Why Does This Bother Me?

[SparrowHawk]

Kansas Governor Signs Bill Effectively Banning Shariah




Friday, 25 May 2012 08:19 PMRepublican Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed a bill aimed at keeping state courts and agencies from using Islamic or other non-U.S. laws when making decisions, his office said on Friday.
The law has been dubbed the "sharia bill" because critics say it targets the Islamic legal code. Sharia, or Islamic law, covers all aspects of Muslim life, including religious obligations and financial dealings. Opponents of state bans say they could nullify wills or legal contracts between Muslims.
Supporters said the law will reassure foreigners in Kansas that state laws and the U.S. Constitution would protect them. Opponents said it singled out Muslims for ridicule and was unnecessary because American laws prevail on U.S. soil.
Sherriene Jones-Sontag, a spokeswoman for the governor, said in an e-mail that the bill "makes it clear that Kansas courts will rely exclusively on the laws of our state and our nation when deciding cases and will not consider the laws of foreign jurisdictions."
Legislators supporting the bill said there were many cases around the country where judges or state agencies cited sharia law in deciding cases, especially involving divorce-related custody and property matters where Islamic code differs from U.S. law.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations in Washington denounced the Kansas law and said it is considering legal action.
About 20 states have considered similar legislation but the Kansas law is the only one signed in recent weeks, council spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said.
Federal courts struck down an Oklahoma law voters approved in 2010 that barred state judges from considering sharia law in making decisions. The court called the law discriminatory.
© 2012 Thomson/Reuters. All rights reserved.

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]On one hand the law makes perfect sense. in the USA our laws and doctrines should prevail at all times. Yet on the other hand, individuals should have the right to practice their faith as they choose. Sometimes that faith runs afoul of US law.[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Once again the Government is charged with maintaining Law & Order while respecting the rights of the Individual. Does this law go over that imaginary line?[/background]​

 

[Ms Tree]

I am trying to imagine a case where Sharia law.or any other law for that matter would trump US. law. I think faith is/should be separate from law. Parts of the old testament have stoning as a punishment. We would not use that place of standard punishment. I have not read the law so I do not know if the law singles.out Sharia or not. if it does there is a good chance.it.will be struck down if contested due to the 14th. I think I agree with the basic principle of the law.

US courts, US law.

 

[delldude]

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]On one hand the law makes perfect sense. in the USA our laws and doctrines should prevail at all times. Yet on the other hand, individuals should have the right to practice their faith as they choose. Sometimes that faith runs afoul of US law.[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Once again the Government is charged with maintaining Law & Order while respecting the rights of the Individual. Does this law go over that imaginary line?[/background]​

This should bother everyone, imposition of Sharia is the end game trumping COTUS.
Sharia isn't the faith it is the law Islam lives under.
Islam isn't a religion per se, it is a theocratic government based on a twisted perversion of religous fundementals.

 

[xUT]

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]On one hand the law makes perfect sense. in the USA our laws and doctrines should prevail at all times. Yet on the other hand, individuals should have the right to practice their faith as they choose. Sometimes that faith runs afoul of US law.[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Once again the Government is charged with maintaining Law & Order while respecting the rights of the Individual. Does this law go over that imaginary line?[/background]​

Superfluous and not required..."YET".
Our Justice system (currently) does not pander to modifications just because of accepted norms/mores of another religious/cult. Read up on SHARIA.
B) xUT

 

[delldude]

Superfluous and not required..."YET".
Our Justice system (currently) does not pander to modifications just because of accepted norms/mores of another religious/cult. Read up on SHARIA.
B) xUT

Tooty frooty liberal judges have made some decisions leaning that way also CAIR is thair.


http://shariahinamericancourts.com/

Sharia,sharia, I'm in love with a girl named sharia?

oops...wrong song.

 

[SparrowHawk]

I'm aware of some court decisions where legal concepts other than US Legal Doctrine were used. Those case are what are causing these laws to be passed. OK had theirs struck down as being unconstitutional. The basis for that I don't know.

As a Libertarian I'm always on guard when it comes to government overstepping their boundaries. These types of laws IMO have the potential to backfire and that concerns me. Conversely the Concept of My Country, My Laws seems completely sensible.