Oklahoma bans sharia law

DaSleeper

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
Oklahoma election results: Oklahoma bans sharia law
4 November, 2010

Oklahoma election results: Oklahoma bans sharia law. A number of issues put for public voting in US elections had grabbed international attention. Legalization of Marijuana and ban Islamic Sharia law were the most talked about issues. As the results came some of these were opted by voters while others failed to win public support.

While the legalization of Marijuana or the Prop. 19 lost voters support in California, Oklahoma voters decided to ban Islamic Sharia law in the state . Today onwards, English would be the “common and unifying language,” in Oklahoma.

Very interestingly, people in Rhode Island decided to shed their slave trade legacy dropping the word “plantations” from the state’s official name. Massachusetts voters were not ready to bring a provision to cut the state sales tax.
Click to expand...
Oklahoma election results: Oklahoma bans sharia law :::: ndChronicle.com

C.A.I.R. not taking it........
Muslim group challenges Oklahoma sharia law ban


An update on that Oklahoma ballot initiative that (preemptively) bars state courts from considering sharia law (as well as international law): the Council on American-Islamic Relations is announcing a lawsuit challenging the measure, which passed overwhelmingly and amends the state's constitution, as violating the U.S. Constitution.

We don't have the text of the suit yet, but here's a local news report on the challenge:
Click to expand...

Muslim group challenges Oklahoma sharia law ban - War Room - Salon.com
 
I

Icarus27k

Council Member
Apr 4, 2010
1,508
7
38
YukonJack said:
Well, now, in addition to Arizona, Oklahoma will be in the cross hairs of the Obama administration.
Click to expand...

And both states should be. Just as when any US state does something unconstitutional. Oh, and yeah, a US federal judge placed an injunction against the Oklahoma "anti-Sharia" vote.

http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/argument.pdf


No state can just go around and violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment like how Oklahoma does here and just expect it to be okay.
 
Tonington

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
It clearly violates the Establishment clause. So many love to pick and choose the Constitution as it suits them....
 
eh1eh

eh1eh

Blah Blah Blah
Aug 31, 2006
10,749
103
48
Under a Lone Palm
Bar Sinister said:
Sharia law was ruled illegal in Canada. Why not Oklahoma?
Click to expand...

Freedom of religion is great. Even if it allows wearing disguises in public, which is a crime in Canada. Changing the laws of a country is taking it too far. Every citezen should be afforded the same rights and freedoms and not be subject to stone age barbaric religion based laws.
Or should this be allowed within our borders? By our borders I mean the free world.
 
CDNBear

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I see the usual suspects still think the the Constitution grants permission to any religion to act outside the greater law of the land, (so long as it's not practiced by white anglo saxon males) including the supremacy of the Constitution. Of which, Sharia, (a law written by men, based on the power in the belief of Islam, not enshrined by Islam) is in direct conflict with.

Good grief, some people are so blinded by their need to be PC, they'll ignore reality to do it.

lol...
 
Tonington

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Bar Sinister said:
Sharia law was ruled illegal in Canada. Why not Oklahoma?
Click to expand...

Do you mean in Ontario? Recently all ecclesiastical arbitration was banned by McGuinty. In Oklahoma they identfied only one. You can't allow Jews to use Beth Din settlements and not allow Sharia. The US Supreme Court has routinely held that the purpose of the establishment clause is that government cannot pass laws which would favour one religion or religions over others.

As there are parts of ecclesiastical laws which are compatible with US laws, it's permissible to use these laws as a basis for arbitration, so long as they are compliant with the local jurisdictions laws first and foremost.
 
CDNBear

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Tonington said:
Do you mean in Ontario? Recently all ecclesiastical arbitration was banned by McGuinty. In Oklahoma they identfied only one. You can't allow Jews to use Beth Din settlements and not allow Sharia.
Click to expand...
One encompasses civil litigation, while the other, both criminal and civil.

I bet in your attempt to be PC, you can't figure out which one is which.

The US Supreme Court has routinely held that the purpose of the establishment clause is that government cannot pass laws which would favour one religion or religions over others.
Click to expand...
Banning Sharia isn't showing favour to any other religion. Sharia is in complete contrast to the fundamentals of the Constitution, period.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

As there are parts of ecclesiastical laws which are compatible with US laws, it's permissible to use these laws as a basis for arbitration, so long as they are compliant with the local jurisdictions laws first and foremost.
Click to expand...
Hence why Sharia was banned.

Good grief.
 
Last edited:
ironsides

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
"there are more" phase sort of kills it. Wonder if anyone compared it to Christian and Jewish laws, there must be some commonality's that would make parts of it acceptable.
 
Tonington

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
CDNBear said:
Banning Sharia isn't showing favour to any other religion.
Click to expand...

Absolutely it does. If someone can use Jewish ecclesiastical law to arbitrate, but they can't use Muslim ecclesiastical law to arbitrate, the law is favouring religions, or if you want unfavouring a religion. That, has been ruled unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court. There's even a test, called the Lemon Test.

One encompasses civil litigation, while the other, both criminal and civil.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. Civil law from other frameworks can be used so long as it's compatible with local law, and there are parts of Sharia law that are, hence why it was used by some Muslims. Criminal law cannot be replaced by other frameworks. One deals with contracts between individuals, which so long as the state is satisfied that local law isn't circumvented, is deemed permissible. The other is between the state and individuals, and it's the states laws which have been broke when there is a trial. Obviously you can't choose which states laws you will adhere to.

In your attempt to troll, I bet you never thought of that.

:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom