Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops “Sharia Court”

[rightwinger]

Political grandstanding

There is nothing the state can do if litigants voluntarily accept the terms of a muslim court
If it was a Christian church, I'm sure they would be celebrating

Without recourse what good is the decision. And what if sharia courts differ in areas such as same sex marriage and women's rights.

If that religious community agrees to the terms established by their clerics, there is little Texas can do about it

I didn't see Texas stepping in about the Branch Davidians making their own laws but god forbid them Moooslims try to do it

 

[Asclepias]

Political grandstanding

There is nothing the state can do if litigants voluntarily accept the terms of a muslim court
If it was a Christian church, I'm sure they would be celebrating

Without recourse what good is the decision. And what if sharia courts differ in areas such as same sex marriage and women's rights.

Theres always recourse.

They stated that if there is a conflict they will side with their religious laws..

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Third party civil arbitration is completely legal in the US.

When all parties agree to it as a precondition to a contract. Otherwise it's not binding.

 

[pwjohn]

Political grandstanding

There is nothing the state can do if litigants voluntarily accept the terms of a muslim court
If it was a Christian church, I'm sure they would be celebrating

Without recourse what good is the decision. And what if sharia courts differ in areas such as same sex marriage and women's rights.

If that religious community agrees to the terms established by their clerics, there is little Texas can do about it

I didn't see Texas stepping in about the Branch Davidians making their own laws but god forbid them Moooslims try to do it

Offering up lawless behavior on the part of others to further justify even more lawless behavior is anachary you dumshit.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The mayor is a bigoted idiot. ... .

The absolute COOLEST thing about the use of the word "bigot"; where such is advanced to frame the character of another, is that it is a marvelous demonstration of BIGOTRY!

HYSTERICALLY! ... such is a paradox that is lost to the Intellectually Less Fortunate. So it happens among them... as a matter of ROUTINE!

The absolute coolest thing about your statement is.....you actually think you said something

Oh, you. Be nice now.

 

[toxicmedia]

Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops "Sharia Court"... Here Is Her EPIC Response! - The Political Insider

"This radical group of Muslims is not pleased with the Mayor of Irving, Texas after she put the end to America’s first “Sharia Court.” Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims, which is why the city voted to stop these supposedly “voluntary” tribunals from operating.

In a very close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. The bill doesn’t mention Sharia or any religion, but it’s a huge defeat for Sharia supporters, as such courts are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Here is how Mayor Duyne responded on Facebook, before the historic and controversial vote:

Don't get me wrong....I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS!!!!!!!!!!

But...can't Muslims willingly participate in it, if they want?

As part of freely exercizing their religion?

 

[Asclepias]

Yeah this was pretty much grandstanding.

Irving City Council backs state bill Muslims say targets them

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

"It" is Islam... which stands wholly antithetical to the principles that define AMERICA. And as an AMERICAN... that is all I need to know ABOUT Islam to reject Islam, entirely and without exception to any of its evil facets.

it, in my sentence, actually referred to your objection to the courts. ...

The Courts ... which are illegal in the United States, because we already have a legal system, which rests in principle rejected by ISLAM. Which is the basis of my REJECTION OF SUCH.

so judge judy is illegal? the people's court is illegal? jewish and amish courts... illegal?
why aren't you protesting them?

incidentally, none of those are illegal.

Does Judge Judy have also have a 1200 year record of employing mass-murder as a means to acquire political power? I wasn't aware?

(Reader Judge Judy considers civil matters to which the parties sign contracts within the scope of the program... Judge Judy does not have any authority over the individuals and she cannot use law enforcement to enforce her rulings. Where the individuals fail to adhere to her ruling, the prevailing parties would need to seek judgement from a duly appointed court to enforce such.

By seeking sanction from the City of Irvine, the Muslims were seeking to increase their perceived authority... a first step to becoming recognized as an ACTUAL "AUTHORITY".)

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

 

[Asclepias]

Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops "Sharia Court"... Here Is Her EPIC Response! - The Political Insider

"This radical group of Muslims is not pleased with the Mayor of Irving, Texas after she put the end to America’s first “Sharia Court.” Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims, which is why the city voted to stop these supposedly “voluntary” tribunals from operating.

In a very close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. The bill doesn’t mention Sharia or any religion, but it’s a huge defeat for Sharia supporters, as such courts are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Here is how Mayor Duyne responded on Facebook, before the historic and controversial vote:

Don't get me wrong....I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS!!!!!!!!!!

But...can't Muslims willingly participate in it, if they want?

As part of freely exercizing their religion?

Thats the whole point the mayor missed. Its completely voluntary.

 

[Asclepias]

it, in my sentence, actually referred to your objection to the courts. ...

The Courts ... which are illegal in the United States, because we already have a legal system, which rests in principle rejected by ISLAM. Which is the basis of my REJECTION OF SUCH.

so judge judy is illegal? the people's court is illegal? jewish and amish courts... illegal?
why aren't you protesting them?

incidentally, none of those are illegal.

Does Judge Judy have also have a 1200 year record of employing mass-murder as a means to acquire political power? I wasn't aware?

(Reader Judge Judy considers civil matters to which the parties sign contracts within the scope of the program... Judge Judy does not have any authority over the individuals and she cannot use law enforcement to enforce her rulings. Where the individuals fail to adhere to her ruling, the prevailing parties would need to seek judgement from a duly appointed court to enforce such.

By seeking sanction from the City of Irvine, the Muslims were seeking to increase their perceived authority... a first step to becoming recognized as an ACTUAL "AUTHORITY".)

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The mayor is a bigoted idiot. ... .

The absolute COOLEST thing about the use of the word "bigot"; where such is advanced to frame the character of another, is that it is a marvelous demonstration of BIGOTRY!

HYSTERICALLY! ... such is a paradox that is lost to the Intellectually Less Fortunate. So it happens among them... as a matter of ROUTINE!

The absolute coolest thing about your statement is.....you actually think you said something

Are you really a 'moderator'? And a USMB staffer?
Does'nt look like you're doing much 'moderating' friend.

All moderators are participants too.

Except Cereal Killer. I never see her around.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The Courts ... which are illegal in the United States, because we already have a legal system, which rests in principle rejected by ISLAM. Which is the basis of my REJECTION OF SUCH.

so judge judy is illegal? the people's court is illegal? jewish and amish courts... illegal?
why aren't you protesting them?

incidentally, none of those are illegal.

Does Judge Judy have also have a 1200 year record of employing mass-murder as a means to acquire political power? I wasn't aware?

(Reader Judge Judy considers civil matters to which the parties sign contracts within the scope of the program... Judge Judy does not have any authority over the individuals and she cannot use law enforcement to enforce her rulings. Where the individuals fail to adhere to her ruling, the prevailing parties would need to seek judgement from a duly appointed court to enforce such.

By seeking sanction from the City of Irvine, the Muslims were seeking to increase their perceived authority... a first step to becoming recognized as an ACTUAL "AUTHORITY".)

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?

Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops "Sharia Court"... Here Is Her EPIC Response! - The Political Insider

"This radical group of Muslims is not pleased with the Mayor of Irving, Texas after she put the end to America’s first “Sharia Court.” Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims, which is why the city voted to stop these supposedly “voluntary” tribunals from operating.

In a very close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. The bill doesn’t mention Sharia or any religion, but it’s a huge defeat for Sharia supporters, as such courts are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Here is how Mayor Duyne responded on Facebook, before the historic and controversial vote:

Don't get me wrong....I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS!!!!!!!!!!

But...can't Muslims willingly participate in it, if they want?

As part of freely exercizing their religion?

They already have that. All religions do. Muslims clearly want to impose civil penalties that go beyond the power of private organizations.

 

[Asclepias]

so judge judy is illegal? the people's court is illegal? jewish and amish courts... illegal?
why aren't you protesting them?

incidentally, none of those are illegal.

Does Judge Judy have also have a 1200 year record of employing mass-murder as a means to acquire political power? I wasn't aware?

(Reader Judge Judy considers civil matters to which the parties sign contracts within the scope of the program... Judge Judy does not have any authority over the individuals and she cannot use law enforcement to enforce her rulings. Where the individuals fail to adhere to her ruling, the prevailing parties would need to seek judgement from a duly appointed court to enforce such.

By seeking sanction from the City of Irvine, the Muslims were seeking to increase their perceived authority... a first step to becoming recognized as an ACTUAL "AUTHORITY".)

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?

Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.

Do you know why they are mad? Evidently you dont or you would not have made the idiotic comment you made about them wanting something above and beyond.

"We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.”

Good for them.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Does Judge Judy have also have a 1200 year record of employing mass-murder as a means to acquire political power? I wasn't aware?

(Reader Judge Judy considers civil matters to which the parties sign contracts within the scope of the program... Judge Judy does not have any authority over the individuals and she cannot use law enforcement to enforce her rulings. Where the individuals fail to adhere to her ruling, the prevailing parties would need to seek judgement from a duly appointed court to enforce such.

By seeking sanction from the City of Irvine, the Muslims were seeking to increase their perceived authority... a first step to becoming recognized as an ACTUAL "AUTHORITY".)

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?

Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.

Do you know they are mad? Evidently you dont or you would not have made the idiotic comment you made about them wanting something above and beyond.

"We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.”

Good for them.

Nonsense. They feel it affects them in a material way beyond a perceived offense.

 

[browsing deer]

The Muslims insisted sharia law was superior. She laid down it is not.

If two sides want to have an arbitrator, that is fine and dandy. If one side or another wants civil law to take over, that is what takes precedence. She made that abundantly clear who wanted their own court to take precedence instead.

 

[Asclepias]

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?

Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.

Do you know they are mad? Evidently you dont or you would not have made the idiotic comment you made about them wanting something above and beyond.

"We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.”

Good for them.

Nonsense. They feel it affects them in a material way beyond a perceived offense.

Yes your post is nonsense. Show me a link that says what you are claiming. The other clown slinked off in defeat when I asked for proof. Are you up to the task?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?

Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.

Do you know they are mad? Evidently you dont or you would not have made the idiotic comment you made about them wanting something above and beyond.

"We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.”

Good for them.

Nonsense. They feel it affects them in a material way beyond a perceived offense.

Yes your post is nonsense. Show me a link that says what you are claiming. The other clown slinked off in defeat when I asked for proof. Are you up to the task?

I don't need to provide a link. Go to the first page and read the OP.

 

[paddymurphy]

Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops "Sharia Court"... Here Is Her EPIC Response! - The Political Insider

"This radical group of Muslims is not pleased with the Mayor of Irving, Texas after she put the end to America’s first “Sharia Court.” Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims, which is why the city voted to stop these supposedly “voluntary” tribunals from operating.

In a very close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. The bill doesn’t mention Sharia or any religion, but it’s a huge defeat for Sharia supporters, as such courts are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Here is how Mayor Duyne responded on Facebook, before the historic and controversial vote:

Of course, there was no "Sharia Court" that she "stopped". Never has been and never can be a "Court" that is based on sharia law. Just like there can never be courts based on Christian law of Jewish law or Buddhist law. And the law that they passed, to the extent it prevents private citizens from agreeing to resolve disputes they have with other members of their faith based on principles of that faith, will be struck down as unconstitutional just like the one in Oklahoma was. And, if the law does not do that, it is a pointless law. In fact, her idiotic facebook post did get one thing correct. No foreign law that violates the public policy, state statutes or federal statutes is enforceable. But, bigots got to demonstrate their bigotry.

 

[paddymurphy]

Third party civil arbitration is completely legal in the US.

Without means of enforcement such arbitration is pointless.

Arbitration awards are completely enforceable unless they violate civil law.