W
- Status
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Sharia is a set of criminal, civil, and religious laws (Islam unlike Christianity doesn’t separate secular law from religious law) developed over the course of the development of Islamic theology, and it is poorly defined as the different Islamic faiths and the schools of Islamic thought within these different faiths don’t have an agreed upon body of work that is Sharia (i.e. no “The complete Sharia law codes for all Muslims” book). There are aspects within Sharia that are moral but disagree with what the Faith teaches, that are moral and agree with what the Faith teaches, immoral due to errors in Islamic theology, and outright immoral (in short- there are good parts and there are bad parts, saying it’s all good or all bad is an error of oversimplification). Sharia itself is no more a threat to the Faith than any other legal system based on faulty theology. Now, the scaremongers would want you to believe that Sharia is “basically Satanism” because if you look at it without fear you’ll see that there is no reason that portions of Sharia could not be used in a similar manner to how we use Jewish and Christian religious laws to deal with civil matters; and you’ll see that the “oh Lord save us!!! we need to outlaw Sharia!!! It’s so evil and dem Muslims are trying to be sneaky with a stealth jihad” crowd is really just blowing a lot of hot air in order to make themselves feel important because those aspects of Sharia that are incompatible with our legal system have zero chance of being used.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Apparently your not going to answer my post’s addressed to you.
I have repeated my same position to another poster in post # 116
G
GFresa9
Guest
Shari’a is believed to be the law of Allah. Because Allah is beyond human comprehension, Muslims developed something called “fiqh” which is the human-interpretation of Allah’s will. In other words, you could talk to 100 different Muslims and ask them their take of Shari’a and get 100 different types of Shari’a. Often in the western media, Shari’a is shown as a physical piece of literature, but I assure you it is not.
As for your belief that certain aspects of Shari’a are entering our political realm, they are. Laws involving murder, theft, divorce, and even right to life are in both Shari’a and American law. The reality is that many of the laws of Shari’a are shared with “Judeo-Christian” values.
Sincerely,
Your Jewish Neighbor
P
PaulDupre1
Guest
Did you miss the part where I said that arbitration cannot circumvent US federal or state law?
Or maybe you don’t know what circumvent means?
Or maybe you are being deliberately obtuse?
Paul
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
First of all if you read my response to your post, all are placed in the form of a question?
Secondly your post reads;
You have the licensed arbitrator who cannot circumvent state or federal law.
What does the licensed arbitrator license have to do with Sharia law? If a criminal act was done from sharia?
The question remains? A licensed arbitrator, as you stated cannot circumvent state or federal law. If sharia law violates a criminal law in the U.S, what does any arbitrator have to do with it? We are not discussing religious disciplines which can use an arbitrator in this case.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Post #116 wasn’t actually written by you. You mean post #84 which is quoted in post#116; and that’s not actually the position you started with. You have like three or four different positions and some of them conflict with each other. So, why don’t you figure out what your position actually is and present it and, this may be hard, actually stick to it instead of creating new positions when it becomes clear your original one is invalid.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
That’s probably because you don’t seem to have mastered the use of punctuation; which includes your non-question statement above which ends with a question mark?
P
PaulDupre1
Guest
Sheesh. You just don’t get it, do you? There is no provision in the United States for sharia law or Jewish law or Catholic law in criminal cases. It is only available in voluntary arbitration, in CIVIL cases, agreed to by both parties. Why do you keep bringing up criminal law when it is not even part of the discussion?
In his duties as adjudicator in the voluntary, civil (not criminal) binding arbitration, the arbitrator CANNOT under any circumstances issue any judgment that would violate any existing federal law or any law in the state in which the arbitration takes place.
THEREFORE, your patently silly ravings about cutting off hands and the like have no basis in reality. Cutting off a person’s hand is ILLEGAL in the United States. THEREFORE, it could NEVER, EVER, EVER be a part of the adjudication of an arbitrated civil matter.
If you don’t (or won’t) understand that then there is nothing more to discuss.
I think you are simply fear-mongering. That is never helpful.
Paul
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Post #116 is a repeat to a poster of the same subject we have discussed.
If you care to see my views of a more advance subject see my post #120.
My position has not changed. The subject of your discussion changes and many subjects which are unrelated to the OP which you have introduced probably has you confused because I have not responded to your negative comments which are unrelated to the OP.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Off topic, with a negative attack against another post not addressed to you. This type of posting serves no purpose to the Op. Funny the original poster had no problem with our thought process, how is it your concern? Being a third person, who is taking liberty of a subject matter out of context, which does not have your thoughts in process of the discussion between person A and B? If you wish to engage in the same subject please read ALL of the previous post’s related to the subject before passing false judgments.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
No, you don’t get it? Sharia law is not in full effect by law in the U.S.
You falsely introduce; a U.S legal arbitration process for Sharia law which does not exist yet. Hello!, end of your discussion.
The OP, remind you; regards sharia law. An attempt to derail our judicial system. You apparently have sharia law already being in full practice by Islamic followers in the U.S, that would require a legal arbitrator?
If you want to start a new thread of how the U.S arbitration laws would dictate sharia law if sharia law were made legal in the U.S? Then by all mean’s do so.
But sharia law is not fully practiced in the U.S according to Islam. So again, I ask you? What does the legal arbitration process have to do with Sharia law which does not exist yet in the U.S?
Take your fear-mongering to your local state law makers, who don’t see sharia law as fear-mongering but a reality that exists.
I am only offering you another view to those who possessed the same false faith of those who did not believe a Tsunami will never hit Indonesia.
Wisdom and understanding from all angles should be nurtured when something new as sharia law is entering free societies in the name of Islam. When Islam itself has a practicing virtue of deception and lie-ing.
For the record; sharia law affects both civil criminal law and civil religious law. Which leaves your arbitration legal process in the dust.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Fun arguing with someone who “knows” they are right about everything when its clear they don’t have a basic grasp on the subject they are talking about (here being the American legal system) isn’t it. Keep it up and soon you will join the “You must think Sharia is a myth” club.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Since the discussion on this thread is apparently going no where, let us recap-
A- Mythical Sharia- This would be the idea that there is one well defined understanding of Sharia (usually the most severe understanding which focuses on maiming and stoning) that all Muslims everywhere want and are doing their best to overtly and covertly put into place across the world as a secret global conspiracy.
B- Actual Sharia- This would be the ill-defined (not all Muslims agree on what is or is not Sharia) grouping of what we in the West would label as criminal, civil, and religious laws which not all Muslims actually want (here for the sake of argument assuming they agree on what it is) and for which there actually isn’t a secret global conspiracy to put it into place across the world.
C- Federal law- Yeah, there actually hasn’t been any passages of federal laws outlawing Sharia. What we have seen is some politicians introduce bills to such effect in order to placate their voting base.
D- State laws- Some states have actually passed laws outlawing Sharia (usually based on the same reasoning that some federal legislators have introduced such bills) and these laws are either being challenged for being or have been found to be unconstitutional.
E- Existing law- The usage of Sharia for civil matters is actually already covered under existing law (it falls under the same laws and conditions which govern the usage of other religious laws to deal with civil matters); and the same existing laws bar the fear mongering claim that Sharia can/will be used for criminal matters (in the same way Jewish and Christian religious laws can’t be used in dealing with criminal matters).
F- The OP’s question of should we be worrying- Only if one believes the fear mongers and doesn’t bother to actually educate oneself on how American governance and the American legal system work. Let us assume for the sake of worrying that all Muslims agree on what Sharia is and all Muslims by the simple fact of being Muslim want Sharia to be placed into effect. Given those rather large assumptions, the only way in which Sharia could be placed into effect in the US is if the vast majority of the US populace were Muslim (see how the Constitution is amended and/or changed for why). Congratulations, in order for the “we need to worry” argument to be true (and here we are still assuming for the sake of argument that all Muslims agree upon what Sharia is and all Muslims want it) we first have to change the US into a Muslim society with a vast majority of US citizens being Muslim.
Why do I say congratulations? Well because in order for us to still be worried about the vast majority of the US populace wanting something so badly that they are willing to change the governing document of the country we must of course abandon the idea of democracy and instead assume the idea of a ruling minority oligarchy (i.e. the minority of non-Muslims) controlling and running the American government because this minority oligarchy “knows best.” Gee, that sounds like the label political conservatives (i.e. the ones most likely to engage in scare mongering regarding Sharia) place on political liberals. That’s why I said congratulations. Congratulations to all the “oh God we need to fear Sharia taking over in the US” people for showing that you are really political liberals at heart.
A- Mythical Sharia- This would be the idea that there is one well defined understanding of Sharia (usually the most severe understanding which focuses on maiming and stoning) that all Muslims everywhere want and are doing their best to overtly and covertly put into place across the world as a secret global conspiracy.
B- Actual Sharia- This would be the ill-defined (not all Muslims agree on what is or is not Sharia) grouping of what we in the West would label as criminal, civil, and religious laws which not all Muslims actually want (here for the sake of argument assuming they agree on what it is) and for which there actually isn’t a secret global conspiracy to put it into place across the world.
C- Federal law- Yeah, there actually hasn’t been any passages of federal laws outlawing Sharia. What we have seen is some politicians introduce bills to such effect in order to placate their voting base.
D- State laws- Some states have actually passed laws outlawing Sharia (usually based on the same reasoning that some federal legislators have introduced such bills) and these laws are either being challenged for being or have been found to be unconstitutional.
E- Existing law- The usage of Sharia for civil matters is actually already covered under existing law (it falls under the same laws and conditions which govern the usage of other religious laws to deal with civil matters); and the same existing laws bar the fear mongering claim that Sharia can/will be used for criminal matters (in the same way Jewish and Christian religious laws can’t be used in dealing with criminal matters).
F- The OP’s question of should we be worrying- Only if one believes the fear mongers and doesn’t bother to actually educate oneself on how American governance and the American legal system work. Let us assume for the sake of worrying that all Muslims agree on what Sharia is and all Muslims by the simple fact of being Muslim want Sharia to be placed into effect. Given those rather large assumptions, the only way in which Sharia could be placed into effect in the US is if the vast majority of the US populace were Muslim (see how the Constitution is amended and/or changed for why). Congratulations, in order for the “we need to worry” argument to be true (and here we are still assuming for the sake of argument that all Muslims agree upon what Sharia is and all Muslims want it) we first have to change the US into a Muslim society with a vast majority of US citizens being Muslim.
Why do I say congratulations? Well because in order for us to still be worried about the vast majority of the US populace wanting something so badly that they are willing to change the governing document of the country we must of course abandon the idea of democracy and instead assume the idea of a ruling minority oligarchy (i.e. the minority of non-Muslims) controlling and running the American government because this minority oligarchy “knows best.” Gee, that sounds like the label political conservatives (i.e. the ones most likely to engage in scare mongering regarding Sharia) place on political liberals. That’s why I said congratulations. Congratulations to all the “oh God we need to fear Sharia taking over in the US” people for showing that you are really political liberals at heart.
W
WilT
Guest
Here’s a good video on Islam youtube.com/watch?v=l-5hEHZfpio
R
Rhubarb
Guest
This is a good video on Islam in the same way that Jack Chick makes good pamphlets on Catholicism.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
I prefer to us the comparison to Matt Slick who unlike Mr. Chick has a formal education (a higher one than Mr. Spencer who has zero formal education on his subject matter) on the subject matter he claims to be an expert on (Christianity).
R
rinnie
Guest
IMHO it depends how you look at it. Who is your trust in Sharia Law or the word of Jesus Christ. I put my faith in the good Lord.
I truly believe you convert a Islamic easier then you could convince a true Roman Catholic.
Simply because Light always overshadows darkness.
Truth always trumps untruths.
G
Gabriel_of_12
Guest
Thank you WilT, the video was very informative.
The main speaker Mr. Spencer, being raised in Islam gives an excellent view of Islam practiced by Muslims, and how Islam is a contradiction to Western free societies, which Islam seeks to conquer and or convert Western free societies to Islam.
**What makes Mr. Spencer’s talks on Islam most credible, is that he travels with body guards, due to death threats made on his life from Muslims in the U.S and abroad. **
After listening to your recommended video. I find myself in conflict with both positions from the left and from the right. Truth is a narrow road.
Peace be with you
- Status