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

I believe my point was fairly clear.

Indeed it was, very clear that you were flinging shit to see if it would stick.

Unless of course you are saying that the representatives in Texas who pushed for the above law and the people all over the internet cheering them on for it are not conservatives.

Ah, more loads of shit flung.

Focus: Irving Mayor - you know, the actual topic?

:lol:

You mean like all your posts in this thread, clown?
 
I believe my point was fairly clear.

Indeed it was, very clear that you were flinging shit to see if it would stick.

Unless of course you are saying that the representatives in Texas who pushed for the above law and the people all over the internet cheering them on for it are not conservatives.

Ah, more loads of shit flung.

Focus: Irving Mayor - you know, the actual topic?
Well the OP actually got the topic wrong. It should have been on why the muslims were angry at the mayor for being a bigot.
 
Nowhere in the OP does it show that Muslims are a bit angry or that the Irving City Council is doing anything more than a symbolic vote to appease the bigots in their community
 
Don't forget ISIS and flying planes into the twin towers

You know how them Mooslims are

You dims have no problem with cutting the clits off little girls, as long as they hate Americans and Christians, you love, love, love em! :thup:

:lol:

Why don't you stay on the topic of the Mayor of Irving, you pathetic whiny piece of shit?
 
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.

Judy Sheindlin retired from her position of "real judge" in 1996, and the set of her TV show is not a "real court of law" in any sense of the word.

It's binding arbitration. More or less the same thing.
 
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.

Judy Sheindlin retired from her position of "real judge" in 1996, and the set of her TV show is not a "real court of law" in any sense of the word.

It's binding arbitration. More or less the same thing.

Well, not exactly. Judge Judy is actually closer to private religious arbitration than a "real" court.
 
Well, not exactly. Judge Judy is actually closer to private religious arbitration than a "real" court.

Do you ever post anything that is accurate and honest?

{
Arbitration is a legal method for resolving disputes outside the court. The disputing parties present their cases to a neutral, third-party arbitrator or arbitrators who hear the case, examine the evidence, and make a (usually binding) decision. Like a court-based case, arbitration is adversarial, but generally less formal in its rules and procedures.

The power that Judge Judy and the rest of the TV arbitrators have over the disputing parties is granted by a contract, specific to their case, that they sign before appearing on the show. These contracts make the arbitrators' decision final and binding, prevent the disputing parties from negotiating the terms of the arbitration, and allow the "judges" wide discretion on procedural and evidentiary rules during the arbitration.}

http://mentalfloss.com/article/29829/what-legal-authority-does-judge-judy-have

It's binding arbitration with the full weight of law.
 
Well, not exactly. Judge Judy is actually closer to private religious arbitration than a "real" court.

Do you ever post anything that is accurate and honest?

{
Arbitration is a legal method for resolving disputes outside the court. The disputing parties present their cases to a neutral, third-party arbitrator or arbitrators who hear the case, examine the evidence, and make a (usually binding) decision. Like a court-based case, arbitration is adversarial, but generally less formal in its rules and procedures.

The power that Judge Judy and the rest of the TV arbitrators have over the disputing parties is granted by a contract, specific to their case, that they sign before appearing on the show. These contracts make the arbitrators' decision final and binding, prevent the disputing parties from negotiating the terms of the arbitration, and allow the "judges" wide discretion on procedural and evidentiary rules during the arbitration.}

What Legal Authority Does Judge Judy Have?

It's binding arbitration with the full weight of law.

...only because both parties sign a contract to that effect beforehand.
 
[


...only because both parties sign a contract to that effect beforehand.

Well no shit, that's how ADR works.

In Texas, the Arbitrator must have legal training for the arbitration to be binding. The Imams lack such training and cannot pass binding rulings, regardless of the leftist desire for theocracy.

The Irving mayor was correct in her statement. The only story here is that you leftists are outraged that theocratic courts were not established.
 
Thank you for proving my point so succinctly. In the words of some moron on the internet:

Ad hom is all you have.. :eusa_whistle:

I grabbed a mitt and started flinging your turds back to you.

:lol:

Is that some more of that conservative "personal responsibility"? It's my fault that you're making a fool out of yourself?
 

Forum List

Back
Top