Oh I’m sure Mediaite would have been psyched about Coptic Christian law being used in the courts. You’ve always been so supportive of religious symbols like the 10 commandments being at court houses. Oh wait…..

 Jon, how much do you get paid by Soros and the Democrat party?

In a sharia world…..Libs are the first to go. HAHA

Yeah Jon!  And when did you stop beating your wife!?!?!

See the Volokh Conspiracy site for a reasoned explanation. The Florida Court honored Moslem ecclesiastical law just as Catholic or Jewish or Methodist or Mormon ecclesiastical law would and have been recognized in disputes involving religious organizations property or internal governance. Stll going to be fun to watch the reactionary igs spew.

The Republican Party forced Sharia law upon the people of Iraq.  This makes Republicans the most successful Sharia law advocates on the planet.

Insane . This is The US and the US justice system . If they cannot assimilate and abide by our laws , they must return to Shariahville , where they can have all the honor killings and beheadings that suit them .

Ho boy, game on. Igs to the left, igs to the right. Nope, just to the right.

Ho boy, game on. Igs to the left, igs to the right. Nope, just to the right.

More Sharia law nonsense to scare the simple minded FOX viewers.  Use fear to scare your base while you screw them over.  

Republicans are too stupid to understand this stuff.

SHAREEEYAAA LAAAW!!!! AAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!

People that watch FOX ‘News’ are a JOKE!

History will laugh at this group even more than people laugh at them now!

You say Sha-ree-ah, and I say Sha-rai-ah.  Let’s call the whole thing off.

And how!

Why don’t they wanna ban kosher pickles?

sez the “korean.”

I Say use it..And any other religious law that will execute criminals. Saves the jails and taxpayers from supporting them forever….So if they want to start beheading and hangings..Give it up to the Slams ( slang for hood muslims)

Mediaite is in love with Fox News — echoing EVERYTHING, including this segment, is the hard proof.

I think it’s appropriate to post now an excerpt from the Isaacson’s new book “Steve  Jobs”:

“You’re blowing it with Fox News,” Jobs told him over dinner. “The axis today is not liberal and conservative, the axis is constructive-destructive, and you’ve cast your lot with the destructive people. Fox has become an incredibly destructive force in our society. You can be better, and this is going to be your legacy if you’re not careful.” Jobs said he thought Murdoch did not really like how far Fox had gone. “Rupert’s a builder, not a tearer-downer,” he said. “I’ve had some meetings with James, and I think he agrees with me. I can just
tell.”

Remember when the far left loons said this would NEVER happen in the us and we (the clear thinking right) were just fear mongering? Well…

Get your law degree with Bachmann at Jesus U?

Wow, you’re a stupid person.  What’s happening in this case is what happens in similar cases involving various other religions, including various brands of Christianity.  Don’t you ever tire of being stupid?

i am ever so scared! help me fox news!

Well what? What is going on in this case has absolutely nothing to do with what you “clear thinking right” were “fear mongering.”

I don’t even think the people of the right are doing the fear mongering, you’re just the sheep that are listening to the fear monger talking heads that play you fools for the suckers you are.

This is nothing more than fear mongering and Islamaphobia by Fox.   My mother-in-law obtained a “get” (a Jewish divorce) and also a civil divorce, but no one is claiming that Jewish law is creeping into the US judiciary.  

Get, Get, Get, creeping Bet Din Law!   :-)

who left patsy”s sock drawer open? close it, the funk is unbearable…

Fox News=Media, dummy. Hence the name, Mediaite.

Why are you against letting Jews arbitrate through their law system?

Beckel is correct on this issue.

nary an original thought.

Why are you against letting Jews arbitrate through their law system?

I want links to where this has happened in regards to Christianity or Christians.

You would think the followers of a religion where their leader was wrongfully accused and executed would be against the death penalty.

At least you are honest about your intellectual deficiencies. Good for you, if you learn good study habits and work real hard , you may progress.

What is wrong with you?

As first mentioned by wawoo, here is a link to the Volokh Conspiracy blurb regarding this ruling:

http://volokh.com/2011/10/26/%e2%80%9cthe-case-should-proceed-under-ecclesiastical-islamic-law%e2%80%9d-jews-ketubahs-and-gets/#more-52120

Here’s how (Eugene) Volokh concludes his posting:

“But in any case, I mention Schneider and Goldman chiefly to highlight what I’ve often said before — many of the disputes about accommodations of Islamic religious practice, about enforcing of Islamic arbitrations, and so on are just special cases of much broader disputes that the American legal system has dealt with for over two centuries. There’s nothing specially shocking or even highly novel about them. They’re not some special new monkey wrench that Muslims are throwing into our legal system; Christians, Jews, and others have routinely raised such issues before, and continue to do so today.

Sometimes the Muslim claimants should prevail (again, whether it comes to religious exemptions from generally applicable laws or employer practices, or to enforcement of religious arbitrations). Sometimes they should lose. Sometimes they should prevail, but do lose, and sometimes they should lose, but nonetheless prevail. But that is no different from what we’ve been seeing with regard to other religious claimants for many years.”

- – - – - – - – -

Highlighting how FNC likes to go Hysteria! anytime the word “Sharia” is mentioned and illustrating how many of your ilk don’t actually understand what it means. 

So, shorter Volokh:  “yeah, this is no big deal.”

Shorter me:  “You’re a frakking idiot FNC sheeple”

I didn’t vote for obama you did. SUCKER! LOL!

I heard that feller Glen Beck say that them Aay-Rabs wanna steal our Tee-Vee sets!

Get my gun, Momma!

he’s obviously an anti-semite!

If an estate is willed to “the Catholic Church,” the courts might use Catholic doctrine to decide who gets the money. Stuff like this happens all the time. Use your head. You don’t have to be a moron all your life.

I would think that liberals would want separation of any church from the state.  

Regardless, that’s the way, in my opinion, the law should be.  There’s no reason that religious law and local, state and federal law cannot parallel each other.  But the law of the land should supercede any religious law.  I say that as a Christian.

However, that’s what appeals courts are set up to determine.

I always find it interesting that liberals can’t have an intellectual debate.  I’m not in fear of Sharia law taking over America any time soon, but I find this case interesting and worthy of a discussion.  Liberals on the other hand would rather just call people crazy and not have to discuss it.  Personally, I think the Constitution should dictate law and not any religion.  Liberals scream about Christianity constantly, but have no problem with a court making decisions based on Sharia law. 

No links? Bummer.

http://news.yahoo.com/income-top-1-percent-far-outgrew-others-report-015302336.html

What they do is attack the messenger. In this case it’s Fox News #1. Most trusted. Fair and Balanced. They really hate the Fair and Balanced part. Really hate it.

Don’t stay up too late tonight. School tomorrow.

Even if there was an ounce of genuine truth to this headline I’d wager that the ever-creeping dominionists lead by the psychotic Michelle Bachmann would still be marginally worse than sharia law and she is a legitimate presidential candidate for one of the two major parties. If you’re seriously concerned about sharia law then start taking a close look at it’s christian equivalent. Undiluted and undisputable christian fascism is running for the presidential nomination of the Republican party (several times if you include Cain & Santorum)

Thanks for proving my point, intellectual lightweight. 

trevor dear,  This is the Republic of the United States of  America. The Constitution is the rule of law. Islam is  the result of the koran, islam is  fascism.

Wrong !!!!!!

And most of those 1% were hobnobbing with Barry this week. 

beckel is his usual idiot/clown self.

Not even close.

You’re just a moron. I don’t even know why I tried to help you.

You’re too stupid to understand what’s going on. You’re not even close. Learn to live with it.

“I would think that liberals would want separation of any church from the state.”

They do, sometimes. Since Fox News reported this they are against it. ;)

While there’s nothing wrong about having a discussion on Sharia Law, it’s obvious that this is yet another example of the destructive behavior FOX specializes in scaring people about hands being chopped off and other practices of the worst Islamic countries like our great ally, Saudi Arabia. It’s really despicable that FOX has done so much to try to marginalize millions of Moslems in this country. If fiends like Bolling and his his rightwing cohorts ever come to power we can well imagine the fun and games these people will have with Moslems, immigrants and other minorities. Fortunately, it really does look like the rightwing political machine is beginning to implode. The contradictions are too great, and the fear mongering is wearing thin, although I do like Cain’s commercial blowing cigarette smoke in our faces. 

Are you saying Obama isn’t a Christian?

What a laugh.  Mediaite runs a story about newscasters talking about Sharia Law…but not a whisper about the actual imposition of Sharia Law in Libya following Obama’s military intervention there. 

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2011/1025/Sharia-law-to-be-main-source-of-legislation-in-Libya

I mean, bias is one thing, but this is kind of clumsy double standard turns Mediaite into a joke.

Oh, really? How did Iraq go from secularism to Sharia?

Your comments demonstrate that you are a moron and incapable of discussing this.  I’m not attacking you; I’m just letting you know.

Please try to understand that you’re too stupid to understand this story.

So your saying he is correct in his opinnon, but you think he is a clown. Got it

Dominionism  is just another term for a theocracy.  I want no part of that.  

That being said, I pretty much hold true to the Calvinist tenets and those tenets seem to be a central jumping off point for dominionists.There’s one thing that needs to be recognized though:  free will.  That concept needs to applicable in both religious and secular thought.You are responsible for your own actions.  Also, a healthy dose of cynicism is necessary these days.

That’s your response to everything. Thank you for proving my point that liberals are incapable of intellectual discussion.  You are their poster boy. 

Broken record alert!

The facts don’t change.

Says the person whose every response on this thread is, “you’re stupid”.  Thanks for proving my point!!

Your entire premise says you’re a moron. You haven’t a clue what this is about.

Scaring people like Joe biden — more rapes and murderers because of the repubicans….fear, fear, hate, hate…..this administration is the destructive entity in this country, not FNC.

I’m thinking he doesn’t like going to church very much…..

I am very libertarian on these issues. Get religion (ALL) out of the sphere of government. I do not want sharia  law any more than I want biblical or talmudic law being used in our courts. I’m a draconian secularist. Get all that crap out. 

From your link…

 Incomes for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans nearly tripled from 1979 to 2007, far outpacing income growth for all other groups, said a new report that underscored sharply increased U.S. income disparity.

My income has more than tripled from 1979 to 2007;  I guarantee you I’m not in the wealthiest 1%.

As a conservative who watches FOX news as well as the other networks I have to say that I agree with Bob Beckel on this issue.

And that is why FOX is so much better then the other networks. You get more then one point of view. I Love Beckel because he is very much on the other side of my views but I like to have my views challanged. I want to hear both side so I can make up my mind. Fox pretty much does this all the time. It’s only Hanity’s show that I really can’t stand. I use to like it when Combs was on it.

Now lets look at the sheep at MSNBC as well as the rest of the liberal flock who just want to live in thier own bubble. The liberal seems to say  ”No opposing points of view thank you…might make me think about what I really believe and that scares me……Or just makes me really angry and intolerant”

I would watch shows like Olbermann and Maddow if they would have more opposing views. Hard to weed out the crap when there is nobody there to call them on it. Or perhaps they have a great point but with no other view to defend against I just find I can’t trust them.

After the last Pres. Election I don’t know how anyone can say the the MSM did not have an agenda. Not only with Obama and McCain but with Obama and Clinton also.

I am not saying that Fox is the end all be all of news. I have seen my fair share of bumbled stories on there. But with opposing views everyone is kept honest. Hell isn;t Shep smith Liberal??

While we probably disagree on many things (certainly religious ones) I agree completely with religion being removed from the sphere of government.

If you want people to have intelligent conversations with you, you are going to have to learn to think for yourself. Remember, Republicans know you’re stupid, so they know they can make you believe ANYTHING.

Aren’t you one of Jeff Dunham’s little puppets?

Sadaam was executed and we gave the country back to their own people who determined their own leaders.

I wonder what Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal (second largest shareholder in News Corp.) things about Bolling’s assessment of Islam?

Proud to be a FNC follower rather then the lsm follower, I have time to watch a variety of news and talk shows and all of the others lean so far to the left its absurd,  and what are you… a Tickle my leg Chris Matthews follower??

Please stop with the stupid already.  Under the Constitution, you have the freedom to enter into a contract with someone else.  In fact, the Constitution even specifically prohibits states from “impairing the obligation of contracts.”

This is a dispute between people who entered into an arbitration contract by which disputes would be resolved according to Sharia law.  No one forced them to enter into this contract, nor is it prohibited under the Constitution.

Is Sharia law a system of beliefs and codes?  Sure it is – just like Talmudic law.

I am not a religious person, and I have no more interest in Islam than I do Judaism or Christianity, but I believe people should be able to enter into contracts that allow the parties to decide for themselves how to resolve disputes as long as the specific rules agreed upon do not violate any fundamental state or U.S. laws.

Funny how when it comes to Islam, conservatives want to take away individual liberty and freedom to enter into contracts.  The mind reels.

What you’re actually saying, whether you understand it or not, is that state and federal governments should be able tell people what PRIVATE contracts they can and cannot enter into simply because the contract makes reference to a particular religion.  Funny how conservatives get all “big-governmenty” on this issue.

Next Tuesday.

This was covered on our librul conference call this morning.

The “far left loons” in this case happen to be empirically correct.  No Sharia law has been imposed on any person in the United States by any court – and this case is no exception.

The parties voluntarily entered into a PRIVATE arbitration contract, and they are bound by its terms just like any contracting parties are bound.  If the parties didn’t want to be bound by Sharia law, all they needed to do was simply not enter into such a contract.

This is yet another case of MediaIte blowing something out of proportion.

“In Florida this week, an appeals court decided to deny a petition that would have stopped Judge Richard Nielsen from using Sharia Law to help decide a dispute between former and current trustees at a local mosque” – So, you want to get mad over Eric’s jocular implication that a limb could be severed, BUT NOT the fact that a FL was allowed to use Sharia Law (which is illegal, given that COTUS is the supreme law of the land, per the document itself) to resolve a dispute?

I’m glad the priorities of MediaIte are in the right place.  {Sarcasm}

Fact: No way Bush was there for the oil!!!!

Lil Baby Jeebus had upset the 1%. He drove the moneychangers from the Temple, the Wall Street of the times. All these righties would have been huzzahing the trial and execution.

Hate to say it, but KoreanTrevor happens to be correct on the law.  If the terms of the will happen to refer to Catholic doctrine, a court will not void it simply because of that reference.

It will sort itself out but you gotta have page views.

Fact: US courts were established under the morality of Christian beliefs!!!!! That’s the fact nothing but the fact!!!!

As a liberal, I do want separation between church and state.  If private entities wish to glorify a particular religion, that is their right.  “God bless America” is sung at privately-owned major league baseball parks, and that’s fine.  If a church owns a plot of land and wants to erect a cross, all the power to them.

And if two parties wish to enter into a PRIVATE contract whereby they agree to have their differences arbitrated according to the tenets of a particular faith, fine.  As long as no one is requiring that I enter into such a contract – and no one is – I don’t have a problem with it.  That is exactly what is going on here.

There are idiot liberals just as there are idiot conservatives.  Try not to throw too wide a net, though.

The courts are not “using” any religious law.  They are merely enforcing private contracts which themselves refer to religious law.

Ironically, you are using a libertarian rationale to enable courts to drastically limit the freedom of private individuals to contract with one another.

He’s more of a rationalist than a religionist.

Looks like Michelle has gone off the deep end. I loved your latest post:

“Barry said to judge him by who he surrounds himself with.  Well he surrounds himself with American-hating racists, terrorists, Socialists, Commies, and Mao loving Marxists.”

You are truly blithering idiot.  

Looks like Michelle has gone off the deep end. I loved your latest post:

“Barry said to judge him by who he surrounds himself with.  Well he surrounds himself with American-hating racists, terrorists, Socialists, Commies, and Mao loving Marxists.”

You are truly blithering idiot.  

This is America.

Hello!!

YOU DON’T AGREE WITH ME, YOU STUPID!!! FAUX NEWS!!!!! I LIKE GAY SEX AND SHARIA LAW!!!!! GLENN BECK!!!!!! MONKEY WANT BANANA!!!!!!

Ahh, more religious bigotry from the tolerant liberals. And imagine that, once again they hate Christianity whilst defending Islam. Nothing could possibly be dumber, so that’s what they choose to do. It’s almost as if liberals are pre-programmed to follow the dumbest route possible in any situation. Zero common sense.

That’s actually not a bad idea. You libs up for some Sharia Law?

Let’s call their bluff.

On any other news network, Eric Bolling would be laughed out of the studio!! However, Fox News and their viewers can’t get enough of the idiot!!

When is Fox News going to stop promoting FEAR??

What about those of us who don’t belong to a religion, but are A ok with the death penalty?

LAZZZLO!

Long time no see?

” The lamb seems right of place in the broadway street scene, somehow it’s lying there brings a stillness to the air”

Anyway, good to see you…

Purveyor   

Aren’t Joe Scarborough and Pat “Boss” Buchanan conservatives? 

You would think the followers of Obama, who cheered the torture and dragging death of Kaddafi less than a week ago, wouldn’t piss their panties everytime we lawfully execute another worthless shitbag on death row… but they do.

Right back at you L-Dog.

Which is why such an agreement is perfectly legal and enforcable.

Don’t forget Beck and his global hippie/Nazi/communist/Islamic caliphate!!

Based on what? You can’t just copy and paste something she said, and then call her an idiot without refuting what she said.

By the way, you’re not fooling anyone with that name. You’ve always been a bedwetting liberal. You know it, we know it.

Let us know when you find out…

There’s nothing rational about Obama. Get off your knees, dipshit.

Enjoy your company with the other 3rd world countries that still execute people.

Sorry to hear you waste your time with FNC and absorbing all of that misinformation and hysteria.  (Of course, you must realize that when you apparently watch it, it’s not the “news” part you’re catching)

Nope, not a Matthews watcher.  I’m not home early enough to catch any of these on their first airing and some not even on their second airing.  Then, when I do get home, it’s not going to be any of this Cable News Crud that I watch. 

I don’t like yelling or orange people and get annoyed by the chirons.  So, if I watch news, it’s usually going to be something delivered via PBS (Newshour, etc). 

You make a good point. However, judging from the comments from liberals on this thread, they seem to have no problem with sharia law in general, so that news probably didn’t even register with them, if they saw it at all. I’m starting to think they either don’t know what sharia law entails, or they have absolutely no consistent set of values. Everything they say and believe seems to hinge on which way the political winds are blowing at the time. It’s actually pretty sad, if you think about it.  

Too many on death row have been proven to be innocent or were represented by incompetent counsel. Hell, too many for other crimes like child abuse are actually innocent. Remember the witch trials in the 80′s, the 1980′s. A whole bunch of innocent people had their lives ruined by mania about witchcraft and involving children at daycare centers in the rituals involving sex acts. None of it was true.The standard police interrogation methods result in false confessions more than a quarter of the time.A few departments have updated their methods to those that actually work but most are still behind the times.

Scarborough isn’t. Buchanan is.

Scarborough isn’t. Buchanan is.

Personally, I think W was there because Sadaam plotted to kill his father.  

And that’s OK…but don’t cater to Christians come election time.  That’s not a threat, it’s just a statement.
I don’t think we should ever need to ask a candidate what their personal beliefs of God are.

But it is hypocritical to go to church for a photo opp.

I think that summarized it better than I could.

Private contracts should not supercede local/state/federal laws.

I had a tough time typing that.

Hmm. If he’s not a Conservative, then why would he write a book titled “ The Last Best Hope: Restoring Conservatism and America’s Promise” ? 

There is a torrent floating around that claims to be a better recording of the Shepperton 1973 concert.

FAX,

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?  Ouch!  Anyway, typically, you and I are “on the same page,” so to speak.

I had a class, a long time ago, about the influence of the “American Indian and Western Legal Thought.” Was taught by a Harvard educated, legal scholar and member of the Pawnee Indian tribe.  Whoa!
We started with the influence of the Catholic Church and “Papal Bulls,” (mandates) which morphed into some, ‘ahem,’ rather arrogant “Church and State” behavior, including, Christopher Columbus and the conquest of the America’s.

No other culture in human history has devoted as many intellectual resources to justify or explain, (legally codify) their actions, as Western Europe.  Hence, right or wrong, good or bad, Old English Common Law and contemporary Law reflect Western history.  The beauty of American Law is that there are mechanisms in place to repair or replace bad law, while considering the “zeit geist.”

Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity, thus, Islam is a 14th century social culture trying exist in the 21st century and bumping up against modernity with unpleasant results.  For those who disavow an informal separation of Church and State, I suggest a quick peek at Islam and see what 600 years of intransigence and dogma can bring.

In other words: “How much Church do we really want with our State?”

Purveyor 

That is a fallacious. I clearly said that individuals can use their religions to come to whatever terms or agreements they want outside the purview of the courts. How is my view restricting them from that practice? I’m preventing the encroachment of religion into the court’s sphere…not the other way around. I just do not want the courts to use religion as an arbiter of facts presented before them. 

But Michelle, this is clearly a case of contract law where the two parties had previously agreed to an arbitration from an article on the Fox News website, 

“The two parties reportedly agreed ahead of time to use an imam and Islamic Law to resolve any potential differences through arbitration.”

This is not a precedent setting decision, religious doctrine has been allowed to enter our courts before in similar cases. It really is not that big of a deal it would be a bigger deal if the courts refused it as they have allowed similar cases to proceed in the past involving not only sharia but other religious law as well.  There is a history of sharia law being used in our courts in contractual disputes, this is nothing new,from a report by the Congressional Research Center;

“In their arbitration agreement, the disputing parties can bind themselves to use a particular arbitrator.
Courts have held that arbitration agreements providing for what is commonly referred to as “biblically based mediation” (relying on specified principles of the Christian Bible) are enforceable. Likewise, 
courts have also dealt with arbitration agreements specifying that Islamic arbitrators, relying on 
sharia or sharia-based law, govern the dispute settlement. For instance, a Texas state appellate 
court recognized a signed arbitration agreement providing for arbitration by the Texas Islamic 
Court as valid and enforceable and compelled submission of all claims to the Texas Islamic 
Court.

In Minnesota, a state appellate court upheld an arbitration award from an Islamic arbitration committee applying Islamic law. Though some of the legal ramifications of these Islamic arbitration agreements are still unclear, courts have in most respects treated them no differently than other arbitration agreements.
Such agreements reflect the mutual consent of the parties to use Islamic principles and institutions in subsequent disputes.”

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41824.pdf

Yeah I’ve been thinking that myself. 

uh… maybe for the money…  Scarborough has been nestled far to long with the left, he has lost any conservative sensibilities that is if he ever actually ever had any.  

On the “zinger,” (thats what we called album covers, LOL) of the Live Album, with Gabriel wearing his weird triangular masque, is a short story…  About a woman who disrobes in a London Subway and becomes a hovering golden rod!  Obviously, the passengers are witnessing something unique, even miraculous when a woman screams—”stop that, it’s disgusting!”  The golden rod disappears…

Did I ask you about this already?  Do you have that album and have you read the story?

Maybe you might know how I could get a copy?  Is the story still on modern CDs?

You know, I’ve seen Genesis on concert, a couple times, that’s pretty cool!  I talked to guy recently, that saw the Doors in Oregon.  But, having seen the Doors at the “Whisky A Go Go” in Los Angeles would be heavy!  LOL

Purveyor

Well there’s certainly nothing rational about you. Get off your crack pipe, you pathetic teatard.

Thanks for the reply. It’s amazing how if someone from “the other side” shows up on a rival network, they lose credibility. And Shep Smith is news man, isn’t he? I thought that FOX “news” had hard news and editorial content separate. If he’s a news man and reports straight news then how can he considered a “liberal” on FOX ‘news”?

I almost agree with you. 

If the two parties in their private contract violate any terms of an ongoing state/federal ruling…they just can’t indepedentally adjucate.

That’s the way of vigilante.

As a private contract.  That contract can be superceded.

I’m listening to it right now.  Currently Suppers Ready.

Bit Torrent…I hadn’t planned on listening to it.  Now I am…it’s good and I haven’t heard it in years.

Google.

Don’t you love it when Fox news passes the dog whistle around the table?

I forgot how much I totally enjoy the bombast of Supper’s Ready.

http://www.planetnana.co.il/shepperton/

You seem to be making the mistake of thinking that I give a rat’s ass what an obvious mental deficient like you does or doesn’t choose to believe. Wake up. A lot of us left that party because we got tired of having to apologize for the idiot yahoos and their birther fantasies and their “Obama is a Marxist” posters. You’re obviously quite comfortable with it, so deal with it. 

It’s not hate — it’s embarrassment that we live in a country with sheeple who are that weak willed and gullible that they watch Fox and pretend it’s “news.” It reflects badly on the whole country.

Three different liberals have tried to explain the context of this dispute. But all some of these conservatives hear is Beckel saying the government will soon be coming for your left hand. Those three liberals have tried to patiently explain why this is not the onset of Sharia law, but a dispute between two entities that entered into a voluntary agreement. So maybe you can see why they get frustrated (after calmly explaining their views). But all the got was insults. Once it’s been explained clearly a few times, if you still see comments like this:

YOU DON’T AGREE WITH ME, YOU STUPID!!! FAUX NEWS!!!!! I LIKE GAY SEX AND SHARIA LAW!!!!! GLENN BECK!!!!!! MONKEY WANT BANANA!!!!!!

…you can understand why we laugh at you. And for YOU, Michelle-in-Utah, to claim the high ground after some of the trash you’ve spewed on these boards just adds to the comedy. You guys sound like Archie Bunker most of the time. That is, until you’re proven to be wrong (again), and then all of a sudden, it’s “Why can’t liberals have an intelligent debate?” It’s because most of you are too obtuse, and you play at what you think is intelligent debate, but is really obfuscation, misdirection and ignorance. Turning up the volume doesn’t make your stupid any less stupid, it JUST MAKES IT LOUDER! 

What on earth could you and LEEDOG find problematic with the subject matter?  There are important socio-legal considerations contained within, and if they don’t now, they soon will affect you and your progeny?

Or doesn’t that matter?  I suppose the both of you tragically misguided souls, are of the belief that Islam is comprised of really swell people, who just happen to live in both the 14th and 21st centuries!

Oops!  I forgot, its all America’s fault!  ”Never mind”

Purveyor

What is Joe… a Progressive or even a Moderate?? Lol!! He’s a Conservative!!

Unhinged loon alert!

“Never mind”

  that part of your post I can agree with.

OK,

I get it, you don’t like Eric Bolling, he can be clumsy.  However, your comment on “Fear” is antithetical to media coverage which suggests the Liberal, (Socialist) Left, with Obama at the helm are the politico’s who are using “fear” as a tactic?  In fact, historically, “Fear” has been in the Socialist playbook since Lenin?

Who are the one’s telling little old ladies they will soon be eating dog food and be without medicine if the Tea Party has there way?  This strikes me as non-debatable, almost axiomatic by way of political history.

All one has to ask is: “What would Lenin do?”  Or, what DID Stalin do?  Ouch!

Purveyor

You nailed it John, you’re exactly right.

I actually like Morning Joe and find it to be far better then Fox and Friends. Sure Joe isn’t super conservative but thats fine with me. Sometimes I agree with his middle of the road stances. but again both sides are presented F&F just has three conservatives on. If I wanted that I could just listen to myself do the news ;) I want to have my ideas challenged but I also want a voice that expresses my ideas.

Ben Hernandez says

Thanks for the reply. It’s amazing how if someone from “the other side” shows up on a rival network, they lose credibility. And Shep Smith is news man, isn’t he? I thought that FOX “news” had hard news and editorial content separate. If he’s a news man and reports straight news then how can he considered a “liberal” on FOX ‘news”?

Shep delivers the hard news but he has been labled Liberal by many. Hard news people have opinions they just should keep them to themselves when giving the facts. Shep seems to do this for the most part but I just point out his liberal side to prove a pointg to the Fox News bashers

I actually catch at least some of Morning Joe most weekdays, and I honestly believe that the network has so surrounded him with liberal co-hosts and regular guest pundits that his thinking has moved to the left.  To me it doesn’t seem so unnatural for that to happen, for years he has been in that environment and his outlook has been somewhat molded by it…  he probably doesn’t even see it, but he has learned to fit in.  Every now and then he likes to sound off about how conservative he is, the next day he is ripping and mocking conservatives, when he does so sometimes it is with reason, but IMO he takes it to far and fits right in with the NY liberal crowd that his network surrounds him with.  He is not a true conservative, like I said I don’t know if he ever was at best he is a progressive republican, which to a conservative is the worst type of politician as they preach conservatism, but they don’t practice conservative values, Bush is a good example, he increased the deficit more than any president before him, actually coming close to all the presidents who preceded him, at least with Obama you might expect this, it was not suppose to happen with a so called conservative. 

There is statutory law and then there is the Bible.

The courts don’t practice ‘Christian Law’ in this country; the laws are Constitution, not Bible, based.

And this isn’t a Christian nation.

Bachmann went to a college that tried to read the law in Christian terms, imposing her faith into the judicial process.

Are you sure you’re against Sharia?

Even if I pray really hard about it?

Good points, but way too long for her attention to sustain.

Um… Iraq?

What is Soros? Some kind of right wing scapegoat?

Whew.  THat was dirty, low down.  You are very insulting and offensive. And yet, what are you doing here  insulting people you consider to be incapable of intellectual discussion?  It is kind of weird and sick.

Well, yeah but the other choice was McCain and Palin, remember?

“They got no horns and they got no tails, they don’t even know of our existence”

Thank You,  Sincerely

Say, you never did mention if you had read the weird story on the back of the Live Album?  If you did, you will not forget…

Purveyor

I thought the lefties said there are NO INSTANCES and NO POSSIBILITY of Sharia Law ever being implemented in the U.S. judicial system.  Isn’t that what the lefties continually tell us?

All of you reading this should find out what is being taught in your public schools–here is what is happening in the suburbs of Boston. Last month my granddaughter (13) was studying Islam in her history class. It was the first lesson plan of the year and would have fallen on September 11th if the teacher had not had the sense to skip a day. Part of the chapter included Muslim contributions to history. The emphasis was that it is a “religion of peace”. There was no mention of Sharia law or of the treatment of women or apostasy (those that leave the faith). As a family we explained to her what the “real facts” were and helped her write her assigned essay “Why study Islam?” It included a very truthful and informative view. She was given an F. This month, in Science, they are studying the Muslim contributions to space and astronomy. Remember all the NASA funds that were going to be re-appropriated to the education of the Muslim contributions to space? There you go. My husband is of Greek descent and with Libya and Egypt right across the way, and Greece in such a vulnerable economic position right now, we are all at a loss as to the actions and motivations of this Administration.

Great!  Then I suppose that means courts should also be able to simply strike mortgages that are underwater if that’s what they want to do.

I agree with that… but that’s not at issue in any of these “Sharia law” cases.  If a contract violates state or federal law or the Constitution, it is not enforceable.  But there is simply no state or federal law or constutitional provision that prohibits parties from having a religious person resolve a corporate contractual dispute.  If the imam arbitrator were to rule that the losing party gets 20 lashes, then fine, that would be prohibited.  But if the imam simply allocates money (which is likely the case), then I can’t see how that would be illegal under any law or legal theory.

I agree.  But no laws are being superseded by the aribtration agree at issue.  If you can name one, I’d love to see it.

You’re confusing enforcement of private agreements with the application of law to a dispute beyond the scope of an agreement.  The present case involves the former, not the latter.  If the court actually were applying Sharia law to resolve a dispute, then I would be concerned.  But the court is merely enforcing what the PARTIES AGREED AMONG THEMSELVES.

This isn’t an example of Sharia law being “implemented” by a court.  It is a court enforcing a PRIVATE contract between two parties that voluntarily entered into it.  There is a big difference between the two.

Actually, the Constitution established the Supreme Court.  The Constitution says nothing about Christianity.  The Judiciary Act of 1789 created inferior federal courts.  Again, that act said nothing about any religion.

You can look it up!

IT’S VERY SIMPLE – AMERICAN LAWS IN AMERICAN COURTS – PERIOD – END OF DISCUSSION.

Now we all KNOW that if this case involved Christianity, the Left-Limousine-Liberal-Socialist-Wannabes would be foaming at the mouth and screaming at the top of their lungs that we can’t have RELIGION INFLUENCING our court system, BUT, since it is their BELOVED Islam, then that’s perfectly acceptable!  AND, if you have a problem with ISLAM INFLUENCING our court system, then you are a racist, Islam-hating Islamaphobe.  THAT’S how the Left-Limousine-Liberal-Socialist-Wannabes work!

There is nothing wrong with that and it is consistent with what I said. The arbiter (Judge in this case) does not need to know what the specific religious “law” says. If it stays that way…Amen!