Shari'a Law In New Jersey
[Note to readers: Please see the post below the one for musical satire with a political twist!]
(Hat tip to Infidel Bloggers Alliance for the above graphic)
The case recently in New Jersey involved a restraining order, and the first court's decision to uphold Islamic law, also called "shari'a law, was struck down in appellate court.
But before rejoicing in justice done, check out the following about the first judge's ruling, a ruling which elevated shari'a law over New Jersey law:
...The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.More about the first judge's ruling below the fold.
After acknowledging that this was a case in which religious custom clashed with the law, and that under the law, plaintiff had a right to refuse defendant's advances, the judge found that defendant did not act with a criminal intent when he repeatedly insisted upon intercourse, despite plaintiff's contrary wishes.Shari'a law does have guidelines about sexual relations between man and wife, never mind all the Islamophilic propaganda to the contrary:
Having found acts of domestic violence consisting of assault and harassment to have occurred, the judge turned to the issue of whether a final restraining order should be entered. He found such an order unnecessary, vacated the temporary restraints previously entered in the matter and dismissed plaintiff's domestic violence action....
Muhammad said: "If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning" (Bukhari 4.54.460).That any court in the United States should even temporarily elevate shari'a law over our rule of civil law should sound an alarm bell!
He also said: "By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel's saddle" (Ibn Majah 1854).
Additional details about the recent case in New Jersey are HERE. Also see the text of the ruling by the appellate court (pdf). Please read the links as my posting has not begun to cover all the details of this case. It is worth your time to read the links in order to understand the precipice upon which we are standing.