The Case for Banning Sharia Law in America

Alias said:
That's my point, thanks. It shouldn't have been allowed. That's why we need to pass laws prohibiting it so it doesn't waste our time and money in the court system only to be reversed.
Click to expand...

There have been laws against religious dogma being used to make laws, but the lawmakers still passed them.

Hell, the chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court decided to ignore the laws and placed a 2 ton monument of the 10 Commandments in the State Supreme Court lobby and would not allow anything else to be displayed there. People argued against it, brought attention to it, and it was removed.

Rather than creating more and more restrictions and more interference from the gov't, lets let the system work like it should, and does.
 
Alias can't help it, he is a rightwing authoritarian who wants to legislate how everyone lives.

Why do you hate freedom Alias?
 
WinterBorn said:
There have been laws against religious dogma being used to make laws, but the lawmakers still passed them.

Hell, the chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court decided to ignore the laws and placed a 2 ton monument of the 10 Commandments in the State Supreme Court lobby and would not allow anything else to be displayed there. People argued against it, brought attention to it, and it was removed.

Rather than creating more and more restrictions and more interference from the gov't, lets let the system work like it should, and does.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree totally. That is why I am behind the movement to prohibit the use of Sharia Law in any way in our court system at every level. That's how things get done. We're passing state laws and it's constitutional. It's unconstitutioinal to favor a religion's laws over govt laws. The whole separation of church and state thing, ya know.
 
Last edited:
Alias said:
Oh, I agree totally. That is why I am behind the movement to prohibit the use of Sharia Law in any way in our court system at every level. That's how things get done. We're passing state laws.
Click to expand...

Then first you should campaign to get rid of "In God We Trust" from our money. Make Blue Laws that forbid the operation of businesses on Sunday illegal. Take "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegience. And remove the state's ability to still have laws in their constitutions that bar athiests from holding public office.

All of those have been around for a long time. The most recent of those dates to the 50s when "under God" was added to the pledge.
 
Return of Dune said:
Alias can't help it, he is a rightwing authoritarian who wants to legislate how everyone lives.

Why do you hate freedom Alias?
Click to expand...

You really want to discuss that? I'll carve you up like a turkey.

What is authoritarian about using laws passed by elected officials in local, state, and Fed Govt? When you allow a religion to use their laws to pass judgement on American citizens then you are in violation of the First Amendment. You are establishing a religion over secular law. It's amazing to watch a dumb fuck like you who is totally against any expression of Christianity in our society argue for the separate laws of a religious totalitarian cult.
 
WinterBorn said:
Then first you should campaign to get rid of "In God We Trust" from our money. Make Blue Laws that forbid the operation of businesses on Sunday illegal. Take "Under God" from the Pledge of Allegience. And remove the state's ability to still have laws in their constitutions that bar athiests from holding public office.

All of those have been around for a long time. The most recent of those dates to the 50s when "under God" was added to the pledge.
Click to expand...

Now you're confusing this with another issue. Pledges and sayings are not law.
 
Alias said:
You really want to discuss that? I'll carve you up like a turkey.

What is authoritarian about using laws passed by elected officials in local, state, and Fed Govt? When you allow a religion to use their laws to pass judgement on American citizens then you are in violation of the First Amendment. You are establishing a religion over secular law. It's amazing to watch a dumb fuck like you who is totally against any expression of Christianity in our society argue for the separate laws of a religious totalitarian cult.
Click to expand...

But many who are worried about Sharia Law violating the First Amendment, have not been worried about Christianity doing the same thing. If it is truly about maintaining a separation of church and state, clear out the violations that already exist before writing laws to avoid problems that do not exist yet.
 
Alias said:
Now you're confusing this with another issue. Pledges and sayings are not law.
Click to expand...

That "saying" is written on all our currency. That takes it a bit beyond just a catchy phrase.

And what about Blue Laws or states with a constitution that forbids athiests from holding office?
 
Alias said:
You really want to discuss that? I'll carve you up like a turkey.

What is authoritarian about using laws passed by elected officials in local, state, and Fed Govt? When you allow a religion to use their laws to pass judgement on American citizens then you are in violation of the First Amendment. You are establishing a religion over secular law. It's amazing to watch a dumb fuck like you who is totally against any expression of Christianity in our society argue for the separate laws of a religious totalitarian cult.
Click to expand...

Start carving any time moron.
Where have I ever argued for the separate laws of a religious totalitarian cult?
You just don't get it. You are a moron and I am a genius. You have never come close to winning a single debate against me or even scoring a point but you are too stupid to realize it.
 
WinterBorn said:
But many who are worried about Sharia Law violating the First Amendment, have not been worried about Christianity doing the same thing. If it is truly about maintaining a separation of church and state, clear out the violations that already exist before writing laws to avoid problems that do not exist yet.
Click to expand...

No, "many" have not been worried about Christianity doing the same thing. That's all in your head and we both know it.

We have elected officials who pass our laws. That is the way it works in America and every legal citizen gets a vote regardless of religion. We are talking about the courts. One law for everyone. I am amazed you would argue against that.
 
Alias said:
No, "many" have not been worried about Christianity doing the same thing. That's all in your head and we both know it.

We have elected officials who pass our laws. That is the way it works in America and every legal citizen gets a vote regardless of religion. We are talking about the courts. One law for everyone. I am amazed you would argue against that.
Click to expand...

I am not arguing with that. I am arguing with your campaign in which you claim to be all about protecting us from violations of the 1st Amendment. But you seem unconcerned about existing violations.

Blue Laws and laws forbidding atheists from holding public office would seem to me to be a bigger issue than whether a man uses Sharia Laws to get off on a domestic abuse charge, only to have the decision overturned by a higher court.

And if saving court costs and unclogging the court system is really your goal, then legalize marijuana. That would save far more money and remove far more cases from trials.
 
Alias said:
No, "many" have not been worried about Christianity doing the same thing. That's all in your head and we both know it.
Click to expand...


Its all in my head? Tell that to the school districts having to fight to keep evolution in the curriculum, or to not teach "intelligent design". Tell that to the multitudes of small businesses that are not allowed to open on sundays.
 
Alias said:
I am honest. Doesn't matter that it was appealed. What matters is that it was even used in the first place, for crying out loud. The thinking process of you libs is amazing to behold. What happens when it's appealed and some appeasing judge affirms it? It should not even be used in the first place, and that's the point.
Click to expand...

Funny. Normal people would think the judge was just an idiot who didn't know the law. And then there are people like you, who jump to the conclusion that the judge is a sleeper cell or something, appeasing Muslims and waiting for the caliphate to arise.
 
Return of Dune said:
Start carving any time moron.
Where have I ever argued for the separate laws of a religious totalitarian cult?
You just don't get it. You are a moron and I am a genius. You have never come close to winning a single debate against me or even scoring a point but you are too stupid to realize it.
Click to expand...

 
WinterBorn said:
I am not arguing with that. I am arguing with your campaign in which you claim to be all about protecting us from violations of the 1st Amendment. But you seem unconcerned about existing violations.

Blue Laws and laws forbidding atheists from holding public office would seem to me to be a bigger issue than whether a man uses Sharia Laws to get off on a domestic abuse charge, only to have the decision overturned by a higher court.

And if saving court costs and unclogging the court system is really your goal, then legalize marijuana. That would save far more money and remove far more cases from trials.
Click to expand...

What I seem or whatever has no bearing on the topic. We have one set of laws in the USA and those laws are for everyone regardless of religion. What is your problem with that?
 
Alias said:
What I seem or whatever has no bearing on the topic. We have one set of laws in the USA and those laws are for everyone regardless of religion. What is your problem with that?
Click to expand...

Nothing I have said even hints that I have a problem with that. I don't see Sharia law as the big threat that you do. You claimed it was about protecting the 1st amendment. But when I point out existing violations, you blow right past them without being the least bit concerned. I think the system worked, and you respond with the "we don't need to waste money or court space.

I have no problem with making sure none of our laws are based solely on religion. I am just trying to get you to explain why Sharia law is the huge threat you claim while you seem ok with blue laws and state constitutions that forbid atheists from serving in elected office.
 
WinterBorn said:
Nothing I have said even hints that I have a problem with that. I don't see Sharia law as the big threat that you do. You claimed it was about protecting the 1st amendment. But when I point out existing violations, you blow right past them without being the least bit concerned. I think the system worked, and you respond with the "we don't need to waste money or court space.

I have no problem with making sure none of our laws are based solely on religion. I am just trying to get you to explain why Sharia law is the huge threat you claim while you seem ok with blue laws and state constitutions that forbid atheists from serving in elected office.
Click to expand...

I don't agree that what you pointed out are violations of the first amendment. If you believe they are then start your law suit against the govt. Get involved and get to work on what you believe like I am.

The system worked, yes, but it needs to be tweaked so Sharia Law isn't even used at all, not once. Then we will have the court system secured with the law passed by legislatures who were elected by the American people. Don't you agree that everyone should be treated equally under the law?

If a state has a law that forbids athiests from holding office then work to change it if you don't like it. Totally different topic.
 
Alias said:
I don't agree that what you pointed out are violations of the first amendment. If you believe they are then start your law suit against the govt. Get involved and get to work on what you believe like I am.

The system worked, yes, but it needs to be tweaked so Sharia Law isn't even used at all, not once. Then we will have the court system secured with the law passed by legislatures who were elected by the American people. Don't you agree that everyone should be treated equally under the law?

If a state has a law that forbids athiests from holding office then work to change it if you don't like it. Totally different topic.
Click to expand...

So you will keep spouting about Sharia law, but any 1st Amendment violations involving Christianity are someone else's problem?

How about we pass a law saying that no religious laws may be used instead of US laws?
 
Alias said:
I don't agree that what you pointed out are violations of the first amendment. If you believe they are then start your law suit against the govt. Get involved and get to work on what you believe like I am.

The system worked, yes, but it needs to be tweaked so Sharia Law isn't even used at all, not once. Then we will have the court system secured with the law passed by legislatures who were elected by the American people. Don't you agree that everyone should be treated equally under the law?

If a state has a law that forbids athiests from holding office then work to change it if you don't like it. Totally different topic.
Click to expand...

Should the system be tweaked so Beit Din can't be used, also?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top