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

[ScreamingEagle]

...
This is NOT a case that provides you with the "proof" that we must allow Sharia law to operate here in the U.S.......instead it is more proof that Immigration needs to do its job better in order to prevent stupid cases like this...

I don't see why you put so much energy into the immigration angle.

If person X, a natural born citizen, goes to country Y and gets married twice and returns to the US alone, what exactly do you want Immigration to do?

Grill him on whether or not he got married twice while he was abroad? He lies, and enters. What next?

What world do you live in? People, including US citizens, move around the world all the time, and situation could be created where they enter into contractual agreements where Sharia law plays a part of. Or they could get decisions from foreign courts that have an impact on them (for example a decision of a family court outside the US granting child custody to a party).

Religious based law, international law, treaties and co. are here to stay. Instead of trying to build a wall that will never be tall enough to stop them, the best is to deal with them in an efficient, moral and legal manner.

I am not for building a "wall" but more of a "funnel"...or you know, like a TSA check on your marriage status ......Immigration policies are important for the protection of the U.S.....if we allow all sorts of weird (aka anti-American) religious or cultural policies to enter and run amok here.....over time they will nibble and tear apart the fabric of the American justice system...just as you are seeing in England for example...there is no frikken reason we should "refer" to any foreign laws in our state courts...as i said before that should be the purview of the federal court system...

Nobody here has yet answered my question as to why the Oklahoma law is so "terrible"....since all it does is affirm the secular laws and the First Amendment of the Constitution and is only basically telling Muslims they cannot establish their own parallel religious court system which would be illegal.....so why the hell is CAIR screaming their stupid heads off....? Gee....sounds to me like some muslims do not really want to absorb into our culture and become Americans....

 

[Varth Dader]

Nobody here has yet answered my question as to why the Oklahoma law is so "terrible"....since all it does is affirm the secular laws and the First Amendment of the Constitution and is only basically telling Muslims they cannot establish their own parallel religious court system which would be illegal.....

(The Oklahoma law is terrible because it directly attacks the right of individuals and companies to decide which law they want applied to their case in situations where this does not conflict with state, local or federal laws - it's also terrible because it singles out a particular religion)

How does the Oklahoma law prevent Muslims from establishing their own parallel religious court system?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Nobody here has yet answered my question as to why the Oklahoma law is so "terrible"....since all it does is affirm the secular laws and the First Amendment of the Constitution and is only basically telling Muslims they cannot establish their own parallel religious court system which would be illegal.....

(The Oklahoma law is terrible because it directly attacks the right of individuals and companies to decide which law they want applied to their case in situations where this does not conflict with state, local or federal laws - it's also terrible because it singles out a particular religion)

How does the Oklahoma law prevent Muslims from establishing their own parallel religious court system?

Because Oklahoma would not recognize it as lawful....

As far as I can see the OK law does not directly attack the rights of individuals/companies.....they still have equal rights under U.S. law....same as anybody else....

 

[Varth Dader]

Because Oklahoma would not recognize it as lawful....

As far as I can see the OK law does not directly attack the rights of individuals/companies.....they still have equal rights under U.S. law....same as anybody else....

Where in the amendment do you see the idea that a Sharia tribunal set up by Muslims would not be lawful?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Because Oklahoma would not recognize it as lawful....

As far as I can see the OK law does not directly attack the rights of individuals/companies.....they still have equal rights under U.S. law....same as anybody else....

Where in the amendment do you see the idea that a Sharia tribunal set up by Muslims would not be lawful?

The OK law is for banning all reference to Sharia law in OK courts....

For some crazy reason i see that as meaning NO Sharia law in the OK court system....which should include any "religious courts".....but are you saying that it is alright for a religion to set up its own separate court system....a separate and theocratic system that handles marriage, divorce, inheritance, child custody, etc apart from the OK state court system...? I believe OK disagrees with that...

Maybe OK needs to refine how they wrote their law.....although for some crazy reason i believe the Constitution covers the basic principle...

 

[Ozmar]

Maybe court systems should not include any religious underpinnings, muslim, rabbinical, or otherwise.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Maybe court systems should not include any religious underpinnings, muslim, rabbinical, or otherwise.

Supposedly that's what we already have......secular law....

If political Islam ala CAIR pushes its piggish snout into our court systems.....we then will have secular law mixed up with theocratic law...

When two systems of law operate within a state which one ultimately prevails....?
Each will claim superiority....and then you have disruption of the state....two warring factions....system disintegration.....perhaps eventual Islamic takeover (stealth jihad)....which you can see happening in other countries...

The nefarious Left is an advocate for Sharia intrusion because they wish to see our system disrupted....in order to assume power themselves...

 

[Varth Dader]

Maybe court systems should not include any religious underpinnings, muslim, rabbinical, or otherwise.

Supposedly that's what we already have......secular law....

If political Islam ala CAIR pushes its piggish snout into our court systems.....we then will have secular law mixed up with theocratic law...

When two systems of law operate within a state which one ultimately prevails....?
Each will claim superiority....and then you have disruption of the state....two warring factions....system disintegration.....perhaps eventual Islamic takeover (stealth jihad)....which you can see happening in other countries...

The nefarious Left is an advocate for Sharia intrusion because they wish to see our system disrupted....in order to assume power themselves...

I think if the OK constitutional amendment is upheld, you will be facing something worse.

Without the OK amendment, courts have the liberty to integrate religious law as they see fit. We, through this public institution, retain the control over how much of the religious law we will accept in society.

With the OK amendment, courts will not be the forum where these issues are dealt with. I think you simply increase the likelihood that a parallel court system is established to deal with these issues. I think this is by far worse. And nothing could be done to stop this.

What you really want to get at is the binding nature of decisions made by parallel courts. I'm not sure how much decisions by these courts could be binding, especially in areas like family law. Clearly we tolerate, even encourage binding arbitration, but I'm guessing there would be a limit to how far that would go.

 

[Ozmar]

Maybe court systems should not include any religious underpinnings, muslim, rabbinical, or otherwise.

Supposedly that's what we already have......secular law....

If political Islam ala CAIR pushes its piggish snout into our court systems.....we then will have secular law mixed up with theocratic law...

When two systems of law operate within a state which one ultimately prevails....?
Each will claim superiority....and then you have disruption of the state....two warring factions....system disintegration.....perhaps eventual Islamic takeover (stealth jihad)....which you can see happening in other countries...

The nefarious Left is an advocate for Sharia intrusion because they wish to see our system disrupted....in order to assume power themselves...

I think if the OK constitutional amendment is upheld, you will be facing something worse.

Without the OK amendment, courts have the liberty to integrate religious law as they see fit. We, through this public institution, retain the control over how much of the religious law we will accept in society.

With the OK amendment, courts will not be the forum where these issues are dealt with.

Indeed. And criminal prosecution can be a forum for those who try to use sharia in a super-legal fashion.

I think you simply increase the likelihood that a parallel court system is established to deal with these issues.

Only if the govenment isn't vigilant in enforcing the laws of this society we have here.

I think this is by far worse. And nothing could be done to stop this.

Your defeatist attitude is noted.

What you really want to get at is the binding nature of decisions made by parallel courts.

No. What I really want is binding systems made by the court system we have in place. What I don't want is parallel courts. Ever.

I'm not sure how much decisions by these courts could be binding, especially in areas like family law.

Hopefully not at all.

Clearly we tolerate, even encourage binding arbitration, but I'm guessing there would be a limit to how far that would go.

You would be guessing wrong. The whole goal of sharia law is to dominate. It would never be enough to leave it at arbitration. The ultimate goal of it is to supplant the legal systems of man with "Allah's" divine law. We must not tolerate that even on the most minute level. You know why? Because at its very core, sharia does not tolerate coexistence with another system.

 

[chanel]

Muslims, who make up two-thirds of Malaysia's 28 million people, are permitted to marry after reaching puberty as long as they have consent from their parents and Islamic Shariah courts. For non-Muslim Malaysians, females must be at least 16 and males 18 to marry.

Read more: Malaysian girl, 14, celebrates wedding in public - FoxNews.com

I believe Bloomberg's favorite imam is a fan of the Malaysian Sharia court system

 

[Varth Dader]

...Indeed. And criminal prosecution can be a forum for those who try to use sharia in a super-legal fashion...

Explain to me why the following can't happen:

Your two neighbors are Muslims. They have a dispute over the interest rate that one is charging the other. One is alleging that it's OK according to Sharia law. The other is saying it is usury. They ask you to settle their dispute according to Sharia law.

Are you telling me you are committing a crime if you do?

 

[Sunni Man]

Muslims, who make up two-thirds of Malaysia's 28 million people, are permitted to marry after reaching puberty as long as they have consent from their parents and Islamic Shariah courts. For non-Muslim Malaysians, females must be at least 16 and males 18 to marry.

Read more: Malaysian girl, 14, celebrates wedding in public - FoxNews.com

What is exactly is the problem with the Malaysian girl getting married at 14 with parental consent??

Here are the laws in some states here in America concerning this issue:

Alabama: If either of you are under 18, you will need a certified copy of your birth certificate. Both parents must be present with identification, or if you have a legal guardian they must be present with a court order and identification. If one or both parents are deceased, proper evidence of such must be provided. Individuals under the age of 14 may not marry.

Michigan: Applicants 16 years of age may marry with parental or legal guardian written consent. Applicants under the age of 15 with parental consent and probate court permission. 'Marriage of a Minor': The legal marriage of a minor “shall release such minor from parental control.”

Missouri: A person under age 18 cannot marry without the consent of the custodial parent or guardian. DzA person under age 15 cannot marry "without" approval of a judge in the county where the marriage license is sought. The statute states that the judge should grant approval only upon a showing of "good cause" and that unusual conditions make the marriage "advisable."

Nevada: If you are 16 or 17 years old, you must have one parent or legal guardian present. A notarized written permission is also acceptable. It must be written in English and needs to state the name, birth date, age of the minor child, along with the relationship of the person giving consent. The notary must note that the parent or guardian personally appeared before or was subscribed and sworn to. If you are under 16, marriage can be authorized only by court order when the request has been filed by either parent or legal guardian.

New Jersey: Applicants under 18 can marry if both parents consent to the marriage. The consent must be given under oath in front of two witnesses. Males: 16 or younger parties may marry with parental consent and/or permission of judge. Younger parties may obtain license in case of pregnancy or birth of child. Females: 16 or younger parties may marry with parental consent and/or permission of judge. Younger parties may obtain license in case of pregnancy or birth of child.

New York: If you are 16 or 17 years of age, you will need to have a completed parental consent form filled out by both parents. If you are either 14 or 15 years of age, you will need to show the written consent of both parents and a justice of the Supreme Court or a judge of the local Family Court.

North Carolina: Applicants 18 to 20 must present a certified copy of their birth certificate. Applicants 16 and 17 must present a consent form signed by the parent, individual, agency or institution having legal custody or serving as the legal guardian of the underage party. (birth certificate is also required). The consent form must be notarized. Applicants 14 and 15 must provide a certified copy of the court order authorizing the marriage.

South Carolina: If you are under 18, you will need a certified copy of your birth certificate and a notarized statement of parental consent. The minimum age for a female is 14 and it is 16 for a male.

Texas: The age is 18 without from a parent or your legal guardian. If under the age of 16, the law requires that the couple receives a court order before being allowed to marry.

Tennessee: If either party is under the age of 18, they must be accompanied by parents. If under the age of 16, Tennessee law requires that the couple receives a court order before being allowed to marry.

Virginia: If either of you are under 18 years of age, you must have written, notarized consent from a parent or your legal guardian.

Wyoming: Applicants must be at least 18 years old or with written parental consent. Applicants under 16 years of age only with court order.


Marriage Laws in the US by Age

 

[Gadawg73]

Muslims, who make up two-thirds of Malaysia's 28 million people, are permitted to marry after reaching puberty as long as they have consent from their parents and Islamic Shariah courts. For non-Muslim Malaysians, females must be at least 16 and males 18 to marry.

Read more: Malaysian girl, 14, celebrates wedding in public - FoxNews.com

What is exactly is the problem with the Malaysian girl getting married at 14 with parental consent??

Here are the laws in some states here in America concerning this issue:

Alabama: If either of you are under 18, you will need a certified copy of your birth certificate. Both parents must be present with identification, or if you have a legal guardian they must be present with a court order and identification. If one or both parents are deceased, proper evidence of such must be provided. Individuals under the age of 14 may not marry.

Michigan: Applicants 16 years of age may marry with parental or legal guardian written consent. Applicants under the age of 15 with parental consent and probate court permission. 'Marriage of a Minor': The legal marriage of a minor “shall release such minor from parental control.”

Missouri: A person under age 18 cannot marry without the consent of the custodial parent or guardian. DzA person under age 15 cannot marry "without" approval of a judge in the county where the marriage license is sought. The statute states that the judge should grant approval only upon a showing of "good cause" and that unusual conditions make the marriage "advisable."

Nevada: If you are 16 or 17 years old, you must have one parent or legal guardian present. A notarized written permission is also acceptable. It must be written in English and needs to state the name, birth date, age of the minor child, along with the relationship of the person giving consent. The notary must note that the parent or guardian personally appeared before or was subscribed and sworn to. If you are under 16, marriage can be authorized only by court order when the request has been filed by either parent or legal guardian.

New Jersey: Applicants under 18 can marry if both parents consent to the marriage. The consent must be given under oath in front of two witnesses. Males: 16 or younger parties may marry with parental consent and/or permission of judge. Younger parties may obtain license in case of pregnancy or birth of child. Females: 16 or younger parties may marry with parental consent and/or permission of judge. Younger parties may obtain license in case of pregnancy or birth of child.

New York: If you are 16 or 17 years of age, you will need to have a completed parental consent form filled out by both parents. If you are either 14 or 15 years of age, you will need to show the written consent of both parents and a justice of the Supreme Court or a judge of the local Family Court.

North Carolina: Applicants 18 to 20 must present a certified copy of their birth certificate. Applicants 16 and 17 must present a consent form signed by the parent, individual, agency or institution having legal custody or serving as the legal guardian of the underage party. (birth certificate is also required). The consent form must be notarized. Applicants 14 and 15 must provide a certified copy of the court order authorizing the marriage.

South Carolina: If you are under 18, you will need a certified copy of your birth certificate and a notarized statement of parental consent. The minimum age for a female is 14 and it is 16 for a male.

Texas: The age is 18 without from a parent or your legal guardian. If under the age of 16, the law requires that the couple receives a court order before being allowed to marry.

Tennessee: If either party is under the age of 18, they must be accompanied by parents. If under the age of 16, Tennessee law requires that the couple receives a court order before being allowed to marry.

Virginia: If either of you are under 18 years of age, you must have written, notarized consent from a parent or your legal guardian.

Wyoming: Applicants must be at least 18 years old or with written parental consent. Applicants under 16 years of age only with court order.


Marriage Laws in the US by Age

You may believe that a parent that gives consent at age 14 to get married may be a good parent but it doesn't make it so. They are following religous mores and are slaves to that first and the welfare of their own child is secondary to religion.
Many cultures view children and women as property of men and their legal systems support that.
We don't do it that way in America. Religion fucks everything up worldwide and we are having to clean that up as I post.

 

[Varth Dader]

...
What is exactly is the problem with the Malaysian girl getting married at 14 with parental consent??

Here are the laws in some states here in America concerning this issue:

Alabama: If either of you are under 18, you will need a certified copy of your birth certificate. Both parents must be present with identification, or if you have a legal guardian they must be present with a court order and identification. If one or both parents are deceased, proper evidence of such must be provided. Individuals under the age of 14 may not marry.

It's because CAIR started the infiltration decades if not centuries ago!

 

[Sunni Man]

It's because CAIR started the infiltration decades if not centuries ago!

LOL you can't blame the muslims and CAIR for everything.

I grew up in a state that bordered Louisiana.

Teenagers used to drive across the border to get married there.

Marriage age for girls was only 13 and boys was 16.

 

[chanel]

Some girls reach puberty at ten.

 

[chanel]

Oh and my point was it trumps the law established for everyone else.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

some girls reach puberty at ten.

true but they are still a child

 

[Sunni Man]

some girls reach puberty at ten.

true but they are still a child

In most cultures of the world.

When a girl reaches puberty she is considered an adult and thus eligible for marriage.

Only in the West do we have an artificial category between childhood and adult known as a teenager.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

some girls reach puberty at ten.

true but they are still a child

In most cultures of the world.

When a girl reaches puberty she is considered an adult and thus eligible for marriage.

Only in the West do we have an artificial category between childhood and adult known as a teenager.

I really don't care what other cultures think or believe. A child is a child let them enjoy life.