Obama's (and the DNC's) worst nightmare.

[TheExtraPoint]

So a woman in New Jersey is originally denied a restraining order against her husband who she claimed RAPED her. The IDIOT judge (and believe me, there are a lot of those) who ruled against her was overruled at the appellate level for obvious reasons. Rape is illegal in the United States, and this country American law supersedes religion. The justice system got this one right, though it took longer than it should have I grant you. I can't fathom why any woman who asks for a restraining order shouldn't be granted one immediately - certainly not one who alleges rape no matter the circumstance. The judge in this instance is an IDIOT, a fact reinforced at the appellate level.

This is the strength of your argument? A judicial misinterpretation of the law that was eventually and correctly addressed by the law?

The difference between the freedom to practice Islam and the supposed desire to impose Sharia law is fundamental. It's explained flawlessly by the only Muslim congressmen in the United States, Keith Ellison, a democrat from Minnesota:

When asked by Beck about his opinion on "Muslim extremists" Ellison replied, "They're criminals. But I think that people who commit criminal acts should be treated like criminals, regardless of their faith."[93]

That's the point that YOU'RE missing.

Not to mention, Sharia law will never govern this country because the overwhelming majority of people in this country aren't Muslim, and because even a Muslim politician (or in the President's case, a suspected one) recognizes that American law governs citizens of this country, not religious law. Meanwhile, those laws implicitly allow for religious freedom so long as it doesn't violate law or the rights of others.

Less than 1% of the population in this country is Muslim, and less still would ever even advocate for Sharia principles to be instituted for the masses in this country. Outside of Anwar Al-Alawki (a terrorist by every possible definition), where are the Muslim-American voices advocating for Sharia Law in this country? Or are they COMING (said in a boogeyman voice, of course).

Do you really believe that Kareem Abdul-Jabbar would justify rape or violence towards women in the name of his faith? Or Keith Ellison? Or the former Cat Stevens? Or Fareed Zakaria? Or Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, an American-Muslim killed serving his country in Iraq? I don't know any of them personally, but I'm skeptical.

In the same link you provided:

Saleem Quraishi, president of the American Muslim Association of Oklahoma City insists that Islam does not allow for men to mistreat women, and that the New Jersey case involved a "crazy, loony man, unfortunately a Muslim. That is not Islam," he said.

The vast majority of Muslim practitioners live in and worship in peace, respect others' right to their own religious worship, and use their religion to inform their approach to everyday life in precisely the same way that a Catholic or Jew or Buddhist or Atheist would. Violent interpretations of the Qur'an, the Bible, or any other religious text are bastardizations of the religion itself, and nothing more. If that fuels criminal behavior, that criminality should be addressed, no matter the religious undertones.

Ellison continued;

He told those in attendance that the principles of Islam guide his life, but he has no intention of imposing his faith on others, "I'm not a religious leader, I've never led religious services of any kind. I'm not here to be a preacher, but in terms of political agenda items, my faith informs me." He addressed the Quran Oath controversy of the 110th United States Congress and said that "religion should be something that unites, rather than divide people...'They've never actually tried to explore how religion should connect us, they're into how religion divides us. ...They haven't really explored...how my faith connects me to you.'"[62]

You can let the paranoia about the big, scary religion creep in on you if you choose... I don't blame you. Modern religion scares the bejeesus out of me too. That's why I love America - because I'm free to not subscribe to any of them if I choose. But the notion that this country will ever be governed by Sharia law is nonsensical. The links you provided about Europe involved:

In France, peaceful religious assembly, which I'm told is tolerated here as well. France is 10% Muslim, by the way. And if they are disturbing the peace or violating law, THAT should be addressed. If French politicians are too spineless to address it or lack the public relations savvy, that highlights their own political weakness, not our's.

In Germany, we have the legal protection of Muslims from having to handle alcohol in a store. The real question is, if they won't do it, why are you hiring them to do that job?

In Spain, nine men were ARRESTED for conspiring to MURDER someone. That's how the legal system works in the civilized world. Violent people go to jail and don't come out until the law says so. We don't do the whole stadium jumbotron decapitation thing in the West.

We're not talking about legally protected rape or murder - either here or in Europe - and that's precisely because it does not, and never will exist in any place but the dreams of of the frightened.

You call me uninformed on the subject, while using totally incidental examples to bolster your argument that Sharia is on the rise, when in fact, it's not any more prevalent than the imposition of Christian or Jewish values on American governance. In reality, it's actually far less significant.

Ellison has also said, "Osama bin Laden no more represents Islam than Timothy McVeigh represented Christianity."[94]

Or than the Neo-Nazi movement represents my mom's family. Or the Jewish Defense League represents my dad's.

IMO, it is in fact western ignorance, hostility and paranoia towards Islam that drives its radical minority (that alongside our asinine presence in their lands, and our historically blind support of Israel), not the core of the religion itself. You can choose to believe that every Muslim in this country is an operative of hate and terror if you please; I know far better.

Cain said Muslim. If he meant imposition of Sharia, he should have said it, because there is a difference. Like you said, words have meaning. He SAID one thing, you HEARD another.

Oppose the imposition of Sharia Law and you're talking about upholding the constitution, and that's just fine by me. But talk about discriminating against all Muslims and impugning their integrity or credibility on the political scene strictly on the basis of the actions of a select few is, to borrow a phrase, "stupid".

[NCRAVEN]

I am not trying to get in the middle of The EP and 4G's discussion or speak for 4G. I just want to point out I think the argument is not Sharia being the laws that Govern America but the law which Muslims follow themselves.

Which leads me to think/believe. If they are devout Muslims than their faith is which guides them and trumps all else, which do you think they will turn to when a choice needs to be made, their faith or the laws of America?

Just my two cents

[4G63]

Oppose the imposition of Sharia Law and you're talking about upholding the constitution, and that's just fine by me.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4612111/h...slim-comments/

Does that suffice?

[NCRAVEN]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4612111/h...slim-comments/

Does that suffice?

No, it's from FoxNews it's not a real clip, it had to have been edited.

[4G63]

No, it's from FoxNews it's not a real clip, it had to have been edited.

I know TEP will watch it but Galen might get a flare-up if he has to watch "Faux".... :D

[TheExtraPoint]

I am not trying to get in the middle of The EP and 4G's discussion or speak for 4G. I just want to point out I think the argument is not Sharia being the laws that Govern America but the law which Muslims follow themselves.

Which leads me to think/believe. If they are devout Muslims than their faith is which guides them and trumps all else, which do you think they will turn to when a choice needs to be made, their faith or the laws of America?

Just my two cents

You're a part of the discussion NC - I won't assume that 4G feels the same way you do without him saying so, but I appreciate your input just the same.

In response to your suggestion though, why then use the New Jersey rape case as evidence of the slow creep of Sharia into our legal system. Or highlight Herman Cain's supposed opposition to such developments in the federal government?

What's true is that government has nothing to do with religion... or at least it SHOULDN'T. That's because government doesn't have the authority to legislate religion, hence our deeply held separation of church and state.

What any government CAN do however is create a system of laws that everyone that lives here must follow irrespective of their religious convictions. Violate those and face prosecution, whatever your motivation, religious or otherwise. Don't like those laws? Move to Saudi Arabia.

We're actually incredibly fortunate in this country. Many people come here because they are allowed to freely worship at their own discretion, unlike in their country of origin. That doesn't however mean that they can legally justify criminality on a religious basis, no matter what religion they are. They can't, and there's precedent that says as much, including the very case in New Jersey 4G referenced.

Again, as Mr. Ellison highlighted, let's treat criminals like criminals, regardless of their faith, while at the same time being careful not to stereotype a massive population for an individual action. For Mr. Cain to issue a blanket statement about all Muslims based upon the malicious intentions of its radical fringe is irresponsible, and rather telling with respect to his core values, his ability to judge an individual's character, and what seems to be an inherent disregard for basic human equality.

Being a black man in America, he should know better.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4612111/h...slim-comments/

Does that suffice?

Eh... I appreciate that he has qualified his comments. I'll leave it at that.

I still believe his view of the Muslim religion (and as a result the vast majority of the over 2-million Muslim-Americans he'd be responsible for protecting by the way) is dangerously skewed towards the darkest corners of Islam, and that's a shame.

There are many more Muslim-Americans who love this country and its ideals, came here because of it, and practice their religion in the name of peace and tolerance. Of course, select individuals do in fact have a breaking point, and I think rhetoric like Cain's pushes them closer, while the current President's approach to Islam keeps them engaged in a constructive way.

I don't tend towards pessimism, and yet that seems to me to be Mr. Cain's approach. I do think that will play well with RNC doomsdayers however. You think America is a "country of crisis". Ask people in Japan, or Haiti, or Afghanistan how much sympathy they have for our "crises".

IMO, the actual risk of Sharia being implemented in any significant way in this country is beyond minute. Cain is pandering, and preying upon unfounded conservative fears, and wisely so, as it will work to help get him nominated. That said, I don't believe portraying Sharia law as an eventuality is a good strategy for getting elected President. We elected a guy with the middle name "Hussein", remember?

[Galen Sevinne]

To justify Cain's comment on a single court decision that was quickly overturned and to think Sharia law is even remotely a concern because of one judge's poor decision is just naive and dramatic. It is no different than Trump getting attention being a birther all of a sudden. Truly it speaks to the susceptibility of parts of the conservative base to fear mongering. Plain and simple....really nothing more to say here.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[NCRAVEN]

In response to your suggestion though, why then use the New Jersey rape case as evidence of the slow creep of Sharia into our legal system. Or highlight Herman Cain's supposed opposition to such developments in the federal government?

Not sure why. I actually did not check out that link.

What's true is that government has nothing to do with religion... or at least it SHOULDN'T. That's because government doesn't have the authority to legislate religion, hence our deeply held separation of church and state.

I agree it shouldn't, which leads back to my point of if someones faith which coincides with laws that guide their faith. I am not saying all Muslims are incapable of public office, just simply stating the conflict and that I understand Cain saying he wouldn't appoint someone who was Muslim

Again, as Mr. Ellison highlighted, let's treat criminals like criminals, regardless of their faith, while at the same time being careful not to stereotype a massive population for an individual action. For Mr. Cain to issue a blanket statement about all Muslims based upon the malicious intentions of its radical fringe is irresponsible, and rather telling with respect to his core values, his ability to judge an individual's character, and what seems to be an inherent disregard for basic human equality.

I follow you here, but you lose me here:

Being a black man in America, he should know better.

[NCRAVEN]

Truly it speaks to the susceptibility of parts of the conservative base to fear mongering.

It does... if you're an idiot. Guess that's why you think that.

BTW, Trump is not a conservative.

[Galen Sevinne]

It does... if you're an idiot. Guess that's why you think that.

BTW, Trump is not a conservative.

You're being susceptible n.c. resist the urge to be dumb..
You will respect yourself more in the morning. Lol

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[tripple7's]

Galen, Why do so many people of the Muslim Faith Migrate?

[Galen Sevinne]

Galen, Why do so many people of the Muslim Faith Migrate?

I don't know is this a joke? Why do so many Muslims "migrate"? Hmmmm...I am going to guess because they are afraid if they stay in the same place to long Palin will fly over their herds in her helicopter and shoot at them?