sharia law courts in Texas

[Agit8r]

The left still likes to pretend that all muslims are peaceful, reasonable people. Here are the "moderates" living in America. They want sharia law and to have their own courts. For now, our laws currently stop them from creating their own system of laws and justice that would trump ours, so they say their verdicts are voluntarily accepted. No mention of what happens to people in their communities who reject sharia law decisions in favor of the American system, which actually supports individual rights.

If we start allowing no-go zones and letting them have their own courts, how much longer before their religious "rights" are upheld in our courts to the point where they are allowed to have their own government? Islam is more of a dictatorship type government than a religion. They force rules on people and force them to believe in their god or face dire consequences.

In N.J., a judge allowed sharia law to overrule our own laws when he refused to hold a man responsible for abuse of his wife. The reasoning was that it's just the way muslims are and we can't hold them to our standards when they know nothing but their own archaic laws. The man considered it normal to abuse his wife since his religious book says it's okay. The woman was not granted a restraining order against the guy because he didn't understand what he did wrong. That pretty much guarantees he'll do it again and the woman remains in danger. He is doing what muslims do and that it mistreat women as they see fit. After all, that's what is says in their book, so no one can hold them liable for abuse. This is getting sick. If this judge is right and it's true that muslim men have no clue what they are doing wrong when they abuse women, then why do we want them here? How about we let them know that they can't break laws here, regardless of what their religious rag says? Maybe they'd think twice about coming if they knew they couldn't come and change things to suit themselves. That is why they come. Many have come out and admitted that their ultimate goal is a world controlled by sharia law.



" While some critics might be mollified by these "judges" claims that their "rulings" are "voluntary" now, how long will it be before this group or others like it start fighting to force American courts to acknowledge Sharia law in our own justice system?

Not as far off as you might think.

For example, a New Jersey judge recently cited Sharia Law in refusing to grant a Muslim woman a restraining order in a horrible case of sexual assault and abuse:


A New Jersey family court judge’s decision not to grant a restraining order to a woman who was sexually abused by her Moroccan husband and forced repeatedly to have sex with him is sounding the alarm for advocates of laws designed to ban Shariah in America.

Judge Joseph Charles, in denying the restraining order to the woman after her divorce, ruled that her ex-husband felt he had behaved according to his Muslim beliefs — and that he did not have "criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault" his wife.

Chilling. An American judge rubber-stamping the horrible abuse of a woman — in America — because her husband acted within the bounds of the barbaric, anti-woman Muslim "holy book." "

http://toprightnews.com/?p=8134

Next thing y'know, they'll allow public schools to teach creationism as science, and disallow abortion...

 

[Coyote]

Sharia courts are a disaster in the UK, as are their ' faith schools ', some of which are purely hate and intolerance factories that breed Islamic terrorists.

Going down the 'agree to anything' to ' protect religious freedom' path would be as much a disaster in America as it has been in the UK.

Sharia courts allow Muslim communities to hide rapists, pedophiles, and domestic violence from the justice system. They attack women's rights, and turn communities into a second state that ignores the laws of 'non-Muslims' and only follows the Koran.

Can you give any examples of where tha

The case might have been overturned, but there was a judge willing to bow to the demands of Muslims. How many others will accept the excuse that because something is allowed in the Muslim community that we should bend or break our laws to let them off the hook?

There are always judges will to bow to crazy things or, making judicial mistakes, I don't understand why it only matters when it was an isolated case involving Muslims that was over turned?

As to "how many others" - do you have evidence to support these many others that seem to be waiting in line for this?

Domestic abuse crosses all religious lines, and those that engage in it will do so knowing that most often, their partner is to scared or dependent to ever go to the law - sharia or no sharia.

We do have some no-go zones on the southern border. Our own government put up signs warning people not to enter certain areas that are controlled by drug and human traffickers. So, that is an indication of how some things will be dealt with.

As I understand it "no go zones" are entirely controlled by criminal gangs who set the laws and penalties and police don't venture in. Where in the US do we have those?

We have Muslims complaining about bacon signs and other idiotic things. Some say American flags are offensive and many landlords and neighborhood associations have banned them so as not to offend certain assholes. The fact that people are willing to bend over for them is a bad sign.

All kinds of people complain about all kinds of things. Who are these "many landlords and neighborhood associations" that have banned flags because Muslims say they are offensive?

 

[ogibillm]

Citing Sharia law as the bases for a judicial decision in an American courtroom is setting, literally, a bad precedent.

do you know what the ruling was on?

 

[hipeter924]

Sharia courts are a disaster in the UK, as are their ' faith schools ', some of which are purely hate and intolerance factories that breed Islamic terrorists.

Going down the 'agree to anything' to ' protect religious freedom' path would be as much a disaster in America as it has been in the UK.

Sharia courts allow Muslim communities to hide rapists, pedophiles, and domestic violence from the justice system. They attack women's rights, and turn communities into a second state that ignores the laws of 'non-Muslims' and only follows the Koran.

Can you give any examples of where tha

The case might have been overturned, but there was a judge willing to bow to the demands of Muslims. How many others will accept the excuse that because something is allowed in the Muslim community that we should bend or break our laws to let them off the hook?

There are always judges will to bow to crazy things or, making judicial mistakes, I don't understand why it only matters when it was an isolated case involving Muslims that was over turned?

As to "how many others" - do you have evidence to support these many others that seem to be waiting in line for this?

Domestic abuse crosses all religious lines, and those that engage in it will do so knowing that most often, their partner is to scared or dependent to ever go to the law - sharia or no sharia.

We do have some no-go zones on the southern border. Our own government put up signs warning people not to enter certain areas that are controlled by drug and human traffickers. So, that is an indication of how some things will be dealt with.

As I understand it "no go zones" are entirely controlled by criminal gangs who set the laws and penalties and police don't venture in. Where in the US do we have those?

We have Muslims complaining about bacon signs and other idiotic things. Some say American flags are offensive and many landlords and neighborhood associations have banned them so as not to offend certain assholes. The fact that people are willing to bend over for them is a bad sign.

All kinds of people complain about all kinds of things. Who are these "many landlords and neighborhood associations" that have banned flags because Muslims say they are offensive?

One link to Imams turning a blind eye to child marriages: Sunday Times front page story on Islamic child brides

 

[Coyote]

Sharia courts are a disaster in the UK, as are their ' faith schools ', some of which are purely hate and intolerance factories that breed Islamic terrorists.

Going down the 'agree to anything' to ' protect religious freedom' path would be as much a disaster in America as it has been in the UK.

Sharia courts allow Muslim communities to hide rapists, pedophiles, and domestic violence from the justice system. They attack women's rights, and turn communities into a second state that ignores the laws of 'non-Muslims' and only follows the Koran.

Can you give any examples of where tha

The case might have been overturned, but there was a judge willing to bow to the demands of Muslims. How many others will accept the excuse that because something is allowed in the Muslim community that we should bend or break our laws to let them off the hook?

There are always judges will to bow to crazy things or, making judicial mistakes, I don't understand why it only matters when it was an isolated case involving Muslims that was over turned?

As to "how many others" - do you have evidence to support these many others that seem to be waiting in line for this?

Domestic abuse crosses all religious lines, and those that engage in it will do so knowing that most often, their partner is to scared or dependent to ever go to the law - sharia or no sharia.

We do have some no-go zones on the southern border. Our own government put up signs warning people not to enter certain areas that are controlled by drug and human traffickers. So, that is an indication of how some things will be dealt with.

As I understand it "no go zones" are entirely controlled by criminal gangs who set the laws and penalties and police don't venture in. Where in the US do we have those?

We have Muslims complaining about bacon signs and other idiotic things. Some say American flags are offensive and many landlords and neighborhood associations have banned them so as not to offend certain assholes. The fact that people are willing to bend over for them is a bad sign.

All kinds of people complain about all kinds of things. Who are these "many landlords and neighborhood associations" that have banned flags because Muslims say they are offensive?

One link to Imams turning a blind eye to child marriages: Sunday Times front page story on Islamic child brides

Which has what to do with what I asked

Interesting bit from the article:

Fitzpatrick’s conflation of ‘forced marriages’ and ‘sharia marriages’ is disturbing for its implication that all forced marriages in the UK are committed by Muslims. Significantly, on the back of the investigation, the Sunday Times published an extensive article on forced marriages in the UK.

Moreover, the opening sentence of the article states “Muslim clerics in Britain are prepared to conduct sharia marriages involving child brides as young as twelve” – is it fair to lead with ‘Muslim clerics’ when there were only two of them? The papers have pounced on the conduct of two imams to suggest widespread ‘rogue’ activity in the Muslim community. For example, the Sun’s headline: ‘Girls, 12, married off in UK’- conflicts with the facts contained in main report which found that two imams would agree to marry a twelve year old girl but not that such marriages were actually being conducted.​

 

[Coyote]

Citing Sharia law as the bases for a judicial decision in an American courtroom is setting, literally, a bad precedent.

Or is it?

I read one article, that I can try to dig up, that was debunking all this frenzy about "anti-sharia" legislation in the US. Sharia law can and has been legitimately used as the basis for decisions in American courts typically involving people or business' operating in multiple countries. For example one involved recognizing a divorce in another country in order for the woman to be able to remarry and the divorce was under sharia law.

 

[hipeter924]

Sharia courts are a disaster in the UK, as are their ' faith schools ', some of which are purely hate and intolerance factories that breed Islamic terrorists.

Going down the 'agree to anything' to ' protect religious freedom' path would be as much a disaster in America as it has been in the UK.

Sharia courts allow Muslim communities to hide rapists, pedophiles, and domestic violence from the justice system. They attack women's rights, and turn communities into a second state that ignores the laws of 'non-Muslims' and only follows the Koran.

Can you give any examples of where tha

The case might have been overturned, but there was a judge willing to bow to the demands of Muslims. How many others will accept the excuse that because something is allowed in the Muslim community that we should bend or break our laws to let them off the hook?

There are always judges will to bow to crazy things or, making judicial mistakes, I don't understand why it only matters when it was an isolated case involving Muslims that was over turned?

As to "how many others" - do you have evidence to support these many others that seem to be waiting in line for this?

Domestic abuse crosses all religious lines, and those that engage in it will do so knowing that most often, their partner is to scared or dependent to ever go to the law - sharia or no sharia.

We do have some no-go zones on the southern border. Our own government put up signs warning people not to enter certain areas that are controlled by drug and human traffickers. So, that is an indication of how some things will be dealt with.

As I understand it "no go zones" are entirely controlled by criminal gangs who set the laws and penalties and police don't venture in. Where in the US do we have those?

We have Muslims complaining about bacon signs and other idiotic things. Some say American flags are offensive and many landlords and neighborhood associations have banned them so as not to offend certain assholes. The fact that people are willing to bend over for them is a bad sign.

All kinds of people complain about all kinds of things. Who are these "many landlords and neighborhood associations" that have banned flags because Muslims say they are offensive?

One link to Imams turning a blind eye to child marriages: Sunday Times front page story on Islamic child brides

Which has what to do with what I asked

Interesting bit from the article:

Fitzpatrick’s conflation of ‘forced marriages’ and ‘sharia marriages’ is disturbing for its implication that all forced marriages in the UK are committed by Muslims. Significantly, on the back of the investigation, the Sunday Times published an extensive article on forced marriages in the UK.

Moreover, the opening sentence of the article states “Muslim clerics in Britain are prepared to conduct sharia marriages involving child brides as young as twelve” – is it fair to lead with ‘Muslim clerics’ when there were only two of them? The papers have pounced on the conduct of two imams to suggest widespread ‘rogue’ activity in the Muslim community. For example, the Sun’s headline: ‘Girls, 12, married off in UK’- conflicts with the facts contained in main report which found that two imams would agree to marry a twelve year old girl but not that such marriages were actually being conducted.​

It is when Imams run the Sharia Courts. A comparison would be church scandals where they covered up incidents of pedophilia.

 

[Clementine]

It is when Imams run the Sharia Courts. A comparison would be church scandals where they covered up incidents of pedophilia.

That equates to any business or organization keeping a lid on negative things and covering their asses. Kind of like how the Obama administration prefers to investigate itself rather than allowing an impartial agency.

The sharia courts seek to adhere to their own laws instead of ours and they would force their decision on people if our pesky laws didn't get in the way. I still think there is hell to pay for any Muslim who rejects their decision and attempts to use U.S. laws.

 

[Clementine]

As I understand it "no go zones" are entirely controlled by criminal gangs who set the laws and penalties and police don't venture in. Where in the US do we have those?

There are places in Arizona where signs warn people not to enter because the area is controlled by drug cartels or human traffickers. It's been that way for years and the government hasn't attempted to regain control of the land. When citizens are warned not to enter, it's a way of saying that our authorities have no control and cannot help you if you enter. It's one thing when they tell us it's dangerous to enter certain countries, but this is for parks in our own country. Have we given this land up for good? Ceding control of land to drug cartels is no different than France ceding control of some neighborhoods to Muslims.

It's all about some people bullying those who challenge their control over a certain territory. It's the same mentality that gangs have.

From the link:

Imagine the federal government closing a section of the Lincoln Memorial because it was under the control of Mexican drug lords and bands of illegal immigrants.

That scenario is playing out as reality in southern Arizona, where parts of five federal lands -- including two designated national monuments -- continue to post travel warnings or be outright closed to Americans who own the land because of the dangers of "human and drug trafficking" along the Mexican border.

Roughly 3,500 acres of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge -- about 3 percent of the 118,000-acre park -- have been closed since Oct. 6, 2006, when U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials acknowledged a marked increase in violence along a tract of land that extends north from the border for roughly three-quarters of a mile. Federal officials say they have no plans to reopen the area.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/18/federal-lands-arizona-travel-warnings-place/[/quote

 

[Clementine]

We do have Muslims demanding that sharia law be accepted in our courts and at least a few willing to go along.
We have Muslims and Hispanics demanding that American flags be taken down because they are offended by them. Some place have given in to them.
We have some Muslims demanding that bacon ads be taken down and the city goes along.
We have illegals sneaking in and demanding welfare, jobs and citizens' rights and they get them.
We have drug cartels and human traffickers bullying law enforcement and we just back off and let them have land to carry on their criminal activity.

The message our government sends is that a little bullying or whining is all it takes to push us around because we don't stand up for ourselves. Since our spineless idiots in Washington give in to anyone that bullies us, we already have ignored laws and created new policies to cater to those who don't like the way our country works.

 

[ogibillm]

We do have Muslims demanding that sharia law be accepted in our courts and at least a few willing to go along.

example? You'll probably point to the New Jersey case, again, where the judge didnt issue a restraining order. Of course, the reasoning doesnt matter to you. It doesnt matter that the judge believed thst since the couple had since been divorced (and i believe no longer living together) that the man no longer believed himself entitled to the woman.
and it doesnt matter to you that there are many christians that dont believe in spousal rape, meaning the ruling could have been the same had the couple not been muslim
and it definitely doesn't matter that the ruling was overturned on appeal

So... what else you got?

 

[eagle1462010]

The Islamization of Britain in 2013

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[eagle1462010]

This is what they want here.............the same dang thing they are attempting to do Europe.......................

We see the problems in Europe, and what they want.....................and IDIOTS would allow it here...................

You CAN'T FIX STUPID.

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[eagle1462010]

Up yours Sharia Law..................

 

[Coyote]

It is when Imams run the Sharia Courts. A comparison would be church scandals where they covered up incidents of pedophilia.

That equates to any business or organization keeping a lid on negative things and covering their asses. Kind of like how the Obama administration prefers to investigate itself rather than allowing an impartial agency.

The sharia courts seek to adhere to their own laws instead of ours and they would force their decision on people if our pesky laws didn't get in the way. I still think there is hell to pay for any Muslim who rejects their decision and attempts to use U.S. laws.

Not really. They are only in use for civil matters, not criminal matters and they can not trump US law.

 

[Coyote]

As I understand it "no go zones" are entirely controlled by criminal gangs who set the laws and penalties and police don't venture in. Where in the US do we have those?

There are places in Arizona where signs warn people not to enter because the area is controlled by drug cartels or human traffickers. It's been that way for years and the government hasn't attempted to regain control of the land. When citizens are warned not to enter, it's a way of saying that our authorities have no control and cannot help you if you enter. It's one thing when they tell us it's dangerous to enter certain countries, but this is for parks in our own country. Have we given this land up for good? Ceding control of land to drug cartels is no different than France ceding control of some neighborhoods to Muslims.

Except France has not done that.

It's all about some people bullying those who challenge their control over a certain territory. It's the same mentality that gangs have.

From the link:

Imagine the federal government closing a section of the Lincoln Memorial because it was under the control of Mexican drug lords and bands of illegal immigrants.

That scenario is playing out as reality in southern Arizona, where parts of five federal lands -- including two designated national monuments -- continue to post travel warnings or be outright closed to Americans who own the land because of the dangers of "human and drug trafficking" along the Mexican border.

Roughly 3,500 acres of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge -- about 3 percent of the 118,000-acre park -- have been closed since Oct. 6, 2006, when U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials acknowledged a marked increase in violence along a tract of land that extends north from the border for roughly three-quarters of a mile. Federal officials say they have no plans to reopen the area.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/18/federal-lands-arizona-travel-warnings-place/[/quote

I don't have much knowledge on this issue with the drug cartels creating "no go zones" in the US - I know they are a huge problem in Mexico, I'll have to read some about it.

If this is all accurate, it seems to me we need to be a lot more concerned about Mexican drug cartel violence then fictional Muslim no-go zones.

 

[Coyote]

We do have Muslims demanding that sharia law be accepted in our courts and at least a few willing to go along.

How many besides this one case? A bare handful? There are always people going to demand something - do we use every fringe element to inact draconian measures that violate freedom of religion?

We have Muslims and Hispanics demanding that American flags be taken down because they are offended by them. Some place have given in to them.

Link?

We have some Muslims demanding that bacon ads be taken down and the city goes along.

link?

We have illegals sneaking in and demanding welfare, jobs and citizens' rights and they get them.
We have drug cartels and human traffickers bullying law enforcement and we just back off and let them have land to carry on their criminal activity.

The message our government sends is that a little bullying or whining is all it takes to push us around because we don't stand up for ourselves. Since our spineless idiots in Washington give in to anyone that bullies us, we already have ignored laws and created new policies to cater to those who don't like the way our country works.

We also have freedom of religion and the right to to free speech and to protest what we don't like or use civic action to create change- you call it "bullying" but how else do you effect change?

Are the following "bullying"?
Group pressures lawmakers to lower NYC speed limit - New York News
Katz Group pressures city for arena deal - Edmonton - CBC News
Groups pressure Faulconer on plastic bag ban - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego
After Pressure from Atheists Grand Haven City Council Puts a Stop to Giant Hydraulic Cross
Houston Mayor Drops Pastor Subpoenas Gleanings ChristianityToday.com
Anti-gay organization targets Idaho city 8217 s anti-discrimination laws Hatewatch