of cannabis and Chianti.
I partied all day with my Pastafarian friends and then we went into the city for Italian food and we ate everything in sight. Almost a religious experience man.
Not exactly a threat to our way of life lol.
WWFSMD?
Sad day for our country. Our country was designed to be governed by the laws set forth by our government! We were a nation of mixed religions then and came together with a common set of laws. I don't see where that needs to be compromised now. If you commit a crime it should be judged against US law whether you are a non-citizen or member of another religion!
So why is this a sad day. It upholds exactly what you are saying. That the secular laws trump all.
This ruling by this Federal Court actually covers only civil law provisions, but it is a dangerous precedent because it gives a toe hold for some radical to try and use it to subvert legal jurisprudence. This is why we need a clear and unequivocal definition of what constitutes a religious belief under our, that is American standards, not African, not European, not Asian, nor Mid Eastern customs. Chinese practice Buddhism, Japanese practice Shintoism, Christians practice a number of off shoots of Christianity, some Africans practice any number of secular beliefs. Most of these religions follow a practice of their customs but they do not seek to change our fundamental laws of government to suit their religious beliefs. They practice benevolence to their members, they do not label other religious beliefs as being inferior to theirs, they have no tenets involving a holy war, they do not try to change how the government of the United States works by intimidation or subterfuge. Their religious leaders do not spew hatred from their pulpits about and for America. Its time we recognized the fundamental precepts of a religion and implemented strict guidelines as what can be called a religion as differentiated from a political entity.
It's compromised by Christians on a daily basis!
Guys you dont know what your applausing for. It boggles my mind how any born and raised american would even think of having a muslims laws make them immune to our laws. What did that one guy say above how he was attacking our founding fathers and equal treatment for men only, not women. Wait until you see Sharia law pal. You think their ways are peaches and cream.. Its horrific what they will be allowed to do and immune to if we allow them immunity from our laws. You think we can go to their countries and declare oursleves immune to their laws because we have our own values ? What in the hell is wrong with you all. Freaking bleeding heart people like you all are part of the reason were in the shape we are now
Christians have an ecclesiastical court to excommunicate people from their organization. How is that different?
Look, there is absolutely no way any religious law is compatible with the constitution. And there is no way we'll ever have a muslim majority in this country to change that. And on top of it all, this decision doesn't render muslims or anybody else immune from the law of the land.
Whoa! Hold on! Who here said they support anything like that? That court decision certainly didn't. One of the biggest faults with the law was that it specifically excluded Shariah law, a clause that was discriminatory. They should have left it at all external law. Also, there's nothing wrong with allowing courts to consider a religious law in determining someone's intent in a will, if the will references those laws. Intent, religious or secular, doesn't override the law.
NC THorton, are you kidding me? The US is a baby nation that has adopted a mariage of different cultures and laws, especially cannon law, and incorporated them into our society. The Constitution is a decendent of the Magna Carta, our Federal Republic is a decendent of Roman, Greek and French philosophies -- heck Louisiana has a legal system entirely different than other States!
Our Constitution is the "supreme law of the land" and unless there are enough muslims in the country that can obtain a vote from 3/4 of the all the States and 2/3 of Congress to amend it, there's no inherent danger of it being adopted here. This is the type of political hyperbole and scare tactics used on a regular basis to scare the massess into voting for these stooge. This guy is a TOOL, and should be voted out of office for being a nincompoop! Really folks, you need to do better!
Sounds like a Federal Judge who needs to be impeached.
Oh you disagree with him? Tell us why, and cite the relevant passages in the Constitution and existing case law.
At a minimun impeached...get my drift. The time is here when our politicians do not listen to the people, the govt grabs private land with out any reason other than "enterprise"...the courts are corrupt, the govt is corrupt....time to get rid of all of them and start over, with the current crop of bottom feeders used as an example of what happens when they try to install themselves as the "American Royalty"....lotta really pissed off people who quite have had enough....its a tinderbox out there...what will be the match to set it off...whatever...I'm in.
I respectfully disagree...in this case, the judge was RIGHT! If we took this to its logical conclusion, then we should essentially forbid Mosaic Law, and by fiat any law influenced by Judeo-Christian beliefs. I could go on, but the fact is as a constitutional republic, our laws are statutory...they are written down and established by judicial precedent. If you don't like it, then change the Constitution, or call your congressman to do so!
teabagger, it sounds like you are looking for an excuse for violence. This bill was not only obviously unconstitutional, but was a solution to a nonexistent problem. There is plenty around to be mad about, but this ain't it.
If the Islamist want religious freedom as they practice under their religion, I say lets accommodate them. Sharia law is swift in its process, generally takig less than a day to have a hearing and one more to carry out the sentence. How does Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and many of the other theocracies of the Middle East deal with their legal problems, both civil and legal. Take for instance illegal entry. A fifteen minute trial, followed by a sentence fifteen years to life or a death sentence. A show appeal by and to the government which is nothing more than a rubber stamp of the religious court conducting the trial. Sentence is carried out the following day. I would set up a religious court comprised of all of the religious faiths in America as judges, appoint a Priest, or a Rabbi or an Imam as his legal representative, have a fifteen minute trial, give him one day to appeal and then execute him according to Sharia law. Any defendent could ask for his trial to be conducted according to his religious belief. I doubt if you could find one Arab who would be willing to place his fate under Sharia law.
I guess this means insecure, sexually deviant men can start terrorizing therefamilies, beat their wifes and kill their daughter and get away with it. Well it's about time. Thank you federal judge. What did you say your name was....Mohammad? Is that you Mohammad?
Just Me,
He may not face a religious court under his religious laws, but you can bet your net worth that he will see the inside of a real court with a real judge who will be really unsympathetic and send him to a real prison where real inmates will make a real mess out of him. Christians and Jews have their own religious laws but it sure doesn't exempt them from our civil laws. Likewise, I won't go to a Jewish court for enjoying some bacon now and then.
Just Me,
Obviously very ignorant when it comes to Sharia Law. No where in Islam is a man allowed to kill his daughter and get away with it.
Sanders, Just Me - There is, however, a passge in the Judeo-Christian bible which gives a man the right to sell his daughter into slavery, so why don't you hold onto those stones you were going to throw?
Er, Prag, guess again.....Catholics have an ecclesiastical government to enforce rules and excommunicate members, not Christians.
Capecod Mom, please read what you're discussing before you presume to interject. There is nothing in the Greek Scriptures (the New Testament to some) that endorses anything of the sort. And I would like you to cite the Hebrew Scripture that says what you're saying. AND you might want to do some background research to find out what the term "slave" signified in that time and place.
I was referring to the Old Testament, which is shared scripture in both Christian & Jewish culture, specifically Exodus 21:7, which gives instructions about how a daughter sold into slavery should be kept separate from male slaves and prevented from accessing the same freedoms.
I do, however, apologize to Sanders - I believe I misunderstood the tone of your comment. After reading the other comments you've made, I realize that I misread. Sorry!
I've read quite a few comments by people agreeing with the ballot measure - that judge's should not be allowed to consider sharia law in general when hearing cases (implied - the case deals with a muslim practicing his religious beliefs in some way).
I have to say first of all - "government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" -
second, if oklahomans wanted this to actually stick and become law, they should have not named sharia specifically. if y'all want it, go for it, but include kashrut law and christian canonical law as well. if a judge can't consider sharia, then they should not be able to consider kashrut law either for say - a case against a guy slaughtering an animal for kosher meat without following local health codes, etc -
there are cases when a judge may consider religious law in rendering a judgement about the free exercise of religious beliefs. singling out sharia to tie a judges hands but not applying the same standard to jews and christians is stupid and should not be tolerated in our country
Government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..
I agree absolutely. Since my belief system (Wicca) welcomes and has sects for the LGBT community, then two of our Minoan Brotherhood (gays) or two of our Dianic Wiccans (lesbians) should be allowed to marry. If our religion says it's okay (and it does) then LGBT couples should be allowed to handfast.
Hear, hear, Amanda! Very true. But this country bends over to kiss the rears of our worst enemies, time after time after time. In my experience, Wiccans don't make a big scene over everything they do, stay out of the public eye except for normal daily interactions, and generally mind their own business. So you can't expect to be treated the same as these our international enemies do, just as you should expect to be frisked at every airport while they go through unchecked out of fear of being accused of profiling. I would welcome you to my neighborhood. I hope I don't have to ever see any religious zealots here though, trying to abuse their women and prohibit normal behaviors, because we're not going to get along.
Sonata's Adela said:
So you can't expect to be treated the same as these our international enemies do
And seeing this after I just left the message board that was discussing detention of suspected terrorists and GITMO...
There's an ICE-run deportation camp in Raymondville TX that human rights groups all 'Ritmo' after having seen it--they say it's looks like the detention facilities at Gitmo. After having spent 3 years there because ICE lost my adoption paper 18 years after I was adopted, I have a basic idea of what the 'enemies' at Gitmo go through; indefinite detention without charge or trial, death threats, psychosexual humiliation, physical and sexual assault, isolation/solitary confinement, witholding of food/water or inadequate food given (maggots in my food), inadequate clothing during temperature extremes, inadequate clothing (assigned underwear still had blood from another woman's period crusted on it because it wasn't washed prior to being given me).
So no, don't tell me I can't expect to be treated the same as our 'enemies'. I know firsthand it isn't true.
Sharia law cannot be stopped! Load your guns righties, and stock up on the ammo!! The entire country will soon be under Sharia law!!! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stupid bumpkins claim to love our Constitution, but try to pass crap like this. The Muslim guy is the only American patriot in the story.
another ignorant libitard comment. Perhaps if the religion was not full of terriorsts that espouse violence and dishonor women more people would be inclined to tolorence. If you want that , the Arab world has plenty of space.
If you see all Moslems as terrorists you really don't have a clue. You should get out more.
So please explain to me a little about muslim belief. Are you saying that most don't believe that non-muslims are infidels that are to be killed? I don't know really anything about muslim and would like to be able to understand a bit more in order to follow this conversation.(not being sarcastic etc.. really want to know)
I wonder how many Christians are aware that under Jewish law if an unmarried virgin is raped she has to marry her rapist. Do they realize that their hero, Newt Gingrich, would be stoned to death because he committed adultery?
Hi Skrewworld, Islam does not call Muslims to kill Non-Muslims. That is a story made up based on Quranic verses that allowed Muslims to fight against a marching army of Jews and Christians and Sabians, otherwise for over a decade Muslims were killed and opressed and the Quran did not allo to fight back.
Quran 60”8. Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly
with those who fought not against you on account of religion and did not drive
you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal with equity.
Quran 60 “9.
It is only as
regards those who fought against you on account of religion, and have driven
you out of your homes, and helped to drive you out, that Allah forbids you to
befriend them. And whosoever will befriend them, then such are the Zalimun (wrong-doers
those who disobey Allah).
Allah calls Christians and Jews, people of the book.
However there does seem to be verses in teh Bible that command you to kill all disblievers and doesnt seem to be about a war.
have a look
17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and
worshiped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I
have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and
enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such
abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man
or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even
that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Bible Deuteronomy 17
17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and
worshiped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I
have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and
enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such
abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man
or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even
that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Bible . Luke 19 27
But those mine enemies, which would not that
I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them
before me.
QMB789, 1) Dueteronomy is the ancient Jewish experience as God's people before the law of Christ - actually revealing the NEED for the superior law of Christ. 2) You have misused Luke 19:27. Please read the ENTIRE illustration or parable given by Jesus and it is apparent Jesus is not condoning his followers kill anyone (he put down his defenders at his own arrest and healed a soldier injured by a defender). Jesus himself and his angels will be the executioners of those who do not submit to his God and father at Armageddon. I have heard similar clergical misapplication of the Qran is responsible for terrorism...it is easy to do with uneducated and already angry people.
1Fiend, are you saying god screwed up when he made his ancient laws? Uh oh, I'm pretty sure you're damned to hell for eternity dude. Doesn't matter if you repent - claiming god is a screwup is a sin that can never be forgiven.
Sucks that you just won eternal torture for an internet comment, but that's how god works. Remember, Jesus loves you!
1Fiend ... I'm not necessarily picking on you because I don't know your political positions, it is amazing how many people will declare the Old Testament and its restrictions as no longer applicable, yet will quick to quote Leviticus when they're trying to deny gays their equal rights. In other words, the Old Testament doesn't apply, except when convenient.
Just as so-called hate crime legislation should be struck down. Why is premeditated murder any more serious when it involves two races, two religions, or two persuasions? White on white crime is no less heinous than white on black crime, and straight on straight crime is no less heinous than straight on gay crime.
You are correct Woody UMO 82. Isn't all murder a hate crime? The problem is when the people of Oklahoma step out to say what they do not want, constitutional or not, they are called retards and violaters of the law, but when our government passes hate crime laws that very specifically identify certain individuals, they have done the same thing as this law has done. Is it ok on the federal level and not on the state? Not to mention that our current administration has no conscience to go around the constitution and not uphold and defend it whenever it suits their fancy. I am not saying other administrations have not done the same, they may have, but it is time to nix the going around the constitution matter if it is indeed the law of our land. When people take an oath to protect and defend it, they should be held to that promise or removed. Thus the comments by some people on this thread that they are concerned about Sharia law becoming law. Could entities that are in power in our governmental offices (ie.. Senators, Congressmen and even Presidents) not simply do the same and go around our constitution? I can say that the going around our constitution has become a very real concern to me. Perhaps that is why some folks are concerned about Sharia law, our own laws seem to be up to interpretation and the choice of weather to go around those laws or not... Much to think about. By the way, the Muslims do have a plan to get into positions in public office and thus could very well change or interpret the constitution as they see fi.t so maybe the Oklahoma law is not so far fetched after all.
Laws like this one (that was finally struck down) are brought up because common sense laws do not buy VOTES...thus politicians can't ride the coat tales of laws and gain support of the sheeple that are blissfully grazing in the koolaid fields...
Right Wing nonsense like the Sharia law crap only serves to increase support for President Obama's re-election.
Republicans are constantly misrepresenting President Obama's record on everything from the economy to the killing of Osama bin Laden.
The nonsense claims made by the right (like calling President Obama a socialist) only strengthen support for his re-election because America fears what would happen if these right wing loonies were in control of the Presidency.
Harbinger...these righties are ignorant bigots of the worst possible kind,.,practicing bigotry and convinced god is on their side...
demopublicans ,and republicrats......and the bastardized mutant factions they produce (like the teaparty) are the problem as a whole, but the bipartisan sheeple that follow them blindly, are the root cause of the problem...
lose the bipartisan mindset and you'll be much better off.
Great post cbawl. Sadly, neither side wants that to happen and perfer to fight dirty, like the Hatfields and McCoys, over NON GOVERNMENT issues!!! The extremes on BOTH SIDES is the direct cause of all the problems they create in our Country, whereas they have become so blinded by the poltiical hyperbole, rheotric and neener, neener, neene" mentality they can't even SEE how F'D UP BOTH THEIR SIDES ARE! They have become so handicapped by all the non-relevant poltiical minutia they're completely incapable of any critical thought whatsoever. BIG Sigh!
What does it really say about a citizenry that doesn't truly care about THEIR COUNTRY, and will selfishly vote in any politician wearing their special politial label into office just to get the opposing side's out?!?! FYI -- Patriotism is about putting your life on the line to preserve and protect the US Constitution, period! If those voted into office are not following the US Constitution, which is the oath they must take in order to do so, and they do not they should be treated like any other persond and tossed out when they're unable to follow the established laws or rules within a household, business, airplane.....
This is political lunacy, wheras the McCarthy mentality needs to be SQUASHED the moment it rears up it's ugly biggoted head!
Hallelujah! (Pardon the exclamation) This bill was as bogus as a three dollar bill. We have no need to fear Shariah Law ever being conceivably put in practice. Why? Because we have federal and state constitutions, and law by statute. This is just another power play by religious zealots at the price of our civil liberties. And for purposes of disclosure, I AM from Oklahoma.
I agree with Wm.Sanders. The Oklahoma law is just another power play by the Republican Religious Right to pander to the religious zealots in an attempt to get a vote. Oklahoma also passed a law to make English the official language. Like WTF? No one in America speaks proper English. That is to say English as it is spoken in England. They call a flashlight a Torch. An Elevator in England is called a Lift. A sidewalk in America is called a Pavement in England. So do we speak proper English in America? Hell No! Its all just hate mongering by the inbred, religious douchebags who claim to love Jesus, God, Guns, Football and Nascar and nothing or no one else.
Mixing religion with the legal system is NEVER good. When will we learn?
And Noneyabusiness: keep your mythical writings to yourself. They only show how truly ignormant you are.
the first people to stand before the sharia law should be the judges that permit this foolish and stupid set of barbaric laws. this is the United States of American where every person has the right before a court of law. our system may not be perfect but we have the best justice system in the world. and sharia courts do not offer or even recognize that. i hope these judges have their hand, head cut off. then they will know the error they imposed on the American people.
These judges were not favoring sharia law, so I don't know what you are talking about.
There are no "sharia courts" in the US that have any legal authority. Under our code of law, our Common Laws have precedence over any religious beliefs. The only time a US Court would ever consider any religious belief was when it did not conflict with US Laws.
The same Constitutional Amendment that negates that foolish law also protects you and all other non-believers from Sharia.
Did you even READ the article or just spout your nonsense? At no point did the judges uphold sharia law or give it any standing whatsoever. They just struck down an unconstitutionally broad statute passed by pandering conservatives to fix a non-existent problem.
Are you also in favor of the "no alligators at the South Pole" legislation?
Wm you got this correct..
This is America! based on American Law and Religion, it is many and we all respect that, but do not force me to be who I am not, Our culter is many and 90% live a life in Harmoney for those who don't like it go back to where you came from live there I know the life there is not what it is in America! but you want your life style go to where you lived before as Americans say you Have the right to LEAVE!
Larry, did you read the article?
LOL, Reading is fundamental.
Um, which religion was that again?
Wha...huh?
21 deleted, Mark-3780194 ruminating about federal judges and how it's 'about time to load the firearms and retake the country.'
Don't do this. It's a lot of work for me. Banned, reported to authorities. Don't talk about loading firearms and going after federal employees or anyone, really.
In England, the Archbishop of Canterbury said that the courts should enforce sharia law. A lady Member of Parliament made the following reply: "The courts will enforce the laws that are passed by Parliament." Rule Britannia!
This is about America.
Hey dave.
THIS IS SPARTA!
Those conservative simpletons. We're facing all manner of economic and other problems, and all they can think about is Sharia law? They remind me of another ignorant, intolerant group - the Taliban.
Excellent point - and from all the collapsed comments here, at least some people - and judges - have the intelligence to see this has been much ado about nothing. My favorite quote in the article was by Feldman: “It’s like a law that says we absolutely ban alligators on the South Pole”.
24, 25 deleted, kind of the same post from Merc Man OD and bruce-1108547 bashing all muslims:
Merc Man OD banned, rereg of currently suspended gdvegas, also banned. Don't register multiple accounts.
bruce-1108547, you're suspended for a week for violating #5 of the Code of Honor. Don't smear all followers of a religion.
I'm all for the tolerance and acceptance of other people's faith (within reason) but when you choose to live in a country you are to abide by the law of that land.
Then you will be relieved to know that particular legal concept was upheld by the ruling you're doing so much complaining about. When you live in our country (the USA), you is subject to the law of that land (except maybe John DeLorean, ha ha). Sharia law is not enforceable in a US court. Lay off the kool-aid please.
So much complaining? Someone's looking for an argument. I didn't fully grasp the whole issue here but now I realize it must simply be one of the constitutionality of the original ruling.
In fact, I really don't see the need for the initial ruling given US law supersedes Sharia in any event. I guess it can best be described as the height of conservative paranoia.
P.S. "you is subject to the law"? hahahaha
No worries, with America's first muslim president running for re-election this fall, we can be sure he will appoint judges to the federal bench that will protect the rights of his muslim brothers above the rights of actual Americans.
Tolerance means they have to respect my rights as well.
Now let's meet the starting lineup of the Nitwit Commenters: paidmyfee, Troll So Hard University
Also, Romley is half mexican so give all of the U.S. to either kenya or mexico. (mormon or muslim)
These liberal judges are ruining this country. Sharia law runs counter to American law and should not be used.
The best thing you democrats can do for this country and our future generations is to not vote in the next Presidential election. That way you are not further ruining this country be possibly electing another democrat to office.
David
Are you an expert on Sharia Law? If not, then exactly how do you know it 'runs counter to American law'?
And you are aware that nothing trumps our secular laws. That's the point of this ruling. We don't need a law that says to use the laws already on the books. Our Constitution protects us from this. If you love and believe in your country then please have enough faith in your fellow Americans.
We can't even agree on what Christmas decorations can be put up on government property. What makes you think we would ever allow any religious law to override our secular laws.
I admit I'm no Sharia expert, but doesn't it allow the degradation and even killing of women? That sounds like something that would run counter to American law.
Also, now that the Fascism Bill is law I don't know how much faith you should put in your precious Constitution protecting you. Your government obviously doesn't seem to think too much of it.
papag, not how it is usually practiced, no. But anything that does run counter to American law is already prohibited, so this doesn't change anything.
Papago
So if you are not an expert on Sharia law please stop acting like it.
I'm NOT happy with the new law you mentioned. I'm PISSED. But there has yet to be a Constitutional challenge. I'm writing my congressmen and voicing my disgust and am working on a repeal or rewording. But I do this within the laws we have in place.
I promise you, if my country ever strays from the basic rights we have under the Constitution I will be one of the first out in front of whatever takes place. I believe that strongly in my rights.
How am I acting like an expert when the first thing I said was that I don't claim to be one? I put forth my understanding and was open to being corrected. That is the very nature of a civil discussion, something which is apparently foreign to you.
You must have some kind of doctorate in Islamic studies to be acting so high and mighty, although somehow I doubt that you do. You sound like one of those self-proclaimed interent experts to me.
Where is common sense in the courts? I understand that US law overrides all others, but rather than give an inch to those that will take a mile, the court should have just told them that they may worship as they see fit, but like all other religions, it must be kept out of the sight of everyone not wishing to be exposed to it
If we can not have the Ten Commandments, they should not have their crap law. There must be some degree of fairness.
As for the muslims, why do you come to another country and try to change it? You have your homeland where you may beat your wives and rape your kids. Don't come here expecting a civilized nation to abide by your rules. Ours may not be perfect, but they are far better than yours.
When you go to another country, you are expected to change. Learn the language, obey the laws. Is that too much for you and you find it easier to spend your time changing things to be just like what you left behind?
Just a sidenote for you: You will never take over the US. We are a country made of strong, loyal people who are not about to adapt to islam. You see, we have guts, we have glory and we have firepower. And, by constitution, grace, and bravado, you will never take these from us.
Go back to your sandbox. You are not wanted or welcomed here.
Wow, where to start.
1). The lawsuit was about the Constitutionality of a law OK passed. It was not about whether anyone could or could not observe their religion. Nor was it about Muslims trying to or wanting to enact Sharia law.
2). The courts have no right to tell them they can worship as they see fit but to keep it to themselves. However, I'm all for that as long as it includes every religion because I don't appreciate all the 'Christians' trying to shove their flavor down my throat either.
"but like all other religions, it must be kept out of the sight of everyone not wishing to be exposed to it"
No, that is not what the Constitution says, and nobody has suggested that.
Sure, they're not trying to enact Sharia Law, but how long until someone claims they are innocent of killing their wife because Sharia Law allows it and cites this ruling in their defense? Obviously they will still be found guilty under American law, but why even allow for any such confusion or misinterpretation of this ruling?
Papago
Don't be silly. You are creating a straw man argument. You and I both know that would never fly. And if anyone tries it no jury would uphold it nor would any appeals court.
You're grasping at straws.
There will be no confusion or misinterpretation because that is not what the ruling says. We do not change rulings just because future idiots might claimit says something different.
I acknowledged they would still be found guilty. I'm just having a hard time grasping the point of this whole issue. If American law already supersedes Sharia then what is the big deal about a ruling that bars its use in state courts if it already isn't usable? Is it purely a question of the ruling's constitutionality?
I fear dsb one day you will deeply regret your comment about Christians...but it may very well be too late.
Soupson
I'm 60 years old. I have spent a lifetime studing religions, all sorts of beliefs. I have thought about this a lot. I am perfectly comfortable with my beliefs. I don't need anyone else to tell me what or how to believe. I'll be honest with you. I believe that I should live my life doing no harm to others, helping those less fortunate than I have been, treating everyone with respect. If there is an afterlife and that's not enough, the so be it. I will be content to know that I lived my life as I thought right. I will be content. I don't need the fear of 'Hell' to convince me of the right thing to do. Do you have the same conviction in your beliefs? Or do you just follow blindly?
Michael,
You impliedly criticize courts for not having common sense. Your ideas are barely understandable. What I understood, however, marks you as a person who knows absolutely nothing about the First Amendment. Here's what it says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Let's focus on the religious part of it: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
It's true that displays of the Ten Commandments cannot appear in public buildings or on public property. You know why, Michael? It's because any displays in or around public buildings require government approval. Under the the first clause of the First Amendment, the Establishment Clause, approving the posting of your religious beliefs tends to give the impression that government favors your religion, thereby violating the Establishment Clause. And your idea that those who practice the Muslim faith must be concealed from your view and that of other Christians violates the second clause of the two religious clauses of the First Amendment by "prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
I'm sorry to break this to you, Michael, but the First Amendment protects everyone's right to worship freely, not just yours. It protects Buddhists, Hindus, Confucianists, Taoists, Shintoists, Sikhs, Mayans, Zoroastrians, various American Indian religions, and yes, even atheists, Michael. At bottom, the First Amendment demands that government be religiously neutral and tolerant toward all religions, not just Judaism or any one of the various Christian faiths to which you may subscribe.
In principle, Michael, Americans who believe in and subscribe to our Constitution, including the First Amendment, believe in religious tolerance, not the kind of religious authoritarianism you display. Your expressed ideas plainly reveals anti-American religious bigotry, Michael. Who's really lacking common sense here?
When you don't have any answers to REAL problems, you make up problems and deal with the. The imaginary threat Sharia Law in the US is one of those make believe problems -- like gay marriage and flag burning. And notice which party talks about these issues???
Liberal/progressive rubbish
That Sharia Law is even in question is proof enough that muslims are working hard in this country to overthrow it.... 30 yrs ago, it would not even be a question, and for that matter, if obama did what he is doing now, only 30 yrs ago, he would be in jail.
Exactly what Obama is doing now that would have landed him in jail 30 years ago? Please enlighten me, oh great legal scholar. And, if you can, do so without using 'socialism' in your answer.
obama is a Marxist, and he could not even enter the military with his background of communists and terrorists... He is a racist also and never had a job except as community agitator in Chicago. He has more in common with Hugo Chavez and North Korea than he does with this country... He, in fact, does belong in jail.
I take it you've never read Marx. Come talk to me when Obama starts collectivizing the land.
In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.'
~Theodore Roosevelt 1907~