There is no Muslim takover of American law. What if they thew dice or played poker to decide? Private parties are free to settle their disputes in any manner they wish -- no matter what religion they are.

http://www.slate.com/articles/video/whos_afraid_of_aymann_ismail/2017/10/inside_a_sharia_law_court_in_texas.html

Of course there are no sharia state courts in the United States.

The UK has granted some legal rights to religious courts. I view the UK approach as yet another example of why the First Amendment saves the United States from doing (some) silly things.

Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, etc. etc. "courts" do their own private thing with the consent of those involved but have no power of the state nor can they attain any power of state under the United States Constitution.

Mårv Fråndsen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, etc. etc. "courts" do
> their own private thing with the consent of those
> involved

But we have to draw the line when they want to impose their idea of justice on children who did not consent, don't we?

I agree about the UK approach. It's a crazy abandonment of legal sovereignty to play nice with religions. Very bad.

They're similar to mormon courts of love and they operate without official legal sanction.

Sharia? You have now idea what Sharia does. Cut off hands. Throw homosexuals off buildings. Cut off heads. Stone women who were raped because there weren't two witnesses which makes her an adultress. You think moron courts of love are harsh. Try a little Sharia. Yeah, that's the ticket!

As if a rapist would arrange to have four males watch him do the dead.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/14/2017 10:59AM by Cheryl.

Dammit ! I keep telling you this is not necrophilia !

incognitotoday Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sharia? You have now idea what Sharia does.

>Cut off hands.
--Still Illegal in USA No chance of ever being legal

>Throw homosexuals off buildings.
--Still Illegal in USA No chance of ever being legal

>Cut off heads.
--Still Illegal in USA No chance of ever being legal

>Stone women who were raped because
> there weren't two witnesses which makes her an
> adultress.
--Still Illegal in USA No chance of ever being legal

There is no Sharia law in the US!
Anyone is free to settle their disputes out of court, but only WITHIN THE US LAW.

Two people have to drop their small claims court case and BOTH agree to abide by Judge Judy's opinion, but she can only make rulings that would be legal for the two parties to agree to in a contract. Judge Judy cant impose prison time or the death penalty because those thing would be kidnapping or murder.

some women divorced under UK law are still considered married by their local mosque and are shamed and shunned if they leave the abuse without an imam's approval, which a woman will never get over her 'owner'/husband. This has also caused problems with the mosque sharia court ordering a battered wife to move back in with her husband; husbands ignoring restraining orders seemingly with impunity; family courts that have ruled husband to have no contact with children he abused have been ignored and muslim women ordered by the imam to allow contact with the father. There are many instances of sharia courts not recognising the law of the western land they reside within; like mormons, their religious courts carry more weight than the court that deals with non-muslims.

Even just the other day a school in england has been ruled as unlawfully segregating boys and girls, contrary to UK law. Not sure what is to be done about the school or if they will comply with any court decision because it is not a sharia court.

The sharia courts mainly discriminate against muslim women and girls. Do your own search for how the secular courts in western europe give muslims 'special treatment' because of their poor understanding of any state law separate from muslim law. An extreme example is rapist refugees who are let off because of 'culture'.

To address the topic of no 'state' sharia law - one sharia court can differ from another, (excepting a fatwa but they can only be given by a revered imam) it all depends on the mosque leaders: there is no ultimate authority except the koran and hadiths and of course the intepretation of them by the individuals who comprise the court, just like 'courts of love' being down to intepretations of the handbook instructions. No doubt favouritism exists in mosque, too, where certain families are treated more benevolently.

Mormons are amateurs compared to muslims, but the behaviour and attitudes are very similar.

What school in england ?

thanks for posting the link

Religion based "schools" are always a problem.

totally agree there, but state run schools have 'good european/global citizens' as their religion at the moment, or so it seems to me.

Not everything is a religion...

well, that depends upon your interpretation of 'religion' - we have debated this before and I do not believe the board wants to see it debated, yet again.

or a Mormon, Jewish, or Catholic one for that matter?

Social standing and status within a community is one thing but the force of law is something else all together.

The Kennedys may have spent lots of cash and political capital on getting annulments -- but there was no LEGAL requirement for them to have one.

Whichever religion breeds fastest and gets enough power will try to impose their "laws" into the culture at large.

This is why the Judge Moore type of Christians need to wake up. They might not be the majority forever, so be careful about the doors you open for religion to impose their beliefs on others.

Norway, Sweden, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Finland--none of them have "no-go zones" where Western Europeans and even first responders enter at their peril. Enlightened First-world Governments have all said so. Not sure about Hungary and Poland. They put fences along their borders.

So who ya gonna believe, postal workers, cops, amublence drivers and local residents, or the much better informed mayors and magistrates and governors? And their official news outlets?

The article showed a Caucasian and a bearded man of apparent foreign origin, walking side-by-side, so I'm convinced that there is complete harmony in Malmo and everywhere else in Sweden...France...Manchester...Belgium...Norway...Denmark...

And all those hundreds of reports of rape and sexual assault in Munich during Octoberfest and Frankfort on New Years Eve? Nothing but mass irrational feminine hysteria and anti-immigrant bigotry!

Think about mormonism. Should we believe grassroots exmormons or GAs and TV advertisements?

Should we believe FARMS or those who have been mormon for decades and are recovering?

Would a reasonable person believe Eric who started this board or Dan Peterson whose job it is to write spin for the morg?

Hmmm.

You are correct that there are no 'official' no-go zones, however, there are areas where police and first responders are regularly attacked when going about their business. Recently in Malmo firefighters and police were attacked during an attempt to control a house fire. An extract from an article on the event:

''Attacks on emergency services personnel in Sweden are becoming more common. In some no-go zones even post office workers refuse to work. In heavily migrant-populated suburbs like Husby, Tensta, and Rinkeby in Stockholm, emergency service workers have been attacked on multiple occasions.''

https://refugee-crisis.eu/firefighters-abandon-house-blaze-after-being-attacked-in-swedish-no-go-zone/#more-1014

Was just back in january that the mayor of malmo appealed for military assistance to police the streets, but I do not know if he received the same. I do not believe for one moment that they have reclaimed all the problem streets back for the safety of ordinary swedes or non-violent immigrants and, most importantly, women of all races and ages.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/755997/Sweden-Malmo-military-intervention-no-go-zone-crime-surge

The main problem is the largely young male migrant population who cannot speak nor read the local language and do not respect the rule of native secular law. They have come from cultures where tribal elders or imams have been the police force, overseeing tribal or sharia rules and 'justice', which can be quite far removed from western values. Tribal rivalries erupt and crime gangs are formed since they cannot secure gainful employment to fill their time.

When the police authority a few years ago identified over 50 areas that needed prioritising, it was turned into a story about 'no-go zones' in Sweden. There is no such thing, says local police chief Erik Åkerlund.

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artikel=6630452

And so say the mayor and the chamber of commerce and the official media. No crime problem in Chicago, either.

... only "challenges". And if there are problems, it's the ethnic Swedes that cause all of them.

That's the official narrative.

We who don't belong to the elite, are getting pretty tired of the BS.

That's the problem with all of this. You want to "believe" in some kind of grand plot or clash of civilisations between the modern West and the Islamic world even though the facts and evidence do not support this belief.

So, instead of correcting your views to correspond with reality you create an alternative reality --- but it's not real no matter how badly you want it to be.

some might believe that it is you who are living in a fantasy world filled with government sponsored propaganda instead of accepting the facts and altering your attitude to correspond with reality.

It is just like Hilary Clinton not recognising the irony of her remark that it is disgusting to have a sexual predator in the white house. (part of her response when asked about her pal wienstein during her UK book promo tour - I cannot find link with quote but I heard it on 'the one show' friday thirteenth october and many tv political presenters have subsequently mocked her for it). THAT'S living in an alternate reality.

What if multiple Islamist leaders ARE working to establish a "Great Caliphate," first in Europe, then throughout the world (which many have openly proclaimed)?
What if a majority of Moslems in the U.K. would prefer to live under Sharia Law?
What if Islamist birthrates in the West are skyrocketing while that of White Euros is stagnating or dropping? (E.g: African births will outnumber white in France in 3-5 years, and yes, only "most" of them are Islamic.)
What if there are multiple no-go zones, but there really is a "grand plan" to deny, dismiss or minimize these facts from the general public?
What if there is political pressure to suppress reports of immigrant violence, gang activity, and sexual assault?
What if "female genital mutilation" is "inconsequential" and "low" because medical authorities refuse (or or ordered not) to gather data on this?
What if police are told to statistically downgrade reports of domestic violence in Islamic households?
What if more homosexuals are being killed throughout the Islamist world than is being reported?

Consider looking through thereligionofpeace.com, which does not report Islamist news, but gathers and re-posts them from worldwide sources. (Yes there are opinion pieces.) There's more Islamist violence then you hear about in the American MSM. Something that simply baffles me is why the Western Liberal/Left (un)Intelligensia* worries so much about an impending "Christian theocracy," but gives Islamists a free pass. E.g: Sweden has removed "Pippi Longstockings" from school libraries ("racist"), but does shelve "GrandaPapa Has 4 Wives."


*With apologies to Fyodor Dostoevsky.

What if they sent young men out into the world, two by two, with specific instructions to convert as many as possible to this new world order? What if they made them labor under intense scrutiny for two years, doing nothing by trying to convince people to follow this new way and to contribute 10% of their income to making this new world order a world dominion?

Nah, who am I kidding?

caffiend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What if multiple Islamist leaders ARE working to
> establish a "Great Caliphate," first in Europe,
> then throughout the world (which many have openly
> proclaimed)?
> What if a majority of Moslems in the U.K. would
> prefer to live under Sharia Law?
> What if Islamist birthrates in the West are
> skyrocketing while that of White Euros is
> stagnating or dropping? (E.g: African births will
> outnumber white in France in 3-5 years, and yes,
> only "most" of them are Islamic.)
> What if there are multiple no-go zones, but there
> really is a "grand plan" to deny, dismiss or
> minimize these facts from the general public?
> What if there is political pressure to suppress
> reports of immigrant violence, gang activity, and
> sexual assault?
> What if "female genital mutilation" is
> "inconsequential" and "low" because medical
> authorities refuse (or or ordered not) to gather
> data on this?
> What if police are told to statistically downgrade
> reports of domestic violence in Islamic
> households?
> What if more homosexuals are being killed
> throughout the Islamist world than is being
> reported?
>
> Consider looking through thereligionofpeace.com,
> which does not report Islamist news, but gathers
> and re-posts them from worldwide sources. (Yes
> there are opinion pieces.) There's more Islamist
> violence then you hear about in the American MSM.
> Something that simply baffles me is why the
> Western Liberal/Left (un)Intelligensia* worries so
> much about an impending "Christian theocracy," but
> gives Islamists a free pass. E.g: Sweden has
> removed "Pippi Longstockings" from school
> libraries ("racist"), but does shelve "GrandaPapa
> Has 4 Wives."
>
>
> *With apologies to Fyodor Dostoevsky.

This is a post of fear; namely, fear of what could happen with an increasing Muslim population in the U.S. Yet, if one looks at history, fear tends to beget fear; and hatred tends to beget hatred.

It would be nice if we could step out of our groups for once and try to see each other through the eyes of whatever group we are trying to vilify. Muslims are just as human as the rest of us, and I think that we would do ourselves a great service by throwing out the welcome mat (along with some economic and political power) to them so they don't feel they have to seek support from some of the murderous religious radicals in their midst.

Yes, there are some Muslims that want to subjugate the world just as there are some Christians that think the same thing.

A few thousand out of a billion is a very small number.

If what you say is true you have no other choice but to kill them all -- because if you don't they'll eventually come to kill you.

So what is it that Alex Jones, Fox News, Breitbart, WND, etc know that no one else does? Or am I just another deluded liberal that doesn't want to listen to the "truth?""

Or perhaps I think and reason things through and make up my own mind?

So why is it that every Muslim country and society on Earth isn't attacking some other Western country? Why aren't the Muslims of Dearborn, Michigan rising up right now and killing every Hindu, Christian or Jew they can find?

Or perhaps the global Muslim anti-Western crusade is just the wild crazy dream of handful of Muslim fanatics and not an entire people.

only right wing racist ethnic swedes empowered by russian ultras (football hooligans) and, of course, trump getting elected. Those racist ethnic swedes are a terrible lot and a very small minority, apparently.

This is a fantasy of the extreme right.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/17/2017 07:48AM by Soft Machine.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/17/2017 07:49AM by Soft Machine.

Now you know why this scares me. Denial of fact is just the first step. If you can control reality you can control and manipulate thought. We are entering an era of extreme nationalism, xenophobia, racism and religious intolerance that could lead to fascist rule -- but unlike previous totalitarian states of the 1930s and 1940s fascist rule based on religion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/17/2017 11:45AM by anybody.

Remember the book by Bertrand Russell "Why I am Not A Christian"?

It's very important to read the book by the born and raised Muslim titled "Why I am Not a Muslim" by Ibn Warraq

It's worth noting that the mere ability to create a topic with this question demonstrates part of the potential conflict Islam has with any society within which it dwells.

There is no other major world religion that has a codified body of laws and governance associated with its core message. Islam is alone among major religions in being a faith that is designed to be a theocracy. In virtually every country where Islam reaches a majority, there is an increased push for a Islamic-based form of government. And with this comes Sharia and its abuse of minorities, gays, women, and apostates.

And as Europe clearly demonstrates, there is a significant concern over importing large numbers of people who currently embrace a sharia-based form of government. Some among these groups clearly want to recreate it where they land, strangely.

There are several countries that proclaim Christianity to be the state religion, but this is infinitely different than a theocracy. Vatacan City is the only Christian theocracy in existence today.

There have been Christian theocracies for centuries, and some Christians are trying to remake the US into one of those even today. Why aren't there currently any real Christian theocracies? The triumph of secularism, my friend. Unbelief: live it, love it.

And regarding your claim that "there is no other major world religion that has a codified body of laws and governance associated with its core message". I'm guessing that you haven't been exposed to Judaism, let alone the myriad of other religions which have had laws codified according to their belief systems. Check out India.

East Coast Exmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There have been Christian theocracies for
> centuries, and some Christians are trying to
> remake the US into one of those even today. Why
> aren't there currently any real Christian
> theocracies? The triumph of secularism, my friend.
> Unbelief: live it, love it.

I fear you may be mistaking hyperbole for reality. Christians seeking political influence is not the same as establishing a theocracy. If you need a primer on the difference, let me know. Hint: There is no sizable movement anywhere on our shores that seeks to establish a government led by religious leaders with a state-sponsored religion.

>
> And regarding your claim that "there is no other
> major world religion that has a codified body of
> laws and governance associated with its core
> message". I'm guessing that you haven't been
> exposed to Judaism, let alone the myriad of other
> religions which have had laws codified according
> to their belief systems. Check out India.

I've had a bit of exposure to Judaism. Am I wrong that Israel is a secular parliamentary system of government? Do Jews emigrate to other nations with scriptures commanding they create a theocracy as part of the expansion of their faith?

India is a secular representative democracy. Have you heard otherwise?

My post specifically addressed the governmental aspect of the Muslim faith. Are you saying there are myriads of other faiths today that seek to export a theocratic system? This is the history of the expansion of Islam.

Muslims have complete religious freedom, and I wouldn't have it any other way. But no religion has the freedom to practice their faith in a way that subverts or replaces the laws of the land.

In most Muslim majority nations there is no division between Islam and Sharia. You cannot claim to embrace one without embracing the other. Any attempt to separate them is considered apostasy, which is condemned as a capital offense among many Muslims.

So Muslims in America are in a bit of a bind as their population increases. They can openly reject Sharia and assimilate, but there is a risk involved. They have far more to fear from zealots in their own faith than from any group that otherwise expresses criticism of Islam from outside the faith.

https://www.facebook.com/MrAdnanRashid/posts/640512389320213
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/01/64-percent-of-muslims-in-egypt-and-pakistan-support-the-death-penalty-for-leaving-islam/?utm_term=.d6d5756d3316

and I mean legal as officially legal in a state or federal court.

For example, if a man religiously divorces his wife in the Muslim manner by saying "I divorce you" three times please show me what court in the USA said the marriage was expunged without having to go through a standard legal divorce proceeding.

America has the principle of equality before the law -- the same law and same rights for all.

Many Mormon men are still "sealed" to former or deceased wives and re-marry to be polygamists in heaven -- but it's not LEGAL in the eyes of the law.

Religious law cannot replace secular law in America.

This Sharia Law "takeover" fear is just xenophobic fallacy.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/16/2017 08:38PM by anybody.

the point is that within the individual local muslim communities (all attenders at local mosque) there is a sharia court that often over-rules secular court decisions. I explained (and you can look it up yourself) that some divorced women have been forced back with abusers, been forced to allow an abusive husband to continue to see and abuse his children, contrary to a court order. The ones I read about in the news media are not the only ones and this kind of religious ruling is not given a lot of publicity outwith the muslim community.

There is no law in the US that endorses all sharia court decisions, just as in UK there is no law that endorses sharia law above our own law systems.

However, as far as muslims are concerned, sharia law is all - no matter what the secular courts say; the imam MUST be obeyed and the family and support group of the individual will help enforce the sharia decision. In many communities, disobedience by females is met with corporal punishment and often an 'honour' killing is performed at the request of the family patriarch, after consultation with imam or tribal elder, but they are usually one and the same. These honour killings include unmarried young girls, not just married women and mothers.

Under-reporting would usually say that all reported crime can be trebled to really get the idea of the unreported crimes, but in these instances, I would say a lot more crimes are committed with the full consent of the local muslim community, tribal or religious.

A survey was conducted by ultra-liberal channel 4 (UK television) a few years ago and the results are here:

http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/c4-survey-and-documentary-reveals-what-british-muslims-really-think

It was very interesting to learn 'officially' how the resident muslim population felt a few years ago.

anybody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> and I mean legal as officially legal in a state or
> federal court.

I did not suggest that Sharia is legal. Did you read my post? I pointed out the fact that in most majority-Muslim nations, there is no distinction made between the embrace of Sharia and Islam. You cannot have one without the other. Muslims outside those countries must necessarily practice their faith in a manner that is considered apostate by large groups of other Muslims. And many of those more zealous believers feel apostasy is worthy of death.

Private arbitration has been part of US law for decades. It has often been used by members of various faiths to mediate disputes among members. Christians, Jews, and Muslims all have a history of participation.

The arbitration cannot violate US law, but this is the exact avenue that has been used in Europe to introduce elements of Sharia into daily interactions. It's being used in the US as well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196165/Britain-85-sharia-courts-The-astonishing-spread-Islamic-justice-closed-doors.html

Women take an inferior position in Islam, and there's good reason to believe their rights will not be well preserved in a Sharia-based arbitration. Decide for yourself.

http://schulzkelaw.com/is-sharia-law-now-enforceable-in-the-united-states/


>
> For example, if a man religiously divorces his
> wife in the Muslim manner by saying "I divorce
> you" three times please show me what court in the
> USA said the marriage was expunged without having
> to go through a standard legal divorce proceeding.
>

A straw man. I never suggested otherwise.

>
> America has the principle of equality before the
> law -- the same law and same rights for all.
>
> Many Mormon men are still "sealed" to former or
> deceased wives and re-marry to be polygamists in
> heaven -- but it's not LEGAL in the eyes of the
> law.
>
> Religious law cannot replace secular law in
> America.
>


You seem very inconsistent on this concept. Islam, which has an actual history of violent theocratic evangelism presents no real threat, but you seem to lay awake at night trembling at the thought of "Cristofascists" that you're convinced are poised to implement their version of a theocracy and strip you of your rights replacing their laws for our secular laws?



> This Sharia Law "takeover" fear is just xenophobic
> fallacy.

It's really just a numbers game. Take a look at the list of Muslim-majority nations and ask yourself if you'd really like to live in any of them. It may not happen in our lifetimes, but wherever Islam becomes the majority religion or even a vocal minority, there is a significant loss of human rights and freedom. And among those most threatened are fellow Muslims who refuse to go along with the zealots.

http://www.newsweek.com/malaysia-beer-festival-cancelled-after-islamist-protests-666792
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/german-carnival-parade-braunschweig-canceled-due-threat-cops-n306521
http://tundratabloids.com/2017/06/german-rock-festival-cancelled-due-to-islamonazi-terror-threats/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4657218/Swedish-music-festival-cancels-2018-event-sexual-abuse.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-23/acid-attacks-on-women-spark-protests-in-iran/5834828

TMSH, surely you must realise this is the same nonsense that was said about European Jews throughout history.

Muslims are not all the same and what you describe is straight out of the "Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion" with Muslims subsituted for Jews and terrorism subsituted for finance.

If you can't see this I pity you.

America is a pluralistic country -- not a Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Catholic, Baptist, Muslim or any religion.

anybody Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TMSH, surely you must realise this is the same
> nonsense that was said about European Jews
> throughout history.
>
> Muslims are not all the same and what you describe
> is straight out of the "Protocols Of The Elders Of
> Zion" with Muslims subsituted for Jews and
> terrorism subsituted for finance.
>
> If you can't see this I pity you.
>

Some would likely say you're delusional. I'm one of them.


> America is a pluralistic country -- not a
> Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Catholic, Baptist,
> Muslim or any religion.

Except for Christofascits, right? They must be stopped because they seek to usher in a theocracy, right?

But if current trends continue, I will be.

There is nothing unique about Islam or any religion for that matter.

Everything you've said about human rights in Islamic countries could have and was said about Christendom in the Middle Ages.

If you want to combat terrorism fight individual people or groups -- not an entire civilisation.

TMSH, I leave it in your lap.

I don't think you are deluded or overtly racist -- just reacting out of fear without thinking.

The Roy Moore types in the US are constantly screaming about how "godless" America needs to be under "the rule of God" and "biblical law" what ever that really means -- not me.

It's up to people like YOU (conservative evangelicals) if you don't want "Christofacism" to take over America.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/17/2017 07:19PM by anybody.

Tall Man, Short Hair Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's really just a numbers game. Take a look at
> the list of Muslim-majority nations and ask
> yourself if you'd really like to live in any of
> them. It may not happen in our lifetimes, but
> wherever Islam becomes the majority religion or
> even a vocal minority, there is a significant loss
> of human rights and freedom. And among those most
> threatened are fellow Muslims who refuse to go
> along with the zealots.
>
> http://www.newsweek.com/malaysia-beer-festival-can
> celled-after-islamist-protests-666792
> https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/german-carnival
> -parade-braunschweig-canceled-due-threat-cops-n306
> 521
> http://tundratabloids.com/2017/06/german-rock-fest
> ival-cancelled-due-to-islamonazi-terror-threats/
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4657218/Sw
> edish-music-festival-cancels-2018-event-sexual-abu
> se.html
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-23/acid-attacks
> -on-women-spark-protests-in-iran/5834828

I can second that. I notice it every single day. There are people in my new country who want to prohibit serving alcohol to Western tourists, or at least limit it: only men over 21 who go to mosque regularly should be allowed to tend bars, that sort of thing. They want to make it illegal for tourists to eat outside their hotel room during ramadan. Separate pools for men and women, no access to the beach, no pork, the list goes on.

And this is in a relatively liberal country. Look at how middle Asian Turkey, once a western European country, has become!

Tall Man, Short Hair Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Muslims have complete religious freedom, and I
> wouldn't have it any other way. But no religion
> has the freedom to practice their faith in a way
> that subverts or replaces the laws of the land.

So those US folks whose religion compels them to subvert or replace the anti-discrimination laws of the land have no right to do so.

Got it.

(just for the record, I'd be quite happy if all religions would go away. And Islam can go first, as far as I'm concerned. That doesn't keep me from bringing up what I see as hypocrisy when it comes to "religious freedom," which if we're going to have, applies to all religions -- not just christianity. When I see christians in my country acting like Muslims in Saudi Arabia when it comes to 'religious freedom,' it makes me cringe)

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> So those US folks whose religion compels them to
> subvert or replace the anti-discrimination laws of
> the land have no right to do so.
>
> Got it.

Well, we will likely disagree on where we see this heading.

I hope future historians will blush with embarrassment over a time in our history where we felt the government had a compelling interest to make sure cake makers were forced to bake their goods for observations the baker objected to. That is a frightening level of government coercion in our lives.

I value liberty above most things, and would prefer that we draw a line with non essential elements of goods and services and just let the free market act as it wishes. Men-only golf clubs? Sure! Women-only resorts? Of course! Gay-only bars? Have at it. Atheist bakers free to refuse baking for bar mitzvahs, baptisms, and Bible studies? Why the hell not? There are plenty of options out there, and none of these services is essential.

If a person somehow ends up completely incapable of getting a seven-tier wedding cake due to their local market, that's a minuscule price to pay to be free of a government so invasive it will coerce citizens to provide forced labor for a good or service that is not essential for anyone's health or well being.

I understand you will disagree, and I likely know your argument, but feel free to reiterate. I only ask that you spare me the tired "But INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE!" blather, since I'm not suggesting backtracking on any racial issue. :-)

It is so strange that one might insist in almost the same sentence, that there is a grand conspiracy to cover up the fact that there is no grand conspiracy.

Of all religions that plotted to take over the world Mormonism is right up there. Danites, Council of 50, King Joseph Smith, then President Joseph Smith (if you are liberal consider a choice between Joe Smith & Don Trump if you want your head to hurt). ;-)

The history of how that worked out is similarly instructive. Today's Mormons are inarguably passionate Americans and even tend to vote for the political party that forcibly invaded Zion and nearly ended their church (since rebranded). They still want to convert the world but an independent Kingdom of Deseret is a long ago forgotten fantasy and seems to have slipped off the agenda.

As other posters have noticed Muslims are human. They will become Americans just as the plotting foreign unAmerican polygamist Mormons became Americans.

As for the children, all societies impose their idea of justice on children who do not consent. For better and worse it is the necessary way of things. The question re Muslims and Sharia law is whether Muslim socialization of their children is within the law and ultimately comports with the morality of American culture generally.

Outside of a few fringe practices Muslims and their children do just fine. Their grandchildren will find the their grandparents' fantasies more than a little strange just as modern Mormons find 19th century Mormons unsuitable for the present world and quietly dump the uncomfortable parts. Journal of Discourses anyone?

(sings) "Sha-ri-a . . . I just met a law names Sharia . . . "

Well done, baura...

:)