Could it really be that easy?

Could it really be that easy?

nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/On-Muslims-agenda-Fight-US-proposals-to-ban-Sharia-law-417191403.html

>The proposals broadly call for banning the application of any foreign law, legal code or legal system that doesn't grant the same rights and privileges as the state or U.S. constitutions.

>move to u.s.a
>demand sharia law

retarded.

So they basically want to go away if they arent allowed to make up their own laws?
Which are identical to the ones from the countries they "fled" from because of these laws(supposedly)?
How many 180 turns did they do already? I lost count.....

Sure some would leave, but it's too comfy here for most of them. The best result would be all the fake news coverage would force millions of normies to look into wtf sharia law really is.

>USA YES

If you guys allow Sharia laws all muslims from Europe will go to USA 100%

Yep. I would absolutely fucking love it if even half of the various shitskin groups who have threatened to leave this country actually followed up on their threats. But they know they actually have it quite good here. They just like to talk big so they can feel important.

Yes and I would think it's already illegal under existing laws. I don't understand why we even need a bill for this.

I think some Muslims don't believe in Shariah law. These are the ones who are Muslim in name, but they drink and their women are westernized liberal whores already.

Muslims don't just walk away in protest. They strap bombs to their chests and run into crowded places. He's not fooling anyone.

A lot of sharia is already banned from being incompatible with the constitution. Odd that anyone would try to fight these largely symbolic bills.

Tell me about Dearborn, Mi

They have to go back.

>>Yes and I would think it's already illegal under existing laws. I don't understand why we even need a bill for this.
should still be done as a security measure

Checked.
It's never going to happen. It would mean the liquor industry, music, and every bar would have to close.
Massive unemployment to appease people from another country? Muslims must be on crack to think half the country is going to give up their jobs to make violent savages happy.

I'm aware of that part, but I am having trouble on getting an accurate read of the local climate. Everything I find is typical virtue signalling and 'isis is not muh islam', and while I am not just wanting to find out it is a Sharia Shithole or anything, these articles and sites paint things way too blue to be trusted. I want surveys or statistics, something concrete.

No, it's because the proposals to ban it is "scaring" (get this) the population.
If a proposal to ban it is scary then I hope they don't actually READ it, because they are in for a ride.

Yes. Unfortunately, they obfuscate information about it every time they report on it. I don't know that any accurate data is available.

There are two kinds of people who don't want to ban Sharia law. One has no idea what it is and the other is a terrorist.

Ah fuck. I'll keep looking. I'm ready to entertain the idea that yes, maybe there is nothing bad happenong there, and these people are all "americanised" Muslims, but I think I know Islam too well to merely accept that without sufficient proofs.

...

Correlation is not causation. Kek

Doesn't the constitution already ban any religious law from being used by the government?

Zoom in and enhance that using the reference map for muslim population concentrations

And also blacks just to be sure

I'm lazy and at work :^)

This is fucking fantastic! Whoever thought of this is a fucking genius. Muslims constantly harp on about how they don't want sharia law, all the while pushing for sharia law.

So with this bill, they shouldn't have a problem with it then should they? Oh wait! They fucking do! Well i guess they want sharia after all then.

Exactly what I thought. Omg it's? Whites! ;)

Just kidding. Arab Muslims are considered white/caucasion on all government statistics. These are old demographics and they were already nearly half of the population. It has increased a lot in the past 7 years.

There, see? This debate is over and we can trust them forever.

Whitey has to be stopped!

I may just be a humble rural and suburban retard, but is that the white concentration in the pic?

Why are there so many naive people who overlook this?

You can agree to civil arbitration under Sharia law, for example to govern a marriage and divorce.

Btw, most threads that get a lot of replies are actual shill threads. We are likely the only legit posters on here right now. Lurkers excluded.

>force millions of normies to look into wtf sharia law really is.
The media already is trying to pre-empt this with 'sharia law says muslims should follow the law of the land'.

“It is necessary upon a Muslim to listen to and obey the ruler, as long as one is not ordered to carry out a sin. If he is commanded to commit a sin, then there is no adherence and obedience.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 2796 & Sunan Tirmidhi)

However, most Muslims view western governments as sinful and enemies, so they justify their lawlessness and push for 'Sharia'.

Muslims are retarded though, as 'Allah's laws' don't prescribe for the more sophisticated functioning of a modern state. This is why Islam is a death-loop. There will always be fundamentalists wanting 'Only Sharia' but when in power, they have to create laws in order to govern. This immediately opens them up to criticisms that the government isn't 'Sharia only', and the fighting starts. The next group gets in power, and the same shit starts again, a ceaseless purity test.

No I can't. Marriage is governed by the state regardless of religion. Obviously people are free to settle matters on without state intervention, so long as they are not breaking any laws, but there will never be any state enforcement of such arbitration. So no. I'm not agreeing to any such civil governance to be recognized by the state other than what is already recognized.

2legit2quit

Now where the fuck is my .25?

Yes.

It's amazing people are unclear on this.

Also, please view this shining example of Islamic jursprudence - whether a marriage between a human and genie is permissible.

This is for users in the UK. These people live in my country.

Please save us.

Yes. I believe that Sharia is already fundamentally illegal. Although it may be that the Constitution forbids government from implementing such a theocracy and this bill prevents private citizens from establishing a theocratic government among themselves which not not observe our laws. The actually execution of many Sharia practices are already be illegal, but the establishment of their legal system among private is not inherently illegal until it is acted on. That's my assumption.

They'll leave the US and go to the heavens after exploding peacefully.

>inb4 tumblr protests the ban on tulpa marriages

>the chance that someone will become a victim of violent crime in dearborn is 1/262
Wait, is that per year? Because that sounds like it's per year.

>trump bans all Shira law
>all Muslims come to Canada
>mfw

I wonder if this will attract shillbots.

Trump Russia Putin Syria gas chemical attack Assad healthcare pizza Rice unmasking gorsuch obama bannon security council

>talking about the gas attacks, instead of the fact that they are being used to conceal the use of the freeze bomb

>Instructions on marrying a Muslim girl without converting
>Step 1, pretend to be a wish granting lamp spirit

What's a freeze bomb?

Sub-zero from Mortal Kombat

The fact that anyone defends Assad- a fucking war criminal is retarded

Its a freeze bomb dude. How can you not even know?

It worked! A shillbot replied even though it was completely out of the context of the thread and the post.

ok fag whatever you say

Does anyone know what would happen in a situation like this Muslims making their own legal system in some part of the country and then doing something thats legal for them but illegal for US citizens? They would be judged properly right?

Should do tests like this more often, cpuld yield intersesting results

See

Let me try

Trump Russia Putin Syria gas chemical attack Assad healthcare pizza Rice unmasking gorsuch obama bannon security council

LITERALLY HITLER

Actually in Dearborn right now, it's interesting. They keep to themselves most of the time and won't interact with you unless you're one of them

sharia law is unconstitutional.
filthy muslins.

...

DO IT FAGGOT

Sharia law is banned in most states already (banned by name) and is fundamentally unconstitutional.

Saved. I've been waiting for this.

No.

Why is Sup Forums so easily trolleed

Because it doesn't matter

Wow. Sup Forums is rly gullible

This is an important thing to notice, for muslims living without sharia law is impossible, to think they will assimilate and adopt culture and other religion is foolish, every region where there are muslims will with time be a region under sharia law
And countries under sharia law are absolute shitholes
So essentially in the future there will be a lot of shitholes where once you had prosperous countries assuming more and more of them let them in and let them thrive.

I suppose it could be worse, but I also suspect it will get worse. This kind of seclusion typically means they are waiting until they achieve larger numbers, no?

>Supporters stress the proposals would impact all religious codes and foreign laws equally.
>If parts of Jewish, Christian or other laws ran counter to fundamental constitutional rights, they too would not be applicable in U.S. courts, said Montana state Sen. Keith Regier, a Republican

In light of how kikes twist the constitution into antichristian interpretations, I find this aspect troubling. Future liberal avtivist judges will use this to dismantle Christianity in America citing how it "violates" the constitution.

Christianity or islam existing within USA is not unconstitutional because of 1st amendment and freedom of religion.
But applying laws within the religion to a whole state or the whole country is not constitutional.

DUDE, NICE

BAN! BAN! BAN! BAN! BAN! BAN! BAN!

I hope so.

I'm talking about hypothetical things like using anti discrimination law to insist that churches allow transgender Muslim otherkin to become priests. If church law is entirely subordinate to the dictates of the constitution then the church would have no legal recourse to fight such a suit.

I think making them do things that are not in line with their religion in their churches would infringe on the freedom of religion. Because they would control what is happening within it.
Interesting question though, not a law expert so i can only assume.

>Muslims having problem with banning an ALTERNATIVE LAW SYSTEM

I'm right when I say they're traitors.

No americans have to assimilate to sharia law reeeeeeeeee

Doesn't the first ammendment already kind of prevent Sharia Law
>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
Since Sharia Law is a religious set of laws? And there are plenty of precedents that force state and local governments to also abide by the this?

You dont have to read an extensive amount of literature on the topic of islam to know what sharia law is and to know not to want it, personally. As far as not wanting it outside of personal reasons, you just have to look at muslim countries and see what islam turns them into.
As far as being compatible with other systems, convert or be killed generally means that its not.
As far as how well can muslims assimilate into a country and accept other forms of belief. Text in the OP image is all the proof that you need.

>retarded
It's retarded to us, but can't you see how they'd think that's possible? Every Euro fag country they've immigrated to has bent over backwards to accommodate them, why should they think the US won't?

And yes, according to American Law, and rule or code that find itself at contrast with current American Federal Law is deemed unenforceable, so Sharia law pretty much already is outlawed in America.

Yes but do you really believe that the muslims know or care about laws of countries they go into? The only law that matters to them is sharia.
And even though under no way establishing sharia is possible without changing the constitution, this motion should still be put to effect just in hopes of them leaving the country, honestly.

>I think making them do things that are not in line with their religion in their churches would infringe on the freedom of religion

I agree, but that's because we're not kikes, a people whose entire religion revolves around seeking ways to twist the letter of the law in a manner that allows them to violate it's spirit.

To put it another way, the fact the constitution explicitly protects the right to bear arms, has never stopped kike and shabbos goy politicians from trying to bear arms. Why would goyische "religious freedom" somehow be exempt from similar kikery?

*from trying to eliminate the right to bear arms

>France is 8% mudslime
>Has more snackbars than cuck capital Sweden

What the fuck man? Why did you frogs let this happen? Why don't you kick them all out?

Frogs used to be the best DEUS VULTers......

I assume you mean they want to fuck with the 2nd amendment?
Yeah the kikes are very well versed into twisting laws and being deceitful, the good thing about the right to bear arms thing is that its very strictly described in the constitution and there so many people that will combat them at every step they make.
But religious freedom is alot more open to personal representation, and in such situations and deals is where the kikes thrive. But we cannot know till it happens.
Even though i myself am an atheist *tips* i hope that the way i argued against trannies in churches, someone can do atleast 5 times better and hope that if it comes to such discussion, this argument will hold.

I'm pretty sure you don't need a law for that since such laws would already be considered unconstitutional.

Then again, on the off chance that liberals somehow steal power in the future, having a little redundancy in place to make it harder for them to implement this shit might not hurt...

Your post indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of the consitution. Go read it again and note the use of phrases such as "enumerated powers" and "shall not infinge".

if it's at a level where the federal government notices, or enough whistle blowers start speaking up about it then yes proper judgement would be applied.

However small groups that are simply choosing to govern themselves and leave others alone are likely not going to be dealt with as quickly. It would take some serious complications for the authorities to get involved.

there was actually an example of this a few years ago involving a noticeably large group of Mormons. They had essentially closed themselves off from the rest of the world and been living according to the tenets of the Mormon faith the entire time. they were large enough for their own police force, fire department, and even judges, thus their local laws were those of the Mormon faith rather than the normal American laws for every where else. They essentially had the numbers to be considered a very large cult (Mormonism is recognized as a religion by the United States, these people had enough numbers to be considered a sizable portion).

eventually something occurred to get the nations attention because It was either the FBI or the NSA that stepped in and ripped the whole thing apart.