Posted on 03/21/2011 1:28:26 PM PDT by opentalk
A judge in Tampa, Florida is creating a buzz with a ruling some say shows that shariah law is creeping into the U.S. One look at the alleged ruling shows it is suspicious. But is it really an example of shariah “comin’ to America?”
According to a document on the website Jihad Watch, Circuit Court Judge Richard A. Nielsen ordered earlier this month that a civil dispute between current and former leaders of a local mosque over who controls funds awarded during a 2008 eminent domain proceeding be decided under “Ecclesiastical Islamic Law.” Below is a copy of the relevant section:
...The judge recently ruled “This case will proceed under Ecclesiastical Islamic law,” (sharia law), “pursuant to the Qur’an.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
Asked and answered. See above.
So .... can a Catholic arbitrator from the Holy Office of the Inquisition order a losing party in arbitration to the stake?
So you are saying that Moslem businessmen can bind non-Moslems to Sharia just by waving a lot of money at them, and getting them to sign an agreement with Sharia in the boilerplate. "It's our standard contract ..... you submit or die."
For most people no. But if you're the losing litigant, then yes, I'm sure he could.
Asked, yes. Care to try again?
No. I have no interesting in appeasing argumentative pricks.
Please clarify how a Catholic arbitrator from the Holy Office could send a party in arbitration to an auto da fe under ecclesiastical law. I'm all ears.
See post #26. Rinse, repeat.
I'll accept your apology right after you prove your point.
Answer the question, please.
If you listen very, very closely, you might be able to hear me ignoring an obnoxious douche-bag. Just one guess who that douche-bag might be.
Considering that the story said it was "...a civil dispute between current and former leaders of a local mosque..." then I'd say it's a safe bet that both parties are Muslim.
Your string of insults are proving nothing except that you are , as you say, an obnoxious prick.
I asked you to prove your uncongenial point, which is that Moslems can immigrate here across 4000 mile and change the rules for everybody and make us kiss their ass. You started talking about pricks and douche-bags. What's up with that?
Yeah, that was Step One.
Guess what Step Two is?
Why don't you tell us?
I was responding to something general said by someone, not the article itself. In other words, please follow that conversation if you really want to know what we were talking about before pointing out the obvious as if I missed that. Thank you.
This would be a cooperative venture binding on all observant Moslems, to do as much business as possible with kufir parties (that would be us) with codicils about arbitration, that they get to pick the arbitrator. Who will be a mufti, operating under Sharia.
"Try it, you'll like it!"
And so on.
They've already embroiled Mayor Bloomberg of New York in Abu Dhabi real-estate deals, and guess what? He's totally on the hook now, working furiously for them to help the jihadis roll the outraged opposition and get their 9/11 "victory mosque" (actually a rabat) built in New York where it will cast its shadow on the ruins of the WTC.
What odds, that Bloomie's Arab deals have Sharia arbitration clauses? He's flacking for them on "Sharia-compliant finance", too. Or is that Grover Norquist? Or both of them?
And I'll bet you lay awake at night worrying about it.
Muslims aren't "changing the rules" for everyone. They're exercising their same contractual rights that anyone else is entitled to in this country. And, those rights are to include a choice of law and/or private arbitration clauses in private contracts.
If you don't want to do business with people who demand that Sharia law is used in private binding arbitration, then don't do business with those people. That would be just like people who don't wish to do business with Hasidic Jews who demand similar private arbitration contract clauses using Jewish Law rather than Sharia Law
People who are running around with their hair on fire screaming "Sharia law is creeping into American courts", are (at best) uniformed with some basic, fundamental principles of American contract law.
"Your string of insults are proving nothing except that you are , as you say, an obnoxious prick."
No, my "string of insults" are in-kind responses to an argumentative ass.
Stop the "victory mosque" in New York and I'll take my hat off to you and believe anything you say.
How's that?
Meanwhile, they're getting their victory mosque, to go with their victory trophy in Shanksville.
Now explain why refusing to do business with people in an open forum (i.e. of business) doesn't expose you to civil liabilities for "antisemitism" or "hydrophobia" or some other b.s. charge, under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
You don't have the right to "refuse service to anyone" any more.
And there he is, your customer, with a copy of the Sunna in his hand, all ready to do Sharia-compliant business with you. You're going to refuse, just because he's black/gay/Moslem/Jewish? You'll pay his lawyer damages, then.
Tell me that won't happen.
And stop being so obnoxious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.