"Islamic Marriage Guide" -Teaches Muslims correct way to beat their wives!!

I love how liberals always say never.

Really? I wasn't aware that was something we "always" say.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion . . . " (U.S. Constitution, First Amendment). If that has been sufficient to protect us from the religious right -- who have far more power in this country that Muslims do, or will in the foreseeable future -- then it can protect us from the tiny, tiny, insignificant, and powerless number of Muslims who would like to see Sharia law imposed here.

You are claiming a difference between Islam and Christianity that does not exist, and trying to rouse fear of a danger that also does not exist. Why? The only reason I can see is to rouse hatred, intolerance, violence, and support for holy war.

You and your kind are a far greater danger to liberty in this country than Islam will ever be.
 
I love how liberals always say never.

Really? I wasn't aware that was something we "always" say.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion . . . " (U.S. Constitution, First Amendment). If that has been sufficient to protect us from the religious right -- who have far more power in this country that Muslims do, or will in the foreseeable future -- then it can protect us from the tiny, tiny, insignificant, and powerless number of Muslims who would like to see Sharia law imposed here.

You are claiming a difference between Islam and Christianity that does not exist, and trying to rouse fear of a danger that also does not exist. Why? The only reason I can see is to rouse hatred, intolerance, violence, and support for holy war.

You and your kind are a far greater danger to liberty in this country than Islam will ever be.

I bet France, German, Britian, Netherlands and Russia were saying that, but their "insignificant" minority became a growing, vocal, demanding and arrogant pain the ass! You don't think it could happen here? I bet those countries thought it couldn't happen there either!
 
I bet France, German, Britian, Netherlands and Russia were saying that, but their "insignificant" minority became a growing, vocal, demanding and arrogant pain the ass!

Are you claiming that Sharia law has been imposed in those countries?

If we get a huge influx of Muslim immigrants, that may (but is unlikely to) prove as challenging an assimilation problem as the huge influx of immigrants from Mexico. I say it's unlikely to because we have a common border with Mexico while we don't with any Muslim country. In any case, it's no cause for hysteria.

Cards on the table time. What do you suggest be done?
 
Last edited:
Are you claiming that Sharia law has been imposed in those countries?
Yes, in some of those countries, particularly the UK, they are recognizing Sharia Law on some issues like family law. Just a few yes ago the Brits didn't think that was possible!

http://ir.stthomas.edu/cgi/viewcont...earch="British courts recognizing Sharia law"

Sharia Law Now Recognized In London, UK Courts | The Voice Christian magazine

If we get a huge influx of Muslim immigrants, that may (but is unlikely to) prove as challenging an assimilation problem as the huge influx of immigrants from Mexico. I say it's unlikely to because we have a common border with Mexico while we don't with any Muslim country. In any case, it's no cause for hysteria.
You have a point there. A huge influx like Europe has is not too likely. Mexican assimilation issues is mainly the language barrier problem. Arabs have been coming to this country for decades and assimulating without issue. However, most of the Arabs were Christians Arabs fleeing persecution in their native lands (like Lebanon, Egypt and Syria). The recent wave has been Muslim Arabs. They don't assimulate and their mosques teach hatred of America!

See hysteria doesn't happen until it's too late. Until the voting bloc becomes too strong and than one political party will exploit them for their election advantage!


Cards on the table time. What do you suggest be done?
Truthfully, makes laws on that book that disallow Sharia Law. Give extra scrutiny and highly extensive background checking for every muslim student visa and immigrant. Go off of better safe than sorry and any doubt kick him out attitude! Stop immigration from any country that polls at 51% or higher negative view of America. If the majority of your countries citizens hate America, then they shouldn't immigrate here (make that for Christian countries also)! Racial profile Muslims (sorry until the religion stops attacking the west, then we will stop racial profiling them). Disallow hijabs, just like France!
 
Yes, in some of those countries, particularly the UK, they are recognizing Sharia Law on some issues like family law. Just a few yes ago the Brits didn't think that was possible!

Your sources indicated this is something under discussion, and ONLY as applied to Muslim families. This is not a case of Sharia being "imposed" on the UK. It's a case of British family law making room for the religious customs of an ethnic minority. The same could well happen here, but it's not any reason for alarm. It would be comparable to Christian Scientists getting a pass on laws requiring vaccination.

See hysteria doesn't happen until it's too late.

Hysteria is ALWAYS the wrong approach. It is ALWAYS too soon for it.

Truthfully, makes laws on that book that disallow Sharia Law.

We have the First Amendment already. What more is needed beyond that, and why?
 
Religious courts already in use in UK
British Jews, particularly the orthodox, will frequently turn to their own religious courts, the Beth Din, to resolve civil disputes, covering issues as diverse as business and divorce.

"There's no compulsion", the registrar of the London Beth Din, David Frei, said. "We can't drag people in off the streets."

Both sides in a dispute must be Jewish, obviously, and must have agreed to have their case heard by the Beth Din. Once that has happened, its eventual decision is binding. English law states that any third party can be agreed by two sides to arbitrate in a dispute, and in this case the institutional third party is the Beth Din.
BBC NEWS | UK | Religious courts already in use
_44411451_londonjews_203.jpg
 
The United States recognizes sharia law as applied to muslims. The islamic Supreme Court is in Texas with lower courts everywhere in the country.

Sharia law is applied the same way any agreed upon rule of arbitration is applied. Sharia courts are courts of arbitration not courts of law. If the agreed jurisdicton is sharia court in contractually agreed to as binding there is no appeal to state or federal court. If it is non-binding either party may appeal to state or federal jurisdiction. What muslims want is for state and federal courts to apply sharia law.

It is not comparable to Christian Scientists getting a pass on vaccinations. It would be comparable to a Family Law court applying a Catholic prohibition against divorce and refusing to grant a civil divorce to a Catholic who petitions for relief.

What muslims are asking for in the UK is for the courts to apply sharia law at least to muslims which would completely eliminate and overturn all honor killing convictions and make prosecution for honor killings impossible. Rape of a muslim girl by a muslim man would require the testimony of five male eyewitnesses. Muslim women would not be able to divorce muslim men. Muslim girls would be "married" to 50 year old pedophiles.

Once the goverment courts apply these laws to muslims, the next will be to make the laws uniform and apply to everyone.

Is this something to be alarmed about?

To say a Catholic can't get a divorce isn't really true. They certainly can. Any Catholic can file for divorce in any country in the nation and get one. But, suppose our courts started applying Catholic ecumenical law and denied divorces based on the religion of the parties? Is that something to be alarmed about? We might imagine that this would be an excessive entanglement and following religious law would be prohibited but that's what the entire imposition of sharia law is all about.
 
If sharia law escapes the arbitration function of the sharia courts and civil and criminal government judges start relying on sharia law, yes it is being imposed.
 
If sharia law escapes the arbitration function of the sharia courts and civil and criminal government judges start relying on sharia law, yes it is being imposed.

And in that case would violate the First Amendment prohibition of establishment of religion.
 
Religious courts already in use in UK
British Jews, particularly the orthodox, will frequently turn to their own religious courts, the Beth Din, to resolve civil disputes, covering issues as diverse as business and divorce.

"There's no compulsion", the registrar of the London Beth Din, David Frei, said. "We can't drag people in off the streets."

Both sides in a dispute must be Jewish, obviously, and must have agreed to have their case heard by the Beth Din. Once that has happened, its eventual decision is binding. English law states that any third party can be agreed by two sides to arbitrate in a dispute, and in this case the institutional third party is the Beth Din.
BBC NEWS | UK | Religious courts already in use
_44411451_londonjews_203.jpg

The thing is Jos are the Jews in English trying to submit the country under Jewish law?
 
I bet France, German, Britian, Netherlands and Russia were saying that, but their "insignificant" minority became a growing, vocal, demanding and arrogant pain the ass!

Are you claiming that Sharia law has been imposed in those countries?

If we get a huge influx of Muslim immigrants, that may (but is unlikely to) prove as challenging an assimilation problem as the huge influx of immigrants from Mexico. I say it's unlikely to because we have a common border with Mexico while we don't with any Muslim country. In any case, it's no cause for hysteria.

Cards on the table time. What do you suggest be done?

Well our problem with the illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central America is a different issue, I have not heard of any illegals wanting to legislate all of us into living under Mexican or Guatamalan law, or asking for separate Mexican or Guatamalan courts.
 
Well our problem with the illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central America is a different issue, I have not heard of any illegals wanting to legislate all of us into living under Mexican or Guatamalan law, or asking for separate Mexican or Guatamalan courts.

Muslims don't do anything like that, either. As Katzndogs noted above, what they do have is arbitration contracts based around Sharia, amounting to a binding agreement among (some) American Muslims.

Even if a state or locality became majority Muslim, actually to frame the law around Sharia would be a First Amendment violation, just as it would be today to enact law based on Christian doctrine. Non-Muslim minorities could challenge any such law in court and win.
 
Well our problem with the illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central America is a different issue, I have not heard of any illegals wanting to legislate all of us into living under Mexican or Guatamalan law, or asking for separate Mexican or Guatamalan courts.

Muslims don't do anything like that, either. As Katzndogs noted above, what they do have is arbitration contracts based around Sharia, amounting to a binding agreement among (some) American Muslims.

Even if a state or locality became majority Muslim, actually to frame the law around Sharia would be a First Amendment violation, just as it would be today to enact law based on Christian doctrine. Non-Muslim minorities could challenge any such law in court and win.

Hmm than why do I keep hearing about demand for Sharia law courts? isn't CHAIR pissed because some states are taking action to block Sharia law?
 
Well our problem with the illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central America is a different issue, I have not heard of any illegals wanting to legislate all of us into living under Mexican or Guatamalan law, or asking for separate Mexican or Guatamalan courts.

Muslims don't do anything like that, either. As Katzndogs noted above, what they do have is arbitration contracts based around Sharia, amounting to a binding agreement among (some) American Muslims.

Even if a state or locality became majority Muslim, actually to frame the law around Sharia would be a First Amendment violation, just as it would be today to enact law based on Christian doctrine. Non-Muslim minorities could challenge any such law in court and win.

So naive. In the end they will use the first amendment (freedom of religion) to get Sharia law recognized in the courtroom!
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Jos
Well our problem with the illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central America is a different issue, I have not heard of any illegals wanting to legislate all of us into living under Mexican or Guatamalan law, or asking for separate Mexican or Guatamalan courts.

Muslims don't do anything like that, either. As Katzndogs noted above, what they do have is arbitration contracts based around Sharia, amounting to a binding agreement among (some) American Muslims.

Even if a state or locality became majority Muslim, actually to frame the law around Sharia would be a First Amendment violation, just as it would be today to enact law based on Christian doctrine. Non-Muslim minorities could challenge any such law in court and win.

So naive. In the end they will use the first amendment (freedom of religion) to get Sharia law recognized in the courtroom!

Oh hell no, I wouldn't last 5 minutes in a Sharia court room with all my drinking and fornicating. :(
 
In the end they will use the first amendment (freedom of religion) to get Sharia law recognized in the courtroom!

If the religious right haven't managed to do that, why should we expect Muslims, who constitute a much smaller minority, to have any chance at all?

There is absolutely zero chance of Sharia being applied to non-Muslims in this country, or for that matter to Muslims who don't want it to apply to them. None whatever, and that isn't naivety; saying to the contrary is paranoid fear-mongering.
 
Last edited:
If it was titled "How to disipline horrendous children" I wouldn't have too much of a problem with it.


Treat people like little kids, and you will find yourself very lonely. Kind of explain why Martydom is a big theological concept in Islamic countries. The seriously devout are abandoned by their family!
 
Religious courts already in use in UK
British Jews, particularly the orthodox, will frequently turn to their own religious courts, the Beth Din, to resolve civil disputes, covering issues as diverse as business and divorce.

"There's no compulsion", the registrar of the London Beth Din, David Frei, said. "We can't drag people in off the streets."

Both sides in a dispute must be Jewish, obviously, and must have agreed to have their case heard by the Beth Din. Once that has happened, its eventual decision is binding. English law states that any third party can be agreed by two sides to arbitrate in a dispute, and in this case the institutional third party is the Beth Din.
BBC NEWS | UK | Religious courts already in use
_44411451_londonjews_203.jpg

The thing is Jos are the Jews in English trying to submit the country under Jewish law?

No more so than the Muslims, who would like disagreements between Muslims settled by arbitration of Muslim courts of dispute
 

Forum List

Back
Top