- Joined
- Nov 15, 2009
- Messages
- 13,156
- Reaction score
- 1,038
- Location
- melbourne florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
All of your links are about attempts to ban the presence of Sharia in US courts, not about Muslims trying to get Sharia to replace our legal system. There are lots of contexts in which Sharia is relevant or necessary for the functioning of our legal system as it is now, in much the same way that the principles of many religions are relevant to certain types of legal proceedings. I've already pointed out two of them:
1) Sharia is relevant to the mental state of certain Muslims accused of crimes. This does not mean that Sharia is infiltrating our criminal justice system, it means that as part of the factual analysis that juries are called upon to perform, they need to look at all the relevant evidence. Similarly, a court may look to the religious beliefs of, say, a Christian, or a Hindu to the extent that those beliefs informed the mental state of the individual in question.
2) Arbitration proceedings - if two people agree between themselves to apply Sharia to, say, a contract, that's their business, and also has no impact on our legal system.
I'm now going to add a third one, raised by one of your articles:
3) Wills. People can, and should be able to set up their wills however the hell they want to. If someone wants to bequeath his estate in accordance with Sharia edict, that's his business. People of other faiths do this all the time.
In short, you really don't know what you're talking about, but you might want to review your own articles more thoroughly. I'll leave you with a relevant quote from the last one:
"While Muslim groups are angry about the Oklahoma referendum, leaders of their community say the way the U.S. currently handles matters pertaining to Sharia law is fine."
So then explain why Muslims are suing to stop the laws