Sharia Law

[Guest]

I'm wondering if anyone knows and are following the march of sharia law,how devastating it will be if we continue to let it take over our country completely. look at what is happening in Detroit . Do some reading about it. I'm not going to tell you what to read that way it won't be one sided. But do look up some info about it. It will scare you and it will be worse than anything going on.

[Guest]

Are you referring to this?


http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2011/02/thomas_more_law_centers_claim.html

[Guest]

I'm wondering if anyone knows and are following the march of sharia law,how devastating it will be if we continue to let it take over our country completely. look at what is happening in Detroit . Do some reading about it. I'm not going to tell you what to read that way it won't be one sided. But do look up some info about it. It will scare you and it will be worse than anything going on.

Keep in mind, that good or bad, Sharia Law is very clear and consistent. With Christianity, you are playing a guessing game. No religion is more conniving than the American Christian. I have a wife, two daughters and two grandaughters, so I would hate to see Sharia Law come into power, but as a man, it would be the better of the two. Sharia Law follows the mandate of the American Republican and Tea Party very closely on issues other than women.

[Guest]

the so called "guessing game" is purely a function of one's personal beliefs and perspective. You represent ONLY one perspective when you refer to Christianity and "conniving" VS Sharia law......which is consistent.

The same can be said for Hitler. He was consistent and unflinching in his belief and expectation. And his following was determined very simply....do what I say or you will die!!!

Please do not insult other thinking persons by comparing the tea party and others to Sharia law belief. It may be your opinion/interpretation but does not by a long shot represent what others believe.

Watch out for the straw analysis method....looking at any subject through a straw...you know like the media does....reaching very narrow perspective conclusions (looking at the side of an elephant through a straw one should conclude the world is grey....just ask the media, Obama and others who pick up and run with minimal input.

btk

[Guest]

Keep in mind, that good or bad, Sharia Law is very clear and consistent. With Christianity, you are playing a guessing game. No religion is more conniving than the American Christian. I have a wife, two daughters and two grandaughters, so I would hate to see Sharia Law come into power, but as a man, it would be the better of the two. Sharia Law follows the mandate of the American Republican and Tea Party very closely on issues other than women.

Some statements are so ridiculous that they don't warrant a reply. Help is only a phone call away.

[Guest]

Never mind the fact that all the sharia hype is overblown.

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/may/14/leo-berman/state-rep-leo-berman-says-judges-dearborn-michigan/

In a nutshell, the only time a judge can consider sharia law is for CONTRACT law when both parties sign a contract stating that sharia law is to be used AND when those clauses don't clash with civil law.

In other words, it's pretty much the same as if two Orthodox Jews entered into a contract and wrote into the terms that they would be bound by the kashrut. If someone were contesting the contract, the judge would have to take into consideration that the kashrut was written into the contract. ...just like any other kind of clause.

[Guest]

Never mind the fact that all the sharia hype is overblown.

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/may/14/leo-berman/state-rep-leo-berman-says-judges-dearborn-michigan/

In a nutshell, the only time a judge can consider sharia law is for CONTRACT law when both parties sign a contract stating that sharia law is to be used AND when those clauses don't clash with civil law.

In other words, it's pretty much the same as if two Orthodox Jews entered into a contract and wrote into the terms that they would be bound by the kashrut. If someone were contesting the contract, the judge would have to take into consideration that the kashrut was written into the contract. ...just like any other kind of clause.

Once again with the voice of intelligent reason. I think some topics are just too complicated for some folks to comprehend. Thanks for a clear and correct post.

:024:

[Guest]

Now that the legal similarities(?) have been touted how about an intelligent list of those things most the real life, day to day people do not or would not like about sharia law?

Somehow the "rest of the story" does not get as much light...eh?

btk

[Guest]

Now that the legal similarities(?) have been touted how about an intelligent list of those things most the real life, day to day people do not or would not like about sharia law?

Somehow the "rest of the story" does not get as much light...eh?

btk

We have no need as those things are not legal here.

[Guest]

Never mind the fact that all the sharia hype is overblown.

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2011/may/14/leo-berman/state-rep-leo-berman-says-judges-dearborn-michigan/

In a nutshell, the only time a judge can consider sharia law is for CONTRACT law when both parties sign a contract stating that sharia law is to be used AND when those clauses don't clash with civil law.

In other words, it's pretty much the same as if two Orthodox Jews entered into a contract and wrote into the terms that they would be bound by the kashrut. If someone were contesting the contract, the judge would have to take into consideration that the kashrut was written into the contract. ...just like any other kind of clause.

Geez that makes me feel better. whatever happen to assimiliation as was practiced by european immgrants when they came to America?

[Guest]

Geez that makes me feel better. whatever happen to assimiliation as was practiced by european immgrants when they came to America?

I may be wrong, but I think the europeans brought their religion with them when the came over.

[Guest]

I may be wrong, but I think the europeans brought their religion with them when the came over.

Yea they did but they also abided by the laws of the US not Germany, Ireland, Italy.......... they didn't ask to be exempt from the US Constitution in fact many of them fought and died to preserve our democracy

I speculate that the ultimate goal of these particular Muslims is to eempt themselves completely from the laws of this country. What concernns me is that the government allowed American Indians the right to their own courts. Does that set precedent?????

the key word in my post was assimilation. without it we cannot be united and if not united then divided we fall

[Guest]

Yea they did but they also abided by the laws of the US not Germany, Ireland, Italy.......... they didn't ask to be exempt from the US Constitution in fact many of them fought and died to preserve our democracy

I speculate that the ultimate goal of these particular Muslims is to eempt themselves completely from the laws of this country. What concernns me is that the government allowed American Indians the right to their own courts. Does that set precedent?????

the key word in my post was assimilation. without it we cannot be united and if not united then divided we fall

Major problem and a good reason to not allow any religion or non-USA laws into our courts or politics at all.

[Guest]

Here's some great stuff from Sharia Law:

Within Sharia law, there is a category of crimes known as the hudud (Koranic) offences, for which there are specific penalties for particular crimes. For example, fornication is punished by stoning, the consumption of alcohol by lashing, and theft by the amputation of limbs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/ihavearightto/four_b/casestudy_art07.shtml

I'm sure all the pro-choice people will appreciate that in the case of fornication, the gal is stoned while the guy goes scott free. I guess Sharia Law doesn't think a woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body.....

[Guest]

Here's some great stuff from Sharia Law:

Within Sharia law, there is a category of crimes known as the hudud (Koranic) offences, for which there are specific penalties for particular crimes. For example, fornication is punished by stoning, the consumption of alcohol by lashing, and theft by the amputation of limbs.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/ihavearightto/four_b/casestudy_art07.shtml

Hey Katz, I don't see Sharia Law in our future, but am ready to fight to keep it out of our country. The worst is the way they treat women. Nasty bunch of laws there. I will be under again for the next two days, but will be back on Saturday if I feel OK by then. You keep posting with your good heart.

The Villager II

[Guest]

Hope all goes well for you VillagerII! Winter should be a good time to bike in The Villages and you've got alot of miles to do! :wave:

[Guest]

Yea they did but they also abided by the laws of the US not Germany, Ireland, Italy.......... they didn't ask to be exempt from the US Constitution in fact many of them fought and died to preserve our democracy

I speculate that the ultimate goal of these particular Muslims is to eempt themselves completely from the laws of this country. What concernns me is that the government allowed American Indians the right to their own courts. Does that set precedent?????

the key word in my post was assimilation. without it we cannot be united and if not united then divided we fall

Since the American Indian, aka, Native America, was here first, and we, the friendly white man, being the good hearted folks that we are, stole their land, killed them off with smallpox and liquor, they have earned the right to have their own courts, land and of course the Casinos. We won the war but they are getting all the money. What goes around comes around.

So the answer to your questions: No it does not give the Muslims the right to set up their own courts in our land.

[Guest]

Since the American Indian, aka, Native America, was here first, and we, the friendly white man, being the good hearted folks that we are, stole their land, killed them off with smallpox and liquor, they have earned the right to have their own courts, land and of course the Casinos. We won the war but they are getting all the money. What goes around comes around.

So the answer to your questions: No it does not give the Muslims the right to set up their own courts in our land.

Countries have been invading and occupying other countries since the cave men would take over one cave because it was better then their own. I personally do not buy this reparation nonsense. How far back in history will this be pertinent?

[Guest]

Until we white men take back the casinos. LOL

[Guest]

Until we white men take back the casinos. LOL

Yes, they took it from us, we should reciprocate.:loco:

[Guest]

Since the American Indian, aka, Native America, was here first, and we, the friendly white man, being the good hearted folks that we are, stole their land, killed them off with smallpox and liquor, they have earned the right to have their own courts, land and of course the Casinos. We won the war but they are getting all the money. What goes around comes around.

So the answer to your questions: No it does not give the Muslims the right to set up their own courts in our land.

IMHO the USA made a mistake(s) and did no favors by settling Native Americans on reservations. It would have been better and more humane to have had the them assimilate into society. I'm just saying.

As to the movement west by white settlers hasn't history shown this was inevitable and been a beneficial result for the world.

[Guest]

IMHO the USA made a mistake(s) and did no favors by settling Native Americans on reservations. It would have been better and more humane to have had the them assimilate into society. I'm just saying.

As to the movement west by white settlers hasn't history shown this was inevitable and been a beneficial result for the world.

We can not make judgements about things that happened many years ago. It is easy to second guess when a 150 years have passed. We do not know the mindset of people back then. Maybe many people lost relatives in the wars with the Indians. There was mistrust on both sides. Just like when Japan viciously attacked us. People were suspect of all Japanese people and rightfully so at the time.
I am sick and tired of people trying to rewrite history and depicting heros as villains and villains as heros. The politically correct will try their best to rewrite history.

[Guest]

"I'm sure all the pro-choice people will appreciate that in the case of fornication, the gal is stoned while the guy goes scott free. I guess Sharia Law doesn't think a woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body..... "

HUH?????? Your comment makes no sense.

[Guest]

In case you aren't aware, the Detroit area, with a large part of the population in the western suburb of Dearborn, is the largest concentration of Muslims outside of Baghdad. They follow Sharia Law, the moral code and religious law of Islam.

So as long as the United States continues to permit it's residents to practice the religion of their choice, we're going to have concentrations of people, such as in Detroit, that practice religion and beliefs that may be different from our own. While we may disagree with the basis of their religion, we have no legal right to limit their religious beliefs in any way. Like it or not, that's just the way America is.

[Guest]

In case you aren't aware, the Detroit area, with a large part of the population in the western suburb of Dearborn, is the largest concentration of Muslims outside of Baghdad. They follow Sharia Law, the moral code and religious law of Islam.

So as long as the United States continues to permit it's residents to practice the religion of their choice, we're going to have concentrations of people, such as in Detroit, that practice religion and beliefs that may be different from our own. While we may disagree with the basis of their religion, we have no legal right to limit their religious beliefs in any way. Like it or not, that's just the way America is.

Those in Michigan who "follow Sharia law" are subject to American jurisprudence which renders their beliefs as quaint, to put it nicely.

[Guest]

the only difference in the differing religions present today is the minority groups have incentive to go after what ever they do not like in what they call Christian beliefs. Why incentives?
Because the permissive and PC authorities have deteriorated to the point where they will not offend the requesting group.....the minority groups know this and exploit it....hence the majority gets trampled time and time again....at least until they rise up and fight back. As many of the frivolous and outright stupid requests are overturned.

btk

[Guest]

I really don't care what flavor of religion you follow or believe in. Rape my wife or my daughter and guess who gets stoned. Guess again, he ain't gonna like it much.

[Guest]

Those in Michigan who "follow Sharia law" are subject to American jurisprudence which renders their beliefs as quaint, to put it nicely.You're absolutely right, Richie. The Muslims can believe in Sharia Law, but so long as they live in this country, our criminal and tort laws trump their beliefs.

[Guest]

You're absolutely right, Richie. The Muslims can believe in Sharia Law, but so long as they live in this country, our criminal and tort laws trump their beliefs.

VK, the belief in Sharia Law or any other foreign or custom may not prevail, even if agreed to by both parties. We are a nation of law and only one law. The tendency has been to accept Sharia as part of an agreement. Sharia courts and elder decisions violate the entire fabric of our rule of law.

[Guest]

i agree wholeheartedly with BBQMan....

[Guest]

So, referencing another thread, our civil courts SHOULD force Catholic Universities to take down their crosses? Are they not allowed to have their own rules so long as they don't violate any civil statutes?

Orthodox Jews should not be allowed to keep kashrut in their contracts?

That guy in Texas should be forced to take Obama-voters in his gun safety class?