I see there was a reference to it on a ballot. We all saw the uproar over the mosque in NY and other mosques around the country.
Is this the NEW wedge issue? Abortion and Gay issues seem to be less and less divisive , at least in elections....
If both parties have agreed to an international/religious law trumping all others in Civil matters, then I see it as an expression of religion. Criminal matters, NO. Here is an example of that fine line that is in question, "The question might seem a befuddling one for a ballot in the heartland, but it stems from a New Jersey legal case in which a Muslim woman went to a family court asking for a restraining order against her spouse claiming he had raped her repeatedly. The judge ruled against her, saying that her husband was abiding by his Muslim beliefs regarding spousal duties. The decision was later overruled by an appellate court, but the case sparked a firestorm."
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:05 PM on Nov. 3, 2010
Answer by pixie_trix at 3:10 PM on Nov. 3, 2010
Yes, but it obviously impacted many to feel there were some loopholes that do NOT protect every individual. Was this a measure to close the loopholes for future questions?... As for the ballot issue~I can't find the EXACT verbiage of the OK law to give my opinion on OK... Like is OK speaking just for criminal matters? Or civil matters when not clearly defined (in writing?) Or both? All I have to go on is just what news clips I have researched. If someone has the link to actual verbiage then I will comment furhter... Till then, My first answer stands, "If both parties have agreed to an international/religious law trumping all others in Civil matters, then I see it as an expression of religion. Criminal matters, NO international law does not apply and should not apply"...
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:16 PM on Nov. 3, 2010
Answer by NotPanicking at 3:16 PM on Nov. 3, 2010
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:17 PM on Nov. 3, 2010
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 3:24 PM on Nov. 3, 2010