"It is an effort to demonize Islam," said Ibrahim Hooper....Hey, Ibrahim-Islam & it's extremists are doing that perfectly by themselves! The more we find out about how the men treat women in Islam & finding out more about Prophet Mohammad--you won't get ANY converts from freedom-loving, tolerant or those people who fight for Women's Rights!!
The ignorance of people. I remember as a child in school the teachers saying the founders of our country were looking for religious freedom. Looks like they believe in freedom right up until someone chooses something other than what they believe. Conservative republicans are pathetic.
Right back at ya gene, since you obviously know nothing about the Rule of Law in the U.S., which has nothing....absolutely nothing.....to do with Sharia Law they practice in places like Iran!
"Their Islamic marriage contract, made in Lebanon, promised her a $5,000 payment should they split. He argued that the contract settled property issues, while Islamic law limited spousal maintenance payments to her to three months. Her attorney said in a court document that following Islamic law would leave her "destitute."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
OK. There are Two parts to this issue. Part One. The "Islamic Marriage Contract" IS a contract between Two people. Now, can a contract signed/agreed to by foreign nationals in another nation be enforced in U.S. Courts? I dunno. But this argument is what makes lawyers, if not rich, "comfortable". The second part, maintenance under Islamic law, is a non-starter. The divorce is not occurring in a nation under Islamic law. It is happening in a secular nation (as stipulated in a treaty negotiated by Thomas Jefferson) that they are a resident of. The Professor should thank Allah that he is not filing for divorce in the state of California as their divorce laws make Kansas divorce laws look entirely reasonable.
No 'marriage contract' or Islamic religious rules are valid outside of what American law says they are. No 'religious traditions' are legally binding either.
When religious traditions match up with American law, American law is what is followed, not religious traditions.
When religious or social traditions DO NOT match up with American law, American law trumps the conflicting religious or social traditions. IT'S THE WAY OUR LEGAL SYSTEM WORKS.
Yes, a person can waste the courts time and thier own money arguing otherwise - but we already do that today for every other possible permutation of this - a religous arguements or not.
The Kansas law makes America look like a bunch of morons. We preach religious freedom, but we only allow it for the 'approved' religion.
We preach 'freedom of religion' but we only allow it for 'approved' religions.
I'm a Christian and I'm damm well offended by the pieces of filth that violate Christianity by forcing thier partcicular interpretation of it upon everyone else. This fools law in Kansas is nothing more than falsely pious Christians forcing thier will upon others.
Which is hypocritically ironic because they say this law is 'preventing someone from forcing thier religion upon our legal system' - and what it really is doing is exactly what they say it's supposed to prevent - forcing THIER version of a religion upon everyone else.
I'm damm glad that I don't live in an intolerant, religiously bigoted state such as Kansas.
Oh btw - we already have protections against ANY religion from becoming the law of the land. It's called the US Constitution. You clowns in Kansas should actually try reading it once. You'd be amazed at what it says - because you clearly have no freaking clue currently.
The US Constitution already prevent ANY religion from controlling rulings and decisions in the legal system.
It's the CHRISTIAN right wing who are taking away rights of others by violating the constitution and forcing religious rules to be considered.
There is NOT one case where Islamic religious rules or even cultural 'agreements' have been allowed to affect a court's decision. In the very, very few cases where an individual judge has ruled to include any such thing, it has been appealed and over-ruled and American rule of law prevails.
This whole thing is nothing but right wing religious extremists blowing sunshine up our *sses in order to keep us in line with thier extreme versions of Christianity.
To do with Christianity what they are using bigotry and hate to get laws passed against Islam 'to prevent'.
Anyone who can't see that is the one who is brain damaged.
btw - I am Christian, and I demand that NO religion be allowed to over-rule the Constitution - not even Christianity.
Pretty ironic considering that Kansas is pretty much the last place on earth facing a threat for Sharia law. But it's pretty much what you'd expect from a bunch of ignorant hayseeds.
As other posters have stated this is basically a redundant law. However, since it is far too easy for lawyers to bend the rules allowing them to bypass many things that are generally accepted as constitutional rights, perhaps this new law will make that a little harder by clarification.
Although I must add that it seems a little hypocritical, since KS wants to force creationism to be taught in public schools.
It's the right wing religious extremists and the usual 'only MY Christianity can violate the Constitution by becoming the law of the land' and the usual 'I am ignorant of the actual truths involved, bigoted and don't care that I'm doing with Christianity what I'm working hard to prevent Islam from doing'.
These are the same people that think anything even close to Islam is automatically 'the evil enemy'. Even if what they see in front of them is a Sihk from India - they'll still shriek 'Islam'....
I BET YOU DOLLARS TO DONUTS ERIC HOLDER WILL TRY TO OVER TURN THIS LAW,HE DOESN`T BELIEVE IN OUR CONSTITUTION.JUST BECAUSE THE JEWS HAVE THEIR OWN COURTS AND POLICE FORCE IN NEW YORK CITY,EVERYONE THINKS THEY ARE ENTITLED TO THE SAME RULES.
Perhaps should a Musl im couple wish a divorce and the husband wants 95% of the net worth, he should ambush his wife, bash her over the head and fly (oops, no fly list) back to a country that supports his "brand" of law? Otherwise, welcome to the United States folks.
Oh, I thought of an exception, an "out" for that needy Musl im husband: come to Florida where you can purchase any decision from the courts you wish. Since you are in charge of the purse strings, YOU will win the decision. Biggest wallet wins - always.
I remember a phrase: "Law of the land". I had thought that meant the law as it applies to the land that you are in? If so, YOU are in America, YOU are subject to it's laws - period. No other system of law matters. Did I interpret this incorrectly?
No you didn't but the people of Kansas clearly have - as have many of the people making comments here.
The Constitution prevents religious or cultural rules from over-ruling 'the law of the land' - and ALL cases where an individual judge has gone astry of that basic rule have been over-ruled and thier judgements reversed.
It's the same bizzare hysteria that comes from the right about voting - They see a giant conspiracy for fraudulent voting so they demand voter ID laws, yet they have no actual proof of any widespread fraud. Same thing here. They see a giant conspiracy even without proof that it exists, They again demand an extreme remedy for a problem that doesn't exist.
Typical of wing nuts. Even if the idea is consistent with the constitution, namely the Constitution is supreme and a 100% trump to religion. These clowns do it in an unconstitutional manner, passing a law against religion and fail to realize that such a law today targeting an anti-woman , anti-freedom religion can be used in the future against any religion. How narrow minded, but then it is Kansas. Home of the bigots that murder medical people for providing health care to women and bombing medical clinics. The court challenges will cost the state millions. These people are as clueless as the Florida legislature. And that is not easy.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
OK. There are Two parts to this issue. Part One. The "Islamic Marriage Contract" IS a contract between Two people. Now, can a contract signed/agreed to by foreign nationals in another nation be enforced in U.S. Courts? I dunno. But this argument is what makes lawyers, if not rich, "comfortable". The second part, maintenance under Islamic law, is a non-starter. The divorce is not occurring in a nation under Islamic law. It is happening in a secular nation (as stipulated in a treaty negotiated by Thomas Jefferson) that they are a resident of. The Professor should thank Allah that he is not filing for divorce in the state of California as their divorce laws make Kansas divorce laws look entirely reasonable.
When religious traditions match up with American law, American law is what is followed, not religious traditions.
When religious or social traditions DO NOT match up with American law, American law trumps the conflicting religious or social traditions. IT'S THE WAY OUR LEGAL SYSTEM WORKS.
Yes, a person can waste the courts time and thier own money arguing otherwise - but we already do that today for every other possible permutation of this - a religous arguements or not.
The Kansas law makes America look like a bunch of morons. We preach religious freedom, but we only allow it for the 'approved' religion.
We preach 'freedom of religion' but we only allow it for 'approved' religions.
I'm a Christian and I'm damm well offended by the pieces of filth that violate Christianity by forcing thier partcicular interpretation of it upon everyone else. This fools law in Kansas is nothing more than falsely pious Christians forcing thier will upon others.
Which is hypocritically ironic because they say this law is 'preventing someone from forcing thier religion upon our legal system' - and what it really is doing is exactly what they say it's supposed to prevent - forcing THIER version of a religion upon everyone else.
I'm damm glad that I don't live in an intolerant, religiously bigoted state such as Kansas.
Oh btw - we already have protections against ANY religion from becoming the law of the land. It's called the US Constitution. You clowns in Kansas should actually try reading it once. You'd be amazed at what it says - because you clearly have no freaking clue currently.
Can we be sure this isn't an Onion article or SNL skit?
Seems to me that YOU are brain damaged.
The US Constitution already prevent ANY religion from controlling rulings and decisions in the legal system.
It's the CHRISTIAN right wing who are taking away rights of others by violating the constitution and forcing religious rules to be considered.
There is NOT one case where Islamic religious rules or even cultural 'agreements' have been allowed to affect a court's decision. In the very, very few cases where an individual judge has ruled to include any such thing, it has been appealed and over-ruled and American rule of law prevails.
This whole thing is nothing but right wing religious extremists blowing sunshine up our *sses in order to keep us in line with thier extreme versions of Christianity.
To do with Christianity what they are using bigotry and hate to get laws passed against Islam 'to prevent'.
Anyone who can't see that is the one who is brain damaged.
btw - I am Christian, and I demand that NO religion be allowed to over-rule the Constitution - not even Christianity.
Judges out there do get terrible pressure to follow other law like sharia law.
This just allows him to point to this law and say sorry.
However, since it is far too easy for lawyers to bend the rules allowing them to bypass many things that are generally accepted as constitutional rights, perhaps this new law will make that a little harder by clarification.
Although I must add that it seems a little hypocritical, since KS wants to force creationism to be taught in public schools.
These are the same people that think anything even close to Islam is automatically 'the evil enemy'. Even if what they see in front of them is a Sihk from India - they'll still shriek 'Islam'....
The Constitution prevents religious or cultural rules from over-ruling 'the law of the land' - and ALL cases where an individual judge has gone astry of that basic rule have been over-ruled and thier judgements reversed.
It's the same bizzare hysteria that comes from the right about voting - They see a giant conspiracy for fraudulent voting so they demand voter ID laws, yet they have no actual proof of any widespread fraud. Same thing here. They see a giant conspiracy even without proof that it exists, They again demand an extreme remedy for a problem that doesn't exist.