Muslim in America

Well since this thread is titled "Muslim in AMERICA", perhaps we could limit our discussion to just that?

I know you need to deflect away from that particular point by broadening the scope of the discussion, but my initial point was why should muslims be faulted for not being suitably outraged by what happens halfway around the globe when they can't even get treated with the same basic respect by their fellow Americans that those selfsame fellow Americans demand right here in the good ol USA?

LOL So its OK to look at Europe when interpreting our Constitution, but not when trying to figure out what Islam wants to do to the US. :palm:
 
Cain claims that Muslims are trying to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government.

Where's the evidence for that?

 

shariah4america.com is a hoax.

Remember Islam4UK? They got banned but came back as ‘Muslims Against Crusades’. Before that they were Al-Ghuraaba and before that Al-Muhajiroun.

Yes, it’s Anjem Choudhary and his 20 idiot mates back to their old publicity stunts again. Previous luminaries from this mob includes Abu Izzadeen and Omar Bakri (now reportedly hiding in Lebanon).

Anyway, their latest project publicity stunt is: Shariah 4 America. The best I can say for them is they have some competent graphic designers who are good at putting the bejeesus into any Tea Party nutjob.

You can tell its the same lot because they have a prominent ‘media enquiries’ page which links to a mobile number (07956 600 569) frequently given out by Anjem Choudhary & co.


http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/12006

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=71704
 
shariah4america.com is a hoax. Remember Islam4UK? They got banned but came back as ‘Muslims Against Crusades’. Before that they were Al-Ghuraaba and before that Al-Muhajiroun. Yes, it’s Anjem Choudhary and his 20 idiot mates back to their old publicity stunts again. Previous luminaries from this mob includes Abu Izzadeen and Omar Bakri (now reportedly hiding in Lebanon). Anyway, their latest project publicity stunt is: Shariah 4 America. The best I can say for them is they have some competent graphic designers who are good at putting the bejeesus into any Tea Party nutjob. You can tell its the same lot because they have a prominent ‘media enquiries’ page which links to a mobile number (07956 600 569) frequently given out by Anjem Choudhary & co. http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/12006 http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=71704

:lolup: Maybe Yurtard just "skimmed" the links, like he did the other day when he thought Trump took the credit for OBL.
 
hypocrite

there are facts in that article, just because they you want to pretend it isn't real, doesn't make the facts not real

Here are the facts:

The article you posted is an opinion piece.

It is FILLED with so many grammatical errors that ascertaining any truths from the article is impossible.

Enjoy a sample:

"But even simple information about sharia — what is it? how is it used in American courts? — are hard to advance by(Hard to advance by??). So we motionless to speak (frozen in silent terror?) to Abed Awad, a New Jersey-based profession (bet this guy never knew he was a profession)and an consultant on sharia who continually handles cases that engage Islamic law. He is moreover a associate of the addition faculties at Rutgers Law School and Pace Law School. He not long ago answered my questions around e-mail.(how far around e-mail did he have to go?)"

Yeah...Yurt can cite all the "facts" he'd like from this one...it's a vertiable treasure trove of ignorance.
 
shariah4america.com is a hoax.

Remember Islam4UK? They got banned but came back as ‘Muslims Against Crusades’. Before that they were Al-Ghuraaba and before that Al-Muhajiroun.

Yes, it’s Anjem Choudhary and his 20 idiot mates back to their old publicity stunts again. Previous luminaries from this mob includes Abu Izzadeen and Omar Bakri (now reportedly hiding in Lebanon).

Anyway, their latest project publicity stunt is: Shariah 4 America. The best I can say for them is they have some competent graphic designers who are good at putting the bejeesus into any Tea Party nutjob.

You can tell its the same lot because they have a prominent ‘media enquiries’ page which links to a mobile number (07956 600 569) frequently given out by Anjem Choudhary & co.


http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/12006

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=71704

ok....if it is fake....why did you ignore the PBS link?
 
Here are the facts:

The article you posted is an opinion piece.

It is FILLED with so many grammatical errors that ascertaining any truths from the article is impossible.

Enjoy a sample:

"But even simple information about sharia — what is it? how is it used in American courts? — are hard to advance by(Hard to advance by??). So we motionless to speak (frozen in silent terror?) to Abed Awad, a New Jersey-based profession (bet this guy never knew he was a profession)and an consultant on sharia who continually handles cases that engage Islamic law. He is moreover a associate of the addition faculties at Rutgers Law School and Pace Law School. He not long ago answered my questions around e-mail.(how far around e-mail did he have to go?)"

Yeah...Yurt can cite all the "facts" he'd like from this one...it's a vertiable treasure trove of ignorance.

and in typical zappa fashion....he focuses on one thing and ignores everything else....like the CBS link, the case that used sharia law etc....why do you insist on doing that?
 
¯¯¯̿̿¯̿̿’̿̿̿̿̿̿̿’̿̿’̿̿;812562 said:
:lolup: Maybe Yurtard just "skimmed" the links, like he did the other day when he thought Trump took the credit for OBL.

whether a website is true or false has nothing to do with "skimming"....but i wouldn't expect you to understand that. there are many false websites that look very legit. go ask your mom what i'm talking about.
 
whether a website is true or false has nothing to do with "skimming"....but i wouldn't expect you to understand that. there are many false websites that look very legit. go ask your mom what i'm talking about.

Is his mother a known expert on such matters?
 
ok....if it is fake....why did you ignore the PBS link?

I didn't ignore it, Kreskin, I just didn't comment on it.

But since you bring it up, I found this part interesting:

HAGERTY: He notes that the heavily Muslim city of Dearborn, Michigan, passed an ordinance that allows the call to prayer to be broadcast over loudspeakers. Khan believes that the rapid growth of American Islam means that more towns will enact laws friendly to the religion...

For centuries we've had ringing church bells calling Christians to prayer, and I don't see the big deal in having a prayer call if Dearborn has a large number of Muslims.
 
there are examples...they have tried to form a separate court for family law matters...i believe they also want a separate court for contract dispute...

I don't see this as a problem. If they want a separate court for family law (which Orthodox Jews already have), this could benefit the overburdened court system.

Court Upholds Ruling by Jewish Court

Posted on: April 8, 2011 10:30 AM, by Ed Brayton

A Maryland Appeals Court has upheld a ruling by a Bet Din, or Jewish court, in a divorce proceeding where the religious court refused to enforce provisions of a prenuptial agreement.
 
I don't see this as a problem. If they want a separate court for family law (which Orthodox Jews already have), this could benefit the overburdened court system.

Court Upholds Ruling by Jewish Court

Posted on: April 8, 2011 10:30 AM, by Ed Brayton

A Maryland Appeals Court has upheld a ruling by a Bet Din, or Jewish court, in a divorce proceeding where the religious court refused to enforce provisions of a prenuptial agreement.

that is all you had to say....they are attempting to integrate sharia law into our government....just like the jewish "courts"...it seeks to implement their own laws INTO our government.

epic asked for examples....i gave them...but per his usual....he ignores facts that don't fit his world view
 
I didn't ignore it, Kreskin, I just didn't comment on it.

But since you bring it up, I found this part interesting:

HAGERTY: He notes that the heavily Muslim city of Dearborn, Michigan, passed an ordinance that allows the call to prayer to be broadcast over loudspeakers. Khan believes that the rapid growth of American Islam means that more towns will enact laws friendly to the religion...

For centuries we've had ringing church bells calling Christians to prayer, and I don't see the big deal in having a prayer call if Dearborn has a large number of Muslims.

is that or is that not seeking to implement sharia law into our government? the christian bells are surely integrated into our government, else they would likely have to seek a modern noise ordinance.

are you following the bouncing the ball now....?
 
is that or is that not seeking to implement sharia law into our government? the christian bells are surely integrated into our government, else they would likely have to seek a modern noise ordinance.

are you following the bouncing the ball now....?

Do churches have to get an ordinance passed in order to ring their bells? Did they ever have to?

This business about Shari'ah law is fear-mongering at its finest.
 
Do churches have to get an ordinance passed in order to ring their bells? Did they ever have to?

This business about Shari'ah law is fear-mongering at its finest.

let me state again what i said and hopefully you will understand it this time:

the christian bells are surely integrated into our government, else they would likely have to seek a modern noise ordinance.

what i said is -- if the christian church was not an integrated part of our government, they would have to get a modern noise ordinance, just like the muslims had to fight to get.

i am not fear mongering, i am telling you FACTS, if you choose to be afraid, that is your problem not mine. i am not afraid. shariah law will never take hold in this country. if any law takes hold, it will be christian law wiping out secular law.
 
that is all you had to say....they are attempting to integrate sharia law into our government....just like the jewish "courts"...it seeks to implement their own laws INTO our government.

epic asked for examples....i gave them...but per his usual....he ignores facts that don't fit his world view

Wrong.

Divorce only terminates the legal union of a couple. If I got a divorce, my church (Catholic) wouldn't recognize it and if I wanted to remarry, I'd have to get an annulment by the Church. Same thing goes for Muslims and Jews.

So whether you like it or not, people do abide by the tenets of their particular religion, and it doesn't mean that particular religion is trying to take the place of civil law.
 
Wrong.

Divorce only terminates the legal union of a couple. If I got a divorce, my church (Catholic) wouldn't recognize it and if I wanted to remarry, I'd have to get an annulment by the Church. Same thing goes for Muslims and Jews.

So whether you like it or not, people do abide by the tenets of their particular religion, and it doesn't mean that particular religion is trying to take the place of civil law.

link to where they want to go to both US courts and their sharia courts to get a divorce
 
let me state again what i said and hopefully you will understand it this time:



what i said is -- if the christian church was not an integrated part of our government, they would have to get a modern noise ordinance, just like the muslims had to fight to get.

i am not fear mongering, i am telling you FACTS, if you choose to be afraid, that is your problem not mine. i am not afraid. shariah law will never take hold in this country. if any law takes hold, it will be christian law wiping out secular law.

Re: church bells, that's your opinion. My opinion is that ringing church bells derive from custom and culture and government doesn't, and never had, any input about them. Note that's not the same as an "integrated part of our government."
 
Whether they want to or not is irrelevant. American courts have to legally dissolve Muslim marriages the same as Christian or Jewish marriages.

it is relevant....your statement indicated otherwise. like i said....link up to where they want BOTH american law and sharia law...you made the claim...the burden is on you.
 
Back
Top