It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tennessee bill makes practicing islam pretty much illegal

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Someone336
 


yeah the constitution is a protection from government and religion.


guess you never heard of the american who killed his daughter because she dated outside of her religion

guess you never heard about the american who raped and beat his wife because she was his property.

and that case the judged ruled in the husbands favor.

muslim americans who practiced sharia and shaira superceeds american law,


yeah i am for the constitution but where were the constitutional rights for those victims and the many others


cafeteria conservative give me a break.


Sharia WILL NEVER EVER usurp US Law!




posted on May, 12 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


IT ALREADY HAS

look it up



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


No it does not and this blatant case of disinformation is not wanted nor needed!



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


yeah you want to bury your head in the sand

the facts are out there a search on ats can prove it

all you have to do is let your fingers do the walking.

but i bet you wont
edit on 12-5-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TonyBravada
And B, there's a key word (key words) in there... "and" or "and which." ... In any case, legal terminology is very clear in the difference between an "and" and an "or" in a law; and means both, not either.
I’m well aware of the differences between the ‘and’ and ‘or’ conjunctions, thanks.

My point was that the language of the bill is intrinsically targeting one religion or religious beliefs, facially unconstitutional.

If the purpose is to regulate some sort of criminal conduct then it’s completely superfluous the connection with a specific religion or religious doctrine. It’s the conduct itself that may be criminal, not the religious dogma that may have led a person to act criminally.


So if your point is that it targets Islam then why even argue the point by quoting me?
Because I understood you to be defending the statute. If you weren’t/aren’t, as I assumed, then I misunderstood your position and we’re actually in agreement.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Seems to be the 1st step in abolishing all religion. First to practice Sharia law with others, then next to practice Christianity among others. More power for the State and less for the individual. More individual rights being stripped.

GV



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
guess you never heard of the american who killed his daughter because she dated outside of her religion
The crime is murder, not the religious beliefs of the criminal. This may shock you, but Christians murder people too.

And I would venture to say, in America, more than any other religious group, since it’s the predominant faith.


muslim americans who practiced sharia and shaira superceeds american law
No. The courts apply the laws used in formulating a contract. Marriage is a contract. The persons in question were, IIRC, married abroad and married according to sharia or local religious laws.

Whenever there are contract disputes, they must be analyzed in light of the laws at the foundation of that contract, unless and when those laws are grossly offensive to US laws and customs.

Our courts apply the same principles in regards to other religious marriages disputes. Not once have you criticized the law then.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


no christian has ever got off on what they did due to their religion.

and no agian

READ UP the new jersey court case about the husband and wife where the judged ruled in favor of the husband to do whatever he wanted per his religion.

LOOK IT UP.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I looked it up, it was a waste of time.

"The husband in the case has been indicted on criminal charges and is expected to face trial in the fall."

Read more: www.foxnews.com...



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96


READ UP the new jersey court case about the husband and wife where the judged ruled in favor of the husband to do whatever he wanted per his religion.

LOOK IT UP.


Yeah, I did.

Guess what happened. The ruling was promptly overturned in appeals court.



First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh, a professor at UCLA, said, "The Shariah law debate is a total distraction," and he noted that in the U.S., two people may sign a contract and give an Islamic court the power to determine if the contract is breached. In a 2003 case, for instance, a Texas district court ruled that the private "Texas Islamic Court" should decide the amount a husband owed his wife in a divorce proceeding -- because when they got married, they had signed a contract specifying that was what they wanted.

But assault is illegal, regardless of any contract, Volokh said, and the Appellate Court in New Jersey ruled correctly.

Read more: www.foxnews.com...


Face it, Sharia Law is not, was not, and will never be practiced in the United States, regardless of how afraid you get.

Continue to let fear make your decisions for you. First they came for the Muslims. Etc.


EDIT: JohnnyTHSeed, you beat me to it!

edit on 12-5-2011 by drwizardphd because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Johnny and drwizardphd beat me to it.



edit on 12-5-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   
This is good. They should make it illegal to practice any form of religion. Religious freedom and freedom in general are out dated ideas.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


did you forget to mention that she went home and could have been raped and murdered while it was in appeal?

all in the name of religious freedom.

laws only have one chance to get it right and it failed.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


reply to post by JohnnyTHSeed
 



this is why i am converting so i can do whatever the hell i want and you people will defend me



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by aptness
 


did you forget to mention that she went home and could have been raped and murdered while it was in appeal?

all in the name of religious freedom.

laws only have one chance to get it right and it failed.


Do you have any evidence at all that the women went home with her abusive husband? From what I understand, they were divorced at the time of the court hearing.

What a ridiculous argument. Anybody could be raped and murdered by anybody at any given time. Should we all just isolate ourselves in little plastic cubes and live out our lives in total separation?

Laws get more than one chance, that's the entire purpose of an appeals court...

Man, you really are letting fear guide your decision making process.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 


i know alot of women who have been raped

that is my guide here.

and i am not sitting here defending a religion that says they can do whatever they want to.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
and i am not sitting here defending a religion that says they can do whatever they want to.
No one is asking you to defend a religion. We would, however, appreciate if you accurately represented the facts.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
You have it wrong Vitchilo, if you goggle Islam it will tell you that Islam is a law or series of laws from where the religion of Islam comes from.

While in the US we have freedom of religion, we can not accept laws regarding a religious practice when we already are a nation with a Constitution and laws.

It is already becoming an issue when it comes to Islam followers and practicers with US courts of laws and they are trying very hard to have the US laws changed into their favors, specially when it comes to women and their rights under Sharia and Islam laws, after all Muslim women in the US have more rights under the US laws than they do in their native lands.

Yes you can worship your Islam but you can not establish Islamic laws while practicing.

This is to avoid sharia law been implemented in the areas where Islam is gaining popularity.

While the article is a littler bit bias I see what is all about.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


yeah the facts are a muslim man killed his daughter because she dated outside of thier religions

case number 1

facts are here a muslim man raped his wife because his religion says shes his property

the case went to court the initial ruling sided with the husband and during the time i took for the second ruling she could have been raped and murdered.

those are the facts.

you people ARE DEFENDING THEM

i am sitting here and saying things like those should not be happening in this country.

another fact in this thread is the tried and truly strawman well christians do it to whatever.

you people are seriously twisted.

and i have nothing further to say here



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Good examples of many, you are right, that is why the Laws by which Islam falls can never be implemented along side US laws, they will be contradicting each other.

Muslim men that practice Islam under their laws are having a hard time making their wifes stick with those laws, specially when it comes to divorces and what is due to the women.

So actually keeping those laws out of the US courts will benefit the women and children of the unions between Islam followers.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join