0
Anvilbrother

At what point would you be ok with stepping in and finishing this?

Recommended Posts

jakee

Quote

The Torah is used by



Ah, you see there's your hypocrisy. You're judging one book by how it is used and another book by what is written in it.



A pox on all their houses.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jakee

Quote

The Torah is used by



Ah, you see there's your hypocrisy. You're judging one book by how it is used and another book by what is written in it.



He reminds me of Alabama.

Create an amendment to the state constitution to prevent the application of any foreign law.

Then objecting to something based on christian law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

***

Quote

The Torah is used by



Ah, you see there's your hypocrisy. You're judging one book by how it is used and another book by what is written in it.



He reminds me of Alabama.

Create an amendment to the state constitution to prevent the application of any foreign law.

Then objecting to something based on christian law.

Can you show me where this so called Christian law is binding in court like sharia law is?
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtlespeed

******

Quote

The Torah is used by



Ah, you see there's your hypocrisy. You're judging one book by how it is used and another book by what is written in it.



He reminds me of Alabama.

Create an amendment to the state constitution to prevent the application of any foreign law.

Then objecting to something based on christian law.

Can you show me where this so called Christian law is binding in court like sharia law is?

As to your basic premise, no religion's law is formally binding in US courts. Generally, in modern times (say, past 40 or 50 years), the closest courts (especially at the appeals court level, where sometimes they have to reign-in individual whacked-out trial judges) have come to appying a particular religion's laws to a legal matter is when it's been deemed that the parties had agreed to be so bound, much the way parties agree to be bound by specific terms in, say, a contract (like a "mandatory arbitration" clause, or a clause agreeing to apply the law of a particular state to any disputes) or whatever.

That said, if you want to see a good example of a (current) judge who's spent his entire legal career bending over backwards to apply Christian "law" (or principles, or whatever) in civil courts, do some research into the applied ideology and career history of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy9o8

*********

Quote

The Torah is used by



Ah, you see there's your hypocrisy. You're judging one book by how it is used and another book by what is written in it.



He reminds me of Alabama.

Create an amendment to the state constitution to prevent the application of any foreign law.

Then objecting to something based on christian law.

Can you show me where this so called Christian law is binding in court like sharia law is?

As to your basic premise, no religion's law is formally binding in US courts. Generally, in modern times (say, past 40 or 50 years), the closest courts (especially at the appeals court level, where sometimes they have to reign-in individual whacked-out trial judges) have come to appying a particular religion's laws to a legal matter is when it's been deemed that the parties had agreed to be so bound, much the way parties agree to be bound by specific terms in, say, a contract (like a "mandatory arbitration" clause, or a clause agreeing to apply the law of a particular state to any disputes) or whatever.

That said, if you want to see a good example of a (current) judge who's spent his entire legal career bending over backwards to apply Christian "law" (or principles, or whatever) in civil courts, do some research into the applied ideology and career history of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore.

I agree fully. I can't stand that douchebag. He just goes waaaay overboard with his religious reasonings applied to his rulings.
"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BillyVance

***
That said, if you want to see a good example of a (current) judge who's spent his entire legal career bending over backwards to apply Christian "law" (or principles, or whatever) in civil courts, do some research into the applied ideology and career history of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore.



I agree fully. I can't stand that douchebag. He just goes waaaay overboard with his religious reasonings applied to his rulings.

Hey, "God said it, I believe it, that settles it."

At least that's the way the bumper sticker goes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy9o8

*********

Quote

The Torah is used by



Ah, you see there's your hypocrisy. You're judging one book by how it is used and another book by what is written in it.



He reminds me of Alabama.

Create an amendment to the state constitution to prevent the application of any foreign law.

Then objecting to something based on christian law.

Can you show me where this so called Christian law is binding in court like sharia law is?

As to your basic premise, no religion's law is formally binding in US courts. Generally, in modern times (say, past 40 or 50 years), the closest courts (especially at the appeals court level, where sometimes they have to reign-in individual whacked-out trial judges) have come to appying a particular religion's laws to a legal matter is when it's been deemed that the parties had agreed to be so bound, much the way parties agree to be bound by specific terms in, say, a contract (like a "mandatory arbitration" clause, or a clause agreeing to apply the law of a particular state to any disputes) or whatever.

That said, if you want to see a good example of a (current) judge who's spent his entire legal career bending over backwards to apply Christian "law" (or principles, or whatever) in civil courts, do some research into the applied ideology and career history of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore.

So what you are saying is that Christian law doesn't exist, while Sharia law is debated in courts?
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtlespeed

************

Quote

The Torah is used by



Ah, you see there's your hypocrisy. You're judging one book by how it is used and another book by what is written in it.



He reminds me of Alabama.

Create an amendment to the state constitution to prevent the application of any foreign law.

Then objecting to something based on christian law.

Can you show me where this so called Christian law is binding in court like sharia law is?

As to your basic premise, no religion's law is formally binding in US courts. Generally, in modern times (say, past 40 or 50 years), the closest courts (especially at the appeals court level, where sometimes they have to reign-in individual whacked-out trial judges) have come to appying a particular religion's laws to a legal matter is when it's been deemed that the parties had agreed to be so bound, much the way parties agree to be bound by specific terms in, say, a contract (like a "mandatory arbitration" clause, or a clause agreeing to apply the law of a particular state to any disputes) or whatever.

That said, if you want to see a good example of a (current) judge who's spent his entire legal career bending over backwards to apply Christian "law" (or principles, or whatever) in civil courts, do some research into the applied ideology and career history of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore.

So what you are saying is that Christian law doesn't exist, while Sharia law is debated in courts?

I don't see how anything he wrote can be interpreted that way.

And "Canon Law" most certainly does exist.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0