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.
It is interesting that I posted two articles of atrocities committed in the name of Islam at the same time on this forum: the gay man sentenced to prison and whipping and a Christian woman set to be executed. The Christian woman's story got a few responses (13 as of this point). The gay man's plight is at 49 posts and will probably continue for quite a few more pages, based on past past posts on homosexuals.
.........why aren't the human rights groups screaming about it?"
It would be like screaming in protest that tomorrow is Wednesday.
Rather meaningless and futile effort.
The US is low hanging fruit with its legal system sympathetic to anyone who hires a lawyer and brings a lawsuit. Any cause that reaches a court pays the lawyers well.
The 9th district court is capable of the most surprising decisions.
Any country containing a town or state that bans dodge ball in school and scoring from baseball games to reduce bad feelings would be my choice of a place to make a case for anything that a human mind can imagine.
You complain in China or the Middle east, Mexico or Russia, your lawyer simply disappears.
The effectiveness of the human rights groups outside EU and the US is comparable to a picnicer shaking his fist in the air at an incoming thunderstorm.
FYI, the ACLU defends many causes that are championed by conservatives too; free speech, free press, etc.
So you don't like Mexicans? How are you in any way affected by Mexican immigrants? How are they any different than the Eastern and Southern Europeans who came in the past century?
Years ago if you went to NYC or Chicago, you would see plenty of Italian and Yiddish language signs on houses, outside buildings, and on restaurants.
We need to prohibit the "illegal" immigration...you are probably speaking of the "legal" immigrants who didn't break the law to get here!
I'm suggesting that the Constitution of the United States already addressed the concerns of this law, which was designed to prevent Sharia law, an expression of religious dogma, from being incorporated into the laws of Oklahoma. Since the Constitution already served this purpose, the law is redundant. And I explained why in my "red car" analogy. Redundant laws are bad because they create confusion in the law. And the 70% of voters in Oklahoma were persuaded of the need for this law by propoganda designed to inspire fear, and their lack of knowledge of the Constitution as well as their lack of trust of the Constitution. And you're right, just because I disagree with them doesn't make them ignorant. But just because you agree with them doesn't make them well-informed or even thoughtful. And most importantly, since their law is Unconstitutional in that it is targeted against a specific religious group, it is an attack on the Constitution. And that is certainly not something that 70% of Oklahomans would choose to be a party to, if they understood the ramifications of the law they supported.
Not true. If it was expressly written into the constitution, then judges today would not be allowed to look to international laws and standards of practice in determining their rulings. This serves only to close a potential loophole in which judges may use in the future, and hence, it is NOT redundant.
Well, 70% of the voters did side with the law, and I fail to see how they all are misunderstanding it. I prefer to think that they are proactively stopping judges who will potentially undermine our present laws in favor of lighter sentences for those who commit crimes based on their cultural/religious views.
There are some people that think sharia law should be implemented here. Recently, there was a controversial vote in OK about whether or not judges could look to sharia law to decide cases. If we get sharia law here...don't be misled that it couldn't happen here.
You're even lower than I previously thought for insinuating that the people arguing against the OK law on constitutional grounds would advocate having this sort of thing in place.
At any rate, backwards country is backwards. This wouldn't be surprising to see in, say, Uganda, which is a nominally Christian country. Whereas you wouldn't get lashes and prison time for being gay in say, Albania.
Whoops, too much measured analysis there. Gotta lower it to the level of this forum. Durrr, mooslums r bayad!
There are some people that think sharia law should be implemented here. Recently, there was a controversial vote in OK about whether or not judges could look to sharia law to decide cases. If we get sharia law here...don't be misled that it couldn't happen here.
Yes it could happen here since the wackos on the left keep supporting muslims and their religion. The guy should be glad he is still alive considering the penality is supposed to be death.
Yes it could happen here since the wackos on the left keep supporting muslims and their religion. The guy should be glad he is still alive considering the penality is supposed to be death.
Well I'm a very left leaning person and I'll tell you one thing, I will fight to the death before I ever consider Sharia law as a valid form of governance in this country.
Regarding England--he'd be tried in the English criminal courts. There are no Sharia criminal courts. There are essentially Sharia arbitrators in civil matters where BOTH parties agree to the arbitration. Kinda like when two people sue for a divorce, but then agree to sit down with their minister for arbitration, to perhaps work out their differences without resorting to divorce.
And while you seem very focused on domestic abuse when Muslims are the abusers, I take it you simply prefer to ignore domestic abuse when Christians are the abusers. Domestic abuse in this country is rampant, and certainly not confined to Muslim households. Muslim households don't even show a statistical propensity for domestic violence. Check the FBI statistics. And lose your argument.
The only argument here is coming from your side as it is your desire to prove me wrong. If you recall my post, I stated that while not law, Sharia will be taken out vigilante style.
When speaking of Sharia, something which is a Muslim law/value system, I can discuss honor killings. You don't like it and try to make it out that I am picking on Muslims. Tough. If you read the article, the men who perpetrate these heinous crimes claim it is about family honor. Could you imagine being raped, and then your family turning on you, stoning you to death? Your daughter speaking with a western boy and then mowing her down? This is domestic abuse to the Nth degree. How about permissible marital rape?
In the big Venn diagram, Muslim honor killings fall into that merged area with domestic abuse, however a drunken Christian beating the tar out of his wife isn't Sharia. Granted, not all Muslims are so strict, but when the head of the WTC mosque's wife, Daisy Khan, counsels soon-to-be marrieds on the concept that the husband may one day take a second wife -- doesn't that send a signal to Muslim women in the western hemisphere that tradition is given more consideration than the laws of the US?
One thing about Sharia -- if you're a male -- your religion approves of abusing females for perceived slights.
Not exactly a Judeo-Christian value.
But then again, the thread is about the treatment of homosexuals and Sharia. It would appear they are as badly oppressed as women under Sharia.
Saudi man gets 500 lashes, five years in prison for gay sex
But remember, gay rights activists: Pat Robertson is your real problem! Sharia Alert from the Kingdom of the Two Holy Places: "Saudi Man Gets Five-Year Prison Term, 500 Lashes for Gay Sex, Okaz Reports," by Glen Carey for Bloomberg, November 8
A Saudi Arabian court sentenced a man to five years in prison and 500 lashes for having sexual relations with another man, Jeddah-based Okaz reported.
The 27 year-old man, who was arrested by the kingdom's religious police, was also convicted of publishing photos on the internet and on mobile phones of himself wearing women's underwear, the newspaper reported without giving his name. The court fined him 50,000 riyals ($13,300), the newspaper said....
I care more about what directly affects my life here in the United States, the supposed beacon of freedom in the world. Brutality has always existed in other parts of the world, but I feel a bit powerless to do much about it. However, I think that positive change can and should be effected in this country because our Constitution says so. That article makes a good case as to why we don't need any more muslims allowed to emigrate into this country. Our country has enough retarded people without adding them to the mix.
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.
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.
What China hears...blah, blah, blah
