TEXAS ISLAMIC COURT

[Heretic]

Sharia law coming to your neighborhood soon.

TEXAS ISLAMIC COURT, 888 s. Greenville Ave., suite 188, Richardson, Texas

The Arbitration Agreement:

On September 25, 2002, all five parties signed an \"Arbitration Agreement.\" This document recites, in full, that the parties:

after consultation with their respective attorneys, agree to submit all claims and disputes among them to arbitration by the TEXAS ISLAMIC COURT, 888 s. Greenville Ave., suite 188, Richardson, Texas, as follows:

http://www.2ndcoa.courts.state.tx.us/op ... onID=14601

[CUDA]

I cant see this court to be legaly binding in any way


just a followup along the same lines

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/05/ad ... es-ruling/

A New Jersey family court judge's decision not to grant a restraining order to a woman who was sexually abused by her Moroccan husband and forced repeatedly to have sex with him is sounding the alarm for advocates of laws designed to ban Shariah in America.

[Cuda68]

Shariah law in America should be banned. We have our own laws and its there duty to comply with them or get locked up.

[Heretic]

I cant see this court to be legaly binding in any way


just a followup along the same lines

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/05/ad ... es-ruling/

A New Jersey family court judge's decision not to grant a restraining order to a woman who was sexually abused by her Moroccan husband and forced repeatedly to have sex with him is sounding the alarm for advocates of laws designed to ban Shariah in America.

That is the article that got me searching for Texas Islamic Court. The court document is from the Second Court of Appeals Fort Worth, Texas Which handed the whole thing over to the Texas Islamic Court.

The Texas General Arbitration Act provides:

§ 171.001. Arbitration Agreements Valid

(a) A written agreement to arbitrate is valid and enforceable if the agreement is to arbitrate a controversy that:

(1) exists at the time of the agreement; or

(2) arises between the parties after the date of the agreement.

(b) A party may revoke the agreement only on a ground that exists at law or in equity for the revocation of a contract.

We reverse the trial court's orders denying Appellants' motions to stay litigation and to compel arbitration in these two consolidated cases. We render judgment that the Arbitration Agreement signed by the parties is valid and enforceable and covers all disputes between the parties that arose prior to the date the parties signed the Arbitration Agreement, including all matters that were the subject of the partial summary judgment previously granted by the trial court.


DIXON W. HOLMAN
JUSTICE

So yes it will be binding due to the fact all parties agree to the arbitration to take place in Texas Islamic Court.

[woodchip]

So let me get this right. People are starting to think Islamic law may be okay in America, but Az can't enact a law to protect themselves from foreign invaders?

[fliptw]

I love how people here are glossing over the Arbitration Agreement part.

[null0010]

I love how people here are glossing over the Arbitration Agreement part.

[Ferno]

So let me get this right. People are starting to think Islamic law may be okay in America, but Az can't enact a law to protect themselves from foreign invaders?

nobody's invading arizona, stupid.

not to mention it was unconstitutional to begin with. requiring immigrants to carry papers all the time? yeah, hello WW2 Germany.

[woodchip]

So let me get this right. People are starting to think Islamic law may be okay in America, but Az can't enact a law to protect themselves from foreign invaders?

nobody's invading arizona, stupid.

Really? Tell that to the people who live there...Mr Intelligent

[Spidey]

Maybe Arizona should just adapt Islamic law.

You know what they do to invaders.

[Heretic]

in·vade   [in-veyd] verb, -vad·ed, -vad·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1.to enter forcefully as an enemy; go into with hostile intent: Germany invaded Poland in 1939.

2.to enter like an enemy: Locusts invaded the fields.

3.to enter as if to take possession: to invade a neighbor's home.

4.to enter and affect injuriously or destructively, as disease: viruses that invade the bloodstream.

5.to intrude upon: to invade the privacy of a family.

6.to encroach or infringe upon: to invade the rights of citizens.

7.to permeate: The smell of baking invades the house.

8.to penetrate; spread into or over: The population boom has caused city dwellers to invade the suburbs.

Yes I think woodchip is right it is an invasion of a sort.

[CUDA]

sounds like Wood is right on the money

In a press conference ignored by the American national media, the sheriff described how his deputies were outmanned and outgunned by the cartel smugglers who increasingly operate using military tactics and weapons. The result, said Sheriff Babeu, was that a wide corridor of Arizona from the border North to the outskirts of Phoenix is effectively controlled by the cartels. \"We do not have control of this area,\" the sheriff said.

“The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about”

[Will Robinson]

Aren't arbitration agreements already capable of holding the involved party's to conditions that include relinquishing what would otherwise be constitutionally protected rights? For example you often agree to let the arbitrators ruling be the final say...no appeal process available...so you are giving up due process when you sign most arbitration agreements.

So with that in mind, an arbitration agreement that uses Sharia law as it's guide is no more of a bastardization of U.S. law than any other arbitration agreement.

It's troublesome to think allowing the Sharia component to be recognized as legally binding if it gives a precedent to build sharia law into other aspects of our courts/law etc. but is that reason enough to exclude Muslims from having agreements between themselves built on law that mirrors their beliefs?
Can you simply say that allowing it to be is contrary to the separation of church and state since U.S. courts would have to enforce a religious law if someone refused to comply with the arbitrators ruling?

It's beyond my understanding of the law that's for sure!

[Lothar]

Legally speaking, it's no different from those daytime \"courtroom\" shows like Judge Judy. Everyone involved signs an agreement to abide by a third party's ruling. Judge Judy uses real judicial experience to make her decisions; the Islamic Court of Texas uses the Koran; plenty of Christian organizations use the Bible.

As long as the arbitration agreement itself holds up to legal scrutiny and the \"court\" doesn't try to force people to do illegal things, it's all good.

The US wouldn't actually be enforcing \"religious law\" by holding people to their agreement, they'd just be enforcing contract law. Just like if the US requires a church to pay a pastor salary he was owed.

[Kilarin]

So yes it will be binding due to the fact all parties agree to the arbitration to take place in Texas Islamic Court.

Legally speaking, it's no different from those daytime "courtroom" shows like Judge Judy. Everyone involved signs an agreement to abide by a third party's ruling.

Exactly. The only problem with arbitration is when it's mandatory. As long as both parties voluntarily agreed to the arbitration this is entirely legal and no threat to our legal system or church state separation.

Any Christian group could do the same and have a Christian Court.

[[RIP]Machete_Bug]

requiring immigrants to carry papers all the time? yeah, hello WW2 Germany.

Well, you have the right era. It's already federal law enacted under FDR. Arizona's law only restates what the fed requires anyway.

Funny, when I visit foreign countries, even if not the law, I just think it's a good idea to keep my passport and/or visa handy along with any valid picture ID. Most places, it is the law. I hardly felt oppressed for it. It's just the kind of thing most civilized countries require of visitors, and hardly unreasonable, IMHO.

Anyway, back on topic...

As long as there's a legal arbitration agreement (like I've had to sign to get a job or treated by a doctor), I'm not sure there's an issue here. I'll be worried once Sharia becomes required in certain instances.

Funny, though. Sharia has very specific sentencing guidelines as well that fall outside what's allowed in the states. If you can't stone your cheating wife to death, is there really a point?

[Ferno]

Really? Tell that to the people who live there...Mr Intelligent

the closest any of them have come to an actual invasion is from watching the 11:00 news.

Invasions (the ones you guys are thinking about) are launched by countries and carried out by armies. Cartels are not armies or countries. What they have happening is a large gang taking territory.

In the war on drugs, the drugs are winning.