Current Quarter Expenses.
Donate Today!
Posted on 01/15/2012 1:52:06 PM PST by John Semmens
The three-member U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the voter-passed initiative blocking state courts from using Muslim sharia law to decide cases . The Court held that the initiative impeded plaintiff Muneer Awad’s right to fully practice his faith.
“U.S. secular law does not recognize concepts like ‘honor killings,’ ‘fatwas,‘ and the suppression of blasphemy that are fundamental to the Islamic faith,” the Court said. “Consequently, if the initiative were allowed to stand, Mr. Awad might be prosecuted for acts that his faith commands him to commit. This interferes with his right to religious freedom under theUnited States’ Constitution.”
Non-Muslims were urged to protect themselves and avoid conflict by “staying out of Muslim areas, refraining from insensitive remarks, and showing a modicum of respect for Muslim values and practices. For example, so-called ‘honor killings’ are only carried out against Muslim women and girls. Non-Muslims aren’t at risk. So there is no danger that a person of differing religious beliefs would be harmed if sharia law is allowed to prevail within the Muslim community on this issue.”
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news posts you can find them at...
http://azconservative.org/2012/01/14/holder-says-obamas-recess-appointments-legal/
A nation divided against itself will fall. Do not alter the US Constitution.
sarc/
It is a religion-based (if you consider islam a religion) and ruling that it can be used in U.S. courts would be a violation of the left’s favorite rule, it violates the separation of church and state. The state should tell the 9th to pound sand unless they are ruling that mixing church and state matters is permissible.
Sir John, this is one of your very best ones....great work!
Hide yer food and lock up yer daughters!
I’m imposing Creek Law!
So if I decide to be a Muslim I can beat my wife and get away with it?
So now, since Sharia law will be accepted, a man can murder his wife/daughter/family member as an honor killing and will NOT face any judgment at all because our courts will say, “It’s his religious freedom....”, therefore “no foul”.
If this holds, our nation is indeed beyond recovery.
Next will be the legalized accepted killings of Christians by Muslims because it has to be allowed to give Muslims “religious freedom”.
OK, I did not read any of the article, but see it is from a spoof site.
Exactly what I reminded the 10th Circuit Court of— A house divided against itself cannot stand. I liked our Country better when our Government understood that laws made by man are invalid if they violate the Laws dictated by God ,Himself. The Revealed Law, discovered by Reason and reflected in the Holy Writ/ Sacred Writings/ the Bible and the laws of nature given those without benefit of the Revealed Law. The enemy of Our country began this corrosive push back about 1940 near as I can tell( maybe one could back it up to the 20’s with the parent organization to the ACLU. But like Cancer and rust it has taken a long time.
John is very good, don’t feel bad. Just make sure you get on his ping list, helps to know what’s coming.
America is to the point of no return unless Christians excercise 2 Corinthians 7:14. Freedom can be lost in one generation.
Seems you are the only one to "get it."
Non-Muslims were urged to protect themselves and avoid conflict by “staying out of Muslim areas.
U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals hoists white flag.They are clueless about our Constitution.They must have studied law between lunch and dinner.
I must have been absent that day when the “Judicial”third of the branches got the ultimate rock/paper/AND scissors part of the “equality.”
So an AMERICAN MUSLIM WOMEN loses her US CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS because someone married her off to a muslim when she was in a country that didn’t give her a choice.
Yeah baby! THAT’S AMERICA!!!!
(well, at least in some left wing extremist nutbar anyway...)
The Speaker of the House should invite the three member appeals court to come testify about the rationale for their decision, if not to review and correct it, than to at least help the public understand the basis of the decision.
It's getting more difficult to even keep up with what's satire and what's for real. Especially with many of these double negative lawsuits, or what appears as one at first glance. The law is supposed to be unambiguous and clear and simple enough for a sixth grader to understand. These days one must have a doctorate in logic in order to understand what the case is all about at first reading.
Never let it be said that a judge would be guilty of giving away trade secrets to the unlearned by speaking in plain English.
Heh! Great blog, John!!
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.