By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mr Khan said:
badgenome said:

I'm not sure about the specifics of the Oklahoma law, but the argument for banning sharia from American courts is to prevent stupid shit like this from happening. Yes, it should go without saying, and yes, was eventually overturned, but some judges are dumb as fuck and need to be told very explicitly what they can and cannot do.

I would doubt anyone needs to violate the first amendment quite flagrantly in order to reinforce the common-sense notion that rape is rape. Judges are fallible too and can make bad decisions, which is why we have the appeals circuits. Really that just sounds like another instance of a usually-strict justice system being lenient towards sexual harrassment, which is a problem all over the planet whether or not Islam comes into the picture (statistically, rape is the only crime here in Japan where there is a conviction rate of under 98%)

Yeah, I agree that it's a very bad idea to hastily craft legislating in response to one outlier case, but that's exactly the sort of thing that happens all the time on a multitude of issues. It almost invariably makes for bad law. My point is that this isn't just coming out of nowhere, but rather because there are judges who, I suppose out of some braindead multiculti celebrate diversity we are the world mindset, want to take such things into consideration as sharia or international law (which the Oklahoma law also banned, IIRC) when ruling on cases. A much better solution is for dumbshit judges like Joseph Charles to be promptly shitcanned after such an outrageous verdict.