Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
October 01, 2014, 03:40:50 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: ATTENTION ALL NEW MEMBERS
PLEASE READ THIS OR YOUR ACCOUNT MAY BE DELETED - CLICK HERE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Sharia law in Oklahoma?  (Read 2421 times)
bigbearomaha
Guest
« on: November 08, 2010, 08:19:44 PM »

FOX News- Sharia law in Oklahoma

I found this an interesting story.   I had read about it passing earlier.  Now,  I haven't read the judges written ruling but...

on one hand,  I think such a law might be redundant, because state and federal law have precedence over any agreements or community type courts.

On the other hand,  I believe  I have read of the U.S. Supreme court  possibly admitting cases from other countries such as the E.U. and the World Court and allowing them as setting precedence in some cases.

If this is correct, then there may be something to have concern with.

any other thoughts on this?

Big Bear
Logged
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5448


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2010, 09:25:58 PM »

This law would permit people to do something otherwise illegal in this country to be done under the name of religion. Such as stoning people for adultery,chopping hands off for stealing ,wife beating ,and other barbaric actions we have long since done away with.
Religious freedom is one thing,but barbaric behavior in the name of religion is something else.
Logged
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2010, 10:56:14 PM »

well, the actual law that Oklahoma voted for would prevent  state courts from using or allowing sharia law as precedence or in any other way

this judge shut that down.

Logged
Bee Happy
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1656


Location: Between Panama city, Florida and Dothan Al.

that's me - setting a phoenix free


« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2010, 03:11:53 AM »

I've been having a long think about this bear, still thinking, but they have definitely shown a pattern(s) of one-way tolerance and using or downplaying whatever facet of Islam will get them whatever thay want. To have Sharia law shot down in OK, they can now scream about the first amendment, (for them, just don't use a koran for kindling) Thing is the first amendment pertains to expression and religion (not assuming you didnt know that) - Islam is a total package in which the religion is a facet of a complete (totalitarian) system of government - (which will be played down).  look for a lot more battles of this nature under the first amendment.
Logged

be happy and make others happy.
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2010, 06:46:34 AM »

I agree with you, This is how they manage to make islam more than a religion, but a societal/cultural movement at the same time.  It tries to be everything to everybody.

in this situation though,  I see it somewhat similar to the legal situation as on the sovereign indian nations on the reservations here.

They have their own police and court systems.  In the end though, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that tribal/nation law does not overrule U.S. Federal law.  In fact, apparently depending on the State, like Nebraska, tribal law is still somewhat subject to state law, as seen in Nebraska with the State law against gambling and some of the tribes trying to set up casinos on their land.  The Sate so far has been successful in trumping tribal law.

I only use that as an example that regardless of the First amendment, religious belief attached to "law" shouldn't likely be accepted as precedent in the states or Federal courthouses.

sharia law has even less legal footing in the courts here in that there is no muslim sovereign nation as a tribe or nation.

What they do have though is legal footing in some countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc... and has influence on many cases presented to the world court as I mentioned earlier. 

it's something to watch.
Logged
winginit
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 262


Location: Batavia, Ohio


« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2010, 09:33:37 AM »

Sorry, but you can't beat your wife in the name of religion in this country. This is a HUGE waste of taxpayer money. The referendum was so badly considered that it's already been struck down.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/asma-uddin/caliphate-on-the-range_b_778207.html


 
Logged
Bee Happy
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1656


Location: Between Panama city, Florida and Dothan Al.

that's me - setting a phoenix free


« Reply #6 on: November 09, 2010, 09:43:57 AM »

I don't believe it can be dealt with on a local or state level. I think I said my bit before about adding an exception to the first which outlaws inherently violent religions. (there's plenty of examples in Europe of where one-way tolerance leads - it's only beginning here)
Logged

be happy and make others happy.
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5448


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2010, 10:26:09 AM »

I don't think the referendum was a waste of money.I believe in New Jersey a man was set free by a judge that had forced sex(raped) his wife because it is allowable under his religion of Sharia law.
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/08/07/new-jersey-judge-rules-islamic-sharia-law-trumps-u-s-law/
Is this what most Americans(majority that is) wants?  I don't think so.The last I knew the US was a sovereign nation not subject to sharia law.
We vcannot allow law written by radical clerics to trump the rule of law in the US.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15160


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2010, 10:35:38 AM »

i think it was O'Connell that referenced international laws in a decision.   not positive of the case, but i think it might have been the death penalty for minors.

the law can be re-written so that it is does not mention a specific religion.  it will probably be ok that way.  the first religion part of the 1st amendment was not written to apply to states, it specifically applies to the US congress, and has a specific direction to congress attached to it.

i don't have a problem with states seeing a potential problem and trying to get in front of it.  lots of states laws end up being test cases and other states can fine tune what they are doing to avoid problems. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
winginit
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 262


Location: Batavia, Ohio


« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2010, 10:39:06 AM »

You're right, bear, he was set free...but what you weren't told is that the court reversed it on appeal. A whole bunch of hype and taxpayer dollars spent on one stupid judge that was overturned. Sigh.

Logged
bigbearomaha
Guest
« Reply #10 on: November 09, 2010, 10:45:33 AM »

actually, that was buzzbee that mentioned that but...

to even allow sharia to be considered in the first place to need to be overturned by a higher court is uncalled for.

I think the others are right in re-wording the proposition to refer to any and all religions instead of pointing out just one.

Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15160


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #11 on: November 09, 2010, 10:55:33 AM »

Quote
I think I said my bit before about adding an exception to the first which outlaws inherently violent religions. (there's plenty of examples in Europe of where one-way tolerance leads - it's only beginning here)

yes, and the response in Europe and Canada was to outlaw things like "hate speech".  the problem with that is that identifying hate speech is a pretty subjective proposition.  it didn't take them long to realize this.  in order to be fair to all, hate speech has been dumbed down to include critical speech.  the effect has been to stifle free speech.

when you make exceptions there will always be those who will expand those exceptions.  pretty soon, you have no meaningful law.  if you need a modern example, look at the creep of gun regulations.  
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
winginit
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 262


Location: Batavia, Ohio


« Reply #12 on: November 09, 2010, 11:39:50 AM »

I'm no lawyer, but we allow plenty of international law to be considered in this country. Many of our global companies will sign contracts that specify that the contract will be adjudicated in a foreign court. So for instance, if a US company is doing business in France, it might agree to settle any disputes in the French courts. If it then tries to sue it's French partner in a New York court, the New York court should require it to use French courts. If we didn't allow that, then it would put a serious damper on our economy. One of the keys to getting foreign investment is to have a strong and stable set of laws and regulations that have a (somewhat) objective way of dealing with international law. And obviously there are plenty of US companies doing business in Middle Eastern countries.

And the thought that all muslims believe in Sharia law is more fear mongering. Sharia law is not the rule in all Middle Eastern countries and many muslims dislike it. In Egypt, for instance, people will commonly tell you that both men and women are supposed to dress modestly. Many women wear tight sexy clothing and don't wear anything covering their hair. Doing business in the middle east in the nineties, I only saw burkas on the Saudi women and in the desert. When in Rome, do as the Romans. I wore knee length skirts (all my suits were knee length anyway) and cap sleeves instead of sleeveless shirts. I could have dressed however I wanted, but it would have been impolite and impolitic.

I found Egyptians to be as nice as Midwesterners, maybe even nicer if that's possible. I've met many a loving, family oriented, kind hearted muslim. Sure there are some wacky ones, but we have those too. People are people. I'll never forget the saudi woman on a street corner. She had the whole black getup on, including a facemask! I was surrepticiously checking out her garb, but I didn't want to be rude and stare so I looked away when she looked at me. Suddenly, I realized she was checking out my garb, and trying not to be rude. We both smiled sheepishly at each other from across the street. Both feeling and doing the same thing even though we were from vastly different cultures, geographies, ethnicities, religions, etc. People are people.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15160


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2010, 11:55:02 AM »

corporations doing international business are not the same and US citizens under US law.  i thought we were talking about US criminal law?

Quote
And the thought that all Muslims believe in Sharia law is more fear mongering

i don't think anyone said they did.  however, since we have seen a movement in Canada, and have an example in the US of Sharia law considered in criminal cases, it's worth taking a second look. 

many mid-east and asian countries have been successful in having secular governments and protecting citizens.  however, they are at war also with the radical factions that would like Sharia law as the law of the land.  remember, the current radical movement was first directed at Muslim countries that were "to westernized".  we can not ignore that, as it has expanded outside the Muslim countries to all the world.  Sharia law is a part of Islam.  their religion and their government are one to the radicals. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
L Daxon
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 669


Location: Oklahoma City


« Reply #14 on: November 09, 2010, 01:38:09 PM »

I voted for it, as did 70+% of Oklahoma voters.  It forbids  judges from taking Sharia OR international law into account in Oklahoma cases.  Sounds good to me.
Logged

linda d
BeesNeeds
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29

Location: Hopelessly Lost


« Reply #15 on: November 09, 2010, 02:11:21 PM »

I've been watching this topic on another forum...
This one is currently on hold... A judge put a stop on it, greatly in part because of the specific wording. Apparently it is under review now so the wording can be revised as a more blanket coverage of not using laws that are not specific U.S. laws. There is the possibility of the restrictive wording of sharia law would be changed to a more general wording of religious laws. That would mean all holy books, all religions.
Logged

- bee -
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15160


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #16 on: November 09, 2010, 03:23:44 PM »

i'd guess that that's what the courts will require.  they will use the separation argument.  they will be wrong because there is nothing in the constitution that would prohibit OK enacting the law as written.  of course, the separation argument is wrong, but it will never be overturned.  even bad supreme court decisions live forever.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
BeesNeeds
New Bee
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29

Location: Hopelessly Lost


« Reply #17 on: November 09, 2010, 04:03:51 PM »

Wow Kathy, I'm not sure what you meant by you comment? Like you think the separation of church and state is wrong? Sorry.
Logged

- bee -
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2010, 04:20:40 PM »

There is nothing in the constitution about separation of church and state. It does say congress shall make no law for or against any religion. So when there are laws against crosses being worn in schools, against Ten Commandments in court houses, then they are breaking the laws of the constitution.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15160


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #19 on: November 09, 2010, 04:30:15 PM »

Quote
Like you think the separation of church and state is wrong?

the idea of separation as decided by the supreme court is not in the constitution.  it was not in the letter from Jefferson that they used as "intent" to make the ruling.  it was a phrase he used in reassuring the Danbury baptist church, that he would not make/allow a law that let the federal government favor a specific church.

1st Amendment
Congress (emphasis mine) shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

now...where is the separation of church and state?  how can this be applied to individual states if you also read this:

10th Amendment
Quote
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.286 seconds with 21 queries.

Google visited last this page September 17, 2014, 08:12:53 AM