Posted on 09/21/2010 12:26:08 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Radical Islam is presently the largest threat to Western civilization, a fact well understood by Progressive leftists like Robinson. The radical left has made common cause with radical Islam because they both hate America, and frequently seek to hide their collaboration by the time-tested techniques of ridicule and reverse-accusation.
A judge in New Jersey(that’s in America, Eugene) ruled a Muslim could not be convicted of raping his wife because it is not illegal to do so in the country he emigrated from. A higher court ruled differently.
bump
There are several, very different issues at stake here.
First and foremost are the hideous statements made by some of the justices on the Supreme Court of the United States.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says that American courts should look more to foreign court rulings and international law in interpreting our Constitution. Does this include Sharia Law?
Justices Stephen Breyer, and Anthony Kennedy have also advanced similar arguments. So have ex-Justices Stevens and O’Connor.
Justice Breyer cited judicial decisions from Jamaica, India, Zimbabwe, and the European Court of Human Rights.
Justice Kennedy cited an action by the British Parliament, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the European Court of Human Rights.
Justice Stevens went so far as to cite a non-existent “World Community”. What, a world opinion poll? What other nations ‘sort of’ do?
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor added fuel to the controversy over foreign precedents, predicting that “over time we will rely increasingly, or take notice at least increasingly, of international and foreign courts in examining domestic issues.”
And though she is a new member of the liberal side of the court, is there any doubt what Justice Kagan will do?
What makes this worse is that for many years, US courts have respected the right of Jewish people to have their own civil courts, as long as they are non-coercive, and respectful to the rights of all parties before them. So there is a precedent of religious exemption.
But Sharia Law is an inherently different thing from Jewish Law. It is inherently coercive, both directly and indirectly, it does not respect the idea of equality before the law, and it is “disorderly”, or in a negative connotation “whimsical”, so that situations of equal merit will have completely different outcomes. There is no semblance of fairness or equity involved.
So Mr. Gingrich has a very good point. Judges within the United States can at times demonstrate good judgment. However, this is very different from permitting them to establish their own rules for judgment. And one very important, even essential rule, must be that they may *only* judge over the laws of this nation, codified and set into print.
Anything else, be it foreign law, religious law, or any other contrivance of law outside of US law, *or* convoluted precedent, made by countless judges that effectively decree that “night is day” from the bench, must be ignored.
Their job, their only job, is to judge situations based on US law, within the authorized jurisdiction of their court.
I think you mean Venona.
Way too soon.
I’m sure Eugene would defend some Christian right group that advocated honor killings and “murder for hire” jobs against cartoonist they didn’t like... /s
Oh, wait - I forgot - Right wing Christians don't kiss gullible liberal butt - so Eugene would condemn Christians - for the same thing he gives a 'pass' to Muslims for...
Eugene - remember when separate but unequal was insulting and degrading? It's the same with unequal "news" reporting.
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.