Oklahoma Judge: Sharia Law is not Actually a set of Laws

Yesterday Judge Miles-LaGrange went against the will of the people, and blocked the certification of the Sharia ban. Besides doing that she has also shown us just how uninformed on the issue she is. She has blinded accepted what the Council on American Islamic Relations has told her.

From the Court documents.

Furthermore, plaintiff has presented testimony that “Sharia Law” is not actually “law”, but is religious traditions that provide guidance to plaintiff and other Muslims regarding the exercise of their faith. Plaintiff has presented testimony that the obligations that “Sharia Law” imposes are not legal obligations but are obligations of a personal and private nature dictated by faith.

I expect CAIR members to say anything to protect Islam, but I also expect the Judge to do some actual research on the issue.

Plaintiff also testified that “Sharia Law” differs depending on the country in which the individual Muslim resides. For example, plaintiff stated that marrying more than one wife is permissible in Islam but in the United States, where that is illegal, Muslims do not marry more than one wife because Sharia in the United States mandates Muslims to abide by the law of the land and respect the law of their land.

I challenge anyone to show me a version of Sharia Law, that does not discriminate against non-Muslims and women. No one can, because the Koran discriminates against both groups of people. If Muslim men are not marrying more than one wife here, it is only because they do not want to go to jail for bigamy. Are they supposed to be applauded for that? Once again CAIR has used the law of the land, against the land.

The plaintiff is most likely talking about Koran verse 4:59.

Koran verse 004.059
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.

The verse means authority amongst Muslims, and the final determination goes to Sharia. This is clearly explained here.

{ يَا أَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ أَطِيعُواْ ٱللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُواْ ٱلرَّسُولَ وَأُوْلِي ٱلأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ فَإِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ وَٱلرَّسُولِ إِن كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلآخِرِ ذٰلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلاً }

O you who believe, obey God, and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you, that is, rulers, when they command you to obey God and His Messenger. If you should quarrel, disagree, about anything, refer it to God, that is, to His Book, and the Messenger, while he lives, and thereafter [refer] to his Sunna: in other words examine these [disputes] with reference to these two [sources], if you believe in God and the Last Day; that, reference to the two [sources], is better, for you than quarrelling or [adhering to] personal opinions, and more excellent in interpretation, in the end.

These two other translations of the Koran state the same thing. “You” means Muslims who are in authority.

PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and those of you who are in authority; and if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to Allah and the messenger if ye are (in truth) believers in Allah and the Last Day. That is better and more seemly in the end.

SHAKIR: O you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from among you; then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end.

Now we get to see just how uniformed the judge is.

Based upon this testimony, the Court finds that plaintiff has shown “Sharia Law” lacks a legal character, and, thus, plaintiff’s religious traditions and faith are the only non-legal content subject Case 5:10-cv-01186-M Document 20 Filed 11/29/10 Page 11 of 15 12 to the judicial exclusion set forth in the amendment. As a result, the Court finds plaintiff has made a strong showing that the amendment conveys a message of disapproval of plaintiff’s faith and, consequently, has the effect of inhibiting plaintiff’s religion.

Really judge, what do you call this? Sharia Law (Islamic Law) 101: Non-Muslims Under Sharia.

If you are not happy with what you have read so far, you are really not going to like the rest. Not only has she done no research on her own, she is actually encouraging the courts to use Sharia Law.

Second, plaintiff claims that his First Amendment rights will be violated by the invalidation of his last will and testament which incorporates various teachings of Mohammed. Specifically, plaintiff asserts that because Oklahoma courts will be banned from considering Sharia Law, an Oklahoma court would not be able to probate his last will and testament because it would be Case 5:10-cv-01186-M Document 20 Filed 11/29/10 Page 6 of 157 required to consider Sharia Law.

The Court finds that plaintiff is objectively justified in believing that said consequences would result from the amendment. Specifically, the article in plaintiff’s will which addresses the distribution of certain of plaintiff’s assets to charity is specifically linked to a teaching of Mohammed – what the amendment would clearly consider Sharia Law – and, thus, it would appear that any Oklahoma court probating plaintiff’s last will and testament would be required to consider Sharia Law when it issued its order approving the distribution of plaintiff’s assets and, because it would be banned from considering Sharia Law, it, thus, would be precluded from probating plaintiff’s will.

The Court further finds that as a result, plaintiff will suffer a concrete, particularized, and imminent injury in that his last will and testament will likely be unable to be probated and, therefore, be unenforceable. Finally, the Court finds, and as defendants have conceded, that plaintiff has shown that his alleged injuries are fairly traceable to the challenged action of defendants and are likely to be
redressed by a favorable decision. Accordingly, the Court finds that plaintiff has standing to bring the instant action.

Judge Miles-LaGrange, you need to take a long look in the mirror, and see how you have failed America. We have our laws, and we do not need Sharia. It is time for you to step down.

Link to Court documents

Comments

comments

21 comments for “Oklahoma Judge: Sharia Law is not Actually a set of Laws

  1. damien
    November 30, 2010 at 11:40 am

    Admin,

    I wish someone like you could have been in the courtroom during the preceding to educate her.

    • admin
      November 30, 2010 at 11:44 am

      Thanks, but she might be one of those people who does not want to hear the truth. But of course, we have to try.

      • damien
        November 30, 2010 at 12:14 pm

        Admin,

        You’re Welcome.

        I don’t like the truth either in many cases, but that doesn’t change the fact that its true. Maybe she is someone who would have trouble dealing with it. Even if so, maybe there’s someway to reach her anyway.

        • admin
          November 30, 2010 at 3:16 pm

          Damien,
          I just put together an email to the judge. It provides information on the legal aspects of Sharia, and info on CAIR. The problem is that the Court will not give out an email address for her. I called there and the woman who answered, said I can only level a comment with my name and number. I said I wanted to give more than my word, and needed to email the judge with my sources. Once again I was told that I can only level a comment. I asked the lady if there was another number I could call. She said in regards to what? Amazing….

          I see there is an email address for the Court’s help desk. I am thinking of sending it there, I will let you know.

          • RGUSA
            December 1, 2010 at 8:11 am

            Most judges have their own “Clerks” who work directly for them. Find out who clerks for this judge and get in touch with them directly. Also, put your information in a fedex and send it to the judge c/o the courts with a CD with videos etc…
            Good luck and thanks!

  2. Tonto
    November 30, 2010 at 11:53 am

    Stupid is as stupid does.

  3. Koala Bear
    November 30, 2010 at 12:21 pm

    Someone ought to send her a quran to read! The Simple Koran would be good.

  4. November 30, 2010 at 12:28 pm

    I wonder what will happen to a female judge under full sharia? Will she even be allowed to keep her foolish head attached to her own torso?

    • eib
      December 1, 2010 at 7:50 am

      They’d probably lash her for pretentions to authority beyond her station.
      And yes, her authority is only a pretention in the eyes of Muslims. The only authority they respect is Sharia and the Koran.

      • eib
        December 1, 2010 at 7:50 am

        I’m not speaking for all, but I think this is most Muslims, and particularly those who are immigrants or second generation.

  5. November 30, 2010 at 12:44 pm

    When will we get people into the govt. who aren’t Islam ignoramuses? The basic concept of Sharia is that Allah rules the land and all Muslims are superior to non-Muslims, and men to women, the rest being details. Hence Sharia in any form can never be accepted as U.S. law under the First Amendment. Tell your friends about the Historyscoper’s free online Islam history course that teaches them everything at their own pace:

    http://go.to/islamhistory

    • eib
      December 1, 2010 at 7:48 am

      Sharia is the rule of fear, not the rule of reason.

  6. December 1, 2010 at 7:44 am

    Wah-Wah-Wah.

    Cry baby Chris Logan thinks he knows more about Constitutional rights than a federal judge.

    Conservatism damages the brain (aswell as the heart and soul).

    • admin
      December 1, 2010 at 8:38 am

      I never said I know more about the Constitution than her, but I certainly know more about Islam than she does. Do you want your family’s future generations to be forced to live under Islamic rule?

      With your name, you are the last person who should talk about brain damage.

    • Darrell
      December 3, 2010 at 8:28 pm

      Piss off a clinton appointee judge does not a proper scholar make the court of appeals wants to enforce it let em. I bet they cant arrest the entire state of Oklahoma.

  7. refuse2lose
    December 1, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    If,and I will use a big IF…. America is turned into a muslim fantasyland,you will be able to blame every single LIBERAL who endorses,applauds and supports what muslims are trying to do here. Every single liberal I confront on this issue tells me I am a racist and a bigot and am anti-freedom. I seriously don’t understand what makes these “Americans”tick.

    • admin
      December 2, 2010 at 4:12 pm

      Ask them what race Islam is, and if they want their family’s future generations living under Islam Law.

  8. October 20, 2011 at 5:55 am

    advertising

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *