Yet Another Group Wants Its Own Law

[Sunni Man]

Does the woman have to pay the man child support when he gets the kids?

No

 

[Madeline]

I thought under Islamic law in divorce cases the children were always awarded to the man, and in cases where property is involved the men are always entitled to more?

High Gravity, the provisions of Sharia Law regarding divorce, property and child custody cannot be applied to any Americans divorcing in the US. Only a US court of competent jurisdiction can alter these rights. The parties could come to court with an agreement -- but the court has to accept it, and likely would not if it were so one-sided as to shock the conscience. In short, American Muslims are beholden to the family law courts just as any other Americans are.

The most American Muslims, or members of any other faith, could expect would be that the courts might consider an agreement to raise the children in one faith or another binding on both parties. But there's not even any guarantee of this.

Well whats the point of having Shariah if Muslims cannot use it for things like divorce cases, property cases etc?

I dunno, High Gravity. In the US -- as opposed to a theocracy, like Iran -- a citizen's rights with respect to family law are laid out by statute and case law and a Muslim has no more nor any less rights than any other citizen. Courts do try to accommodate the parents' wishes and they do show deference to the parents' religious beliefs, but no matter how feverently held, some religious practices that harm children are still illegal.

Compare it to RCC canonical law. Under this, no Catholic has any right to a divorce nor any right to remarry if their spouse divorces them, except when a prior marriage has been annulled. But two divorced Catholics can walk into any courthouse in the US, get a marriage license, and when time and other conditions are met, get married. By contrast, if a legally married person has a RCC annulment, they still have no civil right to remarry until the annulment is recognized by a family law court or they get a divorce. RCC family law does not track US family law -- and this is likely true for all religious laws, from Jewish to Muslim.

I'm not sure if there is only one body of Sharia law, or many, and I dunno if every Muslim sect adheres. Doesn't seem too likely -- but anything is possible.

 

[Madeline]

Does the woman have to pay the man child support when he gets the kids?

No

Yes. Child support is the right of the child, and the noncustodial parent always has an obligation to pay unless legally incompetent to earn (in prison, insane, etc.). I doubt there's a judge anywhere in the US in any family law court that would bless a custody agreement that did not provide for support by the non-custodial parent regardless of that parent's sex.

 

[Si modo]

Does the woman have to pay the man child support when he gets the kids?

No

Yes. Child support is the right of the child, and the noncustodial parent always has an obligation to pay unless legally incompetent to earn (in prison, insane, etc.). I doubt there's a judge anywhere in the US in any family law court that would bless a custody agreement that did not provide for support by the non-custodial parent regardless of that parent's sex.

Leave it to the insane, or moronic, not to understand that the question was about Sharia law.

Idiot.

 

[Madeline]

Monroe Beachy made a big mistake losing $17 million that fellow members of the Plain Community trusted him to invest.

More than 2,000 members of the Amish and Mennonite churches concentrated northeast of Columbus gave him more than $33 million over a quarter-century. Somehow, half of it vanished. Federal authorities suspect fraud.

But, to the Amish, brother Beachy made a bigger mistake by rejecting “Godly counsel” in favor of legal counsel and going to court to declare bankruptcy.

In court filings, Amish leaders write that they don’t believe in the “force and fear” of government-created courts. The use of courts is forbidden by the Bible, classified as the stuff of the Kingdom of This World.

The Amish believe in a higher court — the Kingdom of Heaven. Brothers are to be judged by brothers, disputes and debts settled in an atmosphere of love, trust and mutual aid.

With Beachy’s blessing, the Amish are asking a U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge to dismiss his case and allow them to handle both the matter and the millions to be divided among cash-crunched creditors.

The case constitutes a clash between God’s law and man’s law. The Amish believe there’s no doubt which prevails. This is their problem, they say. They will handle it.

The federal trustee appointed to protect the interests of the creditors and the remaining cash portrays Monroe Beachy as a rarity — an Amish con man.

Amish demand to judge their own | The Columbus Dispatch

The entire article is interesting...please read it. I was struck by the creditors' interest in forgiveness for the man who squandered half their wealth.

I was also struck by the contrast between what the Amish want and what some believe Muslim Americans may want -- the right to settle disputes on their own, under their religious principles, without a civil court. Is this really such a bad thing, if all parties agree?

What're your thoughts?

I think the guy filed his petition in the counts of the land and so the Amish are stuck with it.

Had the guy wanted he could have gone with their brand of justice, but he choose to go with the laws of the greater society.

The malfeasor filed for bankruptcy, editec. That's why a dismissal will be denied if even one creditor disagrees, or is not Amish.

 

[High_Gravity]

Made are you a lawyer?

 

[Sunni Man]

Does the woman have to pay the man child support when he gets the kids?

No

Yes. Child support is the right of the child, and the noncustodial parent always has an obligation to pay unless legally incompetent to earn (in prison, insane, etc.). I doubt there's a judge anywhere in the US in any family law court that would bless a custody agreement that did not provide for support by the non-custodial parent regardless of that parent's sex.

In Islam it is the duty of the Father to provide ALL support for a child.

 

[High_Gravity]

Does the woman have to pay the man child support when he gets the kids?

No

Yes. Child support is the right of the child, and the noncustodial parent always has an obligation to pay unless legally incompetent to earn (in prison, insane, etc.). I doubt there's a judge anywhere in the US in any family law court that would bless a custody agreement that did not provide for support by the non-custodial parent regardless of that parent's sex.

I thought if both parties were in agreement that the mother didn't have to pay child support than it was ok?

 

[goldcatt]

I think the guy filed his petition in the counts of the land and so the Amish are stuck with it.

Had the guy wanted he could have gone with their brand of justice, but he choose to go with the laws of the greater society.

I think this is the real point here, not whether if both sides agreed they should be allowed to settle their affairs their way.

In this case one party has already started the process and filed a voluntary bankruptcy petition in a court of competent jurisdiction. Should the creditors have the right to have the debtor's petition dismissed because they favor a different resolution, regardless of the reason? If it were a different kind of civil case, should the defendant be able to have the plaintiff's case dismissed by claiming it's against their religion to be sued?

The laws don't work that way. The debtor's right to access the court is his right not theirs, and only his action can have his suit dismissed without cause. The creditors may choose to invoke their First Amendment rights, but it's a case of their rights stopping where his begin.

 

[Madeline]

I think the guy filed his petition in the counts of the land and so the Amish are stuck with it.

Had the guy wanted he could have gone with their brand of justice, but he choose to go with the laws of the greater society.

I think this is the real point here, not whether if both sides agreed they should be allowed to settle their affairs their way.

In this case one party has already started the process and filed a voluntary bankruptcy petition in a court of competent jurisdiction. Should the creditors have the right to have the debtor's petition dismissed because they favor a different resolution, regardless of the reason?

The laws don't work that way. The debtor's right to access the court is his right not theirs, and only his action can have his suit dismissed. The creditors may choose to invoke their First Amendment rights, but it's a case of their rights stopping where his begin.

This is an excellent point, goldcatt. I read the article as if the debtor did agree to the dismissal, but mebbe I was wrong.

 

[Madeline]

No

Yes. Child support is the right of the child, and the noncustodial parent always has an obligation to pay unless legally incompetent to earn (in prison, insane, etc.). I doubt there's a judge anywhere in the US in any family law court that would bless a custody agreement that did not provide for support by the non-custodial parent regardless of that parent's sex.

I thought if both parties were in agreement that the mother didn't have to pay child support than it was ok?

IRL this actually happens, but it is not supposed to, High Gravity. No parent can surrender the child's rights to support by the other. The courts are loathe to grant a divorce under which it appears one party coerced the other, nevermind cheated their own child.

I think what actually happens is, mothers without custody are legally obligated to pay support but no garnishment is placed on their wages, the payments are not required to be made through the registry of the courts, and when the father does not seek to enforce the child's rights, no one else does either. This is also wrong, and will likely stop in future.

 

[goldcatt]

I think the guy filed his petition in the counts of the land and so the Amish are stuck with it.

Had the guy wanted he could have gone with their brand of justice, but he choose to go with the laws of the greater society.

I think this is the real point here, not whether if both sides agreed they should be allowed to settle their affairs their way.

In this case one party has already started the process and filed a voluntary bankruptcy petition in a court of competent jurisdiction. Should the creditors have the right to have the debtor's petition dismissed because they favor a different resolution, regardless of the reason?

The laws don't work that way. The debtor's right to access the court is his right not theirs, and only his action can have his suit dismissed. The creditors may choose to invoke their First Amendment rights, but it's a case of their rights stopping where his begin.

This is an excellent point, goldcatt. I read the article as if the debtor did agree to the dismissal, but mebbe I was wrong.

It doesn't read that way to me, but it doesn't really say one way or the other. I guess once the trustee started dividing the res it would be difficult to have it dismissed without cause at this point, even if he wanted to.

 

[hortysir]

The Amish's ability of forgiveness is enviable.
I must disagree with the claim that our courts are in violation of the Bible.
My Bible tells me to follow man's law unless and until they contradict God's law.

 

[Madeline]

The Amish's ability of forgiveness is enviable.
I must disagree with the claim that our courts are in violation of the Bible.
My Bible tells me to follow man's law unless and until they contradict God's law.

The Amish are a bit out there, hortySir. I dun think many non-Amish are interested in converting.

 

[goldcatt]

Yes. Child support is the right of the child, and the noncustodial parent always has an obligation to pay unless legally incompetent to earn (in prison, insane, etc.). I doubt there's a judge anywhere in the US in any family law court that would bless a custody agreement that did not provide for support by the non-custodial parent regardless of that parent's sex.

I thought if both parties were in agreement that the mother didn't have to pay child support than it was ok?

IRL this actually happens, but it is not supposed to, High Gravity. No parent can surrender the child's rights to support by the other. The courts are loathe to grant a divorce under which it appears one party coerced the other, nevermind cheated their own child.

I think what actually happens is, mothers without custody are legally obligated to pay support but no garnishment is placed on their wages, the payments are not required to be made through the registry of the courts, and when the father does not seek to enforce the child's rights, no one else does either. This is also wrong, and will likely stop in future.

I believe this has stopped and all ordered support is garnished, but it's been a long time and I'd have to go back and look it up.

What does happen is some parents rather than going through the State systems set up private contractual agreements, but then good luck enforcing them if (when) one of the parties decides to give the other the shaft. Then to get any enforceable rights (or to enforce responsibilities) the parties end up in the system anyway, plus with a breach of contract problem. Bad, bad move to do it that way if you ask me.

 

[syrenn]

Monroe Beachy made a big mistake losing $17 million that fellow members of the Plain Community trusted him to invest.

More than 2,000 members of the Amish and Mennonite churches concentrated northeast of Columbus gave him more than $33 million over a quarter-century. Somehow, half of it vanished. Federal authorities suspect fraud.

But, to the Amish, brother Beachy made a bigger mistake by rejecting “Godly counsel” in favor of legal counsel and going to court to declare bankruptcy.

In court filings, Amish leaders write that they don’t believe in the “force and fear” of government-created courts. The use of courts is forbidden by the Bible, classified as the stuff of the Kingdom of This World.

The Amish believe in a higher court — the Kingdom of Heaven. Brothers are to be judged by brothers, disputes and debts settled in an atmosphere of love, trust and mutual aid.

With Beachy’s blessing, the Amish are asking a U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge to dismiss his case and allow them to handle both the matter and the millions to be divided among cash-crunched creditors.

The case constitutes a clash between God’s law and man’s law. The Amish believe there’s no doubt which prevails. This is their problem, they say. They will handle it.

The federal trustee appointed to protect the interests of the creditors and the remaining cash portrays Monroe Beachy as a rarity — an Amish con man.

Amish demand to judge their own | The Columbus Dispatch

The entire article is interesting...please read it. I was struck by the creditors' interest in forgiveness for the man who squandered half their wealth.

I was also struck by the contrast between what the Amish want and what some believe Muslim Americans may want -- the right to settle disputes on their own, under their religious principles, without a civil court. Is this really such a bad thing, if all parties agree?

What're your thoughts?

Lets see, first off what do you think would have happened to that man under sheira law? Im guessing hands cut off or some such but sure as hell not forgiving him his sins. (that is unless it was all women he stole the money from)

The amish still have the option to take all of this to court and have it heard by a judge. This is about stealing money not beating your wife. If everyone is fine with him stealing and forgiving him great.

I would also call the amish a religion of peace. Unlike some others ya know.

My bottom line is still no religious law allowed, regardless of what it is, if that "law" is trying to supersede OUR laws.

 

[hortysir]

The Amish's ability of forgiveness is enviable.
I must disagree with the claim that our courts are in violation of the Bible.
My Bible tells me to follow man's law unless and until they contradict God's law.

The Amish are a bit out there, hortySir. I dun think many non-Amish are interested in converting.

I didn't say the faith, itself, is enviable
Just their capacity for forgiveness.

My mind goes back to the school shooting they endured yet still managed forgiveness of the shooter, Charles Roberts

Amish community members visited and comforted Roberts' widow, parents, and parents-in-law. One Amish man held Roberts' sobbing father in his arms, reportedly for as long as an hour, to comfort him.

 

[Madeline]

Monroe Beachy made a big mistake losing $17 million that fellow members of the Plain Community trusted him to invest.

More than 2,000 members of the Amish and Mennonite churches concentrated northeast of Columbus gave him more than $33 million over a quarter-century. Somehow, half of it vanished. Federal authorities suspect fraud.

But, to the Amish, brother Beachy made a bigger mistake by rejecting “Godly counsel” in favor of legal counsel and going to court to declare bankruptcy.

In court filings, Amish leaders write that they don’t believe in the “force and fear” of government-created courts. The use of courts is forbidden by the Bible, classified as the stuff of the Kingdom of This World.

The Amish believe in a higher court — the Kingdom of Heaven. Brothers are to be judged by brothers, disputes and debts settled in an atmosphere of love, trust and mutual aid.

With Beachy’s blessing, the Amish are asking a U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge to dismiss his case and allow them to handle both the matter and the millions to be divided among cash-crunched creditors.

The case constitutes a clash between God’s law and man’s law. The Amish believe there’s no doubt which prevails. This is their problem, they say. They will handle it.

The federal trustee appointed to protect the interests of the creditors and the remaining cash portrays Monroe Beachy as a rarity — an Amish con man.

Amish demand to judge their own | The Columbus Dispatch

The entire article is interesting...please read it. I was struck by the creditors' interest in forgiveness for the man who squandered half their wealth.

I was also struck by the contrast between what the Amish want and what some believe Muslim Americans may want -- the right to settle disputes on their own, under their religious principles, without a civil court. Is this really such a bad thing, if all parties agree?

What're your thoughts?

Lets see, first off what do you think would have happened to that man under sheira law? Im guessing hands cut off or some such but sure as hell not forgiving him his sins. (that is unless it was all women he stole the money from)

The amish still have the option to take all of this to court and have it heard by a judge. This is about stealing money not beating your wife. If everyone is fine with him stealing and forgiving him great.

I would also call the amish a religion of peace. Unlike some others ya know.

My bottom line is still no religious law allowed, regardless of what it is, if that "law" is trying to supersede OUR laws.

I dun know what finality this can be given, syrenn. Seems to me, some sort of written agreement will be necessary to bring the dispute to a close.

It is interesting that, because you have a high opinion of the Amish faith and a low opinion of the Muslim one, you'd be more willing to tolerate extra-judicial action by the Amish. If that is what you meant. My own view is, sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. If we permit the Amish to adjudicate disputes among them, how can we refuse to allow the Muslims to do the same?

The Jews, Catholics, Native Americans and others are gonna be disappointed to read you feel their religious courts should not exist in the US.

 

[SFC Ollie]

No way shape or form should any religion take over the jobs of our courts. Without exception, the US Law must reign supreme over the land. No religious court should exist in our country. And I don't care what religion it is.

 

[High_Gravity]

No way shape or form should any religion take over the jobs of our courts. Without exception, the US Law must reign supreme over the land. No religious court should exist in our country. And I don't care what religion it is.

I agree.