Posted on 02/08/2008 9:08:56 AM PST by 3AngelaD
Assalam aleikum, y'all! The Second Court of Appeals of the State of Texas has rendered a ruling {http://www.2ndcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opinions/HTMLopinion.asp?OpinionID=14601} on the enforceability of shari'a judgments rendered by imams. According to the Texas appeals court, it's all good. You've heard of the Texas Courts. Ladies and gentlemen, make way for the Texas Islamic Courts!!! The parties will ask the courts to refer the cases for arbitration to Texas Islamic court within "Seven Days" from the establishment of the Texas Islamic Court panel of Arbitrators. The assignment must include ALL cases, including those filed against or on behalf of other family members related to the parties. Each party will notify the other party, Texas Islamic Court, and their respective attorneys, in writing of the assignment of all the above Cause Numbers from the above appropriate District Court to Texas Islamic Court.
In general, private arbitration agreements are enforceable by government courts. Shari'a arbitration agreements are one type of private arbitration agreement. Without a theory as to why shari'a arbitration agreements shouldn't be enforced by the courts, I'm not sure what else the appeals court could have done in this case. Still, this is not a welcome development.
WWWWwhooooooooooooooo-eeeeeeeeeeee. I’m gonna rope me up four wives. Hot d*mn!
Does this mean that Canon Law will apply in the event of Catholics filing for divorce?
And you will be able to get rid of them and acquire some more by saying, “I divorce thee,” three times. Cool, huh?
direct link
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/191148.php
Is this for real???
This has got to be a joke, hyperbole, or wrong or something.
If for real, time will not be on an infidel’s side. Soon, infidels will be forced under shari arbitration. Guess what happens then... If this is real, it’s not good for calm, law and order.
Check the link to the court decision, which I included in the post. It is for real. Aren’t appeals court judges elected in Texas?
Providing the agreements are properly drawn, and the standards of arbitration are clear, I don’t see how this is different from any other sort of mutual agreement to binding arbitration.
Of course as a matter of personal opinion I probably would not much like the religious and moral underpinnings of many of the arbitrators’ likely decisions - but that would also likely be true of some of the agreements by the parties in Christian “covenant marriages”, for example.
And I would not try to stop people from making either kind of choice, so long as their choices do not violate secular laws against child abuse, domestic violence, fraud and the like.
I think I’ll cite Sharia law in court whenever I get a traffic ticket. The astonished confusion alone will get me out of it.
Rather it appears that all the parties in a lawsuit, along with their lawyers, agreed to binding arbitration by a panel abiding by "The Texas General Arbitration Act".
Once it got to arbitration there were more disputes but the fact is that everybody agreed including their legal counsel.
The most recent ruling is:
"We render judgment that the Arbitration Agreement signed by the parties is valid and enforceable and covers all disputes between the parties that arose prior to the date the parties signed the Arbitration Agreement, including all matters that were the subject of the partial summary judgment previously granted by the trial court."
Don't want to enter into binding arbitration? Don't agree to.
Camel’s nose under tent. Among other things, Shari’a law defines “acceptable levels” of domestic violence and child abuse.
If I understand this correctly, it would apply only in cases where both parties agreed in advance to use a particular arbitration entity that applied Cannon Law, whether or not the parties involved are Catholic (which presumably they would be if they agreed to such).
If and when there is an attempt to make Islamic law mandatory the <bleep> is really going to hit the fan. I imagine this will happen in Europe first.
Better marry sisters. Otherwise, you’ll have four mothers-in-law, too.
Seems I’ve got a lot to learn about the consequences of Sharia law.
Yeah, well there is that downside risk...but I'll save a bunch of money on my car insurance that way.
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.