Sharia law

Lay off the the Muslims I just met an Irish man with a bomb strapped around his body. And a Greek with a one way ticket to fly to New York. You damn PC people that bleed for the Muslims can go over in the sand box and live with them.

Your are mistaking antipathy for Sharia law as antipathy toward Muslims. I know Muslims here who would not want Sharia law in the US. They left their country because of Sharia. They want to be free.

If at any time Sharia law conflicts with the Constitution, Federal law, State law, Local law or any American law at any level, the American law must take precedence. Treat Sharia as a custom, subject to the laws of the jurisdiction. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

COG, I think I agree.

Lay off the the Muslims I just met an Irish man with a bomb strapped around his body. And a Greek with a one way ticket to fly to New York. You damn PC people that bleed for the Muslims can go over in the sand box and live with them. Originally Posted by tucson

Tucson, people like you frighten me a lot more than any of the numerous Muslim people I have met. It's not just about Muslims, it is about how a group of people can generate an hysterical hatred of another race culture or creed, and then start acting on that hatred, without letting a single rational thought enter the process, all based on the media and some extreme cases. End result, hundreds of thousands of deaths, if not hundreds of millions. The world gone mad. It happened twice in the last century.

Is it worth trying to open your mind to rational thought, or would we be wasting our time?

Let me be a bit provocative. It is said to be better to have frequent mini earthquakes than one big earth quake.

There are many eminent political theorists who have similar views - better to have frequent small wars than a big world war.

In the same way, tragic as 9/11 was, and tragic the number of deaths, and it was very symbolic in many ways, and tragic as subsequent atrocities (incl. London, let alone Iraq), these are relatively minor compared with the big picture of encouraging dialogue, avoiding hysteria, and preventing large scale world wars (or allowing economic stability and power to change).

My theory is Muslims are the root cause of our security problems. I have not found any mention of other religons out to destroy America.

My theory is a very small minority of fanatical Muslims, from some of the Muslim states, have been ideologically blinded by certain strands of radical Muslim teaching, which have been discredited by most other Muslim scholars, and this tiny minority are one aspect of our overall security problems. No religions have set out to destroy America, although some fanaticals from all religions have not been reluctant to expose their misguided beliefs, whether it be about which countries are evil or satanic, or their attitude towards scientifically accepted principle such as evolution. Originally Posted by tucson

I did a quick fix for you, I am sure this is what you really meant to say if you had had time to consider it carefully.

So you think US has no other security concerns, now or in the future, than the Muslim world? No danger from North Korea, no problem with unrest in Greece/Europe, Russia/China are now close cousins so couldn't possibly be a problem? etc etc etc

But in all these kind of debates, I simply say - what are you going to do about it? Invite your Muslim neighbours for tea might be a good first step.

duplicate

ps don;t you think fundamentalist christianity, which attempts to believe in the literal words of the bible, are a worse pernicious danger to the US? They might not have a purpose to destroy America, but by promulgating unscientific nonsense they are destroying the foundations of what made America great, and they are making America weak.

If your education system is captured by religious zealots, whether christian or muslim, you've got some problems.

Like I say, the number of deaths from 9/11, tragic though it was, is very insignificant.

There is some statistic which says more people died in car accidents after 9/11 than 9/11 itself, because they drove rather than took a flight. I think it was from a reputable source. Maybe somebody can tell me the annual road deaths in the US.

here it is

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...ract_id=677549

Essence your spot on with your comments. I should have just posted this on this thread instead of creating a whole new thread on this subject.

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=459017

Some people just don't want to understand and would rather remain in ignorance spewing hate.

I am with you, and I am far more concerned right now with these radical Evangelical Christians who are forcing these laws down our throats from state to state based on their crazy ideology.

Thanks.

I need a cunt every day, get used to it.

It is interesting what the difference in tone is on similar topics in the houston sandbox - houston is not meant to be weak kneed, but it is a lot more tolerant on muslim issues. Maybe because in houston we actually meet and work with muslims every day, so it is difficult to demonise.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-new-face.html

Essence
I pick my words carefully and I don't need you to rewrite my comments. Muslims are a back word religion that has its goal to destroy all that do not believe as they do. As they seek to destroy the United States and all Chritians they can never be trusted. The leaders have brain washed their followers so you can never determine which one will blow them selves up to further the twisted idea of destroying others that don't agree with them. When I worked in a zoo when I was younger I learned that some animals can never be trusted.

Essence your spot on with your comments. I should have just posted this on this thread instead of creating a whole new thread on this subject.

http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=459017

Some people just don't want to understand and would rather remain in ignorance spewing hate.

I am with you, and I am far more concerned right now with these radical Evangelical Christians who are forcing these laws down our throats from state to state based on their crazy ideology. Originally Posted by Sexyeccentric1

I can't believe I'm living in a time were trying to save innocent babies from being killed is considered radical. You liberals scare the hell out of me. You all go through fetuses like popcorn at the local drive in.

Cry babies cry. tuscon is straight up....fuckem & and fuck douchee in the mouth...LOL

‟You do solemnly swear or affirm that you will support and bear true allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Kansas; that you will neither delay nor deny the rights of any person through malice, for lucre, or from any unworthy desire; that you will not knowingly foster or promote, or give your assent to any fraudulent, groundless or unjust suit; that you will neither do, nor consent to the doing of any falsehood in court; and that you will discharge your duties as an attorney and counselor of the Supreme Court and all other courts of the State of Kansas with fidelity both to the Court and to your cause, and to the best of your knowledge and ability. So help you God.”

Oath of office for a Kansas lawyer.

I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (office) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.[62]

Oath of Offce for a federal judge

Two oaths taken by judges and lawyers. Haven't found the exact Kansas oath yet but the generic oath for most state judges agree; there is no reference to Sharia law. In fact the oaths specifically mention the US and State Constutitions but not Sharia law. So I agree that any use of Sharia law should result in a review and possible impeachment of the judge. As for the law Brownback signed (I can't believe you never heard of Brownback. He ran for president four years ago) who is going to bring it to court and on what grounds. Religioius freedom? I don't see where it denies anything like that. It is talking about a court rules as enshrined in their constitutions. To overturn this law would be tantamount to overturning the state's Constitution.

Tucson, you scare me.

Maybe y'all had better do a bit of background reading on sharia law, I think it is all on the other thread, before continuing to make asses of yourselves.

A couple of years ago the then Archbishop of Canterbury was castigated by the media for opening up the possibility of applying sharia law in restricted circumstances.

There was the typical media frenzy.

Then some more sensible journalists did a bit of self education, and what the archbishop said then began to seem sensible, in the context in which he was speaking.

But that didn't stop the whackos from castigating him, saying he is a Muslim lover etc etc etc.

I seem to remember Jesus had the same problem when he spoke out of turn or to people or at times which were not pc at the time.

Maybe i will look up what he said - I'm sure you will hate it!

OK, this is a reasonable overview

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rowan_Williams#Sharia_law

There there, don't let the demons get you down, you can still get a group of your mates together and decide who is paying for the beer without getting the US courts involved.

ps my contracts are subject to Texas law, even though I am not a resident. Being subject to laws from different countries is very common. Does hell with my professional indemnity.

So if a US company was exporting to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or similar, what jurisdiction would be used?

Let's stop seeing demons and phantoms which don't exist.