Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Political grandstanding
There is nothing the state can do if litigants voluntarily accept the terms of a muslim court
If it was a Christian church, I'm sure they would be celebrating
Without recourse what good is the decision. And what if sharia courts differ in areas such as same sex marriage and women's rights.
Theres always recourse.Political grandstanding
There is nothing the state can do if litigants voluntarily accept the terms of a muslim court
If it was a Christian church, I'm sure they would be celebrating
Without recourse what good is the decision. And what if sharia courts differ in areas such as same sex marriage and women's rights.
Third party civil arbitration is completely legal in the US.
Political grandstanding
There is nothing the state can do if litigants voluntarily accept the terms of a muslim court
If it was a Christian church, I'm sure they would be celebrating
Without recourse what good is the decision. And what if sharia courts differ in areas such as same sex marriage and women's rights.
If that religious community agrees to the terms established by their clerics, there is little Texas can do about it
I didn't see Texas stepping in about the Branch Davidians making their own laws but god forbid them Moooslims try to do it
Oh, you. Be nice now.The mayor is a bigoted idiot. ... .
The absolute COOLEST thing about the use of the word "bigot"; where such is advanced to frame the character of another, is that it is a marvelous demonstration of BIGOTRY!
HYSTERICALLY! ... such is a paradox that is lost to the Intellectually Less Fortunate. So it happens among them... as a matter of ROUTINE!
The absolute coolest thing about your statement is.....you actually think you said something
Don't get me wrong....I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS!!!!!!!!!!Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops "Sharia Court"... Here Is Her EPIC Response! - The Political Insider
"This radical group of Muslims is not pleased with the Mayor of Irving, Texas after she put the end to America’s first “Sharia Court.” Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims, which is why the city voted to stop these supposedly “voluntary” tribunals from operating.
In a very close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. The bill doesn’t mention Sharia or any religion, but it’s a huge defeat for Sharia supporters, as such courts are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Here is how Mayor Duyne responded on Facebook, before the historic and controversial vote:
so judge judy is illegal? the people's court is illegal? jewish and amish courts... illegal?it, in my sentence, actually referred to your objection to the courts. ..."It" is Islam... which stands wholly antithetical to the principles that define AMERICA. And as an AMERICAN... that is all I need to know ABOUT Islam to reject Islam, entirely and without exception to any of its evil facets.
The Courts ... which are illegal in the United States, because we already have a legal system, which rests in principle rejected by ISLAM. Which is the basis of my REJECTION OF SUCH.
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?
Thats the whole point the mayor missed. Its completely voluntary.Don't get me wrong....I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS!!!!!!!!!!Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops "Sharia Court"... Here Is Her EPIC Response! - The Political Insider
"This radical group of Muslims is not pleased with the Mayor of Irving, Texas after she put the end to America’s first “Sharia Court.” Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims, which is why the city voted to stop these supposedly “voluntary” tribunals from operating.
In a very close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. The bill doesn’t mention Sharia or any religion, but it’s a huge defeat for Sharia supporters, as such courts are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Here is how Mayor Duyne responded on Facebook, before the historic and controversial vote:
But...can't Muslims willingly participate in it, if they want?
As part of freely exercizing their religion?
Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?so judge judy is illegal? the people's court is illegal? jewish and amish courts... illegal?it, in my sentence, actually referred to your objection to the courts. ...
The Courts ... which are illegal in the United States, because we already have a legal system, which rests in principle rejected by ISLAM. Which is the basis of my REJECTION OF SUCH.
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?
All moderators are participants too.Are you really a 'moderator'? And a USMB staffer?The mayor is a bigoted idiot. ... .
The absolute COOLEST thing about the use of the word "bigot"; where such is advanced to frame the character of another, is that it is a marvelous demonstration of BIGOTRY!
HYSTERICALLY! ... such is a paradox that is lost to the Intellectually Less Fortunate. So it happens among them... as a matter of ROUTINE!
The absolute coolest thing about your statement is.....you actually think you said something
Does'nt look like you're doing much 'moderating' friend.
Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?so judge judy is illegal? the people's court is illegal? jewish and amish courts... illegal?The Courts ... which are illegal in the United States, because we already have a legal system, which rests in principle rejected by ISLAM. Which is the basis of my REJECTION OF SUCH.
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?
Don't get me wrong....I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS!!!!!!!!!!Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops "Sharia Court"... Here Is Her EPIC Response! - The Political Insider
"This radical group of Muslims is not pleased with the Mayor of Irving, Texas after she put the end to America’s first “Sharia Court.” Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims, which is why the city voted to stop these supposedly “voluntary” tribunals from operating.
In a very close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. The bill doesn’t mention Sharia or any religion, but it’s a huge defeat for Sharia supporters, as such courts are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Here is how Mayor Duyne responded on Facebook, before the historic and controversial vote:
But...can't Muslims willingly participate in it, if they want?
As part of freely exercizing their religion?
Do you know why they are mad? Evidently you dont or you would not have made the idiotic comment you made about them wanting something above and beyond.Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?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?
Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.
Do you know they are mad? Evidently you dont or you would not have made the idiotic comment you made about them wanting something above and beyond.Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?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?
Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.
"We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.”
Good for them.
Yes your post is nonsense. Show me a link that says what you are claiming. The other clown slinked off in defeat when I asked for proof. Are you up to the task?Do you know they are mad? Evidently you dont or you would not have made the idiotic comment you made about them wanting something above and beyond.Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?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?
Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.
"We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.”
Good for them.
Nonsense. They feel it affects them in a material way beyond a perceived offense.
Yes your post is nonsense. Show me a link that says what you are claiming. The other clown slinked off in defeat when I asked for proof. Are you up to the task?Do you know they are mad? Evidently you dont or you would not have made the idiotic comment you made about them wanting something above and beyond.Who told you they wanted something above and beyond this?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?
Because they're mad at the Irving city counsel. Apparently they were denied something above and beyond what every church and congregation does to its members.
"We don’t care about the bill,” Sheikh said. “It’s not going to affect us in any way, shape or form. The bottom line is the foundation of this bill is anti-Islamic.”
Good for them.
Nonsense. They feel it affects them in a material way beyond a perceived offense.
Of course, there was no "Sharia Court" that she "stopped". Never has been and never can be a "Court" that is based on sharia law. Just like there can never be courts based on Christian law of Jewish law or Buddhist law. And the law that they passed, to the extent it prevents private citizens from agreeing to resolve disputes they have with other members of their faith based on principles of that faith, will be struck down as unconstitutional just like the one in Oklahoma was. And, if the law does not do that, it is a pointless law. In fact, her idiotic facebook post did get one thing correct. No foreign law that violates the public policy, state statutes or federal statutes is enforceable. But, bigots got to demonstrate their bigotry.Muslims are ANGRY at Texas Mayor After She Stops "Sharia Court"... Here Is Her EPIC Response! - The Political Insider
"This radical group of Muslims is not pleased with the Mayor of Irving, Texas after she put the end to America’s first “Sharia Court.” Mayor Beth Van Duyne has accused mosque leaders of creating separate laws for Muslims, which is why the city voted to stop these supposedly “voluntary” tribunals from operating.
In a very close 5-4 vote, the city of Irving ruled to back the Texas state bill banning foreign law from the state. The bill doesn’t mention Sharia or any religion, but it’s a huge defeat for Sharia supporters, as such courts are in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Here is how Mayor Duyne responded on Facebook, before the historic and controversial vote:
Arbitration awards are completely enforceable unless they violate civil law.Third party civil arbitration is completely legal in the US.
Without means of enforcement such arbitration is pointless.
