Oklahoma's Ban on Shariah Law Blocked:

[Gerald]

Supporters Blame State Attorney General.A popular new law that bars Oklahoma courts from considering Islamic law, or Shariah, when deciding cases was put on hold Monday after a prominent Muslim in the state won a temporary restraining order in federal court.

Two state legislators were quick to blast the judge's ruling and the Oklahoma attorney general, who they said did not stand up to support the new law.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/11/08...ailed-respond/




Note:Published November 08, 2010

[GoldenRivet]

Here we go.

Gotta throw U.S. Law under the bus to cater to the special interests

Edit: so I guess this sets the precedent that every little group can govern itself by it's own unique and separate laws?

If so, my personal beliefs do not prohibit rape & public intoxication.

[Buddahaid]

U.S. law has not changed, only a stupid law that singles out a certain group from equal protection under that law has.

[Platapus]

Nothing to see here folks. No conspiracy.


The Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 9 U.S. C. establishes the right of citizens to voluntarily, in specific civil cases, to mutually agree to arbitration based on their cultural laws.

Two of the more common are Islamic Sharia and Jewish Halakha Arbitration Courts which have been operating just fine since 1925.

The proposed OK law will be a hard case to put before the United States Supreme Court. There have been several Supreme Court cases that have upheld the FAA.

The key concepts of the FAA are:

1. That such arbitration is voluntary
2. All parties must specifically agree to FAA type arbitration when entering into the contract.
3. Only specific civil cases can be arbitrated. No Criminal Law cases
4. The Federal Government and the States have criteria and authority to negate any arbitration if it is found that the arbitration is in violation of Federal and/or State regulations.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Nothing to see here folks. No conspiracy.


The Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 9 U.S. C. establishes the right of citizens to voluntarily, in specific civil cases, to mutually agree to arbitration based on their cultural laws.

Two of the more common are Islamic Sharia and Jewish Halakha Arbitration Courts which have been operating just fine since 1925.

The proposed OK law will be a hard case to put before the United States Supreme Court. There have been several Supreme Court cases that have upheld the FAA.

The key concepts of the FAA are:

1. That such arbitration is voluntary
2. All parties must specifically agree to FAA type arbitration when entering into the contract.
3. Only specific civil cases can be arbitrated. No Criminal Law cases
4. The Federal Government and the States have criteria and authority to negate any arbitration if it is found that the arbitration is in violation of Federal and/or State regulations.

Indeed. And what social harm do you see from muslims being allowed to arbiter their own civil cases? Especially those that concern religiously-grounded practices like marriage/divorce etc. in the first place, which afaik is what religious arbitration is most typically used for.

I'd be horrified if it applied to criminal cases, but there's really no reason not to allow this for civil cases, lest you're willing to surrender religious freedom as such in favour of defending against Islam. That's something you'll just have to make a choice in...

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Especially those that concern religiously-grounded practices like marriage/divorce etc. in the first place, which afaik is what religious arbitration is most typically used for.

That is correct. As marriage under Sharia law can be complicated, the property cases are equally complicated and would be difficult to adjudicate fairly under US law.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Nothing to see here folks. No conspiracy.


The Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 9 U.S. C. establishes the right of citizens to voluntarily, in specific civil cases, to mutually agree to arbitration based on their cultural laws.

Two of the more common are Islamic Sharia and Jewish Halakha Arbitration Courts which have been operating just fine since 1925.

The proposed OK law will be a hard case to put before the United States Supreme Court. There have been several Supreme Court cases that have upheld the FAA.

The key concepts of the FAA are:

1. That such arbitration is voluntary
2. All parties must specifically agree to FAA type arbitration when entering into the contract.
3. Only specific civil cases can be arbitrated. No Criminal Law cases
4. The Federal Government and the States have criteria and authority to negate any arbitration if it is found that the arbitration is in violation of Federal and/or State regulations.

Thank you for sharing this. Have some reading to do as I hadn't heard of this

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Nothing to see here folks. No conspiracy.


The Federal Arbitration Act of 1925 9 U.S. C. establishes the right of citizens to voluntarily, in specific civil cases, to mutually agree to arbitration based on their cultural laws.

Two of the more common are Islamic Sharia and Jewish Halakha Arbitration Courts which have been operating just fine since 1925.

The proposed OK law will be a hard case to put before the United States Supreme Court. There have been several Supreme Court cases that have upheld the FAA.

The key concepts of the FAA are:

1. That such arbitration is voluntary
2. All parties must specifically agree to FAA type arbitration when entering into the contract.
3. Only specific civil cases can be arbitrated. No Criminal Law cases
4. The Federal Government and the States have criteria and authority to negate any arbitration if it is found that the arbitration is in violation of Federal and/or State regulations.

That is U.S. law whether you like it or not and does not pertain to criminal law. Don't be so xenophobic.

That is U.S. law whether you like it or not and does not pertain to criminal law. Don't be so xenophobic.

I take it that is a reasonable reply to yubbas nonsensical rant.
Though it does raise the question of what the US law really is as its set by US politicians and adjudicated by US judges which everyone knows are really our reptilian overlords from the planet Blurg on the dark side of the blue cheese moon.
So Yubbas rant should be "this is the US if you don't want to follow our extraterrestrials laws make them move to another planet and take their evil alien laws with them"

[Ducimus]

I think the problem is this pesky little thing called the first amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

And Shariah law, is being interpreted as some type of religous excercise. They are afraid of setting a precedent. Ban one religion, whats to say we don't ban another?

BUT! I thought of an out! All they have to say is , "Shariah law is not in keeping with practices of a modern civilization." Seriously! Christians used to burn people at the stake, but you don't see them doing that anymore, do you? That was an 18th century or earlier practice. Islam needs to catch up with modern humanity (by abandoning barbaric practices as christianity has done), or simply not be admitted to it!

How ya like them apples?!