Posted on 01/21/2009 5:04:55 AM PST by Islaminaction
I can believe I'm seeing FReepers rushing to embrace the government to protect them from a small bank in Michigan.
Hey! Don’t argue with me about Islam, which is far more than simply a religion. I suppose if you lived during WWII and Nazism called itself a “religion” you would be all for allowing them to operate banks inside this nation too. If you’ll accept sharia banking now, then you’ll love sharia law later.
Thank you.
The UK has it much worse than us and they are having their first one law of all rally against sharia in early March. As they see the threat and how quickly it advances. Maybe Rudeone knows better though....
Hey! If you’ll accept sharia banking here in America now, you’ll love living under sharia law. Not me.
Please see my #84. Answer it, if you can. (Citations to Articles and Sections preferred).
I said LAWS, not washing. They can wash all they want, but sharia LAW itself cannot be brought here and they need that message to get their fantasy out of their minds.
I stand by what I said and if Islamists were reading this thread they would be laughing their asses off as people are actually defending them. Think long term, this just advances them. Next will be the battle of how hitting women is part of their “culture”, then it will be alcohol offends them....it is never ending right now.
The banking regulations in Sharia law are as follows, they must not charge interest, they must not charge undue (high) fees, they must not ‘gamble’ (generally accepted as risky investments.)
So, should it be illegal for a bank to choose not to charge interest? Should it be illegal for a bank to choose not to charge a high fee? Should it be illegal for a bank to choose not to invest in risky investments?
It already is illegal in our country to practice the Sharia law punishments for violating those rules. That doesn’t mean one can’t freely choose to follow the rules without imposing the punishments. You can’t blanket ban all of Sharia because many are personal practices or personal freedoms that we all are afforded. It is the blanket banning that many here are against. It is fine, and acceptable to oppose the parts of Sharia that violate our laws and do not work within a free society.
They use our freedoms against us. It they change America to suit Islam within the law, our future generations still lose.
Yes sharia banking should be made illegal and it only advances their agenda. It is fine and acceptable to oppose Islam and sharia.
It could lead to . . . dare I say it . . . sharia law.
I misread this. Did you see the lawsuit filled?
It did not involve this bank though.
http://islaminaction08.blogspot.com/2008/12/iraqi-war-vet-sues-govt-for-bailout-of.html
Its clear that you would find advantage in the dysfunction caused by people picking whatever system of law they want to use. When sovereign law is debased, it makes it easier for the “free traders” to avoid other constitutional constraints on them.
You should really educate yourself on Islam. It is much more than a religion.
*I think the other way we are being thrown is the term law. We are not talking about writing in the books a legal requirement to follow Sharia, the term 'law' in this case is like how many Christians follow the Noahadic laws, not as a legal definition regulation, but as personal guidelines.
I understand where you are coming from, you don't want the US legal system to adopt the requirement that Sharia law ('law' as in criminal or judicial standards) be required. Most people here are talking about the personal practice of the parts of Sharia law ('law' as in a personal morality) that are part of normal, individual freedoms.
We all are basically talking about two entirely different aspects of this.
Please don’t use the term “clear,” hedge. If you wanted to be clear you would have answered my comment #84.
So, should it be illegal for a bank to choose not to charge interest? Should it be illegal for a bank to choose not to charge a high fee? Should it be illegal for a bank to choose not to invest in risky investments?
What if the bank chose to just do this but not call it Sharia? Should those individual practices I mentioned be banned?
I do not care what Muslims are doing in their own homes, this is more than that. This is part of the their takeover plan, along with the alcohol and Christmas ban. If they want sharia banking let them move to an Islamic country. They did not need it all this time, but now they see us a politically correct and weak.
Gotta run, have a good one.
I read somewhere just yesterday that most of Kentucky’s counties are dry. If you propose to be consistent about banning alcohol bans, how do you propose handling the double standard?
One more time, sharia banking should be against the law.
Part of the money earned goes to Islamic “charities”. NO THANKS.
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.