I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Fed Judge Blocks Voter Approved Anti-Sharia Law

Hits: 13062 | Rating: (3.1) | Category: News & Politics | Added by: goaliejerry
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
8BitHero
Male, 18-29, Europe
 5426 Posts
Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:47:07 PM
Oh America

TIMESWORDSMN
Male, 13-17, Western US
 304 Posts
Thursday, December 02, 2010 9:16:05 AM
This is completely beside the point, but when i clicked the link there was a small video down in the corner that advertised an "IRobot Roomba".
Being a complete nerd I immediately drew connections with Issac Asimov's 'I, Robot'. This brought many hilarious visions to my mind of Roomba's that became self aware.
Here's the website for it.

mmill928
Female, 18-29, Western US
 278 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:48:47 PM
It might be alright if it said that no religious law should be considered in criminal cases. But singling out Sharia while also not limiting it to criminal cases makes it very discriminatory.

sbeelz
Male, 30-39, Western US
 2869 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 8:35:46 AM
"If 70% of Okies voted for it, THAT makes it constitutional."

*facepalm*

auburnjunky
Male, 30-39, Southern US
 10129 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 6:01:37 AM
"Actually, scroll back to page 6 or so where AJ made a comment about Baal being a suicide bomber. And note that he is not banned."

HEY I WAS KIDDING! :) :)

PierreJeanFR
Male, 40-49, Europe
 1337 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:22:42 AM
boring

Baalthazaq
Male, 18-29, Asia
 4753 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 3:53:16 AM
In other words, trying to be as simple as possible.

Two people get married under X tradition.
"Marriage" has a specific meaning in that tradition.
The contract is vague and states that if a partner acts in a way not consistent with marriage, they have obligation Y.

Assuming all the above falls within local law, depending on X, whether either partner has obligation Y, can reasonably be considered with regard to X, as opposed to the definition under the local tradition.

All this falls under "Past Conduct".

Baalthazaq
Male, 18-29, Asia
 4753 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 3:43:05 AM
Sortof Almighty.

You're talking about getting married under one legal system, and getting divorced in another.

However, legally "Past Conduct" is a factor in deciding how money is distributed between two divorcing partners (at least in the UK).

This doesn't mean "she ate bacon, I want more money" is valid, because it doesn't apply to the marriage. Certain marriage contracts may also have vague stipulations on "conduct".

In those cases a cheating partner could effectively be considered to have acted in a way that was inappropriate to the expectations of the agreement.

In a case where they were married under another system/tradition where polygamy/polyandry is allowed, sleeping with another partner may not result in the same ruling, as the partner might not be able to show a reasonable expectation of exclusivity in the relationship.

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 3:22:40 AM
A judge can, for example, consider Islamic Law to determine if someone has broken conditions for their marriage.

But only if there is a marriage contract which outlines it. You couldn't just get married 'normally', then turn round and say "my wife's behaviour X violates Sharia law, therefore I get everything in the divorce". You'd have to have a signed contract beforehand, in which case it just becomes like any other contract. I have no problem with that - contract law is contract law.

Baalthazaq
Male, 18-29, Asia
 4753 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 3:13:43 AM
"So if the marijuana legalization bill in CA would have passed, you would have supported the feds shutting it down?"

If federally it was deemed unconstitutional, sure.
The protocol is important.

Personally, I'm happy to change various parts of the constitution. I'm all in favor of taking away everyone's guns.

However, do I think that the constitution should be ignored, modified, altered, and messed around with willy nilly? No.

You obey the laws, in the order they have applied to them. You petition to change those laws that are seen to be wrong or unfair, but you do all of that through the processes put in place to do so.

In this case, there are at least 2 elements above Oklahoma state law, that say this is unlawful.

Ergo, no. Even before the fact that the law is stupid, fear-mongering, vague drivel.

Baalthazaq
Male, 18-29, Asia
 4753 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 2:58:53 AM
There are many comments here that seem to suggest the article hasn't been read.

There are multiple pages in the article.

Examples are given of what is currently considered with regard to law. Those are the only type of things considered.

None of the scare-tactic scenarios presented by posters here, are real scenarios.

"So if my religion says eye for an eye does that mean..."
No. It doesn't. This law wouldn't have changed that.

US law ranks above all other law. If it's illegal at the top, it's illegal. Full stop. Unless SPECIFICALLY excluded (Kosher laws for food).

If it is ALREADY legal, then a judge can consider any law they like with regard to various civil matters. A judge can, for example, consider Islamic Law to determine if someone has broken conditions for their marriage.

There is nothing wrong with that.

almightybob1
Male, 18-29, Europe
 4278 Posts
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 1:00:33 AM
Baal: If I had ever used such an 'example' aimed toward you I'd be banned, But you've gotten away with it, More than once.


Actually, scroll back to page 6 or so where AJ made a comment about Baal being a suicide bomber. And note that he is not banned.

It's funny that you claim Baal's insults are his last resort, when it was clearly just an example. Anyone's name would have sufficed.
In fact, taking offence at things that are clearly not intended as an insult and demanding apologies seems to be YOUR last resort, for when you know the argument is lost. A quick focus change to the disgusting insult and you've grabbed the moral high ground.

Sadly, that tactic is painfully transparent.

phoneybone
Male, 18-29, Western US
 1750 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:40:06 PM
wouldn't considering Sharia law in the first place violate US's separation of church and state? I know I know, that's no where *officially* in the law, just saying.

sbeelz
Male, 30-39, Western US
 2869 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:24:08 PM
"If 70% of Okies voted for it, THAT makes it constitutional."

*facepalm*

Jackson13W
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 153 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:27:37 PM
woah... just going to throw this out there. the beginning of the first amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

sbeelz
Male, 30-39, Western US
 2869 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:22:20 PM
@Gerry1of1-
What do you mean by that? Everyone knows that Oklahoma is the Land of Enlightenment.

Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
 33910 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 9:52:08 PM
We need to reconsider the wisdom of doing anything that 70% of Okies approve of.

pyrrhios
Male, 30-39, Western US
 185 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 9:39:57 PM
The problem is the law is a solution without a problem. Also, not mentioned in the article is the interference the law would have had with trade agreements with corporations from outside the united states. It is simply a very bad law, regardless of it's specificity toward a faith, violating that whole 1st amendment thing.

michaelcsr
Male, 40-49, Western US
 598 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 8:48:34 PM
Now, I have been accused of being liberal at times, so some people will look at me in shock when I say this. If 70% of Okies voted for it, THAT makes it constitutional. The separation of chruch and state only means that the church can't persicute you for not folowing thier doctorine. That's what freedom of religion is. If the people of OK want no consideration for sharia law, then it's their right to do so. Now, that Federal judge is unconstitutional.

axeman929
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 191 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 6:36:59 PM
You can kill any animal you own...you just can not have them fight each other, mutilate them, or not feed them, or abuse them.

sbeelz
Male, 30-39, Western US
 2869 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 6:35:05 PM
"Of course, that should also mean that the various "blue laws" across the country should also be struck down"

Well, open a liquor store, keep it open on Sunday in a city where it's illegal, then take your case to the Supreme Court.

mvangild
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 528 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 6:13:38 PM
I think the judge did the right thing here. The law violates separation of church and state. Of course, that should also mean that the various "blue laws" across the country should also be struck down.

LuckyDave
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 674 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 5:39:04 PM
When was it said that they were ever using Sharia law? When was it ever said they were using Jewish law? Hindu? Buddhist? Catholic? I think some people are just getting out of hand, if Islamic law is barred, then so should all other religious law, and only the law of the land should rule. This is how it should be anyway, but seeing as barring Catholic law wouldn't pass for obvious reasons, then it simply must refer back to the separation of church and state, which if I recall correctly, already bars this sort of freaking thing from happening in the first place.

nettech98
Male, 50-59, Eastern US
 989 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 5:13:32 PM
@seastone: Would the Supreme Court's decision on the sacrifice of animals fit the bill?

Animals can't be killed for non-food reasons EXCEPT for religious reasons?

OldOllie
Male, 60-69, Midwest US
 14445 Posts
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:41:33 PM
QueenZira, are you saying that I read something into your post that you didn't actually say or mean? I'm shocked, SKOCKED! Where in the world would I EVER have gotten such an idea?

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.