'Anti-Sharia' law is back

[gambit]

Isn't this already what happens right now and state and federal laws trump over all others? Why does the Florida Senate think that they need another law? I always thought that you cannot sign away your fundamental rights by getting into a contract.
and
Are religious communities actually asking that they be exempted from state laws and that they be allowed to use their own laws instead? I was of the view that these communities were asking that they be allowed to use their own laws in matters such as divorce and alimony where all parties have consented in a manner akin to arbitrage. This could save money to both parties in terms of court expenses. If either party objects to such arbitration, the case would have to be decided in a court of law.

There is nothing wrong with arbitration and that all parties agreed to accept any decision coming from arbitration. But the ideal of arbitration is that all parties must be on equal status, not just under the current legal system but also from the one the parties came from.

You should understand that legally speaking, an arbitration is not that different from a court judgement. An arbitration is a legal dispute that has full backing of the court in any decision. In an arbitration, the arbiter is both judge and jury, whereas in a full court, the judge there is to primarily ensure all parties conduct their disputes according to the laws, and let the jury decide on guilt and/or culpability. So what SB 58 does is to visibly elevate the legal status of all disputants in any legal issue, should there be any disparity prior to arbitration or court.

Look at it this way...

If a woman came from a society where she has only 5 rights while the current US system gives her 10 rights, her opponent in arbitration cannot use the legal legal system that gives her only 5 rights as basis for arbitration. The superior disputant have every advantage and an arbitration with its speedier resolution process would grossly skew the entire process into his favor. Hence the phrasing '... the same fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges guaranteed by the State Constitution or the United States Constitution.

Religions are where women seems to suffer the fullest of man's inhumanity to man and always under the supposed will of a god and this is why this law is seen by religious people as somewhat an oblique intrusion into religious affairs.

What does this mean for pre-nup contracts. Can they ever be enforced?

Of course. Because a pre-nup is usually assumed that both sides came from equal legal standing. Here is where it gets sticky: Say a woman came from a society where she has only 5 rights and she entered into a pre-nup where she agreed to be penniless if there is a divorce, is that contract enforceable in a country where she has greater amount of rights? This law seems to say no.

 

[Ayush]

very good initiative

 

[ephone]

Great move. sharia-my-axx.

A renewed attempt to pass a controversial "foreign law" bill proposed by Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla, and Rep. Larry Metz, R-Yahala, was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday, after more than an hour of sometimes emotional public testimony.

The bill, SB 58, bans courts or other legal authorities from using religious or foreign law as a part of a legal decision or contract relating to family law. Florida law would supercede foreign law regarding divorce, alimony, the division of marital assets, child support and child custody. The bill is ready to be heard on the House floor but it has more committee stops in the Senate. Last year, the bill passed the House but died in the Senate.

Supporters say the proposal isn’t targeting religious groups, but the bill has been criticized as anti-Sharia, a Koran-based code followed in some Islamic countries, by Islamic groups as well as Jewish organizations and the American Civil Liberties Union.

"It should raise some eyebrows for you, the fact that there’s a rabbi speaking out against the bill who’s from Israel and a Arab Muslim, that’s me, also speaking out against the bill," said Ahmed Bedier, president of the United Voices for America. "We may disagree what is happening in the Middle East, but we agree on this bill — that it discriminates and targets our communities."

Hays said the bill "prevents a potential problem" from occurring in Florida courts and that it’s "not insulting to any religious group."
"If your law violates the constitutional rights of a Floridian, it has no business being in a Florida court," Hays said.

Read more here: 'Anti-Sharia' law is back | Naked Politics

 

[fallstuff]

Then let US do that 'nothing'. Unless the Muslims are afraid that this 'nothing' is really 'something' they do not want US to know.

No one gives a crap about these retarded issues.

 

[MST]

Islam supersedes man made laws. Secularism simply means superiority of man made laws over religious laws. This makes sense in cases where religion is indeed failed to provide justice and have been tempered with like christianity. But islam is different and encomposes all aspects of life and nation-state. That is what we muslims believe.

But now even if we argue on the basis of secularism i.e no religion in state affairs. How the hell does is make sense by the state on infringing upon family affair of a religous group. It goes against the concept of US secularism and violates freedom of religion barring the baseless logic of islamophobia as your post clearly demosstrates with words like "can stay in their native shitholes" Its not about secularism or law but hatred against muslim & islam. Orthodox jews are also feeling the pinch.

Then you are free to stay where you are or move to a place where what you are saying is followed. Everyone has a choice here. Its not like someone is forcing you to move to here.

 

[fallstuff]

It matters most in inheritance. In absence of a Will a state statues.p will dictate.

 

[Wright]

Awesome. If they want Sharia move to Saudi Arabia or Iran. If you want Communism, move to Cuba or North Korea. Dont expect everyone to bend to your demands.

 

[King Solomon]

Why do Muslims need a legal system from the 7th century? Hasn't everything changed since then?

If Jews or Christians were trying to follow the legal system in place at the time of David or Christ, they would be a laughing stock.

 

[Mian H Amin.]

lol .. your country .. your rules ...

 

[KRAIT]

Europe is facing troubles because of these extremists and they make life of moderate Muslims difficult.

 

[fallstuff]

Why do Muslims need a legal system from the 7th century? Hasn't everything changed since then?

If Jews or Christians were trying to follow the legal system in place at the time of David or Christ, they would be a laughing stock.

Sunny Boy,

Jews are claiming a land mass that was not in their possession for thousands of years.

 

[jbond197]

From OP --
The bill, SB 58, bans courts or other legal authorities from using religious or foreign law as a part of a legal decision or contract relating to family law. Florida law would supercede foreign law regarding divorce, alimony, the division of marital assets, child support and child custody. The bill is ready to be heard on the House floor but it has more committee stops in the Senate. Last year, the bill passed the House but died in the Senate.

Ignoring the title, I think the bill is awesome and should be passed with full majority support.. We can not have laws for every bunch of people. There should be one set of laws applicable to all..

 

[Green Bullet]

Islam is anti-secular religion itself , which insult non-Muslims , offer them second class treatment .

Your posts has been reported, because it can lead to inflammatory remarks from other members. Your just a bigot who has no clue what Islam is and what it tries to teach.

 

[thesolar65]

When in Rome, do as Romans do!!

 

[Hack-Hook]

If state applies family planning and one child or two child policy, will it mean denying Muslims right to have kids ?

Islam may supersede all man made laws for Muslims, but for rest of us, we don't accept Islamic laws. Why should we ? Its about what our state decides. Secularism means policies without interference of religion.

I wonder what Muslims said in China over one-child policy ?

Well as a matter of fact in China one child policy don't apply to minorities which muslims are part of them.