Posted on 11/04/2010 3:47:34 PM PDT by Osage Orange
Edited on 11/05/2010 7:31:50 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The people have spoken!!!!
STFU!!!
Stand your ground Oklahoma, tell these thugs to take a hike. America supports you.
Oklahoma muslim tries to ram his religion down his neighbor’s throats.
Well, I don’t know why you would want to disallow Islamic bras but if you did, that would explain the retraining order.
Maybe Coons could show them the “separation clause” as justification for the prohibition.
Since Obama has taken over the presidency ,the Muslims have felt empowered. By his actions,comments,he perpetuates the impression that we will cater ,accommodate etc to make them as happy as possible. Can you feel the love?
misinformation and fear.
God Bless the people of Oklahoma! The birthplace of my mother~
It is because Islamic law is based on FEAR! It is based on putting a large portion of it’s people~women~under the thumbs of overbearing men.
Way to go Oklahoma!
Anybody got any tar and feathers handy?
Moslems do not make laws ~ they accept laws laid down in courts over 1,000 years ago.
I don't think this guy has a chance in Oklahoma courts, nor in federal courts. After all, if it can be neither repealed, nor changed in any way IT'S NOT A LAW as we understand it.
You better zip it though...Muneer Awad...might take offense.
Ha!!
I love that name....what Awad!!
Based on fear?? Is that Arabic for truth?? Show this Muslim clown the door.
You mean there's more than one?
If I were in Oklahoma, I would file a law suit claiming the opposite: Sharia and Inl law is unconstitutional!
Apparently, not only did Obama not get the message on Tuesday, these clowns didn’t either.
Bring it on Muneer Awad........
You will lose this fight!
I wouldn’t recommend Oklahoma for those wanting Muslim law.
The international law part, on the other hand, is unconstitutional, as worded. International law includes treaties. Under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, treaties are the "Supreme Law of the Land," and take precedence over any state law to the contrary. For example, a state court hearing a child custody case is required to follow The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction if it is applicable.
I don't think this is what the drafters of the referendum meant to do-- they were thinking of foreign law, which is not the same as international law-- but it is what they said.
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.