[andyt]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Europe is using Shaira law now? I must have missed that memo.

When people get arrested and prosecuted for 'hate speech' because they say something the goat f*cking followers of the false prophet don't like then that's Sharia Law.

Oh, well, when you put it that way. Eminently reasonable. Guess the followers of the false God need to be more on their guard.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

You must be very well informed. I've never heard of one decision that any religious court has made.

It's amazing what you won't learn reading Spiderman comics.

And in Canada there's a major part of the whole Jewish court thing that you seem to not have a clue about. Any rulings could be challenged in a Court of Appeal and/or ultimately the SCC. The Jewish courts did NOT necessarily have the final say in civil matters.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Europe is using Shaira law now? I must have missed that memo.

When people get arrested and prosecuted for 'hate speech' because they say something the goat f*cking followers of the false prophet don't like then that's Sharia Law.

Oh, well, when you put it that way. Eminently reasonable.

Hyperbole aside, yes it is.

Moslems are using their willing tools on the left to impose Sharia under the guise of 'tolerance'. Regardless of the mechanism and regardless of the proghole gobbledygook that's used to couch these actions it is still, at the end of the day, the imposition of Sharia Law.

[andyt]

Yes, but the woman "victim" would have to do the challenging. How likely is that if she was pushed into going to the religious court in the first place? Who would support her, where would she get the money? Hassidic women are going to be living very isolated lives same as some Muslim women, out of the mainstream.

Anyway, if you want to argue for the Jewish courts, surely any Sharia ones we have here would also have the same safeguards, so what's the problem?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

Yes, but the woman "victim" would have to do the challenging. How likely is that if she was pushed into going to the religious court in the first place? Who would support her, where would she get the money? Hassidic women are going to be living very isolated lives same as some Muslim women, out of the mainstream.

Anyway, if you want to argue for the Jewish courts, surely any Sharia ones we have here would also have the same safeguards, so what's the problem?

Yeah dumbass, that exactly what I'm arguing, despite me saying this to you on the previous page

I I:

Although I do agree with you in principle, there should only be ONE arbiter of the law in Canada and that's our own secular court system. Courts based on religious "law" have no place in Western society.

[andyt]

No, I got that. But then you went on to argue the Jewish courts had a safety measure, so they're not that bad. OK, then the same would apply to Muslim courts. So no worries, right?

[N_Fiddledog]

Earlier people were wondering if it was even possible for Sharia law to begin its incremental creep into Texas.

$1:

An Islamic Tribunal using Sharia law in Texas has been confirmed by Breitbart Texas. The tribunal is operating as a non-profit organization in Dallas. One of the attorneys for the tribunal said participation and acceptance of the tribunal’s decisions are “voluntary.”

Breitbart Texas spoke with one of the “judges,” Dr. Taher El-badawi. He said the tribunal operates under Sharia law as a form of “non-binding dispute resolution.” El-badawi said their organization is “a tribunal, not arbitration.” A tribunal is defined by Meriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “a court or forum of justice.” The four Islamic attorneys call themselves “judges” not “arbitrators.”

El-badawi said the tribunal follows Sharia law to resolve civil disputes in family and business matters. He said they also resolve workplace disputes.

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/01/ ... -attorney/

[martin14]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Earlier people were wondering if it was even possible for Sharia law to begin its incremental creep into Texas.

$1:

An Islamic Tribunal using Sharia law in Texas has been confirmed by Breitbart Texas. The tribunal is operating as a non-profit organization in Dallas. One of the attorneys for the tribunal said participation and acceptance of the tribunal’s decisions are “voluntary.”

Breitbart Texas spoke with one of the “judges,” Dr. Taher El-badawi. He said the tribunal operates under Sharia law as a form of “non-binding dispute resolution.” El-badawi said their organization is “a tribunal, not arbitration.” A tribunal is defined by Meriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “a court or forum of justice.” The four Islamic attorneys call themselves “judges” not “arbitrators.”

El-badawi said the tribunal follows Sharia law to resolve civil disputes in family and business matters. He said they also resolve workplace disputes.

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/01/ ... -attorney/

We will have this soon enough.

[Freakinoldguy]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Earlier people were wondering if it was even possible for Sharia law to begin its incremental creep into Texas.

$1:

An Islamic Tribunal using Sharia law in Texas has been confirmed by Breitbart Texas. The tribunal is operating as a non-profit organization in Dallas. One of the attorneys for the tribunal said participation and acceptance of the tribunal’s decisions are “voluntary.”

Breitbart Texas spoke with one of the “judges,” Dr. Taher El-badawi. He said the tribunal operates under Sharia law as a form of “non-binding dispute resolution.” El-badawi said their organization is “a tribunal, not arbitration.” A tribunal is defined by Meriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “a court or forum of justice.” The four Islamic attorneys call themselves “judges” not “arbitrators.”

El-badawi said the tribunal follows Sharia law to resolve civil disputes in family and business matters. He said they also resolve workplace disputes.

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/01/ ... -attorney/

Exactly and given the fact that the Muslims are already illegally using their own "Tribunals" some people might consider this anti Sharia law prudent because, as everyone knows Muslims will use that law within their communities, not giving a shit whether they violate State or Federal ones and the only way we infidels ever find out they're breaking the real ones is if some disgruntled Muslim brings their rulings to light.


Although, I do love some peoples "nothing to see here folks, just move along" attitude when confronted with things like this.

[Thanos]

Hey, speaking of 'nothing to see here, just move along', another example of 'whadda we need accurate intelligence for anyway? just go with yer gut instincts! wOOt!' goes wrong. Sharia vs. Faces Of Meth. TMHB*.

*typical meth-ho behaviour

[Freakinoldguy]

Thanos Thanos:

Hey, speaking of 'nothing to see here, just move along', another example of 'whadda we need accurate intelligence for anyway? just go with yer gut instincts! wOOt!' goes wrong. Sharia vs. Faces Of Meth. TMHB*.

*typical meth-ho behaviour

I blew coffee all over my keyboard while reading the comments at the bottom of the page. I'd love to see the whole thread on FB because it probably got even funnier.

[Thanos]

Yeah, I'm not sure what's better for laughs. The comments on YouTube, or the comments from the full-retard side of Facebook.

[N_Fiddledog]

I'm not sure how that story connects here, but it is a little bit fascinating.

What a winner.



When you get beyond Gawker though, it turns out the "rifle" was a pellet gun. That's most likely why the story hasn't gone national yet. She was this drunken, Minnesota, neighbourhood watch women who now claims she didn't threaten anybody.

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2015/05/2 ... d-by-bias/

The case comes up in June. I don't understand the charges. As of 5 days ago there doesn't seem to be a formal charge for the felony.

http://www4.co.hennepin.mn.us/webbookin ... 2015013068

Lucky for her, Minnesota doesn't have Sharia law yet. They'd already have her hands chopped off.

[stratos]

Some here are saying this law was not needed. Here are a few links for why it was. I know it is right wing sources but at the same time what they are saying is true and was/is happening in some parts of Texas.

http://rightwingnews.com/democrats/conf ... ariah-law/

http://toprightnews.com/muslims-tried-t ... -response/

this one appears to be an atheist type source

http://shoebat.com/2015/02/04/state-tex ... -states-2/

[Thanos]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

I'm not sure how that story connects here....

Just a thumb in the eye to the creeping-sharia hysteria. I'm no pal to the Muslims by any stretch and I can see this kind of idiocy being allowed in Britain and Europe where any dissenters are forced into submission by the overwhelming political correctness. The US though, especially a red state like Texas? They try to allow sharia there and the locals would (rightly) lynch any politician that signed off on it and go all Rosewood on every Muslim they could catch within the state limits.