What Do You Think?

[Cymberly]

copied from:
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/judge-blocks-oks-ban-on-shariah-law

Judge Blocks OK’s Ban On Shariah Law

From a cheering New York Times:

Judge Blocks Oklahoma’s Ban on Using Shariah Law in Court

By JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr.
November 29, 2010

HOUSTON — An Oklahoma constitutional amendment aimed at stopping the use of Islamic law in its courts was dealt a serious blow on Monday when a federal judge temporarily blocked the state from putting it into effect. The amendment would forbid state judges from considering Islamic or international law in their decisions.

Right off the bat The New York Times intentionally misrepresents the amendment. Oklahomans sought to forbid judges from considering non-US laws, such as international law and Sharia.

This is an important distinction. But The Times chose to twist the ban to help support the judge’s tortured ‘logic.’

Known as State Question 755, the measure passed with 70 percent of the vote during the Republican landslide on Nov. 2, and has generated bitter debate.

Of course, "bitter debate" means that the Solons at the New York Times oppose it. After all, why should 70 percent of the voters get their way?

Muslims claim the state is discriminating against their religion, while supporters — many of them Christian conservatives — say the amendment is needed to thwart what they maintain is an effort by radical Muslims to impose Shariah law in the United States.

Is Islam a religion or a system of jurisprudence? If it is a religion, then this ban does not discriminate against it. If it is a legal code, then there is nothing in the Constitution to prevent its prohibition.

Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange of Federal District Court in Oklahoma City, however, said in her decision to grant a preliminary injunction on Monday that the measure did not appear to pass constitutional muster.

It conveys a message, she said, that the state favors one religion or particular belief over others. The federal courts have long held that such a message violates the First Amendment’s clause prohibiting the establishment of a state religion, she said…

The judge barred the State Election Commission from certifying the results of the election until she makes a final ruling. She set no timetable for her decision.

Ms. Miles-LeGrange is a buffoon. Needless to say, she is a Bill Clinton appointee who has spent her entire life in government or ‘academia’ (African and women’s studies).

Muneer Awad, the executive director of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, had sued to block the amendment, arguing that the state was condemning his religious beliefs.

“We are definitely satisfied,” Mr. Awad said. “She is recognizing the majority vote cannot be used to take away my constitutional rights.” …

Who has a "constitutional right" to be tried in US courts under a different set of laws? Where is that in the Constitution?

The detainees in Guantanamo would love to be tried under Sharia law, which encourages jihad and the killing of infidels.

But of course Mr. Awad is ultimately proving the rightness of the citizens of Oklahoma’s concerns. He and his terrorist enabling organization want to impose Sharia law on us and the rest of the world.

This is their goal in life, their jihad. And, alas, useful idiots like Ms. Miles-LeGrange are only too eager to help them.

At a hearing last week, Scott Boughton, an assistant attorney general for the state, said the measure was not intended to infringe on anyone’s religion; it was intended to keep Oklahoma judges from looking at the legal principles of other nations and cultures in applying state and federal law. When the judge asked whether that had ever happened in Oklahoma, however, Mr. Boughton acknowledged that he did not know of an instance in which Shariah law had been invoked by the courts.

Again, this isn’t just about Shariah law. But if Shariah law has never been brought up in court, how can CAIR argue that this ban will prohibit Muslim funerals and weddings?

But this seems to have been a ‘logic free’ hearing.

Mr. Awad testified in court that the amendment was impossible to enforce, since the concept of Shariah law varies from person to person.

We would love to see Mr. Awad make this argument in Somalia or Iran. It would cost him his head.

He asserted the law might make it impossible for the courts to enforce his own last will and testament, since it requests he be buried according to Islamic principles…

Sadly, such laughable idiocy was apparently enough to convince Ms. Miles-LeGrange.

In her ruling on Monday, Judge Miles-LaGrange said she agreed with Mr. Awad’s contention that the definition of Shariah shifts depending on the country in which a Muslim lives and on each person’s religious beliefs.

She noted that one strong precept of Islamic law is to abide by the law of one’s land, and this explains why American Muslims do not generally practice bigamy, even though the Koran allows it.

Needless to say it is hilariously wrong to claim that Islamic law encourages its followers to abide by the law of one’s land. It stands Islam entirely on its head.

And speaking of bigamy, is Ms. Miles-LeGrange unaware that American law seems to favor Christian monogamy over Mormon polygamy? And that this has been upheld by our courts? (Just kidding. Of course she is pig ignorant of such details.)

The judge concluded that Shariah law “lacks a legal character” and “is not ‘law’ but is religious traditions that differ among Muslims.” As a result, she said, the amendment “conveys a message of disapproval of plaintiff’s faith and, consequently, has the effect of inhibiting plaintiff’s religion.”

If Shariah "is not law," then how would it even come up in court? If it is not a law, then it is unaffected by this amendment.

Supporters of the measure in the state Legislature had portrayed it as a protection against what they see as an international effort by radical Muslims to establish Islamic law throughout the world…

What deluded people. Any sane person should see that Muslims have no desire whatsoever to establish Islamic law throughout the world.