Banning Sharia Law

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It's still unnecessary isn't it? If sharia law was supplanted into the American legal system, somehow,

wouldn't that strike down our legal system? Unless it was somehow some queer treaty with some

another nation, a law like this couldn't be passed, could it? I thought our laws based on the Constitution

was the law of the land.

That's why I think it is just a redundancy anyway.

[Guest cmchap76]

I'm sure they thought the same thing in England or which ever Country it is thats having issues with sharia law being brought up and fought out in court. "Our law is the law of the land", "It should trump all other law". Hey, why is it called sharia "law" anyway? Could it be that thats their governing body? Their law of the land? Looks to me like they want it superceeded to in every country they reside. But the only thing is, jihad right. The act of spreading sharia world wide. Thats the whole point of Islam, the whole plan of mohammad. To make Islam the one and only, highest religion. Sounds like more of a Roman/German-esk world take over. So why not put a law in place to prevent the violent act of spreading that? Thats what this Bill is doing. Making it illegal for persons to gather with the resources and intent to conduct acts of terroism ,jihad, in the name of Islam. Someone mentioned above that mighten it be best to instead maybe enact laws that simply reinforce our Constitution and laws we have are the laws to be followed. I aggree that that is a good idea, only 1, Not many politicians in office have even read the Costitution, some even have stated that its out dated and of no revalence in this day in time, and 2, there are already islamic advocates lobbying to have sharia law recognized and tolerated in our Country. All of sharia, Not just the peaceful aspects of it. They want to be able to kill their children for becoming to "western" for their likings and it be ok because its their "religion". Really? Is that not the total opposite of our law? How can we as a Country have 2 sets of governing laws? One set for us "Americans", and one set for them, the "Muslims"? But thats not even what they want. Their ultimate goal is world domination. One religion. Are you ready to die, or CONVERT? Becasuse based on their own book, thats what their after.

[Guest mosinon]

If you make sharia law illegal only criminals will have sharia law!

Seriously, you can't make it illegal because sharia law isn't well codified. It varies from place to place and person to person. There is this overwhelming idea that every single muslim is the same but that is far from the truth. That is kind of like imagining every Christian is an adherent to the tactics of Westboro baptists.

What people don't get, what they have a very hard time comprehending is that they aren't really worried about muslims, they are worried about energetic *******s willing to die.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Maybe you're right, I don't know.

I believe it was someone in the religious community, like the Archbishop of

Canterbury that has had ideas on embracing the muslim beliefs, to some extent,

and that was bad enough for England. The Brits are just dumb enough to let it

happen, too. I don't recall any laws passed by the British government, though.

Those people are nuts, anyway. Plenty of evidence for that to go around.

One of Obama's fellow commies, some law professor, thinks that judges should look to

other countries and use their laws to enhance ours in cases where a different approach

might be needed. I think he is an idiot, but you probably figured that out.

Forgot his name but that is a dangerous enough approach to use in our country.

This is America. If you come here, you obey our laws. If we come to your country we

have to obey your laws. That's the way it is. I doubt a law being passed to ban sharia,

specifically, would do more than make a statement. That ain't what lawmaking is for. It

makes for bad laws and there are too many of them.

[Guest mosinon]

Maybe you're right, I don't know.

I believe it was someone in the religious community, like the Archbishop of

Canterbury that has had ideas on embracing the muslim beliefs, to some extent,

and that was bad enough for England. The Brits are just dumb enough to let it

happen, too. I don't recall any laws passed by the British government, though.

Those people are nuts, anyway. Plenty of evidence for that to go around.

One of Obama's fellow commies, some law professor, thinks that judges should look to

other countries and use their laws to enhance ours in cases where a different approach

might be needed. I think he is an idiot, but you probably figured that out.

Forgot his name but that is a dangerous enough approach to use in our country.

This is America. If you come here, you obey our laws. If we come to your country we

have to obey your laws. That's the way it is. I doubt a law being passed to ban sharia,

specifically, would do more than make a statement. That ain't what lawmaking is for. It

makes for bad laws and there are too many of them.

Don't know about the archbishop stuff but when you talk about a Supreme Court Just looking at international law I think you're talking about Anthony Kennedy. He is the swing vote from what I can tell and, logically, he takes his info from wherever he gets it. If it is a good law and logical from a foreign source, he cites it.

On your larger point I completely agree. You come here (or even if you a born here) you get the chance to obey the laws of the US. You run afoul of those laws and you get a ride to prison. All the laws of the US might not be right but they are the laws you get to follow if you live here.

Between you and me AR, I'd wager the problem is not that sharia law is coming but it is that we have too many laws already.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

No doubt about that. I can always think of a

bunch that could be outright voided or whatever

the word is. Those that make all of us criminals

somehow or another.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dolomite_supafly]

As far as our laws go, the only ones that should remain are those that directly and negatively impact others.

The lawmakers are too worried about what someone might do rather than what they did do.

I have never used drugs but if someone wants to put some poison in their body they should be allowed to. But if they steal in order to afford those drugs then hold them accountable for stealing and not the the use or possession of the drugs. Big Macs aren't regulated and they are probably just as damaging as most drugs when eaten as often as drugs are used. If someone wants to drive their car without a seatbelt, more power to them. There are dozens of examples of there shouldn;t be a law regulating it but there is.

Also, I don't need the government to tell me how to protect myself, I am pretty good at that. It is survival of the fitest, both metally and physically.

Dolomite

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Now you have a point about the Big Mac. I accidently stopped and got a Big Mac meal, should have gotten a

Happy Meal. little sauce almost no meat, mostly bun. Not like the old days. They used to be good.