sundevil777 102 #26 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe video only claimed that it was practiced between consenting Muslims in civil matters. No, it said that women were being forced to submit to the court's decisions. In civil matters only between women that agree, it's like arbitration. If you can find a case, where a woman did not consent, and then was not able to have the case heard in a civil court, I would be shocked. http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/jul/05/sharia-law-religious-courts Your link confirms the arguments against the sharia courts, but your comment implies you don't agree. Please clarify.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #27 August 29, 2010 QuoteMuslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. Imagine how the victim here felt when she found out she couldn't even get a restraining order against her rapist/ex-husband, let Aline secure a conviction in a criminal trial.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,611 #28 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuoteMuslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. I don't need to, the appeals court already told him he was talking bollocks.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #29 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteMuslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. I don't need to, the appeals court already told him he was talking bollocks. That it would take an appeal is very telling of the state of liberal must-not-insult-Muslims atmosphere that is quite troublesome and dangerous. It seems that liberals are not able to recognize such obvious things as this.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #30 August 29, 2010 Quote The title of the thread is just a bit misleading, while I am no fan of Sharia law, The video only claimed that it was practiced between consenting Muslims in civil matters. There you go getting all FACTUAL in an irrational thread. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,611 #31 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteMuslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. I don't need to, the appeals court already told him he was talking bollocks. That it would take an appeal is very telling of the state of liberal must-not-insult-Muslims atmosphere that is quite troublesome and dangerous. It seems that liberals are not able to recognize such obvious things as this. I think it probably says more about the state of family courts. This single isolated incident isn't a liberal issue, it's twat who doesn't know or care about the law issue.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #32 August 29, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote what day is this.... I wonder which ism's will be on display this week Liberalism Ok... you can take all the rest... I would have thought that being a religious minority... you might have chosen otherwise. What does being Jewish have to do with an intolerance of intolerable actions? Jews are very tolerant of others. Muslims, not so much. That depends on the Jew or Muslim involved neither are more or less tolerant as a group than the other. My best friend is a Jew, we're very tolerant of each other, others less so.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #33 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuoteMuslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. Imagine how the victim here felt when she found out she couldn't even get a restraining order against her rapist/ex-husband, let Aline secure a conviction in a criminal trial. Judge Charles is a practitioner of Sharia Law? How interesting.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #34 August 29, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Muslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. I don't need to, the appeals court already told him he was talking bollocks. That it would take an appeal is very telling of the state of liberal must-not-insult-Muslims atmosphere that is quite troublesome and dangerous. It seems that liberals are not able to recognize such obvious things as this. I find it tragic that you and your fellow travellers find this so abhorrent... but the facts are that women in this country that the percentage of prosecutions of sexual predators is very low compared to the incidence of sexual predation. If the sexual predators of this country were actually put in prison... you would need many thousands of new judges, many thousands of new prisons and the staff managing all of the millions of sexual predators in this country alone.VERY few women or children get justice for this offense Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #35 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteMuslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. I don't need to, the appeals court already told him he was talking bollocks. That it would take an appeal is very telling of the state of liberal must-not-insult-Muslims atmosphere that is quite troublesome and dangerous. It seems that liberals are not able to recognize such obvious things as this. Pretty funny eh? Especially when you consider that it is ILLEGAL in many countries to deny the holocaust so as not to offend Jewish peoples sensibilities. (I am not denying the holocaust, just pointing out the hypocracy of a Jewish person pointing at other religious groups whos sensibilities society is aware about offending.)When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #36 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuote I'm just really surprised she posted this. In another thread she said that immigrants coming to America should assimilate to our standards of acceptance, peace, and such. Extremist Muslims have been using sharia law as a part of their culture as a foot hold to circumvent that, so they can beat and kill their wives legally. I didn't think that would be something she would try to defend. Excuse me, what? Muslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. You are right. It is not legal. But that hasn't stopped the honor killings in the US, and where sharia law has been allowed in the European Union, honor killings are on the rise, like in France. If sharia law is allowed in the US, more Muslim men will claim its their right. Lawyers will kick these cases out of our courts and defer them to sharia courts. Just like in post 6 of this thread, we already have bleeding heart liberal activist judges that are willing to over look this stuff. What happens when the woman isn't able to get or afford an appeal?"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #37 August 29, 2010 'Honour' killings are not Islamic, they are cultural./traditional, People of other religions (Including Catholics & Jews) also commit these murderes. in Brazil, until 1991 wife killings were considered to be noncriminal 'honour killings', in just one year, nearly eight hundred husbands killed their wives. Similarly, in Colombia, until 1980, a husband legally could kill his wife for committing adultery, it still happens. http://www.awid.org/eng/Issues-and-Analysis/Issues-and-Analysis/Why-Are-Hindu-Honor-Killings-Rising-in-India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning_of_Du'a_Khalil_Aswad http://www.law-lib.utoronto.ca/Diana/fulltext/wile.htm http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_honorkilling.html http://www.karentintori.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=49&Itemid=21When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #38 August 29, 2010 Quote'Honour' killings are not Islamic, they are cultural./traditional, People of other religions also commit these murderes. http://www.awid.org/eng/Issues-and-Analysis/Issues-and-Analysis/Why-Are-Hindu-Honor-Killings-Rising-in-India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning_of_Du'a_Khalil_Aswad I would tend to believe that in western countries that under the law, murder is usually prosecuted... whether the perpetrator is claiming it his right based on tradition. If it was ok to do it based on tradition, some of our conservatives would be claiming the right to lynch non whites as tradition. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #39 August 29, 2010 Quote'Honour' killings are not Islamic, they are cultural./traditional, People of other religions (Including Catholics) also commit these murderes. in Brazil, until 1991 wife killings were considered to be noncriminal 'honour killings', in just one year, nearly eight hundred husbands killed their wives. Similarly, in Colombia, until 1980, a husband legally could kill his wife for committing adultery. http://www.awid.org/eng/Issues-and-Analysis/Issues-and-Analysis/Why-Are-Hindu-Honor-Killings-Rising-in-India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning_of_Du'a_Khalil_Aswad http://www.law-lib.utoronto.ca/Diana/fulltext/wile.htm So sharia law, which is supposedly based on the Koran, doesn't call for the stoning to death of a woman who commits adultery? Yes other cultures may do it, but it doesn't change the fact that it isn't taught as OK under sharia law, which is religion based. All you have said is other people do it too."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #40 August 29, 2010 QuoteI would tend to believe that in western countries that under the law, murder is usually prosecuted True. However being prosecuted and being found guilty are two different things. There was a case in Italy of a Catholic man who killed his wife for adultry, he was prosecuted but not found guilty even though the evidence was overwhelming.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #41 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuote'Honour' killings are not Islamic, they are cultural./traditional, People of other religions (Including Catholics) also commit these murderes. in Brazil, until 1991 wife killings were considered to be noncriminal 'honour killings', in just one year, nearly eight hundred husbands killed their wives. Similarly, in Colombia, until 1980, a husband legally could kill his wife for committing adultery. http://www.awid.org/eng/Issues-and-Analysis/Issues-and-Analysis/Why-Are-Hindu-Honor-Killings-Rising-in-India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning_of_Du'a_Khalil_Aswad http://www.law-lib.utoronto.ca/Diana/fulltext/wile.htm So sharia law, which is supposedly based on the Koran, doesn't call for the stoning to death of a woman who commits adultery? Yes other cultures may do it, but it doesn't change the fact that it isn't taught as OK under sharia law, which is religion based. All you have said is other people do it too. Deuteronomy 22:21 she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #42 August 29, 2010 Punishment of death under sentence of law is not the same thing as a 'honour killing'. If so then Texas would be the domacile of the majority of its proponents.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,611 #43 August 29, 2010 QuoteYou are right. It is not legal. But that hasn't stopped the honor killings in the US, Murder has always been illegal in the US, yet murder continues to this day. Quoteand where sharia law has been allowed in the European Union, honor killings are on the rise, like in France. What forms of Sharia law are allowed in France? QuoteIf sharia law is allowed in the US, more Muslim men will claim its their right. Lawyers will kick these cases out of our courts and defer them to sharia courts. No they wouldn't. QuoteJust like in post 6 of this thread, we already have bleeding heart liberal activist judges that are willing to over look this stuff. You have one, not in a criminal court, who got smacked down by the court of appeal.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 3 #44 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteMuslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. I don't need to, the appeals court already told him he was talking bollocks. That it would take an appeal is very telling of the state of liberal must-not-insult-Muslims atmosphere that is quite troublesome and dangerous. It seems that liberals are not able to recognize such obvious things as this. Excellent: you've made two brilliantly stupid observations in a single post. OK, here we go: 1. Trial court judges make wrong decisions all the time. That's why there are appellate courts. 2. Any random twit can take a cheap, opportunistic pot-shot at "liberals". But I have to tell you: when an intelligent person does it, it's painful to watch. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #45 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuote'Honour' killings are not Islamic, they are cultural./traditional, People of other religions (Including Catholics) also commit these murderes. in Brazil, until 1991 wife killings were considered to be noncriminal 'honour killings', in just one year, nearly eight hundred husbands killed their wives. Similarly, in Colombia, until 1980, a husband legally could kill his wife for committing adultery. http://www.awid.org/eng/Issues-and-Analysis/Issues-and-Analysis/Why-Are-Hindu-Honor-Killings-Rising-in-India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning_of_Du'a_Khalil_Aswad http://www.law-lib.utoronto.ca/Diana/fulltext/wile.htm So sharia law, which is supposedly based on the Koran, doesn't call for the stoning to death of a woman who commits adultery? Yes other cultures may do it, but it doesn't change the fact that it isn't taught as OK under sharia law, which is religion based. All you have said is other people do it too. Happy to discuss this but before we do try and learn a bit about the subject first, then let us talk. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShariaWhen an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #46 August 29, 2010 Quote Quote The title of the thread is just a bit misleading, while I am no fan of Sharia law, The video only claimed that it was practiced between consenting Muslims in civil matters. There you go getting all FACTUAL in an irrational thread. Being all factual is OK, but he wasn't being factual. the video claimed the opposite of what he said.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #47 August 29, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteMuslim immigrants cannot legally beat or kill their wives in America or any other western nation. There is no way to circumvent murder laws. Really? Tell that to [URL "http://www.google.com/m/search?oe=UTF-8&client=safari&hl=en&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=1161&fsdt=4750&q=nj+judge+joseph+charles"]Judge Charles of NJ[/URL]. I don't need to, the appeals court already told him he was talking bollocks. That it would take an appeal is very telling of the state of liberal must-not-insult-Muslims atmosphere that is quite troublesome and dangerous. It seems that liberals are not able to recognize such obvious things as this. Excellent: you've made two brilliantly stupid observations in a single post. OK, here we go: 1. Trial court judges make wrong decisions all the time. That's why there are appellate courts. 2. Any random twit can take a cheap, opportunistic pot-shot at "liberals". But I have to tell you: when an intelligent person does it, it's painful to watch. 1) It was an especially awful, tolerance based decision. Much worse than an ordinary bad decision by a court. It is a matter of degree, and the nature of the bad decision that you do not want to recognize, so you do not consider it noteworthy. That liberals don't want to see it as significant is a really big deal. All in the interests of not offending muslims. Also, Sharia courts don't bother with those appeals. Big difference. 2) It wasn't just a cheap shot at liberals, it was well deserved and I really do mean that it is indicative of the liberal mentality, and something significant enough to deserve discussion. To compliment me as intelligent along with the personal attack is a traditional way of throwing an insult at a person, but please don't bother. If you're going to insult me, just do it directly.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,611 #48 August 29, 2010 Quote1) It was an especially awful, tolerance based decision. Much worse than an ordinary bad decision by a court. It is a matter of degree, and the nature of the bad decision that you do not want to recognize, so you do not consider it noteworthy. That liberals don't want to see it as significant is a really big deal. All in the interests of not offending muslims. You are assuming that the Judge in question made his decision because he didn't want to offend Muslims. And in terms of how 'liberals' are seeing it - in terms of growing Sharia influence in US courts it is not significant, it is an isolated incident concerning one Judge who clearly doesn't know his job. Quote2) It wasn't just a cheap shot at liberals, it was well deserved and I really do mean that it is indicative of the liberal mentality, and something significant enough to deserve discussion. It's indicative of what you think the liberal mentality is, not what it actually is.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #49 August 30, 2010 That'll be the sound of silence then. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3936691#3936691When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pchapman 280 #50 August 30, 2010 Quote In civil matters only between women that agree, it's like arbitration. If you can find a case, where a woman did not consent, and then was not able to have the case heard in a civil court, I would be shocked. Just a comment: There is the issue of whether consent is really consent. Sharia law was rejected where I am (province of Ontario) a few years back, and allowed no official standing, for various reasons. Naturally it was more about family law matters, that sort of thing, not stonings and chopping body parts off. A major argument against sharia was the concept of two systems of justice. Another was the idea that someone might not really be consenting, and be subject to community pressure to use the sharia law. Yet then the decisions of a sharia court would have some weight in the eyes of the law, much as if one decided to go to arbitration, or signed a business contract. So you are right that one SHOULD still have recourse to civil court, but in practice, that layer of justice might be harder to exercise if sharia law courts have any official standing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
