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

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.
Not even close
It is prize money and all judgements are taken from the pot of money.
 
[


...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.

Oh wow! You almost made a whole post with resorting to an ad-hom fallacy!

The Irving mayor was not "correct" about anything in her statement, which was nothing more than an enormous pile of rile-up-the-scared-white-people fear mongering.

The "Islamic Tribunal" of Texas has never claimed, suggested, or even implied that it's decisions were legally binding.
 
[


...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.
Nothing is binding about the decisions of the Imams. You can still go to court if you want........but your fellow worshippers will not be pleased if you do
 
Oh wow! You almost made a whole post with resorting to an ad-hom fallacy!

The Irving mayor was not "correct" about anything in her statement, which was nothing more than an enormous pile of rile-up-the-scared-white-people fear mongering.

The "Islamic Tribunal" of Texas has never claimed, suggested, or even implied that it's decisions were legally binding.


Oh wow, you almost made a whole post without spewing racist bullshit.

Oh wait, no you didn't.
 
Only Texas is afraid of Sharia Law and demands their lawmakers protect them from the Muslims
 
Oh wow! You almost made a whole post with resorting to an ad-hom fallacy!

The Irving mayor was not "correct" about anything in her statement, which was nothing more than an enormous pile of rile-up-the-scared-white-people fear mongering.

The "Islamic Tribunal" of Texas has never claimed, suggested, or even implied that it's decisions were legally binding.


Oh wow, you almost made a whole post without spewing racist bullshit.

Oh wait, no you didn't.

:lol:

Mindlessly playing the race card? That's a new one for you.

Show me the "racism".
 
Nothing is binding about the decisions of the Imams. You can still go to court if you want........but your fellow worshippers will not be pleased if you do

Exactly, it is not arbitration and has zero weight of law. The attempt to portray this as Sharia COURT violated the state law.

What "attempt" to portray this as a "Sharia court"?

The only people who "attempted" to do that were morons on the internet, and the Mayor of Irving.
 
Nothing is binding about the decisions of the Imams. You can still go to court if you want........but your fellow worshippers will not be pleased if you do

Exactly, it is not arbitration and has zero weight of law. The attempt to portray this as Sharia COURT violated the state law.

How is it a violation?

They are a religious group providing judgements on consenting members It is the Texas fear mongerers who are calling it a Sharia COURT
 
But if a married couple agrees to go to a muslim court to resolve their differences there is little a grandstanding mayor can do
There is plenty she can do. If both parties agree to a muslim courts findings...say for example they have a gay son...and the court stones him to death or allows the parents to stone him to death in their back yard, that ain't gonna fly. It is against OUR laws.

Yeah, no shit. What's your point?
No point. Just saying there is something the mayor can do.
What's YOUR point?

It's nice to see you admit that you had no actual point in bringing up stoning people to death.

But that makes me wonder why you mentioned it in the first place...
Because that is part of Sharia law. So are honor killings.
 
:lol:

Mindlessly playing the race card? That's a new one for you.

Show me the "racism".


"
which was nothing more than an enormous pile of rile-up-the-scared-white-people fear mongering."


Nothing you Commies hate more than white people..

Well, maybe Christians.

White Christians get y'all sputtering with hate.

:lol:

Jesus Christ, grow the fuck up.

I'm whiter than you are, and you're making radical feminists look like Donald Trump with your bullshit race card victimhood.
 
There is plenty she can do. If both parties agree to a muslim courts findings...say for example they have a gay son...and the court stones him to death or allows the parents to stone him to death in their back yard, that ain't gonna fly. It is against OUR laws.

Yeah, no shit. What's your point?
No point. Just saying there is something the mayor can do.
What's YOUR point?

It's nice to see you admit that you had no actual point in bringing up stoning people to death.

But that makes me wonder why you mentioned it in the first place...
Because that is part of Sharia law. So are honor killings.

According to whose interpretation of Sharia law?
The people who follow it....mostly the extremists. Are you saying none of them are here in the US, and/or are you saying you are FOR Sharia law in the USA?
 
Yeah, no shit. What's your point?
No point. Just saying there is something the mayor can do.
What's YOUR point?

It's nice to see you admit that you had no actual point in bringing up stoning people to death.

But that makes me wonder why you mentioned it in the first place...
Because that is part of Sharia law. So are honor killings.

According to whose interpretation of Sharia law?
The people who follow it....mostly the extremists. Are you saying none of them are here in the US, and/or are you saying you are FOR Sharia law in the USA?
Muslims are capable of adapting their implementation of Sharia to our country. You can safely sleep knowing they will not be coming to cut your head off
 

Forum List

Back
Top