Posted on 03/21/2015 9:30:48 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Excerpted from Mad World News: The first Islamic Sharia Court in the U.S. just got some very bad news, and Muslims are not happy.
In a close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. It basically would slam the door in their faces, preventing them from spreading Sharia throughout the country. Now they are accusing the city council of unfairly being targeted.
All four of the “voluntary” court’s lawyers were unlicensed in the state of Texas, a third degree felony. Mayor Beth Van Duyne received several phone calls on the matter. It seems that the Islamic Tribunal not only was unlicensed, but they failed to notify the city of their illegal court being operated in city limits. She promised to get to the bottom of it, and she did.
By their own website’s admission, if U.S. law conflicts with Sharia law, “we follow Sharia law.” It also openly admitted separate rules for men and women in their proceedings, discriminating and humiliating women which is against the U.S. Constitution. The Islamic Tribunal also openly declared that they hope will “set a precedence that will be emulated and duplicated throughout the country.”
The more the mayor looked into it, the more it was apparent that they were attempting to establish a foothold using her city. She made a public Facebook post stating that she would back the new Texas law. She states that it was apparent that Zia Sheikh, imam at the Islamic Center of Irving, and the other Imams were “bypassing American courts” to make rulings under Sharia. Sheikh demanded an apology and wanted her Facebook post removed, which stated she would “fight with every fiber of my being” if the group was violating basic rights.
heikh says he just “asked her to clarify a statement … which seemed very Islamophobic.”
“She flat-out refused,” he said. “She said, ‘My statement wasn’t inflammatory in any way, shape or form.’” (Dallas Morning News)
Her office then asked for them to support the American Laws for American Courts bill and to abide by the Constitution. Sheikh instead flew off the handle.
“We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.” (Dallas Morning News)
The meeting was filled by Muslims from the Council for American-Islamic Relations, a known terrorist organization. They even tried to paint the vote as Islamaphobia and bigotry.
“This continues efforts by elected officials who seek to score points with their voting base by demonizing Muslims,” Alia Salem, who directs the North Texas chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, told the City Council before Thursday’s vote. She said it had a choice between “diversity” and “hatred, fear and bigotry.” (Dallas Morning News)
The state bill doesn’t even mention Muslims or Islam. It states no specific foreign law. Keep reading
The Muslim who said this meant that he considers God’s Law superior to Man’s. So do most Christians. At least if they follow the Bible.
“The apostles were brought in and made to appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,” he said. “Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man’s blood.” Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings!”
When God’s law and man’s law directly conflict, any Christian should follow God’s law, accepting the legal consequences cheerfully.
the important part of the issue is that whether they follow sharia or not does not affect their legal position in this country in any way.
If someone is accused, arrested and indicted on rape charges, the local DA will prosecute.
See the link in my #59.
Sharia is -Not- what one would want if faced with a situation as those girls in britain.
That’s because you didn’t post three replies, you posted one reply three times.
It doesn’t change the obvious fact that these are not courts in any meaningful sense, they are at best arbitration boards. If and when someone tries to enforce their rulings on unwilling people, I’ll be glad to stomp all over them.
Until then, it’s much ado about nothing at all.
That is, of course, the defining characteristic of Law, that it can be imposed on you against your will. If it doesn’t have that, it’s a suggestion, not a Law.
“Sharia is -Not- what one would want if faced with a situation as those girls in britain.”
I would then advise you that if you are indicted by a voluntary Muslim court that you not show up it trial.
I would agree if this person had not stated that Sharia is above US law.
If it is a moral or religious matter...who cares? But it doesn’t appear to be the case.
I don’t like sharia law principles.
But they have no legal power, and rape is a crime under our laws and will be handled accordingly, whether the Muslims involved like it or not.
They may of course refuse to cooperate or testify, but then people do that all the time for all sorts of reasons.
BTW, the present common interpretation of sharia law with regard to rape is not only a corruption, it’s an exact reversal of the clear intent of the Koran.
many thanks;
the important part was in the “rest of the story”.
No sharia law ! Not now, not ever!
America, wake up! I hope the new President confronts this head on. 597 more days of this crap. .
You posted three replies to my one posting. Why would you do that? Other than being neurotic?
As long as it is voluntary, they have no power and no party can be completed to attend or punished.
The city will lose in a real US Court.
It's the same exact thing.
Three different comments?
Racists.
You replied three different times to my comment. You’re the one who started it.
The public disgrace associated with being branded a “racist” is not (yet) a crime.
If I’m having a dispute with my neighbor on the west and the two of us agree to accept the arbitration of the guy across the street, it’s simply nobody else’s business.
Now if I refuse to accept the ruling, and my two neighbors band together to try to force me to accept it, that’s a crime, and they can be prosecuted if they break the law.
Up until these courts break the law, they should be beneath the notice of our legal system. When they do break the law, nail em.
From the article:
“...By their own website’s admission, if U.S. law conflicts with Sharia law, “we follow Sharia law.”
It also openly admitted separate rules for men and women in their proceedings, discriminating and humiliating women which is against the U.S. Constitution.
The Islamic Tribunal also openly declared that they hope will “set a precedence that will be emulated and duplicated throughout the country.” ....”
OK, what about the statements made by the group trying to become a supposed voluntary place of arbitration?
they plainly state that they don’t care about the u.s. or state constitution.
I must respectfully disagree with your position.
Most Christian law and US law are in agreement, is it not?
After reading the Koran and seeing the bastardization of it’s translations I don’t accept the teachings. I, nor does the law of the land, accept their teachings.
We must absolutely obey God over man, I agree. But whose God should we obey?
The fact that this made to court at all tells me that there is a problem. Or we wouldn’t know anything about it.
Since you posted multiple responses to my previous post and blamed me, I understand that it would be confusing for you, Ahmed.
“OK, what about the statements made by the group trying to become a supposed voluntary place of arbitration?”
If they sent you summons, would you feel compelled to attend the proceedings?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.