There are instances in which male Muslim immigrants in the US have not been prosecuted by law for behavior considered illegal (beating one’s wife, for instance and other forms of domestic abuse) because in Islamic law, this is acceptable behavior for a Muslim male.
Should this happen? Why or why not?
Cite, please?
There are many examples in the file on there.
Seconded. Multiple instances preferably.
Edit: I just read one and it was a pretty boring case about whether a marriage from Egypt should stand. Not exactly people stoning infidels.
Please give me a link to something about clear cut abuse.
Yes, before we get into a discussion, please provide a cite or two to the underlying premiss. Because if you haven’t got that, there’s no point in the discussion.
I provided a link but here goes since that doesn’t seem to have been enough. Here is another example;
http://news.yahoo.com/penn-judge-muslims-allowed-attack-people-insulting-mohammad-210000330.html
"This story comes from the Yahoo! Contributor Network, where individuals publish their unique perspectives on some of the world’s most popular websites. "
Dude, can we get something legit please? Like CNN, BBC, etc.?
I’ve reviewed the top 20 cases listed at pp. 29 onwards, and have not found a case listed there that matches your summary in the OP. Can you please be specific in your reference to the cases you are relying on in that document? That is, that American courts have allowed violent behaviour towards the woman because of the man’s Muslim culture/beliefs?
Second story down… New Jersey Divorce Case.
First, that is not a criminal matter, so it does not support the statement in your OP that “…male Muslim immigrants in the US have not been prosecuted by law.” It was a divorce case, which is a civil matter.
Second, as stated in that cite, the initial trial decision, which did cite cultural differences in declining to grant a civil restraining order, was overturned by the appellate court in New Jersey. So the answer to your question in your OP is clearly “No” - the New Jersey courts did not accept that cultural differences override New Jersey law.
So again, I ask: please provide cases which support your premiss:
And from your own cite:
This was a case of conflicting testimony; nothing in your cite suggests that an American court dismissed an assault charge because of Muslim cultural attitudes. Rather, the court applied US law to exclude a videotape, and then applied the American principle of reasonable doubt when faced with conflicting testimony. A result as American as apple pie.
Here;
Either way the point is the same… should Sharia Law ever take precedence over US law?
And, the court case you keep citing says clearly, “No - New Jersey law applies.” So there’s nothing here to debate.
But the question is “SHOULD” Sharia Law ever take precedence. Even if it hasn’t, should it be able to? Apparently since the ban against Sharia Law in Oklahoma is unconstitutional and was not allowed, it makes sense that it could at some point end up taking precedence over US law there.
And no, it stated “The judge then refused to issue a restraining order against the man, leaving the woman vulnerable to repeated rape attempts with no legal protection of any kind.”
I can see some validity to voluntary religious courts, for civil cases, which could take some of the pressure off the regular court system. The same is true for secular arbitrators. I’ve signed several contracts which agree to independent arbitration as a first approach to reconciliation.
I do want to make sure there are safeguards preventing anyone from feeling compelled to go to a religious court, if they would prefer to go to a civil court. The peer pressure in this kind of case could be immense.
No, that doesn’t “make sense.”. We have all kinds of laws throughout the United States, and if you violate one, Sharia law won’t help you. You think it should?
No. But if Sharia Law is applicable here in the US, as some think it should be, then it would give people to whom it concerns the ability to get away with things that US law prohibits on the grounds of their faith.
Strawman. Slippery Slope. etc.