Oklahoma's anti-Islamic law referendum

[Michael]

Judge extends ban on Oklahoma's anti-Islamic law referendum

This is interesting to me more as an example of how all these laws come about and why we're awash with them. Someone wrote here elsewhere about some law that bans having sex with horses - which had to be initiated because someone ODed on horse dong. In the case here, a man claimed his first amendment right to rape his wife - for which a judge agreed he should be able to rape her, I mean, It's be da man's pro-per-tee idn't it? Apparently his interpretation of some 6th century Bronze Age bullshit makes clear he can rape his wife.

Thus this law.



What I don't get is - surely the man is violating many other Laws? There's no need for more and more laws is there???

 

[Tiassa]

The Monkey, the Wrench, and the System

In the case here, a man claimed his first amendment right to rape his wife - for which a judge agreed he should be able to rape her, I mean, It's be da man's pro-per-tee idn't it? Apparently his interpretation of some 6th century Bronze Age bullshit makes clear he can rape his wife.

This is one of those sticky issues insofar as it's actually commonplace for local courts to write basic, even silly decisions. True, this one has something of a plot twist about it, but still, local courts issue dumb-assed decisions all the time. Hell, I was living in Oregon when a local judge threw out the Fourteenth Amendment in order to tell a defendant that since a cop said you broke the law, that means you broke the law, and no evidence is needed.

It was a traffic infraction, not something worth thousands of dollars in legal fees. But, still, it was stupid.

In the New Jersey case, though, the appellate court seems to have done its job.

What I don't get is - surely the man is violating many other Laws? There's no need for more and more laws is there???

Well, sure, exactly. Sometimes you have to climb the ladder a little to get the actual laws considered.

I mean, I can almost imagine how a family court ruling could be so silly. They work with assertions of fact, not principles of law. So when we object, "But ... but ... she has rights! Under the Constitution!" it falls on deaf ears, until an appellate court picks it up and deals with the relevant laws.

 

[JuNie]

Judge extends ban on Oklahoma's anti-Islamic law referendum

This is interesting to me more as an example of how all these laws come about and why we're awash with them. Someone wrote here elsewhere about some law that bans having sex with horses - which had to be initiated because someone ODed on horse dong. In the case here, a man claimed his first amendment right to rape his wife - for which a judge agreed he should be able to rape her, I mean, It's be da man's pro-per-tee idn't it? Apparently his interpretation of some 6th century Bronze Age bullshit makes clear he can rape his wife.

Thus this law.



What I don't get is - surely the man is violating many other Laws? There's no need for more and more laws is there???

Bravo. No Islam. We already have laws. I find it absurd that a judge could even make such a decision. I honestly think I can fight, and WIN, the argument that we should ban ANY person that holds such beliefs from holding ANY office. I wish to include Christians as well as Catholics. Be done with them. They shouldn't be allowed to make any decisions. This is not just the alcohol talking, in fact it's simply amplifying my stance on the issue. Muslim dogs should stay in their place, under the heel of my boot.

 

[John99]

This is not just the alcohol talking

ha ha ha...that was cute.

 

[Tiassa]

The pertinent question?

Muslim dogs should stay in their place, under the heel of my boot.

What are the statistics on dog ownership by Muslims?

 

[Pinwheel]

103%.

 

[pjdude1219]

Bravo. No Islam. We already have laws. I find it absurd that a judge could even make such a decision. I honestly think I can fight, and WIN, the argument that we should ban ANY person that holds such beliefs from holding ANY office. I wish to include Christians as well as Catholics. Be done with them. They shouldn't be allowed to make any decisions. This is not just the alcohol talking, in fact it's simply amplifying my stance on the issue. Muslim dogs should stay in their place, under the heel of my boot.

why the seperation of catholics from christians? catholics are christians

 

[Read-Only]

why the seperation of catholics from christians? catholics are christians

Seems pretty obvious to me the actual intention was to separate Protestants from Catholics. :shrug:

 

[quadraphonics]

why the seperation of catholics from christians? catholics are christians

Yeah, I've run afoul of that one before myself. Doesn't make sense in terms of simple definitions, but the term "Christian" has been appropriated to mean "Protestant," at least in the US (as Read-Only says). It also excludes Mormons, from what I can tell, and probably also Unitarians, depending on who's using the term. Some people surely use it in an even narrower sense than that - in some not-inconsiderable circles, it would only refer to Evangelicals.

It is an instance of fucked-up supremacism, for sure. But I've generally been content to let it lie, since I don't really have a dog in that fight (Catholic ancestors notwithstanding).

 

[JuNie]

Yeah, I've run afoul of that one before myself. Doesn't make sense in terms of simple definitions, but the term "Christian" has been appropriated to mean "Protestant," at least in the US (as Read-Only says). It also excludes Mormons, from what I can tell, and probably also Unitarians, depending on who's using the term. Some people surely use it in an even narrower sense than that - in some not-inconsiderable circles, it would only refer to Evangelicals.

It is an instance of fucked-up supremacism, for sure. But I've generally been content to let it lie, since I don't really have a dog in that fight (Catholic ancestors notwithstanding).

Yes, that is what I meant, but when I'm drinking heavily I tend not to make those little distinctions.