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

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Every Muslim follows sharia law as they understand it.

Hey! LOOK! It's Relativism!

LOL!

I say it HERE and it comes out ^ THERE! ^

You can NOT make this crap up!

 

[rightwinger]

Every Muslim follows sharia law as they understand it.

Hey! LOOK! It's Relativism!

LOL!

I say it HERE and it comes out ^ THERE! ^

You can NOT make this crap up!

There are no absolutes

Only to conservatives and they are absolutely wrong

 

[paddymurphy]

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.

Do you ever read the posts you are commenting on? The only thing the idiots on council voted on was whether or not to support efforts to pass a state law banning foreign law from Texas Courts. They did not ban anything in Irving. The law will not ban Islamic ADR panels. To the extent it is worded to target any particular faith or faith in general as a basis for alternate dispute resolution panels, it will be declared unconstitutional just like the law in Oklahoma was in this decision: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/sharia2.pdf.

 

[paddymurphy]

It can only be used for civil cases.

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

No. It means an arbitrator or arbitrators selected by the parties. Usually from a list provided by an alternate dispute resolution company or organization.

 

[paddymurphy]

What civil penalties?

Whatever penalty the islamic Kangaroo Court declares. The point of going to the city was to gain the authority representative OF the City.

Don't burden yourself by trying to understand, as despite such being the most elementary of equations... it is well above your means to understand.

again, why do you think they went to the city? maybe for a business license but that'd be all

Read the fucking article. They did not go to the city. The city council passed a resolution supporting efforts to pass a state law. Jesus but you people are morons.

 

[paddymurphy]

What civil penalties?

Whatever penalty the islamic Kangaroo Court declares. The point of going to the city was to gain the authority representative OF the City.

Don't burden yourself by trying to understand, as despite such being the most elementary of equations... it is well above your means to understand.

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?

Don't be thick. They're seeking the right to impose whatever penalties they deem fit and as part of their strategy, they're omitting specifics. We don't have to give you the specifics they choose not to disclose, nor can we. But you're not the only one asking that question which is why Texas saw fit to pass the law banning the practice.

They did not pass the law.
Anti-Sharia Bill Dead, but Sentiment Alive

 

[paddymurphy]

Nothing screams "small government" than making laws based on fears of boogeymen.

What law was made?

Enforcing existing law is not making laws.

Correct. The so called anti sharia law simply stated this:

Sec. 1A.002. DECISION BASED ON FOREIGN LAW. A ruling or decision of a court, arbitrator, or administrative adjudicator under this title may not be based on a foreign law if the application of that law would violate a fundamental right guaranteed by the United States Constitution or the constitution or a statute of this state.

No decision by a court, arbitrator or administrative adjudicator can be applied in such as way that it violates a fundamental right protected by they US constitution, the state constitution or state law NOW. This law is not necessary.

 

[paddymurphy]

What civil penalties?

Whatever penalty the islamic Kangaroo Court declares. The point of going to the city was to gain the authority representative OF the City.

Don't burden yourself by trying to understand, as despite such being the most elementary of equations... it is well above your means to understand.

Nothing in the OP says they went to the city for anything

It is the city going after them

The city voted to support a state law that was defeated in the State House. Nothing more.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[paddymurphy]

Nothing screams "small government" than making laws based on fears of boogeymen.

What law was made?

Enforcing existing law is not making laws.

Its not an existing law idiot. Thats why Texas is voting on it this week.

They are not voting on it this week. Irving council made asses of themselves in February of this year. The Texas House rejected this asinine bill. Islamic arbitration panels, applying principles of Sharia law to civil disputes, continue to exist and function in Texas and across the US and all of the bigots who object are powerless, because of the US constitution, to stop them.

 

[paddymurphy]

I guess you haven't been paying attention.

This is the law that I'm referring to:

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/billtext/pdf/HB00562I.pdf

I guess you didn't read the OP or any subsequent posts.

The Irving Mayor didn't create state law.

No, she did not. Her council, in February, supported a law that was rejected by the Texas House in May.

 

[paddymurphy]

[


...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.

Legal training? Yes. Be lawyers? No.

Larry Maxwell is a member of The National Academy of Distinguished Neutrals, an association whose membership consists of ADR professionals distinguished by their hands-on experience in the field of civil and commercial conflict resolution, and by their commitment to the practice of alternative dispute resolution.

Membership in the Academy is by invitation only and limited to attorney mediators and arbitrators who have proven experience in the field. All Academy members have been thoroughly reviewed and found to meet stringent practice criteria. Members are amongst the most in-demand neutrals in their respective states, as selected by both peers and local litigation firms. To assist litigation counsel in selecting top-tier ADR professionals, the Academy is in partnership with the American Association for Justice, representing the national Plaintiff’s Bar, and DRI (formerly Defense Research Institute), the voice of the Defense Bar.
Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) | Texas Dispute Resolution

There is court ordered ADR where the court, in an existing civil case, can order the parties to mediation and ADR if they agree or on its own motion. The results are only binding on the parties if they agree. There is also out of court ADR. That is where the parties have signed a contract requiring that their disputes be decided out of court, before a panel of arbitrators. The American Arbitration Association is the largest provider of ADR services in the country. You can become an AAA arbitrator whether or not you are a lawyer. If you are an expert in a particular field, you can serve as an arbitrator as long as you have training in the legal principles involved. The decisions of an arbitrator are binding on the parties unless the decision is contrary to law or public policy or the losing party can prove that the arbitrator went beyond the contract to and beyond the scope of the dispute to render a decision. ADR panels that apply religious principles to resolve disputes remain legal in Texas. Their decisions are binding.

 

[paddymurphy]

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.

That state law the council supported DID NOT PASS. If parties to a civil matter agree to have their dispute decided by an ADR panel that will apply principles of their faith, whatever that faith is, then the decision is binding on the parties. End of story.

 

[paddymurphy]

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.

Alternate dispute resolution only applies to civil law. Are you really so fucking stupid that you think that there as an effort to allow a court based on sharia law to mete out penalties for crimes or actions that violate fundamentalist interpretations of the Koran?

 

[paddymurphy]

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

They can damn well try, since I am a heathen and all. But they better make sure I'm dead.

The point is....I think....this is the USA. We have our own laws. Other countries have theirs. We do not allow another country to have their own set of laws HERE.
"They" can do whatever they want, but OUR laws supercedes theirs.

So, then, Blackstone's Commentaries should no longer be taught in law school? The centuries of common law from Great Britain that forms the basis for much of our common law should be ignored? Our constitution is based on principles of law developed by Europeans. Did you know that?

 

[paddymurphy]

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

They can damn well try, since I am a heathen and all. But they better make sure I'm dead.

The point is....I think....this is the USA. We have our own laws. Other countries have theirs. We do not allow another country to have their own set of laws.
"They" can do whatever they want, but OUR laws supercedes theirs.

Everyone agrees with that, and NO ONE has actually suggesting making stoning gay people "legal" in the US, aside from a crazy Christian guy in California.

If you give muslims an inch, they will take a mile. If they have their "court" and their "laws" implemented, they WILL want to stone someone..or honor killing someone, and letting the perp be punished according to Sharia law. It's a given. They already want to wear a burka where the face is not seen in a drivers license. Didn't work, but they TRIED. That's the point.

Sometimes it's hard for me to believe that people like you actually exist, you're way too cartoonish to be real.

Keep yer head buried in the sand then.

Better than where yours is up your ass. There was no attempt by Muslims to have their DL photo taken with their face covered. There was a dispute in Illinois over whether a Sikh could have his picture taken wearing a turban on his head. Some moron at the DMV, probably related to you, demanded that he take off his "hat". The DMV promptly clarified that people could have their photos taken with any head covering their faith required. Not a face covering, a head covering.

 

[Asclepias]

Nothing screams "small government" than making laws based on fears of boogeymen.

What law was made?

Enforcing existing law is not making laws.

Its not an existing law idiot. Thats why Texas is voting on it this week.

They are not voting on it this week. Irving council made asses of themselves in February of this year. The Texas House rejected this asinine bill. Islamic arbitration panels, applying principles of Sharia law to civil disputes, continue to exist and function in Texas and across the US and all of the bigots who object are powerless, because of the US constitution, to stop them.

Thanks. I should have known the OP was fucked from the beginning with all the other inconsistencies, hyperbole, and outright lies. I guess all the clowns declaring this a win against Mooslims and Sharia law have to eat this one with a side of crow.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right...

... tell `em if dey want a sharia court...

... den go back to the Middle East."

 

[ogibillm]

What civil penalties?

Whatever penalty the islamic Kangaroo Court declares. The point of going to the city was to gain the authority representative OF the City.

Don't burden yourself by trying to understand, as despite such being the most elementary of equations... it is well above your means to understand.

again, why do you think they went to the city? maybe for a business license but that'd be all

Read the fucking article. They did not go to the city. The city council passed a resolution supporting efforts to pass a state law. Jesus but you people are morons.

Your issue isn't with me. I was just saying that they might have, at some point, needed a business license. They charge for their services

 

[Uncensored2008]

No. It means an arbitrator or arbitrators selected by the parties. Usually from a list provided by an alternate dispute resolution company or organization.

I posted the text of the law.

If you are too stupid to grasp it, ask one of the conservatives in the forum to explain it to you.