Posted on 04/30/2014 1:27:02 PM PDT by Ray76
Anyone who isn’t certain that Democrats are devoted to destroying America need only take a look at their despicable conduct in the Florida Senate. In a vote that never should have had to be taken, every single Democrat voted to force Sharia Law on the people of Florida.
Hi, I am a recent convert to islam in Nigeria.
Here? IT’s okay to kidnap Christian girls, school girls, force them to convert to islam. We hand picked 234, left the uglies and weak, converted the nice ones , raped them, married some and sold the rest to slavery at a huge profit! $13 dollars each!
I kid you not, Islam is great!
Do you want your own Miami franchise so you can kidnap your 234? Call Allison Tant or her Superior Barry Soetaro.
*Franchise prices from area to area may vary*
Anyone on the left who says there a war on women on the right, should just say it’s the democrats who voted for sharia law which allows men to beat their wife,...... Thanks Florida democrats for taking that issue off the table.
Agreed...
I think Islam is that wedge.
When your opinion is correct you shouldn't need to resort to hyperbole and emotional drama. This only opens up our side for ridicule.
No law should be used in the U.S. without due process. If the law hasn't been formally adopted by our legislatures and signed by our executives, it shouldn't be used. This is an argument that 90% of Americans could get behind and understand.
One could just as easily say that the position of the Democrats here could let Martian or other extra-terrestrial law be used on U.S. soil.
Why resort to that when there is a much easier way of opposing it?
yes--i have to say, i am not an "ends justify the means" no matter what side it falls on... i especially do not like when propaganda is based on tenets that i agree with... that are true... i expect it from the emotional left, but not from our side--where truth really does matter... we do not have to resort to such underhandedness... btw--i do not think i trashed the article... just didn't care with the slant...
Please explain what you thought was overt propaganda.
I don’t see it myself. If the things said were true, then there’s only the approved of or not style in question.
The inference I agree with ‘the end justifies the means’ was uncalled for. I do not see any lies in there.
What about the Methodists? The Protestants?
What about the Methodists? The Protestants?
He’s a Democrat.....what else do you expect? All those north Florida counties are still largely Dem.....when are they gonna wake up?
Sounds like Democrat talking points.
I doubt there would be interference with business contracts. If the contract specified that German, French, Brazilian, or Japanese, ect, civil law governed I think it unlikely that reciprocity would not be granted.
On the other hand, ecclesiastical law - which sharia is - can not trump Florida and U.S. civil law. For example, you can not stone to death a rape victim or behead a person who criticizes islam.
Sharia is ecclesiastical and civil.
he was not straight up... he inverted it... which made it highly charged--i think to get a certain reaction... unstead of saying that the Dems voted against something, he turned it inside out and said they voted for something... and while i was reading the article, i kept wondering how this is something they could actually even vote on... as it turns out that was not the case... i do not think he needed to do that...
in this case, i do not think "the end justifies the means" was uncalled for... i think if a liberal writer did this with a liberal point of view, many here would not like it... and would think it was typical of their "ends justifies the means" way of doing things...
Your examples are violations of criminal law. No contract, no matter where or when, is enforceable if criminal law is violated. Did you read the bill yourself. There is no mention of Sharia or criminal courts. It deals with foreign law and venue selection in the civil courts. You might know, but many do not that a Florida company can enter a contract with a German company that will use Turkish law adjudicated in a South Dakota courtroom. If the contract is freely entered into, then the South Dakota judge will apply Turkish law to settle any disputes. This happens all the time, and is accepted by courts in all 50 states. You probably know, but many do not, that if two Hasidic men enter into a contract based on Jewish Law, the courts will adjudicate the matter using Jewish Law if the contract so states. I just do not like government interfering in private contracts between individuals and corporations that do not violate criminal law. I have no problem with a Muslim man basing his will on Sharia law, and the courts executing the document. It is called freedom.
Sharia allows polygamy. You accept that?
The point is that foreign law not in comity is excluded.
The bill read not in comity with “Florida Public Policy.” That might be all well in good with a Gov Scott and a GOP legislature, but when writing these laws one should assume it being applied by a Gov Grayson. My point is that people too often confuse the criminal law with the civil law. They hear Sharia Law, Sharia Law and think that this applies to criminal courts, which it never has and never will. Ecclesiastical and Foreign law are only referenced in cases adjudicated in Civil Courts. My worry for Florida companies is that foreign companies will not trust that they could ever collect debts owed them, thus they will take their business elsewhere.
I think your worry is unfounded.
This topic has come up more than once on this forum, and every time a real lawyer will chime in and explain this. They explain that people’s worry over Sharia law is also unfounded. It is all academic anyway because the Supreme Court will rule this law unconstitutional as a violation of the 1st Amendment, as it did with the same law in Oklahoma.
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.