Judge Blocks Oklahoma’s Ban on Using Shariah Law in Court

[Coyote]

Again....any dispute involving a foreign country should be tried under a federal court which knows treaty law....our state courts should not be involved with foreign affairs....that is the realm of the federal court system....

I fail to see if this is wishful thinking on your part or simply a lack of recognition of what is going on everyday in state courts.

Consider the decision discussed on this page (JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie)

This was done by the NY state court. Not Federal. (New York Court of Appeals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

The court looked at foreign law to reach its decision. It not only looked at foreign law, it even did the whole analysis that a foreign court would do with that foreign law.

So bottom line, you are trying to completely rewrite the way courts deal with foreign law. Congrats.

Now before you really make up your mind, try to see the impact of your bold suggestions.

And finally, stop thinking that only immigrants import international law. US citizens, permanent residents, domestic corporations, foreign corporations, all import foreign laws in the court system. You might not like it, but that is the reality, so instead of trying to limit your analysis to newcomers, look at the big picture.

What is going on elsewhere is NO EXCUSE to recognize Sharia law inside the U.S.......

Answer this: Why is it we don't recognize "Christian law" or "Jewish law" or "Hindu law" or "Buddhist law" or "Wiccan law" or "Satanic law" in the U.S. court system.....?

What U.S. court has made a judgement based specifically on Sharia law?

 

[logical4u]

Why do the people who scream about "creeping sharia" never seem to have a problem with Beth Din courts? There have been Beth Din courts in NY for 50 years or so...

Are the people using Beth Din courts beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????
Why do the people that thinK Sharia law is perfectly acceptable, scream about 'rightwingers' trying to force their religion, when they have no evidence that is happening? Why do they only site "seperation of church and state" when Christian morals are highlighted?

Are you suggesting that "Sharia" law calls for "beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????"

Why is it ok to have a law that specifically singles out Islamic law, and no other religious law?

As a side note: Christian morals are, by and large the same as Islamic morals and Jewish morals. They all have the same roots whether it's "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "an eye for an eye".

Sharia law IS islam. It is the base for the religion. Once Sharia law is implemented, you are considered a practicing muslim with all the laws of the faith to be used against you, if you do not practice the faith according to another's standards. You are then, OPPRESSED.

 

[logical4u]

Why do the people who scream about "creeping sharia" never seem to have a problem with Beth Din courts? There have been Beth Din courts in NY for 50 years or so...

Are the people using Beth Din courts beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????
Why do the people that thinK Sharia law is perfectly acceptable, scream about 'rightwingers' trying to force their religion, when they have no evidence that is happening? Why do they only site "seperation of church and state" when Christian morals are highlighted?

Are you suggesting that "Sharia" law calls for "beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????"

Why is it ok to have a law that specifically singles out Islamic law, and no other religious law?

As a side note: Christian morals are, by and large the same as Islamic morals and Jewish morals. They all have the same roots whether it's "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "an eye for an eye".

What Christian teaching tells Christians to convert, kill or unfairly tax non-believers?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I fail to see if this is wishful thinking on your part or simply a lack of recognition of what is going on everyday in state courts.

Consider the decision discussed on this page (JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie)

This was done by the NY state court. Not Federal. (New York Court of Appeals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

The court looked at foreign law to reach its decision. It not only looked at foreign law, it even did the whole analysis that a foreign court would do with that foreign law.

So bottom line, you are trying to completely rewrite the way courts deal with foreign law. Congrats.

Now before you really make up your mind, try to see the impact of your bold suggestions.

And finally, stop thinking that only immigrants import international law. US citizens, permanent residents, domestic corporations, foreign corporations, all import foreign laws in the court system. You might not like it, but that is the reality, so instead of trying to limit your analysis to newcomers, look at the big picture.

What is going on elsewhere is NO EXCUSE to recognize Sharia law inside the U.S.......

Answer this: Why is it we don't recognize "Christian law" or "Jewish law" or "Hindu law" or "Buddhist law" or "Wiccan law" or "Satanic law" in the U.S. court system.....?

What U.S. court has made a judgement based specifically on Sharia law?

As far as i know...none so far....however....when you look at the goals of CAIR.....and you look at what is happening in England right before your eyes.....we would be STUPID to invite the same problems here....thus Oklahoma is on the cutting edge....

 

[Varth Dader]

Sharia law IS islam. It is the base for the religion. Once Sharia law is implemented, you are considered a practicing muslim with all the laws of the faith to be used against you, if you do not practice the faith according to another's standards. You are then, OPPRESSED.

Can you give me one or two hypothetical scenarios where Sharia law is implemented by the court system?

 

[Coyote]

Are the people using Beth Din courts beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????
Why do the people that thinK Sharia law is perfectly acceptable, scream about 'rightwingers' trying to force their religion, when they have no evidence that is happening? Why do they only site "seperation of church and state" when Christian morals are highlighted?

Are you suggesting that "Sharia" law calls for "beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????"

Why is it ok to have a law that specifically singles out Islamic law, and no other religious law?

As a side note: Christian morals are, by and large the same as Islamic morals and Jewish morals. They all have the same roots whether it's "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "an eye for an eye".

Sharia law IS islam. It is the base for the religion. Once Sharia law is implemented, you are considered a practicing muslim with all the laws of the faith to be used against you, if you do not practice the faith according to another's standards. You are then, OPPRESSED.

No, Sharia law is not "Islam" - Sharia law is a part of Islam. You really need to learn more about Islam than what you glean from partisan websites and inaccurate talking points.

You also did not answer the questions.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Are you suggesting that "Sharia" law calls for "beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????"

Why is it ok to have a law that specifically singles out Islamic law, and no other religious law?

As a side note: Christian morals are, by and large the same as Islamic morals and Jewish morals. They all have the same roots whether it's "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "an eye for an eye".

Sharia law IS islam. It is the base for the religion. Once Sharia law is implemented, you are considered a practicing muslim with all the laws of the faith to be used against you, if you do not practice the faith according to another's standards. You are then, OPPRESSED.

No, Sharia law is not "Islam" - Sharia law is a part of Islam. You really need to learn more about Islam than what you glean from partisan websites and inaccurate talking points.

You also did not answer the questions.

Sharia law does not equate Islam.....Islam is more than just Sharia law.....however he has a point.....show us where an Islamic follower does NOT follow Sharia law....if you claim that all U.S. muslims forego Sharia law.....i will call you a liar...

 

[Coyote]

What is going on elsewhere is NO EXCUSE to recognize Sharia law inside the U.S.......

Answer this: Why is it we don't recognize "Christian law" or "Jewish law" or "Hindu law" or "Buddhist law" or "Wiccan law" or "Satanic law" in the U.S. court system.....?

What U.S. court has made a judgement based specifically on Sharia law?

As far as i know...none so far....however....when you look at the goals of CAIR.....and you look at what is happening in England right before your eyes.....we would be STUPID to invite the same problems here....thus Oklahoma is on the cutting edge....

Ok.

So. There is not a single case of Sharia law being used in U.S. courts. That justifies singling out one religion only, in a body of law? Shouldn't we simply say "religious" law?

After all, it was religious law that issued the death penalty for homosexuals in Uganda; or that mandates no liquor can be sold in some states on Sundays. In fact, we can find cases of other religion's laws in our codes of law. Shouldn't that worry you....we might someday adopt a death penalty or jail term for sodomy just like in Uganda?

Or, maybe our system of law is far stronger than you give it credit for. Christians have long sought to impose more of their morals and laws onto our legal system and we have thus far managed keep it secular. You don't think we can do so against erosion by other religions? I do.

The only time I've heard of religious law being "allowed"- whether it's Jewish, Islamic, or that of certain Christian sects (for example Mormons or Amish) is in arbitration and family court type of things. Even then they do not trump U.S. law - at least not that I'm aware of. Those involved agree to abide by the arbitration willingly, but they always have recourse to other courts of law.

I could be wrong but that is how I understand it.

 

[Varth Dader]

Sharia law does not equate Islam.....Islam is more than just Sharia law.....however he has a point.....show us where an Islamic follower does NOT follow Sharia law....if you claim that all U.S. muslims forego Sharia law.....i will call you a liar...

If US Muslims commit illegal acts, they should arrested and prosecuted. Same as everyone. If anyone, Muslim or not, beheads someone, s/he should be in jail.

What exactly are you trying to do? Prevent all US Muslims from using the part of Sharia law they like and that is compatible with the laws in the US?

 

[Misty]

Dear idiot , you can not discriminate against any religion in US government.

man I wish the constitution meant something to you assholes.

Religions don't count as legislatures. They don't make laws.

 

[Varth Dader]

Ok.

So. There is not a single case of Sharia law being used in U.S. courts.

Here is one:

http://162.114.92.72/COA/2004-CA-001531.pdf

Quote:

We must first determine whether the trial court’s
findings of fact regarding the interpretation of Islamic law
were supported by substantial evidence. We hold that there is
substantial evidence in the record from the testimony of both
Mohammad and his expert witness to support the finding that the
Jordanian divorce was final, at least as to Mohammad, as of the-8-
date it was filed. Therefore, this finding is not clearly
erroneous.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Sharia law does not equate Islam.....Islam is more than just Sharia law.....however he has a point.....show us where an Islamic follower does NOT follow Sharia law....if you claim that all U.S. muslims forego Sharia law.....i will call you a liar...

If US Muslims commit illegal acts, they should arrested and prosecuted. Same as everyone. If anyone, Muslim or not, beheads someone, s/he should be in jail.

What exactly are you trying to do? Prevent all US Muslims from using the part of Sharia law they like and that is compatible with the laws in the US?

You mean....What is the Oklahoma law trying to do.....?

Prevent Sharia law from insinuating itself into the U.S......as it is happening in England....


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLOflbAOeg[/ame]

 

[Coyote]

Sharia law IS islam. It is the base for the religion. Once Sharia law is implemented, you are considered a practicing muslim with all the laws of the faith to be used against you, if you do not practice the faith according to another's standards. You are then, OPPRESSED.

No, Sharia law is not "Islam" - Sharia law is a part of Islam. You really need to learn more about Islam than what you glean from partisan websites and inaccurate talking points.

You also did not answer the questions.

Sharia law does not equate Islam.....Islam is more than just Sharia law.....however he has a point.....show us where an Islamic follower does NOT follow Sharia law....if you claim that all U.S. muslims forego Sharia law.....i will call you a liar...

Not all Muslims are observant - like Christians or Jews, the vary in what they follow and how. So no, I doubt they all follow Sharia - as you visualize Sharia.

The other question is what exactly is Sharia?

Sharia, or Islamic law, influences the legal code in most Muslim countries. A movement to allow sharia to govern personal status law, a set of regulations that pertain to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and custody, is even expanding into the West. "There are so many varying interpretations of what sharia actually means that in some places it can be incorporated into political systems relatively easily," says Steven A. Cook, CFR senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies. Sharia's influence on both personal status law and criminal law is highly controversial, though. Some interpretations are used to justify cruel punishments such as amputation and stoning as well as unequal treatment of women in inheritance, dress, and independence. The debate is growing as to whether sharia can coexist with secularism, democracy, or even modernity.

There are similarities with Halakha - the collective body of Jewish law. The Halakha, like Sharia, sets out guidelines for everyday life as well as dealing with religious and civil law. Israel, in fact, as a "dual" system, like that of a number of Muslim countries, where some facets of law fall under the rabbinical courts (usually family and personal issues) and others under the secular courts. Also, like Sharia - it is interpreted differently by different sects. Other than in Israel, most modern Jews are bound to Halakha by consent, not mandate and in countries that allow this, can choose to have matters decided by Halakha rather than civil law. Sharia - in the western countries that allow some forms of it, operates in much the same way - voluntary consent, family and personal matters and the country's secular code of law trumps it in conflict.

 

[britishbulldog]

The muzzie loving judge should be executed.

Isn't Sharia law unconstitutional...?

According to Sharia law if one was to leave Islam they are aspostates and are to be killed...and there are plenty of other aspects of Sharia law that blatantly oppose the laws of the United States...so why should we allow Sharia law within our borders just because it is part of a religion....?

An Oklahoma constitutional amendment aimed at stopping the use of Islamic law in its courts was dealt a serious blow on Monday when a federal judge temporarily blocked the state from putting it into effect.

The amendment would forbid state judges from considering Islamic or international law in their decisions. Known as State Question 755, the measure passed with 70 percent of the vote during the Republican landslide on Nov. 2, and has generated bitter debate.

Muslims claim the state is discriminating against their religion, while supporters — many of them Christian conservatives — say the amendment is needed to thwart what they maintain is an effort by radical Muslims to impose Shariah law in the United States.

Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange of Federal District Court in Oklahoma City, however, said in her decision to grant a preliminary injunction on Monday that the measure did not appear to pass constitutional muster.

It conveys a message, she said, that the state favors one religion or particular belief over others. The federal courts have long held that such a message violates the First Amendment’s clause prohibiting the establishment of a state religion, she said.

“While defendants contend that the amendment is merely a choice-of-law provision that bans state courts from applying the law of other nations or cultures — regardless of what faith they may be based on, if any — the actual language of the amendment reasonably, and perhaps more reasonably, may be viewed as specifically singling out Shariah law, conveying a message of disapproval of plaintiff’s faith,” the judge wrote.

The judge barred the State Election Commission from certifying the results of the election until she makes a final ruling. She set no timetable for her decision.

Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, had sued to block the amendment, arguing that the state was condemning his religious beliefs.

“We are definitely satisfied,” Mr. Awad said. “She is recognizing the majority vote cannot be used to take away my constitutional rights.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/us/30oklahoma.html?_r=1&src=twrhp

 

[Coyote]

Ok.

So. There is not a single case of Sharia law being used in U.S. courts.

Here is one:

http://162.114.92.72/COA/2004-CA-001531.pdf

Quote:

We must first determine whether the trial court’s
findings of fact regarding the interpretation of Islamic law
were supported by substantial evidence. We hold that there is
substantial evidence in the record from the testimony of both
Mohammad and his expert witness to support the finding that the
Jordanian divorce was final, at least as to Mohammad, as of the-8-
date it was filed. Therefore, this finding is not clearly
erroneous.

Interesting - good find. But it sounds like it would be impossible to judge that case without referring to Sharia since the divorce was in Jordan and it's legitimacy set under Jordanian (Sharia) law?

 

[CaféAuLait]

What U.S. court has made a judgement based specifically on Sharia law?

As far as i know...none so far....however....when you look at the goals of CAIR.....and you look at what is happening in England right before your eyes.....we would be STUPID to invite the same problems here....thus Oklahoma is on the cutting edge....

Ok.

So. There is not a single case of Sharia law being used in U.S. courts. That justifies singling out one religion only, in a body of law? Shouldn't we simply say "religious" law?

After all, it was religious law that issued the death penalty for homosexuals in Uganda; or that mandates no liquor can be sold in some states on Sundays. In fact, we can find cases of other religion's laws in our codes of law. Shouldn't that worry you....we might someday adopt a death penalty or jail term for sodomy just like in Uganda?

Or, maybe our system of law is far stronger than you give it credit for. Christians have long sought to impose more of their morals and laws onto our legal system and we have thus far managed keep it secular. You don't think we can do so against erosion by other religions? I do.

The only time I've heard of religious law being "allowed"- whether it's Jewish, Islamic, or that of certain Christian sects (for example Mormons or Amish) is in arbitration and family court type of things. Even then they do not trump U.S. law - at least not that I'm aware of. Those involved agree to abide by the arbitration willingly, but they always have recourse to other courts of law.

I could be wrong but that is how I understand it.

Sure there are cases:

“This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did,” the judge ruled. “The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.”

The ruling is based on a Muslim belief which says that “If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning” (Bukhari 4.54.460).

Breaking News Blog Archive Court Reverses Decision by U.S. Judge Who Applied Sharia Law to Domestic Violence Case

His 17 year old bride said she was being raped and the judge felt that this was okay since the man believed it to be okay under his religious beliefs.

 

[logical4u]

Sharia law IS islam. It is the base for the religion. Once Sharia law is implemented, you are considered a practicing muslim with all the laws of the faith to be used against you, if you do not practice the faith according to another's standards. You are then, OPPRESSED.

Can you give me one or two hypothetical scenarios where Sharia law is implemented by the court system?

Afganistan, Iran, Sudan, etc....

I am just saying I want no part of that in this country. Muslims that live by our laws are welcome. If they want to change it into a poverty hole like most of the other islamic run nations, no thank you.

 

[logical4u]

Are you suggesting that "Sharia" law calls for "beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????"

Why is it ok to have a law that specifically singles out Islamic law, and no other religious law?

As a side note: Christian morals are, by and large the same as Islamic morals and Jewish morals. They all have the same roots whether it's "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "an eye for an eye".

Sharia law IS islam. It is the base for the religion. Once Sharia law is implemented, you are considered a practicing muslim with all the laws of the faith to be used against you, if you do not practice the faith according to another's standards. You are then, OPPRESSED.

No, Sharia law is not "Islam" - Sharia law is a part of Islam. You really need to learn more about Islam than what you glean from partisan websites and inaccurate talking points.

You also did not answer the questions.

Sharia is not practiced without muslims. Islam teaches: convert, kill or tax unfairly those that do not follow islam. I would reason that once Sharia is accepted, then islam beliefs will also become "accepted" and that would mean killing "Westerners".

 

[logical4u]

Are you suggesting that "Sharia" law calls for "beheading "Westerners" or trying to kill large groups of citizen bystanders?????"

Why is it ok to have a law that specifically singles out Islamic law, and no other religious law?

As a side note: Christian morals are, by and large the same as Islamic morals and Jewish morals. They all have the same roots whether it's "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "an eye for an eye".

Sharia law IS islam. It is the base for the religion. Once Sharia law is implemented, you are considered a practicing muslim with all the laws of the faith to be used against you, if you do not practice the faith according to another's standards. You are then, OPPRESSED.

No, Sharia law is not "Islam" - Sharia law is a part of Islam. You really need to learn more about Islam than what you glean from partisan websites and inaccurate talking points.

You also did not answer the questions.

I stand corrected. Tell me, who implements Sharia law that is not muslim?

 

[logical4u]

Sharia law does not equate Islam.....Islam is more than just Sharia law.....however he has a point.....show us where an Islamic follower does NOT follow Sharia law....if you claim that all U.S. muslims forego Sharia law.....i will call you a liar...

If US Muslims commit illegal acts, they should arrested and prosecuted. Same as everyone. If anyone, Muslim or not, beheads someone, s/he should be in jail.

What exactly are you trying to do? Prevent all US Muslims from using the part of Sharia law they like and that is compatible with the laws in the US?

Then, why don't they just follow USA laws?????