The Briefing Room
General Category => Editorial/Opinion/Blogs => Topic started by: rangerrebew on March 26, 2017, 02:05:09 pm
-
March 26, 2017
Montana on the verge of a law that can pass constitutional muster prohibiting courts from applying sharia
By Thomas Lifson
In the face of American states and courts allowing Sharia Law to be a factor in our justice system, and the ongoing demand of jihadists that sharia law should rule the world, a number of states have advanced laws that would prohibit its application. Montana is on the verge of passing such a law, carefully designed to withstand legal challenges asserting that it unfairly discriminates against Muslims, despite the best efforts of a Democrat legislator to insert a poison pill.
Erin Loranger reports on the Billings Gazette:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/03/montana_on_the_verge_a_law_that_can_pass_constitutional_muster_prohibiting_courts_from_applying_sharia.html
-
Good on 'em.
Sooner or later, this must be done.
Of course, I have my own version:
Change this...
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
to this:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. The followers of muhammed are specifically excluded and denied the protections of this amendment along with any and all other Constitutional protections. Neither the United States nor the Several States will offer such protections or liberties to the followers of muhammed."
-
The followers of muhammed are specifically excluded and denied the protections of this amendment along with any and all other Constitutional protections. Neither the United States nor the Several States will offer such protections or liberties to the followers of muhammed."
And they shall be required to wear crescent moons on their outer garments, and pay additional taxes, until we ship them off to camps.
What the hell is wrong with you, son?
-
r9etb wrote:
"And they shall be required to wear crescent moons on their outer garments, and pay additional taxes, until we ship them off to camps.
What the hell is wrong with you, son?"
You said that.
I didn't.
But I stand by everything I wrote above.
I want The West to win.
I want islam to lose. To be gone from the earth.
that is all...
-
r9etb wrote:
"And they shall be required to wear crescent moons on their outer garments, and pay additional taxes, until we ship them off to camps.
What the hell is wrong with you, son?"
You said that.
I didn't.
But I stand by everything I wrote above.
I want The West to win.
I want islam to lose. To be gone from the earth.
that is all...
You didn't need to "say" it, mein herr. It's obvious what you meant.
-
You didn't need to "say" it, mein herr. It's obvious what you meant.
@r9etb
So, hypothetically, how would you propose addressing a political system that is couched in a faith structure that is absolutely antithetical to the American form of government?
-
@r9etb
So, hypothetically, how would you propose addressing a political system that is couched in a faith structure that is absolutely antithetical to the American form of government?
Let's first say how I wouldn't: genocide, which is what our little friend seems to favor. How do you feel about that?