U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-08-2010, 08:32 PM
 
5,915 posts, read 4,415,178 times
Reputation: 1397

Advertisements

Was CAIR that loudly outraged after 9/11?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-09-2010, 02:55 AM
 
3,277 posts, read 4,803,279 times
Reputation: 1919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guamanians View Post
It doesn't have a remote possibility of coming to fruition? Apparently you have not been paying attention to life on planet earth.
Dude, there must be so few Muslims in Oklahoma that they all wave to each other as they pass on the street. And considering the general moderation of American Muslims(as much as some posters here would like to distort, we don't have near the problems with our Muslim population as Europe does) that makes it even less likely that there will be any substantial threat to secularism from Muslims.

Remember who it is that got religion put on the money, in the pledge, and in the courthouses. Then get back to me on who is trying to impose religion.

P.S. For a few lulz

Quote:
The measure directs state courts to ignore "legal precepts of other nations or cultures"
Do they not realise that our laws come from English Common law? And in common law, even International Law could become domestic law if cited as a precedent? This is what happens when people get to vote on things they have no background with.

Last edited by Hoarfrost; 11-09-2010 at 03:07 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2010, 06:20 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 18,671,573 times
Reputation: 7751
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoarfrost View Post
Dude, there must be so few Muslims in Oklahoma that they all wave to each other as they pass on the street. And considering the general moderation of American Muslims(as much as some posters here would like to distort, we don't have near the problems with our Muslim population as Europe does) that makes it even less likely that there will be any substantial threat to secularism from Muslims.

Remember who it is that got religion put on the money, in the pledge, and in the courthouses. Then get back to me on who is trying to impose religion.

P.S. For a few lulz

Do they not realise that our laws come from English Common law? And in common law, even International Law could become domestic law if cited as a precedent? This is what happens when people get to vote on things they have no background with.
No, that's what happens when a bunch of lawyers (the OK Legislature) votes for something they know will not pass Constitutional muster and offers it to The People on the ballot for their predictable approval. But, it looks good and makes the base feel like they've done something substantial.

The whole thing is just another example of politics for show. It's form over substance, appearance over reality and it will cost the taxpayers millions to defend before it's finally tossed out by the Courts.

But, who cares about that?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2010, 06:39 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 54,309,015 times
Reputation: 24736
Referring to another thread, this is just another Weapon of Mass Distraction.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2010, 11:41 AM
 
3,566 posts, read 4,809,680 times
Reputation: 1855
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Okay... here you go, again:
a6107-08.opn.html (http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a6107-08.opn.html - broken link)
If you insist:

Is there any reason that you are insisting that a criminal case be tried in family court today?

Wrong court room.

But, lets play your game for a quick sec, what will you be calling the other states that still don't prosecute spousal rape unless the couple is separated? or don't have a problem if the wife is mentally impaired?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2010, 12:03 PM
 
74,804 posts, read 34,953,571 times
Reputation: 10596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
If you insist:

Is there any reason that you are insisting that a criminal case be tried in family court today?

Wrong court room.
I never said anything about which court it was tried in. I merely posted the court's ruling, which does in fact base the decision on the defendant's belief in Sharia Law.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2010, 12:10 PM
 
42,492 posts, read 26,536,677 times
Reputation: 14117
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
Are your fellow southern baptist's suing to have their beliefs incorporated into the American legal system?
They don't sue. They just propose. And sometimes get their laws. For instance, two people of the same sex living together not being able to adopt or foster in Arkansas. Their intention was to stop homosexual people from adopting, because it offends their religious beliefs, but such a law has already been deemed Unconstitutional. So, they broadened it to debase the religious focus, but they broadened it so much that say someone's sister wants to adopt her nieces and nephews, but the sister's mother lives with her. Oops!

Baptists and other religious groups have imposed their beliefs on the American judiciary, and continue to do so. It's one of the reasons the ACLU is so busy.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2010, 12:12 PM
 
42,492 posts, read 26,536,677 times
Reputation: 14117
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
I never said anything about which court it was tried in. I merely posted the court's ruling, which does in fact base the decision on the defendant's belief in Sharia Law.
The decision wasn't BASED on the defendant's belief in Sharia Law. The decision was BASED on the judge's determination of the husband's potential threat to his wife.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2010, 12:36 PM
 
74,804 posts, read 34,953,571 times
Reputation: 10596
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
The decision wasn't BASED on the defendant's belief in Sharia Law. The decision was BASED on the judge's determination of the husband's potential threat to his wife.
That's not what this says...
Quote:
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 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.
a6107-08.opn.html (http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a6107-08.opn.html - broken link)
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-09-2010, 12:56 PM
 
42,492 posts, read 26,536,677 times
Reputation: 14117
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
That's not what this says...
a6107-08.opn.html (http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a6107-08.opn.html - broken link)
Actually, that's exactly what it says.

The judge was considering intent. What a person believes applies to intent. Always.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top