I'm surprised no one is talking about the Oklahoma

[Tilted (Premo)]

... thing. I've been withholding comment, waiting to see the exact wording that the affirmative vote on State Question 755 will cause to be added to the Oklahoma constitution. But, I'm surprised no one on here has commented on or celebrated the situation.

And yes, a legal challenge has already been filed, by CAIR.

More.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Hey! Anyone interested in the new Oklahoma idea of preventing something that the law, properly understood, already prevents?

[Tilted (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

Hey! Anyone interested in the new Oklahoma idea of preventing something that the law, properly understood, already prevents?

Yeah, I don't quite get the point of the amendment myself. That's why I'd like to see its exact wording.

But, it seems like the kind of thing that mainstream media would be all over - part of it decrying the unfair persecution of Islam and part of it celebrating the triumph of traditional American values over political correctness.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Tilted

Yeah, I don't quite get the point of the amendment myself. That's why I'd like to see its exact wording.

But, it seems like the kind of thing that mainstream media would be all over - part of it decrying the unfair persecution of Islam and part of it celebrating the triumph of traditional American values over political correctness.

I'm not seeing the triumph of traditional values over political correctness.

I am seeing a law passed to decry that we have too many laws and, sadly, I DO see that as keeping in the modern American tradition. The only thing I see missing that is keeping this from being a total fiasco, at this point, is a commity being commisioned to study the potential impact of non American law being used to apply American law.

[Lenny]

Originally Posted by Tilted

... thing. I've been withholding comment, waiting to see the exact wording that the affirmative vote on State Question 755 will cause to be added to the Oklahoma constitution. But, I'm surprised no one on here has commented on or celebrated the situation.

And yes, a legal challenge has already been filed, by CAIR.

More.

Yesterday one of the many blonde lawyers on FoxNEWS said (1) CAIR has no standing and the suit will probably be thrown out (2) international law cannot totally be ignored when dealing with international issues so that part of the amendment is moot (3) any lawsuit before someone is harmed by the amendment is meaningless (but then, so was Arizona's "We will enforce the law even if the Feds won't" issue.

[Tilted (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

I'm not seeing the triumph of traditional values over political correctness.

I don't see that either, I was just searching for an abstract description of how pundits might frame it.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Lenny

Yesterday one of the many blonde lawyers on FoxNEWS said (1) CAIR has no standing and the suit will probably be thrown out (2) international law cannot totally be ignored when dealing with international issues so that part of the amendment is moot (3) any lawsuit before someone is harmed by the amendment is meaningless (but then, so was Arizona's "We will enforce the law even if the Feds won't" issue.

They do like their brainy babes over there.

I remember hearing about a ruling (in the last 5 yrs) where the judge made reference to case law or laws passed in Europe when coming to a decision over an American Issue


A Danger of Using Foreign Law to Interpret US Law:



and I found this involving Shari'a Law:

Court Reverses Decision by U.S. Judge Who Applied Sharia Law to Domestic Violence Case



By Susan Brinkmann, OCDS
Staff Journalist

A New Jersey appellate court has overturned the decision by a judge who ruled that a Muslim man who committed sexual assault against his wife was not guilty because he was acting on his Islamic beliefs.

According to Jihad Watch, the ruling reversed an earlier decision by a judge who refused to charge a Moroccan man with the repeated sexual assault of his teenaged bride.

“This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did,” the judge ruled. “The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.”

and this:

EU judges want Sharia law applied in British courts

Judges could be forced to bow to Sharia law in some divorce cases heard in Britain.

An EU plan calls for family courts across Europe to hear cases using the laws of whichever country the couple involved have close links to.

That could mean a court in England handling a case within the French legal framework, or even applying the laws of Saudi Arabia to a husband and wife living in Britain.

it is not surprising folks will start waking up and pass laws to keep the Camel's nose out of the tent in their jurisdiction






I am not sure how CAIR can claim this is Unconstitutional .... after all we have Separation of Mosque and State in this country .... this would seem like a prime example of upholding the separation ........







Shari'a Law does not provide "Equal Protection" Under the Law .... in fact a woman is 2/5s a Man's Equal .... NON Muslims are sub class citizens

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Tilted

I don't see that either, I was just searching for an abstract description of how pundits might frame it.

Well, let's see...

How about "...a triumph of the modern legal/industrial complex where no matter what the suit is about, the lawyers win..."


How'd that be?

[Tilted (Premo)]

This page purports to show what the Oklahoma constitution would be amended to read.