+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 147

Thread: Muslims see ‘foreign law’ bill as attack on Shariah

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brewskier View Post
    Please explain how that law would have "banned Islam".
    It mostly deals with "purely religious matters" such as "when to pray, how to pray, where to pray, etc." This "blatantly unconstitutional" bill would make anyone engaging in such private religious activities a felon.
    http://theweek.com/article/index/212...constitutional
    Forever Forward

  2. Default

    From your own article

    But this bill is about terrorism, not Islam: Did these critics actually read the bill? asks Mollie Hemingway at Get Religion. It specifically protects the "peaceful practice of Islam." It targets only those involved in "Shariah-based jihad and terrorism," giving the state "more legal tools" to fight Muslim groups that support the overthrow of the U.S. government by violent means. The bill may be flawed, but it has nothing to do with banning Islam.
    Anything else?

    Out for the night.
    Last edited by Brewskier; Aug 23 2011 at 10:07 PM.

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brewskier View Post
    From your own article

    Quote:
    But this bill is about terrorism, not Islam: Did these critics actually read the bill? asks Mollie Hemingway at Get Religion. It specifically protects the "peaceful practice of Islam." It targets only those involved in "Shariah-based jihad and terrorism," giving the state "more legal tools" to fight Muslim groups that support the overthrow of the U.S. government by violent means. The bill may be flawed, but it has nothing to do with banning Islam.
    Anything else?

    Out for the night.
    You skip a very significant next step in the argument in singling out a specific religious group for higher penalties for the same crimes.
    It wouldn't outlaw Islam, but it is still discriminatory: The bill wouldn't ban Muslims from practicing Islam, says Jerome McCollom at Opposing Views, but it's still unconstitutional. This legislation would impose a greater penalty on terrorist plotters if they proposed killing "in the name of Shariah or Islamic law." That effectively "signals out one religion and its believers for extra punishment," which is unconstitutional. And it ignores the fact that terrorism is already illegal, whatever your religion.
    I don't care if its extremist Muslim Jihadists or Right Wing Christian terrorists blowing up my fellow citizens and buildings, BOTH groups should get the same penalties.
    -----------------------

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Margot View Post
    LOLOL.. you have no clue..
    Is that why you ran away from the specific points and just replied to the entire thing? lol so predictable.

    the divorce rate is 50 percent in Riyadh and women have EVERY right to divorce, support and child custody for the past 1300 years.
    Another lie and easily disproven

    Under sharia's civil code, a woman's testimony is worth half of a man's. A man can divorce his wife by repudiation, whereas a woman must give justifications, some of which are difficult to prove. Child custody reverts to the father at a preset age; women who remarry lose custody of their children even before then; and sons inherit twice the share of daughters.

    Where is your evidence that women are equal in Sharia Law when it comes to divorce? Quote it. Back up your claims just one time. I provide mine each and every time. Shock everyone here and do the same.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/j...ligious-courts

    Study... its not that difficult and you can stop making a fool of yourself on this subject.

    Read the Koran yourself.. I am tired of spoon feeding lazy, ignorant bigots.
    I have read many parts of it. And I post quotes to support my claims. You NEVER support your claims and simply rely on the classic liberal "I'm smarter than you so I don't have to back myself up" intellectual cowardice to carry you through these debates.

    Let's see your evidence.

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by celica View Post
    because anti Sharia bills are themselves totally worthless but they are used as wedge issues aimed to marginalize an ethnicity and turn the public against them in order to energize GOP base.
    Where is Islam or Sharia law mentioned anywhere in the bill? Quote it for us.

  6. #36
    Location: Southeast USA
    Posts: 62,086
    My Latest Mood: Amused

    Default

    A woman can divorce her husband if he breaks the terms of the marriage contract which SHE writes or if he fails sexually, mistreats her or can't provide for her.


    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Is that why you ran away from the specific points and just replied to the entire thing? lol so predictable.



    Another lie and easily disproven

    Under sharia's civil code, a woman's testimony is worth half of a man's. A man can divorce his wife by repudiation, whereas a woman must give justifications, some of which are difficult to prove. Child custody reverts to the father at a preset age; women who remarry lose custody of their children even before then; and sons inherit twice the share of daughters.

    Where is your evidence that women are equal in Sharia Law when it comes to divorce? Quote it. Back up your claims just one time. I provide mine each and every time. Shock everyone here and do the same.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/j...ligious-courts



    I have read many parts of it. And I post quotes to support my claims. You NEVER support your claims and simply rely on the classic liberal "I'm smarter than you so I don't have to back myself up" intellectual cowardice to carry you through these debates.

    Let's see your evidence.

  7. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Zero View Post
    One story is proof of "constant" pushing? Your argument is absurd, as is your definition of constant.
    Hardly just one place.



    Muslims to defend sharia law in NY, NJ, Texas

    Defend meaning promote. It’s part of terror-linked ICNA’s National Sharia Campaign featuring the grandson of the founder of the infamous Muslim Brotherhood. The ‘Islamic Circle of North America’ or ICNA seeks an Islamic super-state governed by sharia law.

    The campaign and this sharia roadshow is the Muslim response to Americans who are becoming increasingly aware of Islamic sharia law and its encroachment into U.S. courts, and want it banned.






    Now what agent? Still going to ignore the push is happening in multiple areas around the US?

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Margot View Post
    A woman can divorce her husband if he breaks the terms of the marriage contract which SHE writes or if he fails sexually, mistreats her or can't provide for her.
    So you quote nothing, provide no links to support any of the bs you are spewing.

    Nor could you refute anything I said or supported with fact.

    Typical Margot.

    And you want people to take your claims seriously?
    Last edited by texmaster; Aug 24 2011 at 06:51 AM.

  9. #39
    Location: Southeast USA
    Posts: 62,086
    My Latest Mood: Amused

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    So you quote nothing, provide no links to support any of the bs you are spewing.

    Nor could you refute anything I said or supported with fact.

    Typical Margot.

    And you want people to take your claims seriously?
    Who is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood?

    I just know how things work because I have talked with lots of Saudi women over the years.

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Margot View Post
    A woman can divorce her husband if he breaks the terms of the marriage contract which SHE writes or if he fails sexually, mistreats her or can't provide for her.

    When it comes to the wife initiating a divorce it is a whole different issue. It’s not even called divorce, it’s called khula which literally means taking off as in taking off clothes or jewelry. What the woman has to do is prove that the husband did something. Abuse whether physical or verbal does not get a woman far in court even with a medical report because the Saudi judges tend to believe that she probably did something to provoke it. The only proof that will absolve the woman and get her treated favorably is one of three; proof that the husband is a drug addict, has AIDS or being a daughter of a VIP. Otherwise the process is stressful, expensive and might lead to her never seeing her children again. In one case the judge and his assistants demanded from the wife that she detail her husband’s performance in bed. Another woman had to pay her dowry back in full after more than a decade of marriage and four children. Some of those years she financially supported her then husband and yet she still had to give back the money he spent on her as a young bride and give up child custody completely. To rub salt into injury, she was hushed in court while listening to the guy tell everyone there including her father and brothers how horny she was and that she wouldn’t be doing this unless she had someone else in mind to marry.

    I am jack's righteous indignation....

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks