Separation of church and state...unless it's Sharia law.

[dammitgibs]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/08/oklahoma.islamic.law/index.html

"Judge blocks Oklahoma's ban on Islamic law"

"What this amendment is going to do is officially disfavor and condemn the Muslim community as being a threat to Oklahoma," said Muneer Awad, executive director of CAIR's Oklahoma chapter and the lead plaintiff in the suit. In addition, he said, it would invalidate private documents, such as wills, that are written in compliance with Muslim law.

Let me preface this by saying up until now I was the furthest away from extremist right-wing anti-muslim feelings but now I'm thinking "wtf is going on here??" You don't write documents and wills in compliance with muslim law, you write them in accordance with US LAW.

 

[Brainonska511]

-nevermind

 

[fskimospy]

The ruling was not that we should use muslim law in place of US law, it was that singling out a specific religion for discriminatory treatment was illegal.

 

[nonlnear]

The Oklahoma lawmakers seem to have made the mistake of targeting their amendment too narrowly. Perhaps they will try again with a more robust version...

 

[IBMer]

Outrageous out cry at protecting our constitution!

 

[manimal]

The ruling was not that we should use muslim law in place of US law, it was that singling out a specific religion for discriminatory treatment was illegal.

This is actually the tactic they are going for. Rational judges and politicians will see the merit of not singling out any specific religion while they get to claim the other side is siding with terrorists....

 

[dammitgibs]

But supporters said a New Jersey case, in which a judge refused to grant a restraining order against a Muslim man whose wife accused him of raping her repeatedly, made it necessary for Oklahoma to take action to keep Islamic law from being imposed there.

The New Jersey decision, in which the family court judge found the husband was abiding by his Muslim beliefs regarding spousal duties, was overruled by an appellate court.

Way to go NJ, rape is ok if you're muslim

 

[JTsyo]

It should be fine for Muslims to follow Islamic laws as long as it doesn't conflict with local laws. What's not OK is forcing people to follow the laws even if they are Muslims. Not sure what that judge in NJ was thinking, glad it was overruled.

 

[nick1985]

Fuck sharia law.

:thumbsdown:

 

[spidey07]

This is all part of the jihad. Take over courts and offices to implement sharia law. All muslims are duty bound to perform this goal. It's already been long underway in Europe.

 

[Sinsear]

Fuck sharia law.

:thumbsdown:

Fuck Islam.

 

[Pens1566]

This is all part of the jihad. Take over courts and offices to implement sharia law. All muslims are duty bound to perform this goal. It's already been long underway in Europe.

Good to see the election didn't tone down your lunacy to anything less than full on retard.

 

[ayabe]

This is all part of the jihad. Take over courts and offices to implement sharia law. All muslims are duty bound to perform this goal. It's already been long underway in Europe.

Yeah nevermind the ban on veils and all that other stuff. It's a full blown invasion and if we don't write some stupid laws here soon, some really stupid stuff is going to happen.

Or not.

 

[Throckmorton]

Why didn't Oklahoma ban ALL religious law in state courts instead of singling out one religion? Oh right...
I thought conservatives didn't believe in separation of church and state to begin with.

 

[Scotteq]

The ruling was not that we should use muslim law in place of US law, it was that singling out a specific religion for discriminatory treatment was illegal.

Exactly: You can't say "Sharia" in US law. Whatever gets written (if anything) must apply equally to all.


The referendum is poorly written and needs to be trashed and revised.

 

[spidey07]

Good to see the election didn't tone down your lunacy to anything less than full on retard.

What part is not true? Is jihad when called not the duty of all muslims? Is the act of jihad not to implement sharia law by controlling the hosts countries polices and law?

It's sad if you don't believe this is the truth. Hell, just go to wikipedia to learn more.

 

[thraashman]

I'd be fine with states banning Sharia law as long as they also banned all laws based on Christian doctrine that has no bearing on secular legal doctrine. So go ahead and ban Sharia law, but also legalize gay marriage and assisted suicide.

 

[BoberFett]

Was there an attempt to argue Sharia law in an OK court or was this just a pre-emptive "We hate Muslims" law?

And is there really a need to enshrine this in a law? A judge could shut down any attorney trying to argue Sharia law in court. It has no relevance to the case.

 

[Scotteq]

Why didn't Oklahoma ban ALL religious law in state courts instead of singling out one religion? Oh right...
I thought conservatives didn't believe in separation of church and state to begin with.

They should.


In this case, the referendum references a case where a Muslim man claimed in a US court that serially raping his wife was acceptable under Sharia, and that therefore he was innocent. The judge bought it, and let him go. This decision was later overturned On Appeal.

To add to this: The 'International Law' verbage was added in response to a Senator's comments that the USA should also be internally subject to International Law above and beyond the treaty requirements already in place.


So the good people of Oklahoma got a lovely piece of Political Fear~mongering in the form of a Referendum saying that International and Sharia Law can not be considered in Oklahoma Courtrooms. Because it says 'Sharia', I predict it will not pass the legal challenge since it doesn't apply equally to all.

There's already been a thread on this topic. But I will state that in this case, I fully agree with the Judge's decision to place a Stay on the law. It needs to be rewritten to be religiously neutral: So the language should be along the lines that "no law should be considered aside from United States Federal and State Laws as properly enacted by..." Then it's fair.

 

[ShawnD1]

Fuck Islam.

Hate speech reported to moderator.



Anyway, separation of church and state doesn't say you can't use religious laws. The bible says the death penalty is ok for almost everything, and the US has no problems using the death penalty. If popular opinion showed support for stoning people to death after they were the victim of rape, then that too could be made a US law. Islamic law is only illegal when it contradicts the not-Islamic laws; I can't stone bitches to death because stoning people is illegal (for now...)

 

[Throckmorton]

Just to be clear, fuck Sharia law and anybody who wants to implement it in a secular Western country. And fuck Westerners who capitulate (like this judge http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5670250/new_jersey_family_judge_accepts_sharia.html or like the UK http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece)

 

[Kadarin]

It should be fine for Muslims to follow Islamic laws as long as it doesn't conflict with local laws. What's not OK is forcing people to follow the laws even if they are Muslims. Not sure what that judge in NJ was thinking, glad it was overruled.

Not in any officially recognized capacity. Muslims in the US need to understand (and not undermine) the fact that here the law is derived from the Constitution, and that the supreme authority is NOT the Quran. There is no room to waver on that point, period.

If you give Muslims an inch on this, they will take a mile.

 

[DesiPower]

Anyway, separation of church and state doesn't say you can't use religious laws. The bible says the death penalty is ok for almost everything, and the US has no problems using the death penalty. If popular opinion showed support for stoning people to death after they were the victim of rape, then that too could be made a US law. Islamic law is only illegal when it contradicts the not-Islamic laws; I can't stone bitches to death because stoning people is illegal (for now...)

here we go again... another monkey with a keyboard... Its not about what religion supports what and what is the popular opinion. Its related to a simple fact. You live in a state which has laws, now someone commits a crime, which by common sense and by the standards of the modern civilization its totally eccentric and then they try to justify their actions by hiding behind sharia. Totally unacceptable, such ppl should be removed from civilized society.

 

[Pens1566]

What part is not true? Is jihad when called not the duty of all muslims? Is the act of jihad not to implement sharia law by controlling the hosts countries polices and law?

It's sad if you don't believe this is the truth. Hell, just go to wikipedia to learn more.

Only in your demented little world ...

 

[shira]

If a member of the orthodox Jewish community sued for fraud a kosher slaughterhouse for failing to abide by the tenets of the Kashrut (if, for example, chickens were routinely being killed with two swipes of the blade rather than the prescribed single swipe) , do you think state courts should or shouldn't allow such a lawsuit to proceed? That is, if customers engage a business because the business claims to be following certain religious practices, should the business be liable for fraud in state courts if the business knowingly fails to follows the claimed practices?

Similarly, if two parties agree contractually to be bound by a set of rules, and then one of the parties reneges on the agreement, should the agreement be enforced by state courts. Now, suppose the set of rules happen to have their origins in a religion - should that make any difference?

Well, this is exactly the sort of thing this Sharia case is about.