Haha, Oklahoma

Oklahoma passed some stupid anti-Sharia law not too long ago. Because we all know what a threat that is. Especially in Oklahoma. But it looks like THE FREEDOM HATING EVIL OF ISLAMIST DEVILS is still alive:

A federal appeals court upheld an injunction against a voter-approved ban on Islamic law in Oklahoma on Tuesday, saying it likely violated the U.S. Constitution by discriminating against religion.

A three-member panel of the Denver-based U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that the rights of plaintiff Muneer Awad, a Muslim man living in Oklahoma City, likely would be violated if the ban on Sharia law takes effect.

The decision upholds the ruling of a lower federal court.

“While the public has an interest in the will of the voters being carried out … the public has a more profound and long-term interest in upholding an individual’s constitutional rights,” the appeals court said in a 37-page written decision.

I find a lot of satisfaction in this. The law was an obvious waste of time, only meant to fear-monger and scare up a few Christian votes. I hope the few people who take it seriously are scared shitless right now. I really do.

Also, sorry for laughing at your state, Mike.

6 Responses

  1. Well, no, I don’t really think so. If I remember correctly it passed in the wake of a judge deciding that a husband had not raped his wife do to sharia granting the husband the right to sex.

    I’ve made the point before that sharia is not an issue because who cares how people decide to adjudicate their issues, but barring state courts from considering religious and international law when making decisions doesn’t strike me as a ploy to gain christian votes they would have had anyway.

  2. I’m confused a little bit here Michael, are you for allowing the courts to consider religious law when making decisions?

  3. And that case, aside from not even being in Oklahoma, was overruled soon after. This was nothing more than a little rabble rousing.

  4. I’m not so sure. Everything does not add up to what would be expected.

    I think it was in Florida… I can’t remember well enough to say. I didn’t mean to imply it had been in Oklahoma, but I see that it could be read that way.

    It should be noted, and you didn’t do so, that the reason for the court ruling as it did was because of the amendments specific prohibition on sharia. I don’t read the amendment, copied below, as barring only sharia law. I think it is a case, as with my previous comment, that the words chosen don’t reflect the true intent.

    “The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law.”

    Even if it is not so, I still fail you see why you come down on the side you do. I would have expected that you would be for banning religious law in any dosage you could, but whatever.

  5. It was in New Jersey, but I didn’t think you implied it was in Oklahoma.

    This whole thing is a non-issue since religious law is already banned under the First Amendment. I’m just pleased to see the paranoid kooks get a slap in the face.

  6. New Jersey, that’s right.

    I’m not so sure whether that is entirely true or not.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: