End Times and Current Events
December 12, 2017, 06:16:25 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome To End Times and Current Events.
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Sharia taking over one State at a time!

Shoutbox
November 24, 2017, 07:52:34 pm tennis shoe says: What happened to BA? He seems to have vanished.
November 14, 2017, 01:43:05 am Mark says:
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
View Shout History
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Sharia taking over one State at a time!  (Read 5315 times)
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: August 19, 2011, 08:50:00 am »

"This plan goes against our country's core values of accepting people from all races and walks of life," said state Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Detroit, who is Muslim. "We simply cannot move forward with this plan.

"It's racism at its core."

 Huh

Islam is a RELIGION, NOT a *race*.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: August 19, 2011, 09:17:07 am »

Huh

Islam is a RELIGION, NOT a *race*.

 Cheesy i was wondering if any one else would pick up on that.
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #32 on: August 29, 2011, 07:35:19 am »

Sharia Law Topic of First Amendment Panel Discussions


The First Amendment Center moderated a panel discussion in Tennessee this week, addressing a growing legal concern in the United States: Sharia Law.

About 20 U.S. states have legislative measures filed barring judges from considering Sharia law in their decisions. Four states have passed legislation. An earlier restatement of a Tennessee law would effectively criminalize the practice of Islam, punishing those individuals with up to 15 years in prison.

Open Doors advocacy coordinator Lindsay Vessey explains, "Sharia law is basically Islamic law, and that deals with everything from legal issues to social issues and marital issues—it basically controls every aspect of one's life."

In recent years, a movement has been growing steadily as more Muslims come to the U.S. to live. Vessey says, "In Western countries, a lot of Muslims would like to bring Sharia law. Their argument is essentially that to be culturally sensitive to them, these countries should allow them to govern themselves by their own Sharia law, and that it doesn't really contradict or cause any problems with the existing legal structure."

Opponents of such laws say the proposals reflect an "Islamaphobia" aimed at restricting the presence and religious beliefs of Muslims. However, Vessey explains, "It actually takes away the rights of people who maybe don't want to be subjected to Sharia law, but because they were born into a Muslim family who ascribes to it, they're actually forced into it. That's a really dangerous situation, to have two parallel systems of law going on in a country."

In other countries experimenting with the concept, the Sharia law system has proven to be chaotic. "One of the best examples where we can see this is in England," Vessey says. "There are hundreds of Sharia courts there. Many of the Muslim immigrants use those courts as opposed to using the British legal system."

The issue is that "under Sharia law, something that's illegal is to convert away from Islam. That means that if you are a Muslim in England and you are being subjected to Sharia law, you can't convert to Christianity, or you can't even leave your faith and become an atheist," explains Vessey.

Under that scenario, there is no religious freedom. Vessey says the argument that Sharia does not conflict with an existing legal system also fails the Constitution test. "You can be punished under that law," Vessey says. "That's a court that would be in direct contradiction to our laws here in the United States—the freedom of religion/ freedom of expression is one of our dearest-held constitutional beliefs."

Similar to other bills in the U.S., the language does not mention "Sharia" specifically. For example, the Michigan bill, introduced by State Rep. Dave Agema, R-Grandville, says the ban would "limit the application and enforcement ... of foreign laws that would impair constitutional rights."

Vessey says although Muslim groups are threatening to challenge the constitutionality of the proposals, the legal argument will likely be what defenders are focused on: "Everything that goes at the heart of what Americans believe and what is enshrined in our Constitution is contradicted by Sharia law in terms of religious freedom. Something should be done to prevent having Sharia courts and Sharia law being used side-by-side in the United States like is already being done in England."

As the opponents and proponents of the bills continue to make their cases, Vessey says it's important not to forget the reason why believers are part of this discussion: "The one thing that we can do is to pray that their hearts and eyes are opened to the message of the Gospel. Pray for opportunities to share with Muslims in our communities."

http://www.charismanews.com/us/31861-sharia-law-topic-of-first-amendment-panel-discussions
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: September 07, 2011, 05:43:02 am »

The Sharia Threat to America

On this week's special edition of the Stakelbeck on Terror show, CBN News analyzes the growing push by radical Muslims to incorporate Islamic Sharia law in America.

National security experts Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy and retired Lt. Gen. William "Jerry" Boykin join the conversation. The pair contributed to the Team B II report, "Shariah: The Threat to America."

Watch as they explain how Sharia is making inroads in the U.S., who's behind the trend, and what can be done to stop it.



full vid: http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/May/Stakelbeck-on-Terror-Sharias-Threat-to-America/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: September 13, 2011, 09:24:22 am »

Appeals Court Hears Challenge to Oklahoma's Sharia Law Ban


Oklahoma Solicitor General Patrick Wyrick fielded pointed questions Monday from judges on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who asked why a state constitutional amendment banning Sharia law applies only to one religion.

“There’s no mention of any other specific law,” said Judge Scott Matheson, appointed last year to the Denver-based federal court by President Barack Obama. “We just have Sharia law singled out.”

Wyrick explained that the Oklahoma ballot measure that would ban Sharia law, SQ 775, the “Save our State” amendment, applies not just to Sharia – the body of law based on the Quran and the religion of Islam – but to all international laws.

Approved in November 2010 by 70 percent of voters in the Sooner State, the measure is aimed at so-called “cases of first impression,” legal matters for which there is no specific law or precedent on which to render a decision.

Often in such cases, judges look to laws or precedents outside their jurisdiction for some guidance as to how to rule. The Oklahoma amendment, concerning which the 10th Circuit heard opposing oral arguments Monday, declares that states may not consider anything other than U.S. laws.

Muneer Awad, executive director of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council of American-Islamic Relations, has mounted the court challenge to SQ 775 with the help of the ACLU and support of Muslim organizations around the country.

His challenge claims that Oklahoma’s proposed ban on Sharia law violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free exercise of religion. He accuses the supporters of SQ 775, carried in the state legislature by the Republican Rep. Rex Duncan, of being “politically motivated.”

Duncan denies the accusation. He says he just doesn’t want Oklahoma judges deciding state cases on the basis of Sharia or other non-American laws. And while Awad and other Muslim leaders suggest that the prospect is remote of Sharia law being applied in Oklahoma or any other state, it has, in fact occurred.

Perhaps the most notorious case occurred in 2008 when a New Jersey woman sought a temporary restraining order against her estranged husband, whom she claimed had raped her.

A trial judge denied the restraining order, ruling that the husband had acted according to Sharia law, under which “his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to” was not prohibited, no matter state or federal law.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/appeals-court-hears-challenge-to-oklahomas-sharia-law-ban-55501/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: October 23, 2011, 12:57:50 pm »

Libya's transitional leader declares liberation

10/23/11

..BENGHAZI, Libya (AP) — Libya's transitional leader declared his country's liberation on Sunday, three days after the hated dictator Moammar Gadhafi was captured and killed.

He called on Libyans to show "patience, honesty and tolerance" and eschew hatred as they embark on rebuilding the country at the end of an 8-month civil war.

The transitional government leader Mustafa Abdul-Jalil set out a vision for the post-Gadhafi future with an Islamist tint, saying that Islamic Sharia law would be the "basic source" of legislation in the country and that existing laws that contradict the teachings of Islam would be nullified. In a gesture that showed his own piety, he urged Libyans not to express their joy by firing in the air, but rather to chant "Allahu Akbar," or God is Great. He then stepped aside and knelt to offer a brief prayer of thanks.

"This revolution was looked after by God to achieve victory," he told the crowd at the declaration ceremony in the eastern city of Benghazi, the birthplace of the uprising against Gadhafi began. He thanked those who fell in the fight against Gadhafi's forces. "This revolution began peacefully to demand the minimum of legitimate rights, but it was met by excessive violence."

Abdul-Jalil said new banks would be set up to follow the Islamic banking system, which bans charging interest. For the time being, he said interest would be canceled from any personal loans already taken out less than 10,000 Libyan dinars (about $7,500).

He also announced that all military personnel and civilians who have taken part in the fight against Gadhafi would be promoted to the rank above their existing one. He said a package of perks would later be announced for all fighters.

"Thank You, thank you to the fighters who achieved victory, both civilians and military," he said. He also paid tribute to the Gulf Cooperation Council, a six-nation alliance led by Saudi Arabia, The Arab League and the European Union. NATO, which aided the anti-Gadhafi fighters with airstrikes, performed its task with "efficiency and professionalism."

..
Report Spam   Logged
PeanutGallery
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 223


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: October 23, 2011, 05:14:31 pm »

Huh

Islam is a RELIGION, NOT a *race*.
Cheesy i was wondering if any one else would pick up on that.
It's religious and political.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: October 26, 2011, 05:51:00 am »

Islam makes inroads through U.S. courts
Many cases being decided by edicts from Muhammad


Islamic law, or Shariah, already is being applied in the U.S. court system, according to an extensive new report.

A recent Center for Security Policy study called "Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases
http://shariahinamericancourts.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Sharia_Law_And_American_State_Courts_1.4_06212011.pdf
 outlines dozens of cases in which the Islamic system of law has been applied.

Center spokesman David Reaboi said the Islamic strictures are being carried out mostly in cases in which foreigners are the principals.

"Shariah enters U.S. courts through the practice of comity to foreign law," Reaboi explained. "This happens, for example, when a judge decides to allow the use of say, Pakistani or Saudi family law (Shariah) in a dispute between Pakistanis or Saudis."

He said the study only scratches the surface of Shariah's presence in the nation.

"For every case in this sample drawn from published appellate legal cases, there are innumerable cases at the trial level that remain unnoticed except by the participants," the study said. "Thus, this report is a only a sample of possible cases – a 'tip of the iceberg' – of legal cases involving Shariah in local, state and federal courts."

Among the cases cited was one from New Jersey in which a wife sought a restraining order against her husband because of spousal abuse.

"S.D. (wife) and M.J.R. (husband) were both Muslims and citizens of Morocco and both resided in New Jersey. After only three months of marriage, husband began physically abusing wife. The physical abuse administered by husband injured wife's entire body including her breasts and pubic area," the report said. "Additionally, husband forced himself on wife and had non-consensual sex with her on multiple occasions. Husband stated to wife that Islam allowed him to have sex with her at any time he wished. Wife asked the trial court to grant a restraining order against husband shortly after he verbally divorced her in front of their imam," the report said.

"The trial court refused to issue a final restraining order against husband finding that, although husband had harassed and assaulted wife, husband believed it was his religious right to have non-consensual sex with his wife and that belief precluded any criminal intent on the part of husband," according to the report.

"The New Jersey appellate court reversed the trial court and ordered that the trial court enter a final restraining order against husband. The New Jersey appellate court stated that the trial court erroneously allowed the husband's religious beliefs to excuse him from New Jersey’s criminal code and that husband knowingly engaged in non-consensual sex with wife," the report said.

The report also presents details of 19 more "top cases" and a summary of 50 cases from 23 states that have used Shariah as the basis for court decisions.

American Center for Law and Justice Shariah expert Shaheryar Gill said in the prominent New Jersey case, "the judge actually looked at Shariah law to decide."

Gill says an ACLJ book, "Shariah Law: Radical Islam's Threat to the U.S. Constitution," discusses the problem.

"In the case of 'S.D. v. M.J.R,' the New Jersey appellate court rightly refused to accommodate the sincerely held religious beliefs of a Muslim man who physically, verbally, and sexually abused his wife in accordance with Shariah," the ACLJ book says.

The study emphasizes that family law is only part of the complete Shariah picture. It concludes that since Islamic religious law moves further than American constitutional law on a range of subjects, Shariah is incompatible with U.S. precedents.

"Institutionalized, authoritative Shariah is comprehensive and by definition without limit in its ambitions and scope, and it also includes legally mandated, recommended, permitted, discouraged and prohibited practices that are strongly biased and discriminatory against women, homosexuals and non-Muslims," the study said.

"Shariah law provides a legal framework for violence up to and including legalized murder against apostates (people who have left Islam), homosexuals, blasphemers and especially women accused of various crimes," the study said.

"Just this year in 2011, in Pakistan's Shariah legal system, both apostates and blasphemers have been imprisoned and faced execution. Shariah criminal punishments are extreme, including amputations and lashings for numerous crimes," the study reported.

WND reported in January about the high profile blasphemy case of Pakistani Christian woman Asia Bibi, who received the death penalty for blasphemy, simply for sharing the Gospel with her Muslim coworkers.

WND also reported in June that former terrorist Kamal Saleem agreed that one of the methods of carrying out jihad is through the courts.

"What they're trying to do is fake cases for Islam and these cases are done purposefully. We take an imam, there are two of them. They were fighting against each other and the fight was over a mosque," Saleem said. "That is so devious and it is part of the culture of Islamic invasion. These two imams are fighting over a mosque in Florida. Each imam says it belongs to me.

"One says I built it and I raised the funds. The other one says the Wahhabi government put me over here and they're the ones who sent the money. Both of them are right," Saleem continued.

"They went to the Supreme Court in Florida. What happened is that they said this was a Muslim matter and you need to judge us by Islamic Shariah law or you will not understand how these things work," he said.

Gill said there are other recent cases that demonstrate the level to which Shariah has infiltrated the court system.

"There are different types of cases in which you see that Shariah or Islamic law is applied or is required to be applied, or looked at," Gill said.

"For example, indirectly, there are cases in which foreign judgments are brought into the United States and enforced here," he said.

One such case according to the ACLJ's booklet is the case of 'Farah v. Farah,' heard in Virginia.

In that case, a Virginia trial judge recognized the validity of a Muslim marriage that was conducted through a proxy in England."

"The trial judge ruled that the marriage, which was solemnized in England (though no certificate of marriage was issued by any English authority) and its ceremony completed in Pakistan, must be honored in Virginia because 'the law of the state of Pakistan sanctions marriages performed under the personal law of the parties which in this case was Moslem law,'" the ACLJ book reported.

The book pointed out that the Virginia court, "correctly recognized, however, that Pakistan's recognition of Shariah 'does not control the issue of the validity of the marriage under Virginia law.' Instead, the court applied Virginia law, which only granted comity according to the principles of the location celebrating the marriage, which was England."

There is also the California case of "Malak v. Malak," which involved a Lebanese court decision.

"The court determined, however, that the Lebanese order was enforceable because even though the Lebanese court had not explicitly applied the 'best interests of the child' standard, its decision aligned with California's 'best interests of the child' standard," the ACLJ book said.

An Emory University Law School publication noted that the "Malak" case was cited as precedent in other Muslim child custody cases.

Atlas Shrugs publisher and Islam analyst Pamela Geller says that Islamic law cited as the basis for any American court decision shows that the American legal system is turning a dangerous corner.

"It is setting a very dangerous precedent. Shariah law and U.S. law conflict in numerous ways, including on issues of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and equality of rights for women. Allowing Shariah to be a determining factor in U.S. courtrooms threatens those rights for all of us," Geller said.



Read more: Islam makes inroads through U.S. courts http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=360081#ixzz1bsrdMbCo

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
akfools
Guest
« Reply #38 on: October 27, 2011, 11:45:17 pm »

Use of Islamic law has been accepted in a civil case, a judge has ruled


A state appeals court has ruled that a Hillsborough County Circuit judge can consider Islamic law to decide a civil case between a mosque and its former trustees.

The decision by the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Lakeland to decline the appeal of the Islamic Education Center of Tampa sends the case back to Hillsborough County Circuit Judge Richard A. Nielsen. Nielsen's decision in March to allow the case to proceed under "ecclesiastical Islamic law" drew national attention when the ruling was criticized by conservative bloggers.

The case has its roots in 2002, when the mosque ousted four of its founding members; those founding members later sued the mosque. One of the main issues of dispute was who would be responsible for how to spend $2.5 million Florida's Turnpike Enterprise had paid the mosque for 3.4 acres needed to widen Veterans Expressway.

When he made his March ruling, Nielsen said courts have ruled "that ecclesiastical law controls certain relations between members of a religious organization, whether a church, synagogue, temple or mosque."

The uproar over the ruling went overboard, said Lee Segal, a Clearwater attorney representing the ousted trustees. He said the ruling follows established legal precedent and does not mean Nielsen is allowing Islamic law to trump U.S. law.

"When the parties agree (before the trial that) they are bound to Islamic law, they can be bound to Islamic law," Segal said. "As long as what you are agreeing to doesn't violate the constitution of the United States, you can apply any type of law."

Though the issue of Islamic law has garnered attention, the legal fight over the lawsuit is complicated, with much of it revolving around the arbitration process.

On Monday, Paul Thanasides, the attorney for the mosque, filed a new motion to dismiss the case because of lack of jurisdiction.

http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2011/oct/25/menewso5-use-of-islamic-law-ok-in-civil-case-judge-ar-274429/
Report Spam   Logged
akfools
Guest
« Reply #39 on: October 28, 2011, 12:10:50 am »

Judge Rules American Courts Can Use Sharia Law (Video)

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1242110053001/judge-rules-american-courts-can-use-sharia-law/?playlist_id=87485
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #40 on: October 28, 2011, 03:16:59 pm »

I disagree with this in that US law is sufficient to handle a given case. If the parties involved are all arguing over some religious aspect, and are demanding relief of some kind, the courts reserve the right to dismiss the case and refuse to hear it.

The judge I suspect could also recommend arbitration, which is private and outside the courts. Done. So we need to pay attention to just what the courts are saying or ruling on. If the court agrees to hear a case, using Sharia, instead of US law to make a ruling, that's wrong. Parties who insist on Sharia, Judaism, Christianity, etc. should be encouraged to take their case outside the US court system, being a religious matter, and not a secular one.

If your seeking relief in the US court system, then all parties involved must agree to the rules of that system, and not decided to bring in your own set of laws. That just makes no sense. Regardless of religion, Caesar demands allegience above any religious beliefs, so it's strange that Sharia is being allowed in. Surely this won't go anywhere outside of very basic lower court cases, but even then, it shouldn't happen.

The US courts and America itself is secular, which is why we have freedom of religion, but the government itself is secular, and supposedly by law is not allowed to discriminate against religion, so by design it has traditionally not recognized religious defenses in courts, such as medical treatment cases of children. It's a double-standard to allow Sharia, and opens a huge legal can of worms, which in the end may be their goal.

In order for there to be no discrimination against any particular religion, including Sharia, then the courts must accept ALL religions. Let people think about the implications of that for awhile.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #41 on: December 15, 2011, 05:30:59 am »

The Simpsons holiday episode mocks shariah law in the U.S.

did you really expect anything less?  Roll Eyes



Last night’s holiday episode of The Simpsons portrayed the family years into the future, when grown-up Lisa’s man Milhouse complains of Christmas allergies and heads to Michigan, which she says is “under shariah law.”

Milhouse is shown on the University of Michigan campus wearing a niqab, which shows only his eyes.

Dearborn, Michigan is the home of the largest Arab population outside of the Middle East and the location of the now-controversial Muslim reality show All-American Muslim.

It’s not under Islamic law now, and as long as the American legal system continues to operate under the Constitution, won’t be under Islamic law in decades to come.

Still, conservative politicians concerned about Islam in America bring up the threat of shariah, and anti-shariah laws have been proposed in at least seven states in the past year or so, including in Texas. Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich brought up shariah early in the campaign for president this spring, but candidates have since stayed away from the issue for the most part.

The Council on American Islamic Relations posted The Simpsons clip, saying the episode jokes such “anti-shariah hysteria”
http://blog.chron.com/believeitornot/2011/12/the-simpsons-holiday-episode-mocks-shariah-law-in-the-u-s/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #42 on: December 19, 2011, 06:47:02 am »

Islamic world targets First Amendment
Muslim group tells Clinton: Defamation of Islam must be prevented ... in America


As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton welcomes Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu to Washington this week, it is critical that Americans pay attention to what these two leaders intend to do. From 12 to 14 December 2011, working teams from the Department of State (DoS) and the OIC are going to discuss implementation mechanisms that could impose limits on freedom of speech and expression.

The OIC's purpose, as stated explicitly in its April 2011 4th Annual Report on Islamophobia, is to criminalize "incitement to hatred and violence on religious grounds." Incitement is to be defined by applying the "test of consequences" to speech. Under this twisted perversion of falsely "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater," it doesn’t matter what someone actually says — or even whether it is true or not; if someone else commits violence and says it's because of something that person said, the speaker will be held criminally liable.

Read the whole story at BigPeace
http://bigpeace.com/clopez/2011/12/17/islamic-world-tells-clinton-defamation-of-islam-must-be-prevented-in-america/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #43 on: December 19, 2011, 01:34:17 pm »

Quote
The OIC's purpose, as stated explicitly in its April 2011 4th Annual Report on Islamophobia, is to criminalize "incitement to hatred and violence on religious grounds."

So how do they define "hatred" and "violence", and who is it that defines it? Typical. And people are all bothered by "bible thumpers"! They really need to understand the difference between how Christians deal with the "infidels", and how Islam deals with them. Christians avoid them, while Islam removes them whenever they find them. Islam lives by "an eye for an eye", and believe in dealing with some issues with the point of the sword.

Islam, and Judaism, hates their enemies, while Christians love their enemies.

Islam is currently "invading" the US from the inside, just like Latinos are in the southwest, by using American law against any who try to block them. The real question that must be asked though is who is funding and pushing these groups? It's not what the public is told. The whole point of all this is delusion, a lie, as to what is really going on in the world. Islam, The RCC, Mexican illegals, etc., it's none of that. That is just a distraction from the real spiritual war that is going on.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #44 on: December 20, 2011, 06:40:31 am »

'Bashing' Islam to be crime in U.S.?

Bloggers and talkers beware: The Obama administration is working to make Islam "bashing" a crime.

Clare Lopez is a former CIA operations officer and strategic policy and intelligence expert with a focus on Middle East, homeland security, national defense and counterterrorism issues. In an article published at Big Peace last week, she warned Americans to pay close attention to what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu did while in Washington last week.

According to blogger Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs, "The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is a religious and political organization. Close to the Muslim World League of the Muslim Brotherhood, it shares the Brotherhood's strategic and cultural vision: that of a universal religious community, the Ummah, based upon the Koran, the Sunna, and the canonical orthodoxy of Sharia. The OIC represents 56 countries and the Palestinian Authority (considered a state), the whole constituting the universal Ummah with a community of more than one billion three to six hundred million Muslims."

Back to Lopez: "From 12 to 14 December 2011, working teams from the Department of State and the OIC are going to discuss implementation mechanisms that could impose limits on freedom of speech and expression. The OIC's purpose, as stated explicitly in its April 2011 Annual Report on Islamophobia, is to criminalize 'incitement to hatred and violence on religious grounds.'"

In a follow-up, CNS News reported that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last Wednesday "told the closing session of the meeting at the State Department that the adoption of [United Nations] Resolution 16/18 had 'ended 10 years of divisive debate where people were not listening to each other anymore.'"

"Critics have been doubtful about the OIC's sincerity, however," CNS News reports, "noting the top priority it has given to the drive to curb speech and actions [that] it views as insulting to Islam – ranging from the Mohammed cartoons and threats to burn the Qur'an to anti-shari'a campaigns and post-9/11 security profiling."

"U.N. Resolution 16/18, formally entitled 'Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons based on religion or belief,' is championed by the Obama administration," the report concludes.

Read more: 'Bashing' Islam to be crime in U.S.? http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=379225#ixzz1h4u39xwZ
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #45 on: December 20, 2011, 08:15:54 am »

U.N. Adopts ‘Religious Intolerance’ Resolution Championed by Obama Administration

The U.N. General Assembly on Monday adopted a resolution condemning the stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion, and urging countries to take effective steps “to address and combat such incidents.”

No member state called for a recorded vote on the text, which was as a result adopted “by consensus.”

The resolution, an initiative of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), is based on one passed by the U.N.’s Human Rights Council in Geneva last spring. The State Department last week hosted a meeting to discuss ways of “implementing” it.

Every year since 1999 the OIC has steered through the U.N.’s human rights apparatus a resolution condemning the “defamation of religion,” which for the bloc of 56 Muslim states covered incidents ranging from satirizing Mohammed in a newspaper cartoon to criticism of shari’a and post-9/11 security check profiling.

Critics regard the measure as an attempt to outlaw valid and critical scrutiny of Islamic teachings, as some OIC states do through controversial blasphemy laws at home.

Strongly opposed by mostly Western democracies, the divisive “defamation” resolution received a dwindling number of votes each year, with the margin of success falling from 57 votes in 2007 to 19 in 2009 and just 12 last year.

This year’s text was a departure, in that it dropped the “defamation” language and included a paragraph that reaffirms “the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance.”

The nod to freedom of expression won the resolution the support of the U.S. and other democracies, with the Obama administration and others hailing it as a breakthrough after years of acrimonious debate.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took the opportunity of the State Department-hosted talks with foreign governments, the OIC and other international bodies last week to stress the importance of freedom of speech in the U.S. She argued that “the best way to treat offensive speech is by people either ignoring it or combating it with good arguments and good speech that overwhelms it.”

Saudi initiative singled out for praise

Nonetheless, the resolution adopted in New York on Monday does contain elements that concern some free speech and religious freedom advocates.

It calls on states “to take effective measures to ensure that public functionaries in the conduct of their public duties do not discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion or belief.”

Governments also are expected to make “a strong effort to counter religious profiling, which is understood to be the invidious use of religion as a criterion in conducting questionings, searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures.”

“Effective measures” to counter cases of religious stereotyping and stigmatization include education, interfaith dialogue and “training of government officials.”

And in the worst cases, those of “incitement to imminent violence” based on religion, the resolution calls on countries to implement “measures to criminalize” such behavior.

Also of note is the fact that the resolution singles out for praise only one interfaith initiative – and that initiative was established by Saudi Arabia, a leading OIC member-state with a long history of enforcing blasphemy laws.

The resolution commends the establishment of the King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, “acknowledging the important role that the Centre is expected to play as a platform for the enhancement of interreligious and intercultural dialogue.”

(Another clause welcomes “all international, regional and national initiatives aimed at promoting interreligious, intercultural and interfaith harmony and combating discrimination against individuals on the basis of religion or belief,” but the Saudi one alone is recognized specifically.)

Monday’s adoption of the text took place without a debate. Earlier, when a General Assembly committee considered the draft resolution, a delegate of Poland – speaking on behalf of the European Union – raised concern about the fact it mentioned by name only one center for interreligious dialogue, even though there were numerous such facilities around the world.

The E.U. was also concerned that the resolution considered the world as “monolithic religious blocs,” while religious hatred was primarily a threat to individual freedoms, he said.

Despite those concerns, the E.U. was prepared to join consensus and support the resolution.

The U.S. representative, John Sammis, said the United States was pleased to join the consensus.

It had been unable to support previous resolutions of this type because they sought to restrict expression and were “counterproductive,” he said, but the new one upholds respect for universal human rights.

“The United States welcomes all international, national, and regional initiatives that respect universal human rights and that recommend these types of measures to promote interfaith harmony and combating discrimination against individuals on the basis of religion or belief,” Sammis said. “Such initiatives can promote respect for religious diversity in a manner that respects universal human rights.”

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/un-adopts-religious-intolerance-resolution-championed-obama-administration

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: January 11, 2012, 08:04:02 am »

Court: Oklahoma can't enforce Sharia law ban


READ THAT AGAIN!!!

Court: Oklahoma can't enforce Sharia law ban


- A federal appeals court upheld an injunction against a voter-approved ban on Islamic law in Oklahoma on Tuesday, saying it likely violated the U.S. Constitution by discriminating against religion.

A three-member panel of the Denver-based U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that the rights of plaintiff Muneer Awad, a Muslim man living in Oklahoma City, likely would be violated if the ban on Sharia law takes effect.

The decision upholds the ruling of a lower federal court.

"While the public has an interest in the will of the voters being carried out ... the public has a more profound and long-term interest in upholding an individual's constitutional rights," the appeals court said in a 37-page written decision.

The Washington, D.C.-based Council on American-Islamic Relations welcomed the ruling, calling it "a victory for the Constitution and for the right of all Americans to freely practice their faith."

Oklahoma's "Save Our State Amendment," which was approved by 70 percent of state voters in 2010, bars Oklahoma state courts from considering or using Sharia law.

The lawsuit challenging the measure was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of Awad, who is director of the Oklahoma chapter of CAIR.

A federal judge in Oklahoma City issued a court order in November 2010 barring the measure from taking effect while the case is under review, finding a substantial likelihood that Awad would prevail on the merits.

The Council said the Oklahoma amendment is among 20 similar proposed laws introduced in state legislatures nationwide.

Defenders of the amendment say they want to prevent foreign laws in general, and Islamic Sharia law in particular, from overriding state or U.S. laws.

But foes of the Oklahoma measure, also called State Question 755, have argued that it stigmatizes Islam and its adherents and violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment prohibition against the government favoring one religion over another.

State Senator Anthony Sykes, one of the measure's sponsors, called the decision an attempt "to silence the voice of 70 percent of Oklahoma voters. At some point we have to decide whether this is a country of, by and for the judges, or of, by and for the people."

Opponents also say it could nullify wills or legal contracts between Muslims because they incorporate by reference specific elements of Islamic prophetic traditions.

http://news.yahoo.com/court-oklahoma-cant-enforce-sharia-law-ban-011240179.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: January 11, 2012, 09:57:39 am »

What??

How in the world is NOT enforcing Sharia Law being UNCONSTITIONAL?? Wouldn't it be UNCONSTITIONAL to DO just that, b/c it would be FAVORING the Islam religion over other religions Huh
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #48 on: January 12, 2012, 02:08:14 am »

Quote
But foes of the Oklahoma measure, also called State Question 755, have argued that it stigmatizes Islam and its adherents and violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment prohibition against the government favoring one religion over another.

I can't believe they even have the nerve to even suggest such drivel! Wow. This is insanity and a clear and open attempt to use the US law against itself, just as I have said they do.

THere is no way this is a 1st amendment issue. Not even close.

The citizens aren't saying they can't practice their religion, what they said was citizens won't allow a single relighion to be the law. No religion gets to have it's laws in place of civil law. Not even Christians get that. And the US is considered Christian!

They can use Sharia amongst themselves no problem in the Islamic communitites, but they cannot get the US courts to use Sharia in place of US law. No way.

Quote
Opponents also say it could nullify wills or legal contracts between Muslims because they incorporate by reference specific elements of Islamic prophetic traditions.

Then they need to change their paperwork! What kind of legal advice did they get designing a US legal document around laws the US doesn't even recognize?

That is an obvious attempt to make the US an Islamic state, just like they are doing around the world, and world better wake up, or the next thing they know, they'll be waking up to the call to prayer every 5am.

This is insanity!
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #49 on: January 20, 2012, 08:38:03 am »

CAIR: Islamic Sharia Law is Similar to Catholic, Jewish Laws

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) says Islamic Sharia law is comparable to Catholic canon law and Jewish Halacha -- the Jewish law that governs everything from lighting candles to "kosher" dietary laws.

In a news release issued Tuesday, CAIR National Legislative Director Corey Saylor defended Sharia, saying it literally means “path,” and is “a set of interpretations that are dynamic and intended to accommodate the time, place and laws -- like the U.S. Constitution -- of a particular community.”

“Sharia is interpreted differently based on its surroundings. Sharia mandates Muslims to respect the law of the land in which they live. Many familiar with Islam note that Sharia is similar to Catholic Canon law and Jewish Halacha law,” the release said.

The American Muslim group issued the statement to criticize GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, who was asked at an event in Columbia, S.C., whether he would ever support a Muslim candidate for president.

“It would depend entirely on whether they would commit in public to give up Sharia,” Gingrich said.

"If they are a modern person integrated in the modern world and they are prepared to recognize all religions, that’s one thing. On the other hand, if they’re Saudis, who demand that we respect them while they refuse to allow Christians to worship in Saudi Arabia, that's something different,” Gingrich added.

CAIR lashed out at Gingrich, saying his “outdated political ideas look backward to a time when Catholics and Jews were vilified and their faiths called a threat.”

Saylor said Sharia “teaches marital fidelity, generous charity and a thirst for knowledge” and includes guidelines for “praying, fasting, giving charity, helping the needy, feeding the hungry and caring for the environment.”

But human rights advocates say that under Islamic Sharia law, those who drink alcohol or **** can be whipped, thieves’ hands can be chopped off and husbands are allowed to beat their wives without punishment.

Worse, according to the U.S. State Department, in countries like Iran, whose constitution explicitly states all laws and regulations are to be based on Sharia law, and Saudi Arabia, where religious police enforce Sharia law, conversion from Islam to another religion is punishable by death.

In fact, in its 2011 country report on Pakistan, the State Department noted that a Sharia court in Pakistan had sentenced Asia Bibi, a Pakistani Christian woman, to death last year for blasphemy against Islam. She is currently in prison awaiting execution.

In its 2011 report on Saudi Arabia, the U.S. government said women in Saudi Arabia were routinely punished under Sharia law -- for being raped.

“**** is a punishable criminal offense under Sharia with a wide range of penalties from flogging to execution. Generally the government enforced the law based on its interpretation of Sharia, and courts punished both the victim and the perpetrator,” the  State Department said.

“The government views marital relations between spouses as contractual and did not recognize spousal ****. By law a female **** victim is at fault for illegal ‘mixing of genders’ and is punished along with the perpetrator.”

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cair-islamic-sharia-law-similar-catholic-jewish-laws-1
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #50 on: January 20, 2012, 02:08:50 pm »

There is a big difference between Islam, and Jews and Catholics. Only Islam wants the US courts to go by Sharia, whereas Jews and Catholics go by US law, and have to deal with their religious leaders later so to speak. Yes, Jews and Catholics are active politcally, but no more than any other group that lobbies Washington. They haven't asked the US to observe Judaism or Catholicism as a practice instead of US law. Some judges no doubt have ruled based on a religious basis, but only as US law allows them leeway from the bench.

Islam is wanting the US to look the other way because Muslims want to practice their religion irregardless of US law. Christians have wanted religious freedoms and autonomy since before the US was founded, but it hasn't happened yet, not in this world. What makes them think it's now okay for Islam? Their attitude goes against even the UN mandates on discrimination issues. It flys in the face of the NWO "let's all be one big family" mantra. I'm not sure what to make of it, because it clearly presents issues if they keep it up. Seems like a clash in the end between Islam and the NWO policy of nobody's religion is bigger than the NWO.
Report Spam   Logged
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: February 05, 2012, 11:18:29 pm »

http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/sharia-court-in-india-orders-expulsion-of-christians-from-kashmir/

Posted on February 5, 2012 by creeping


via Sharia Court in India Orders Expulsion of Christians | NCRegister.com.
 
The sharia court in Muslim-majority Kashmir has no constitutional or legal authority. But its recent verdict ordering the expulsion of five Christians from the troubled Indian side of Kashmir has sent alarm bells ringing among Christians in India.
 
Apart from ordering the expulsion of the Christians, the court also directed the government of Jammu and Kashmir to take over the management of the Christian missionary schools besides monitoring their activities.
 
Those ordered to be expelled include Father Jim Borst of the Dutch Mill Hill Missionaries, who has been based in Kashmir since 1963.
 
“This is much more than conversion. It is humiliating and certainly threatening for us,” Bishop Peter Celestine Elampassery of Jammu-Srinagar told the Register Jan. 27, reacting to the verdict.
 
Srinagar is the capital of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, which is nestled in the Himalayas.
 
On Jan. 19, the court ordered the expulsion of Father Borst, along with two Protestant pastors and their wives, accusing them of “luring the (Kashmir) valley Muslims to Christianity.”
 
The verdict focused more on Pastor Chander Mani Khanna of the Protestant All Saints Church at Srinagar and pronounced him guilty of conversion. The pastor of the Church of North India had been arrested in November by state police on the dubious charge of “fomenting communal trouble” after Muslim groups pressed charges against him. Though the civil court released him on bail, the sharia court went ahead with its own trial.
 
“Khanna and his associates have been found guilty of spreading communal disaffection and were involved in immoral activities. They are ordered to be expelled from the state,” deputy grand mufti of Jammu and Kashmir, Nasir-ul-Islam, said Jan.19 while reading the verdict of the sharia court.
 
Father Borst, a well-known retreat preacher, runs the Good Shepherd School at Pulwama. The school had been partially burnt during widespread protests against the desecration of the Quran in the United States during the 9/11 anniversary in 2010.
 
Church leaders, Christians groups and Kashmiri Christians all have expressed alarm over the sharia court pronouncement and the subsequent Christian bashing in the local media, despite the Kashmir Valley having fewer than 400 Christians among 4 million Muslims.
 
“Kashmir Zealots Push Christians Into Valley of Fear” read the headline in The Times of India, the nation’s largest English daily, on Jan. 23.
 
The report said that even Juan Marcos Troia, an Argentinian football coach developing soccer in Kashmir and training local youth, is now facing the heat. State football association officials have questioned him about the funding for his clubs. While a whisper campaign is on against the “Christian” coach by Islamic fundamentalists, his house has already been vandalized.
 
“This is not a good development,” Bishop Elampassery said while on a visit to the Muslim heartland of Srinagar. “In the 1970s, they targeted Sikhs, and from 1980 they went after the Hindus. It looks like now they want to target us.”
 
In the entire Kashmir Valley, there are only about half a dozen churches, half a dozen Christian schools and a couple of Christian hospitals.
 
“What is going on there right now is the plan to scare away the remaining Christians from Kashmir. They want to make it an exclusive Muslim area,” asserted Predhuman Joseph Dhar, a Kashmiri Catholic from a Hindu background.
 
Dhar, a journalist, teacher and scholar who has translated the Bible into Kashmiri, recalled that he fled Kashmir with his family in January 1990 after mosques across the Kashmir Valley began using their loudspeakers to order Hindus to leave the Muslim-majority region.
 
Subsequently, more than 400,000 Hindus in Kashmir fled the region to the Hindu-majority Jammu and other parts of India. Though he has been a Catholic since 1984, when his entire family of six embraced the Christian faith, Dhar too fled Kashmir.
 
“Right now there are only less than 100 Christians of Kashmiri origin in the valley. Others are migrant Christians,” pointed out Dhar.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #52 on: February 08, 2012, 04:36:12 am »

Billboard offers defense to Shariah threats
'They don't want Americans to know truth about gendercide, honor killings, stonings'




A patriotic organization is launching a billboard campaign intended to undermine the efforts to advertise and promote Shariah, the Islamic law that calls for beheadings, executions and amputations, across America.

The group, Stop Islamization of Nations, is buying ad space for a billboard calling on people to learn the dark side of Shariah law.

The effort’s leader, Pamela Geller, says her group, has one real purpose – to counter the impact of the pro-Shariah billboard campaign of the Islamic Circle or North America, an alleged Muslim Brotherhood front organization.

“ICNA is a Muslim Brotherhood group, according to a captured internal document of the Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood groups in America are trying to norm Shariah, mainstream Shariah,” Geller warned.

The billboard will lead people to the Refuge from Islam site.

rest: http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/billboard-offers-defense-to-shariah-threats/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #53 on: February 09, 2012, 06:25:19 am »

Kansans called to stand against sharia

A Kansas-based pro-family organization is encouraging people of faith to support a legislative effort to keep sharia law out of The Sunflower State.

A radical Islamic organization known as the Islamic Circle of North America has lately been running paid radio commercials and billboards in Kansas City to promote its "National Sharia Campaign." It offers a hotline and a website for people who want to know more about sharia law and Islam as a whole.

But Donna Lippoldt of the Culture Shield Network (CSN) says the campaign is nothing more than Islamic propaganda aimed at whitewashing the negative aspects of Islam.

"Sharia law says that a man can just declare that he is divorced, and a woman has no recourse; a man can have multiple wives, and a woman just has to be silenced and abused," Lippoldt notes.

She suspects that the Islamists are trying to head off Senate Bill 2087, which would prohibit the use of any foreign law in Kansas. However, she believes the measure can withstand the legal challenge that befell similar legislation in Oklahoma last year, when the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the American Civil Liberties Union successfully blocked implementation of an anti-sharia law that 70 percent of voters approved.

"We believe that our Kansas Constitution will back us up," the CSN founder asserts. "We are aware of what happened in Oklahoma, but I will tell you that there have been people in our capital, in Topeka, from the Muslim faith trying to influence the legislators to be very sensitive and that they do want sharia law implemented in Kansas."

So Lippoldt is calling on people of faith to stand against sharia in the name of Jesus Christ.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1532206
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #54 on: February 09, 2012, 12:17:10 pm »

Quote
the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the American Civil Liberties Union successfully blocked implementation of an anti-sharia law that 70 percent of voters approved.

How is that even possible under the Constitution? Clearly America isn't being run as a constitutional republic any longer.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #55 on: February 09, 2012, 12:23:56 pm »

How is that even possible under the Constitution? Clearly America isn't being run as a constitutional republic any longer.

we havent been a constitutional republic in decages...  Cry
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #56 on: February 09, 2012, 12:31:21 pm »

"decages"...I like that word!  Wink
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #57 on: February 25, 2012, 06:10:54 pm »

Penn Judge: Muslims Allowed to Attack People for Insulting Mohammad

COMMENTARY | Jonathon Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, reports on a disturbing case in which a state judge in Pennsylvania threw out an assault case involving a Muslim attacking an atheist for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.

Judge Mark Martin, an Iraq war veteran and a convert to Islam, threw the case out in what appears to be an invocation of Sharia law.

The incident occurred at the Mechanicsburg, Pa., Halloween parade where Ernie Perce, an atheist activist, marched as a zombie Muhammad. Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim, attacked Perce, and he was arrested by police.

Judge Martin threw the case out on the grounds that Elbayomy was obligated to attack Perce because of his culture and religion. Judge Martin stated that the First Amendment of the Constitution does not permit people to provoke other people. He also called Perce, the plaintiff in the case, a "doofus." In effect, Perce was the perpetrator of the assault, in Judge Martin's view, and Elbayomy the innocent. The Sharia law that the Muslim attacker followed trumped the First Amendment.

Words almost fail.

The Washington Post recently reported on an appeals court decision to maintain an injunction to stop the implementation of an amendment to the Oklahoma state constitution that bans the use of Sharia law in state courts. The excuse the court gave was that there was no documented case of Sharia law being invoked in an American court. Judge Martin would seem to have provided that example, which should provide fodder for the argument as the case goes through the federal courts.

READ MORE:  http://news.yahoo.com/penn-judge-muslims-allowed-attack-people-insulting-mohammad-210000330.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #58 on: February 29, 2012, 08:37:52 pm »

Number of American mosques rising despite protests aimed at Muslim houses of worship 
Researchers find 2,106 Islamic centers, compared to 1,209 in 2000


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/number-american-mosques-rising-protests-aimed-muslim-houses-worship-article-1.1030973#ixzz1npSAuK55
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: February 29, 2012, 09:19:30 pm »

Number of American mosques rising despite protests aimed at Muslim houses of worship 
Researchers find 2,106 Islamic centers, compared to 1,209 in 2000


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/number-american-mosques-rising-protests-aimed-muslim-houses-worship-article-1.1030973#ixzz1npSAuK55


B/w 2000 and now is when the Emergent Church has gained prominence in the modern-day church - coincidence that it was during this time when EC leaders like Warren and Hybels have pushed Chrislam/ecumenism is also the same time period when mosques have nearly doubled in this country?
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 9   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines