OKlahoma voters reject foreign laws

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Twisp

Because it specifies Sharia Law, which is a law based on the religion of Islam.

Singling out singles out a particular religion violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

It does not single out a single religion. And there is no way it violates the establishment clause which is about governments promoting religion. It is the Free Exercise clause that forbids the government from singling out religions.

An example of this is when they passed a law forbidding the slaughter of chickens for sacrificial purposes. That is unconstitutional, it was expressly to keep Santeria from practicing.

In the late 1800 the Supreme court took on Reynolds and forbid the Mormons from having more than one wife. This was not unconstitutional. Only one religion was practicing polygamy but they still said nope.

[Twisp]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

It does not single out a single religion. And there is no way it violates the establishment clause which is about governments promoting religion. It is the Free Exercise clause that forbids the government from singling out religions.

An example of this is when they passed a law forbidding the slaughter of chickens for sacrificial purposes. That is unconstitutional, it was expressly to keep Santeria from practicing.

In the late 1800 the Supreme court took on Reynolds and forbid the Mormons from having more than one wife. This was not unconstitutional. Only one religion was practicing polygamy but they still said nope.

So you are saying it does not specify one religious law and not others?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Twisp

So you are saying it does not specify one religious law and not others?

You do understand that some countries use sharia law as part of their legal system right? Specifying that Sharia law cannot be used is the same as saying French statutes cannot be used.

[Twisp]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

It does not single out a single religion. And there is no way it violates the establishment clause which is about governments promoting religion. It is the Free Exercise clause that forbids the government from singling out religions.

An example of this is when they passed a law forbidding the slaughter of chickens for sacrificial purposes. That is unconstitutional, it was expressly to keep Santeria from practicing.

In the late 1800 the Supreme court took on Reynolds and forbid the Mormons from having more than one wife. This was not unconstitutional. Only one religion was practicing polygamy but they still said nope.

And yes, the establishment clause is in effect here, since it does not allow the government to establish a national religion or prefer one over the other.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Twisp

And yes, the establishment clause is in effect here, since it does not allow the government to establish a national religion or prefer one over the other.

NO NO NO. You don't get it. Establishment. say it slow. it has nothing to do with what you are saying. It is not establishing or preferring. At best it is prohibiting which is the Free Exercise clause not the Establishment clause.

[Twisp]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

NO NO NO. You don't get it. Establishment. say it slow. it has nothing to do with what you are saying. It is not establishing or preferring. At best it is prohibiting which is the Free Exercise clause not the Establishment clause.

yes yes yes yes.

"The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion."

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/establishment_clause

This law specifically targets one religion and a religious community.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Twisp

yes yes yes yes.

"The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion."

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/establishment_clause

This law specifically targets one religion a religious community.

Not a religious argument.

Neither Amish horse and buggies nor Camel riders allowed on interstates, nor Indians on Elephants if they can't stay above minimum posted speeds.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Twisp

yes yes yes yes.

"The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion."

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/establishment_clause

This law specifically targets one religion and a religious community.

Explain how this measure:

1. establishes an official religion
2. favors one religion over another
3. favors religion over non-religion
4. favors non-religion over religion

[coadie]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Explain how this measure:

1. establishes an official religion
2. favors one religion over another
3. favors religion over non-religion
4. favors non-religion over religion

Twisp can't and won't

It is business as usual in OK mosques.