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

"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?
 
"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
Where does it say the arbitrators have to be retired judges? Dont lose sight of the question.

You know, I was just noticing, I've been a member here a few months longer than you, yet you have four times as many posts.
That's insane !
You have 43 thousand fucking posts in just two years !!
Don't you think you should concentrate on getting a life ?

how about you worry about yourself. mmmkay.
 
"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
Where does it say the arbitrators have to be retired judges? Dont lose sight of the question.

You know, I was just noticing, I've been a member here a few months longer than you, yet you have four times as many posts.
That's insane !
You have 43 thousand fucking posts in just two years !!
Don't you think you should concentrate on getting a life ?
Its not my fault you have nothing to say. Dont try to compete with me. Be yourself and dont be envious.
 
"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
Where does it say the arbitrators have to be retired judges? Dont lose sight of the question.

You know, I was just noticing, I've been a member here a few months longer than you, yet you have four times as many posts.
That's insane !
You have 43 thousand fucking posts in just two years !!
Don't you think you should concentrate on getting a life ?

how about you worry about yourself. mmmkay.
Envy is getting to him.
 
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

Texas law requires arbitration to be conducted by retired judges at law.

It doesn't appear that the Imams ever served on the bench. :eusa_whistle:
"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?
they're mad because for some reason the mayor and the council thought that it was appropriate to puff their chests and pass an ordinance aimed at stopping their perfectly legal practices. the mayor and council thought that just because the people involved were muslims they had to be stopped.

how happy would you be if your town heard you were engaged in a perfectly legal endeavor they disagreed with and tried to pass an unenforceable ordinance to hinder you?
 
"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
Where does it say the arbitrators have to be retired judges? Dont lose sight of the question.

You know, I was just noticing, I've been a member here a few months longer than you, yet you have four times as many posts.
That's insane !
You have 43 thousand fucking posts in just two years !!
Don't you think you should concentrate on getting a life ?
Its not my fault you have nothing to say. Dont try to compete with me. Be yourself and dont be envious.

Lol !
I'm definitely not envious of someone who spends all their time here ! :lol:
 
[


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

Only for non-binding, i.e. not legally enforceable, issues.
 
"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
Where does it say the arbitrators have to be retired judges? Dont lose sight of the question.

You know, I was just noticing, I've been a member here a few months longer than you, yet you have four times as many posts.
That's insane !
You have 43 thousand fucking posts in just two years !!
Don't you think you should concentrate on getting a life ?
Its not my fault you have nothing to say. Dont try to compete with me. Be yourself and dont be envious.

Lol !
I'm definitely not envious of someone who spends all their time here ! :lol:
Of course you are envious. Thats the reason you took the time to note how many posts I have made. I, on the other hand, could care less about how many posts people make. You should be more secure in yourself or learn the ability to have something to say people will respond to.
 
Last edited:
they're mad because for some reason the mayor and the council thought that it was appropriate to puff their chests and pass an ordinance aimed at stopping their perfectly legal practices. the mayor and council thought that just because the people involved were muslims they had to be stopped.

how happy would you be if your town heard you were engaged in a perfectly legal endeavor they disagreed with and tried to pass an unenforceable ordinance to hinder you?

If you democrats were planning to stone a womand to death for blasphemy in Irving, you'll have to wait, Obama Akbar.
 
they're mad because for some reason the mayor and the council thought that it was appropriate to puff their chests and pass an ordinance aimed at stopping their perfectly legal practices. the mayor and council thought that just because the people involved were muslims they had to be stopped.

how happy would you be if your town heard you were engaged in a perfectly legal endeavor they disagreed with and tried to pass an unenforceable ordinance to hinder you?

If you democrats were planning to stone a womand to death for blasphemy in Irving, you'll have to wait, Obama Akbar.
you really are stupid.
jewish law calls for stoning - do you see that happening anywhere with jewish courts?
 
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:

facebook11.png
Isn't this the town that went bonkers over clock boy?
 
[


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

Only for non-binding, i.e. not legally enforceable, issues.

Of course it is non-binding

You can always tell the religious court to stick it and go to a government court

If you are willing to face banishment from your religion
 
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:

facebook11.png
Isn't this the town that went bonkers over clock boy?
yeah. gee, why would anyone think they were bigots down there?
 
100 lashes is better than death, which is what the old testament proscribes for adultery. where's the outrage over jewish arbitration?

A LASH... is A FELONY.

Not much lower than the FELONY for 'intentionally causing death'.
so why don't you complain about jewish arbitration again?
This is going to put a cramp in the Amish legal system as well.
And the Mormon one.
 
you really are stupid.
jewish law calls for stoning - do you see that happening anywhere with jewish courts?

When is the last time Jews stoned anyone, sploogy? A thousand years ago?

What about your Muslim cronies?

Yesterday?
 
Of course it is non-binding

You can always tell the religious court to stick it and go to a government court

Or not go to any court. They are not matters of black letter law.

If you are willing to face banishment from your religion

What religion bans people for not following mediation?
Wow! You are really uneducated. You never heard of shunning?

Shunning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Shunning can be the act of social rejection, or emotional distance. In a religious context, shunning is a formal decision by a denomination or a congregation to cease interaction with an individual or a group, and follows a particular set of rules. "
 
Of course it is non-binding

You can always tell the religious court to stick it and go to a government court

Or not go to any court. They are not matters of black letter law.

If you are willing to face banishment from your religion

What religion bans people for not following mediation?

What do you think happens if you ignore the findings of your church?

Ask the Amish, Mormons, Orthodox Jews, Scientologists or fundamentalist Christians
 
The absolute coolest thing about your statement is.....you actually think you said something :lmao:

OH! A demonstration of intellectual impotence, advanced as a means to concede the point?

Now how adorable is THAT? Thank you Vulva... and I want you to know that I recognize that you're doing THE VERY BEST YOU CAN! Bless you lil' black heart.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Well, we know what THAT means. :rofl:

As for that Mayor...she needs to extend that law to ALL religions. No arbitration by any religious group. I'd support that.
 
If you have an agreement that provides for binding arbitration, the decision of the arbitrator is binding and non appealable. The civil court is only limited to enforcement.
 

Forum List

Back
Top