Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops “Sharia Court”

[Uncensored2008]

[

here in the united states? i'm going with never.

When is the last time Jews stoned anyone, anywhere in the world?

A thousand years ago? More?

The democrats BFF's do it every day.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Third party civil arbitration is completely legal in the US.

Without means of enforcement such arbitration is pointless.

Judge Judy is legally binding if the participants agree that it is beforehand.

Judith Sheindlin is a real judge in a real court of law.

You did not type that, did you?

Tell me you left your computer on and your boss came along, saw you were pissing away his money decided to get even with you.

SAY IT AIN'T SO!

 

[Coyote]

[

here in the united states? i'm going with never.

When is the last time Jews stoned anyone, anywhere in the world?

A thousand years ago? More?

The democrats BFF's do it every day.

Who cares? No one is going to stone anyone in the US.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

For the upteenth time, let's try to stick to reality. What civil penalties are they seeking to impose - surely you can come up with an informational link with out a brain spasm?

LOL! See...?

I told you it was beyond your means.

I don't have a crayon font, so there's no way for me to dumb it down any further than to simply say, that the Islamic Cult sought the permission of the City to stand as a Court, wherein ANY CIVIL JUDGMENT THAT THEY MAKE, WOULD BE A CIVIL PENALTY. WHAT EVER THEY JUDGE, WOULD BE A CIVIL JUDGMENT.

ANYTHING... WHATEVER ... THEY ... SAID~

Despite knowing it will not, I DO hope that helps.

 

[ogibillm]

Reader, be sure to take a moment to scan this thread and note that without exception, each individual advocating on behalf of Islam, is a Socialist.

That is all you need to know, to understand why:

THERE ARE NO LEFTIST AMERICANS!​

what should be noticed is those advocating against freedom are fascists, without exception.

 

[ogibillm]

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Nothing.

Most of these are civil cases involving marriage, divorce, contracts.

Which are all public institutions subject to law and not subject to private arbitration. These are Muslims and Muslims have always meant Sh'ria law to have the force of law behind it. One has to be willingly blind to see nothing short of this will satisfy them.

Actually, all of those things can be subject to "private arbitration", as my parent's divorce was.

Your delusions of what those scary muslims really want are irrelevant.

You still owe me an apology, one that you agreed to give. Until that happens, I have NOTHING to say to you.

The less you say to anyone the better. You probably embarrass everyone around you whenever you start talking.

careful, he'll go after your cat.

 

[ogibillm]

For the upteenth time, let's try to stick to reality. What civil penalties are they seeking to impose - surely you can come up with an informational link with out a brain spasm?

LOL! See...?

I told you it was beyond your means.

I don't have a crayon font, so there's no way for me to dumb it down any further than to simply say, that the Islamic Cult sought the permission of the City to stand as a Court, wherein ANY CIVIL JUDGMENT THAT THEY MAKE, WOULD BE A CIVIL PENALTY. WHAT EVER THEY JUDGE, WOULD BE A CIVIL JUDGMENT.

ANYTHING... WHATEVER ... THEY ... SAID~

Despite knowing it will not, I DO hope that helps.

sought permission... where do you get that information?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Who cares? No one is going to stone anyone in the US.

LOL!

This reminds me of a response I received on the night of September 10th, 2001, after I had asserted that it was only a matter of time before the longstanding Clinton Policy promoting the interests of our enemies would result in our being injured... . The response was: "[Keys] no one is going to attack the United States...".

 

[Asclepias]

For the upteenth time, let's try to stick to reality. What civil penalties are they seeking to impose - surely you can come up with an informational link with out a brain spasm?

LOL! See...?

I told you it was beyond your means.

I don't have a crayon font, so there's no way for me to dumb it down any further than to simply say, that the Islamic Cult sought the permission of the City to stand as a Court, wherein ANY CIVIL JUDGMENT THAT THEY MAKE, WOULD BE A CIVIL PENALTY. WHAT EVER THEY JUDGE, WOULD BE A CIVIL JUDGMENT.

ANYTHING... WHATEVER ... THEY ... SAID~

Despite knowing it will not, I DO hope that helps.

sought permission... where do you get that information?

He heard it from his parrot.

 

[ogibillm]

Who cares? No one is going to stone anyone in the US.

LOL!

This reminds me of a response I received on the night of September 10th, 2001, after I had asserted that it was only a matter of time before the longstanding Clinton Policy promoting the interests of our enemies would result in our being injured... . The response was: "[Keys] no one is going to attack the United States...".

lol. you are such a liar.

 

[rightwinger]

"Texas law requires arbitration to be conducted by retired judges at law." More made up shit.

Here is the actual Texas law on arbitration. It says nothing remotely like what you claim.

CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE CHAPTER 154. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES

Here are the required qualifications of the third party to arbitrate:

Sec. 154.052. QUALIFICATIONS OF IMPARTIAL THIRD PARTY. (a) Except as provided by Subsections (b) and (c), to qualify for an appointment as an impartial third party under this subchapter a person must have completed a minimum of 40 classroom hours of training in dispute resolution techniques in a course conducted by an alternative dispute resolution system or other dispute resolution organization approved by the court making the appointment.

(b) To qualify for an appointment as an impartial third party under this subchapter in a dispute relating to the parent-child relationship, a person must complete the training required by Subsection (a) and an additional 24 hours of training in the fields of family dynamics, child development, and family law.

(c) In appropriate circumstances, a court may in its discretion appoint a person as an impartial third party who does not qualify under Subsection (a) or (b) if the court bases its appointment on legal or other professional training or experience in particular dispute resolution processes.

Had your Imams completed the training required, comrade?


Also, what you list is mediation, not binding arbitration.

For binding arbitration the requirement is as I stated:

{
The TAA sets forth specific procedures for the handling of arbitrations. For the most part, the
procedures to be followed are those that were specified
by the parties themselves in their own agreement.
Lacking the details in such an agreement, the court may appoint qualified arbitrators to proceed.
Tex.Civ.Prac.&Rem.Code § 171.041. Under the TAA, duly appointed arbitrators may issue subpoenas,
adminis
ter oaths, hear evidence and decide cases. Parties at arbitration have a right to be heard, present
evidence and cross examine witnesses.
Id.
at § 171.047. An arbitrat
ion
award must be in writing and
signed by each arbitrator, and an award may be enforc
ed by the courts.
Likewise, the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) also recognizes the right of parties to agree to
resolve their disputes by arbitration. In instances where there is some disagreement between the TAA and
the FAA, the Federal Act prevails. It
provides for procedures that are generally similar to those found in
the TAA. The Federal Arbitration Act, found in Title 9 of the United States Code was first enacted in
1925 and has since been revised from time to time. The United States Supreme Court
has repeatedly held
that an agreement between parties pursuant to the FAA to arbitrate will be enforced even over objections
or contrary provisions of state law.
See
e.g.
Preston v. Ferrer
, 522 U.S. 346 (2008).}

http://fletcherfarley.com/articles/Alternative Dispute Resolution in Texas.pdf

Has nothing to do with members of a religion resolving conflicts internally

It is done not just by Muslims but Christians, Mormons, Amish, Orthodox Jews and Scientologists

Exactly my point. So what more are Muslims seeking that goes beyond the rights of all private organizations that they should be mad at this law?

Who said they were seeking anything other than an apology?

I did. I said they were seeking the right to impose civil penalties like government can because that's what Sh'ria law is all about and nothing short of that will satisfy this evil religion.

Show where they asked for the right to impose civil penalties

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I guess the coolest part of all of this is that the Left's point is MOOT... as the Sharia Council is now officially ILLEGAL in Irvine, TX. And ALL Islamic Councils will be illegal rather soon, throughout Texas, on the whole.

 

[toxicmedia]

so judge judy is illegal? the people's court is illegal? jewish and amish courts... illegal?
why aren't you protesting them?

incidentally, none of those are illegal.

Does Judge Judy have also have a 1200 year record of employing mass-murder as a means to acquire political power? I wasn't aware?

(Reader Judge Judy considers civil matters to which the parties sign contracts within the scope of the program... Judge Judy does not have any authority over the individuals and she cannot use law enforcement to enforce her rulings. Where the individuals fail to adhere to her ruling, the prevailing parties would need to seek judgement from a duly appointed court to enforce such.

By seeking sanction from the City of Irvine, the Muslims were seeking to increase their perceived authority... a first step to becoming recognized as an ACTUAL "AUTHORITY".)

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Ummmm...maybe because they are trying to exercize their religious beliefs?

Their religious beliefs entail the application of religious law.

Right.

Their religious beliefs entail adherence to their religious law.

it's not like these Muslims are saying everyone in Irving, who is Muslim, has to go before thier courts, instead of our courts.

I bet if a Muslim stole a car, and was tried in their court...the crime within the state of Texas would supercede it.

Furthermore, I'm sure the state of Texas would not allow them to execute people

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Does Judge Judy have also have a 1200 year record of employing mass-murder as a means to acquire political power? I wasn't aware?

(Reader Judge Judy considers civil matters to which the parties sign contracts within the scope of the program... Judge Judy does not have any authority over the individuals and she cannot use law enforcement to enforce her rulings. Where the individuals fail to adhere to her ruling, the prevailing parties would need to seek judgement from a duly appointed court to enforce such.

By seeking sanction from the City of Irvine, the Muslims were seeking to increase their perceived authority... a first step to becoming recognized as an ACTUAL "AUTHORITY".)

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Ummmm...maybe because they are trying to exercize their religious beliefs?

Their religious beliefs entail the application of religious law.

Right.

Their religious beliefs entail adherence to their religious law.

Oh its MUCH worse than that.

The "Religious Law" is whatever the Religious Leader SAYS the Law is. It's raw Relativism... absent a scintilla of objectivity.

It's no different than putting Leftists on the Supreme Court. In short order that judicial body is converted into a Supreme Legislature; as we recently witnessed in their move to federally license degeneracy.

 

[toxicmedia]

Where is it ever mentioned that the Muslim Court is seeking any "sanction" from the City of Irvine?

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Ummmm...maybe because they are trying to exercize their religious beliefs?

Their religious beliefs entail the application of religious law.

Right.

Their religious beliefs entail adherence to their religious law.

Oh its MUCH worse than that.

The "Religious Law" is whatever the Religious Leader SAYS the Law is. It's raw Relativism... absent a scintilla of objectivity.

It's no different than putting Leftists on the Supreme Court. In short order that judicial body is converted into a Supreme Legislature; as we recently witnessed in their move to federally license degeneracy.

But it doesn't sound like anyone is being forced to adhere to the religious law in question.

That's the only problem.

Are beheadings and sexual mutilations going on?...or things happening that are against Texas state law?

 

[Uncensored2008]

It can only be used for civil cases.

Civil cases require binding arbitration. That means a legal professional appointed by the courts.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The better question is, why are they seeking anything more than what any church does when there's an offense. Disciplinary action is decided upon within their power and anything from a rebuke to full disfellowship is applied. Any religion can do this, so what the hell do Muslims want above and beyond this?

Ummmm...maybe because they are trying to exercize their religious beliefs?

Their religious beliefs entail the application of religious law.

Right.

Their religious beliefs entail adherence to their religious law.

Oh its MUCH worse than that.

The "Religious Law" is whatever the Religious Leader SAYS the Law is. It's raw Relativism... absent a scintilla of objectivity.

It's no different than putting Leftists on the Supreme Court. In short order that judicial body is converted into a Supreme Legislature; as we recently witnessed in their move to federally license degeneracy.

But it doesn't sound like anyone is being forced to adhere to the religious law in question.

That's the only problem.

Are beheadings and sexual mutilations going on?...or things happening that are against Texas state law?

They have no power. Therefore... their decree is presently meaningless.

What you need to understand is that what they're doing HERE... and NOW, is what they did throughout the North Africa and the Mediterranean for 9 hundred years. It's what they did in Asia, it's what they're doing in the West-Pac, its what they're doing to the Euro-peons... .

THIS is how 'it is done'.

Take a search of "Dearborn, MI" and read for yourself how its working out there.

 

[Camp]

Why is the mayor and a city council getting involved with the inner workings of a religious institution? Shouldn't it be the Attorney General and law enforcement to handle any situations that run foul of the local and state laws? Why would we want or allow a chief executive and or legislature to supervise how a religion practices their religion? That town is going to be buying real estate and building a big beautiful mosque for the folks they are depriving of their constitutional rights to worship as they please.

 

[Uncensored2008]

But it doesn't sound like anyone is being forced to adhere to the religious law in question.

That's the only problem.

Are beheadings and sexual mutilations going on?...or things happening that are against Texas state law?

Of course there are.

Anywhere their are Muslims, there will be genital mutilation.

{More than half a million women and girls in the U.S. are at risk of undergoing FGM in the U.S. or abroad, or have already undergone the procedure, including 166,173 under the age of 18, according to the Population Reference Bureau (PRB).}

http://www.newsweek.com/fgm-rates-have-doubled-us-2004-304773

 

[ogibillm]

I guess the coolest part of all of this is that the Left's point is MOOT... as the Sharia Council is now officially ILLEGAL in Irvine, TX. And ALL Islamic Councils will be illegal rather soon, throughout Texas, on the whole.

it really isn't.