Skip to comments.Tampa Court Allows Sharia Law
Posted on 03/19/2011 10:16:29 PM PDT by Mgm3com
Tampa Court Allows Sharia Law
The 13th Circuit Court Judge Richard A. Nielson ruled that a civil suit between the Islamic Education Center of Tampa and four of it`s trusties be settled, not in a court of law, but under Ecclesiastical Islamic Law.
(Excerpt) Read more at mazzeo-freeworldblog.blogspot.com ...
TEOTWAWKI if this stands.
I think its the CONTRACT, that both parties signed off on, that the Judge ruled on. I could be wrong.
Parties in a contract can agree to whatever law they want. Its not a judicial endorsement or adoption of Sharia.
This is pretty much like agreeing to arbitration mechanism in a sales contract. As long as both parties agree to an alternative dispute resolution forum - they can be bound to it. This is not a big deal.
If all parties agree to this form of arbitration then what’s the problem?
Precisely. But this is at least the 3rd such post Ive seen on FR about this topic, all frantically claiming Sharia is now law in FL.
Total effing joke.
Can e lawyer tell what this really is? Legally, did they just drop the suit in infidel courts?
I found it very odd and disturbing that the judge wrote where this will be settled. Why not leave it at “they’ll work it out in mediation”
Did you actually follow the links to read the article? The court didn’t do anything close to implementing Sharia law. Over-reactions like this do us no favors.
Why is this crap even in this country under the guise of a religion??
Efforts to impose any code of law which is not part of U.S. law is an attempt to subvert the Constitution. As such, they are an attack on U.S. national sovereignty. They are aimed at fomenting the abandonment of our laws and a takeover of our government without using military force, but instead using our own laws and politicians.
In the U.S., big business, the “intelligentsia” and the political class, by a wide margin, are deluded into the notion that islam is “just another religion” and that it will simply join in America as all past immigrations have. They tell themselves that current U.S. citizens and muslims will “learn to get along”. They believe that muslims will blend into American society and that life will go on as it has. Big business assumes that it makes no difference. Many that are highly educated and agnostic or atheists arrogantly tell themselves that if they are interested enough in these new immigrants “as people”, and they humor the immigrants’ desires enough, that they will retain their position in society. The political class assumes that it will stay in power, in the worst case become vassals for a foreign power. Such ideas indicate that they do not understand the rights they are giving up and that they are afraid. Freedom lost is freedom truly appreciated.
This is a common MISTAKE!
The parties in contract can agree in whatever they want indeed, UNLESS IT IS AN ATACK ON THE LAW OF THE LAND - THE USA CONSTITUTION.
SHARIA IS AGAINST THE USA CONSTITUTION.
Material was plagiarized from Fleming-Hayes.com.
You then posted a thread about it, linking to the original piece:
Realizing that this gained you no blog hits, you then copied
the material onto your blog and posted a second thread about
it, this time linking to your blog.
Personally I think this is pretty dang scummy and a blatant
attempt to milk blog hits from Free Republic.
Shame on you, Mgm3com.
Parties can agree to settle however they wish, with certain limitations.
Dueling, by sword or pistol, legally called “Trial by Mortal Combat,” is no longer permitted.
It appears from his posting history -
- that Mgm3com has a long standing habit of linking excerpted material to his blog.
It also appears that he regularly uses other people’s material from such sources as The Globe and The Wall Street Journal, Politico and the Denver Post in his teasers without bothering to credit the sources when posting on FR, thus making it appear that it is solely his commentary, when in fact, the commentary is only an addendum to the “borrowed” story.
People may be interested enough to check it on a regular basis.
But if FR is being used to troll for blog hits, well, that's just not sportin'. And it certainly isn't the purpose of FR.
With apologies to Pink Floyd...
So if the penalty is stoning to death, that’s okay? How can Sharia law be allowed anythere in this country, contract or not?
Thanks for the link to the original source, humblegunner.
Plagiarizing and blog pimping are frowned upon here, Mgm3com.
You must already know that, since you are not a raw n00b. Surely you have spent
a lot of time reading Free Republic and learning all the ins and outs.
It's an order enforcing a contractual obligation to resolve contract disputes (stemming from the this contract) in the manner stipulated by the contract. In this instance, both parties agreed (when the contract was executed) that all disputes would be arbitrated by a sharia court.
"I found it very odd and disturbing that the judge wrote where this will be settled. Why not leave it at theyll work it out in mediation"
Because that's not the contract stipulates. The contract stipulates a sharia court, just like the millions of contracts in the US that stipulate Jewish laws and Jewish courts for arbitration involving a company who may be "orthodox".
If you don't want to resolve your contract disputes using Sharia law, then don't sign the contract. These people did.
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.