Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Religion & Politics

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 04-29-2011, 11:34 AM
piece-itpete's Avatar
piece-itpete piece-itpete is offline
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
So, no sanctity of contract if a church is involved?

Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-29-2011, 04:32 PM
bhunter's Avatar
bhunter bhunter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Diego California
Posts: 3,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by flacaltenn View Post
ITPete:

I Religion itself, is pretty much a neutered authority without some outside help..
Everywhere but where you have an Islamic majority. I do not think it is possible to be a Muslim and have no interest in ultimately expanding Islamic power via the state apparatus. If one looks at the population growth of Muslims vis-a-vis Christians, they will be successful in controlling a lot of democracies. They do not share our concept of separation of church and state, but actively oppose it.
__________________
Dear Optimist: Unless life gives you water and sugar too, your lemonade will suck.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-29-2011, 04:54 PM
flacaltenn's Avatar
flacaltenn flacaltenn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,145
bhunter:

Quote:
Everywhere but where you have an Islamic majority. I do not think it is possible to be a Muslim and have no interest in ultimately expanding Islamic power via the state apparatus. If one looks at the population growth of Muslims vis-a-vis Christians, they will be successful in controlling a lot of democracies. They do not share our concept of separation of church and state, but actively oppose it.
It's kinda like the generalization that Christians have the neccessity to prosteletize. Some recruit a lot more aggressively than nothers. But I hear what you say.. Not because I'm in favor of the kinda Muslim bashing I saw in the Tenn legislation, but because we shouldn't go "overboard" like our Canadian cousins (some of them MerryLander) and just make it easier for Muslims with intent to interfere with our political and legal process. I was raised Jewish, so I could carry a lot of reasons to suspect Muslims, but I won't put that ahead of general principles. And their right to construct places of worship, and actually practice religious arbitration are not negotiable. I doubt if my Christian yahoo neighbors REALLY want govt setting precedents on limits to the 1st Amendment..

Piece--ItPete:
It's Ok man.. Don't panic, I'm not a lawyer, so I should be able to explain this pretty well!! (D-ray is cringing now)

A contract is enforceable because it adheres to all tenets of the "law of the land". The state will back you up on a contract, or bring you down by providing a full legal system to resolve differences. If someone owes you money from a verdict, the state will help you collect. I believe the court can also refer a civil case to the criminal court or at least reserve the right to charge someone criminally. Then you have prison in the equation. You can also agree in contract to binding arbitration in lieu of using an actual court proceeding. But (I believe), you have some means of appeal even in arbitration..

In the case of agreeing to abide by the determination of a religious panel or process such as a Sharia case or Hallakah for Jews, or a Catholic edict, the law that is used to decide the case has NOTHING to do with law sanctioned by the state. (or at least it should be separate as Canada found out). Doesn't mean that the parties aren't obligated to feel "compelled" to submit to the verdict. It just means that there is no real enforcement other than for the church, temple, mosque, to bar you from membership -- damn your soul to hell --- or have your mother vetch at you for the rest of your life.

Can't use the state to appeal, Can't use the state to collect or to carry out the punishment. OTHER THAN THAT --- carry on. Settle disputes out of court. Make decisions on who is guilty.. You're just not gonna get the keys to the jail from us...

Gotta be that way -- else we'd have to have secular judges trying to balance secular national law with biblical law. For instance, the concept of interest on a loan or even a loan are ABSENT in Sharia law. (That's why the great Jew/Arab conflict thing ((BIG))) And women not having full and equal rights in ALL 3 of those religions I mentioned is simply a no-go in American civil court. FOR CRYING OUT LOUD -- there are some local churches here from the 1700's with 2 doors on the front.. One for MEN, the other for WOMEN.. My bible buckle neighbors better be careful what they ask for in terms of using the law to SUPPRESS other religions..

Last edited by flacaltenn; 04-29-2011 at 05:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-29-2011, 05:16 PM
d-ray657's Avatar
d-ray657 d-ray657 is offline
Loyal Opposition
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
No cringing here; that was an excellent explanation.

There are illegal contractual provisions (for example, excluding people of particular races from employment). There are also unenforceable contractual provisions - for example a consumer credit contract with all sorts of draconian penalties hid in the fine print. Those are known as contracts of adhesion, and won't be enforced by the court. Similarly, under our legal system, there is no way that our civil courts can enforce a contractual provision that requires a citizen to do as he is directed to do by a religious authority.

Regards,

D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-29-2011, 05:59 PM
flacaltenn's Avatar
flacaltenn flacaltenn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,145
Thanks officer.. It won't happen again.. I'm gonna play doctor next.

Ya know... I was thinking here that a sly religious court COULD request your extradition to a favorable Sharia country for the verdict to be carried out.. That would be a prob for folks that abided by the compact.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-29-2011, 08:12 PM
d-ray657's Avatar
d-ray657 d-ray657 is offline
Loyal Opposition
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by flacaltenn View Post
Thanks officer.. It won't happen again.. I'm gonna play doctor next.

Ya know... I was thinking here that a sly religious court COULD request your extradition to a favorable Sharia country for the verdict to be carried out.. That would be a prob for folks that abided by the compact.
That would NEVER happen.

A couple of examples of how hands off our court system is with religious questions is the decision by the goofball Fla. pastor who burned the Koran. The administration did utilize the bully pulpit, but that is IMHO an appropriate response. The goofball was expressing his bigotry, the the administration expressed the view that that behavior is not who we are as a nation, but he was not subjected to any official coercion.

A sadder example, but probably the correct decision is that the Neanderthals from Topeka had the right to express their hateful message without being subject to damages. The point has been made before that popular religious expression and popular speech are not in great need of First Amendment protection - it's the ones pushing the envelope that are at risk.

Regards,

D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-29-2011, 09:21 PM
finnbow's Avatar
finnbow finnbow is offline
Reformed Know-Nothing
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657 View Post
That would NEVER happen.

A couple of examples of how hands off our court system is with religious questions is the decision by the goofball Fla. pastor who burned the Koran. The administration did utilize the bully pulpit, but that is IMHO an appropriate response. The goofball was expressing his bigotry, the the administration expressed the view that that behavior is not who we are as a nation, but he was not subjected to any official coercion.

A sadder example, but probably the correct decision is that the Neanderthals from Topeka had the right to express their hateful message without being subject to damages. The point has been made before that popular religious expression and popular speech are not in great need of First Amendment protection - it's the ones pushing the envelope that are at risk.

Regards,

D-Ray
Beyond those examples, look at the pass the Fundamental Latter Day Saints have gotten in southern Utah and northern Arizona over the years.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-02-2011, 11:06 AM
piece-itpete's Avatar
piece-itpete piece-itpete is offline
Possibly admin. Maybe ;)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Land of the burning river
Posts: 21,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by flacaltenn View Post
bhunter:



It's kinda like the generalization that Christians have the neccessity to prosteletize. Some recruit a lot more aggressively than nothers. But I hear what you say.. Not because I'm in favor of the kinda Muslim bashing I saw in the Tenn legislation, but because we shouldn't go "overboard" like our Canadian cousins (some of them MerryLander) and just make it easier for Muslims with intent to interfere with our political and legal process. I was raised Jewish, so I could carry a lot of reasons to suspect Muslims, but I won't put that ahead of general principles. And their right to construct places of worship, and actually practice religious arbitration are not negotiable. I doubt if my Christian yahoo neighbors REALLY want govt setting precedents on limits to the 1st Amendment..

Piece--ItPete:
It's Ok man.. Don't panic, I'm not a lawyer, so I should be able to explain this pretty well!! (D-ray is cringing now)

A contract is enforceable because it adheres to all tenets of the "law of the land". The state will back you up on a contract, or bring you down by providing a full legal system to resolve differences. If someone owes you money from a verdict, the state will help you collect. I believe the court can also refer a civil case to the criminal court or at least reserve the right to charge someone criminally. Then you have prison in the equation. You can also agree in contract to binding arbitration in lieu of using an actual court proceeding. But (I believe), you have some means of appeal even in arbitration..

In the case of agreeing to abide by the determination of a religious panel or process such as a Sharia case or Hallakah for Jews, or a Catholic edict, the law that is used to decide the case has NOTHING to do with law sanctioned by the state. (or at least it should be separate as Canada found out). Doesn't mean that the parties aren't obligated to feel "compelled" to submit to the verdict. It just means that there is no real enforcement other than for the church, temple, mosque, to bar you from membership -- damn your soul to hell --- or have your mother vetch at you for the rest of your life.

Can't use the state to appeal, Can't use the state to collect or to carry out the punishment. OTHER THAN THAT --- carry on. Settle disputes out of court. Make decisions on who is guilty.. You're just not gonna get the keys to the jail from us...

Gotta be that way -- else we'd have to have secular judges trying to balance secular national law with biblical law. For instance, the concept of interest on a loan or even a loan are ABSENT in Sharia law. (That's why the great Jew/Arab conflict thing ((BIG))) And women not having full and equal rights in ALL 3 of those religions I mentioned is simply a no-go in American civil court. FOR CRYING OUT LOUD -- there are some local churches here from the 1700's with 2 doors on the front.. One for MEN, the other for WOMEN.. My bible buckle neighbors better be careful what they ask for in terms of using the law to SUPPRESS other religions..
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657 View Post
No cringing here; that was an excellent explanation.

There are illegal contractual provisions (for example, excluding people of particular races from employment). There are also unenforceable contractual provisions - for example a consumer credit contract with all sorts of draconian penalties hid in the fine print. Those are known as contracts of adhesion, and won't be enforced by the court. Similarly, under our legal system, there is no way that our civil courts can enforce a contractual provision that requires a citizen to do as he is directed to do by a religious authority.

Regards,

D-Ray
To be clear - if I as a free man agree to be bound by a contract, by a decision by my church elders on something concrete - say a money issue - it is not a legally binding contract?

Pete
__________________
“How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.”
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-02-2011, 11:44 AM
flacaltenn's Avatar
flacaltenn flacaltenn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,145
Pete:

If the preacher holds your mortgage, you're bound by the contract if it's valid in civil law. If the preacher only holds your soul as collateral because you've promised to stop drinking, it's pretty much unenforceable. Likewise, if a Catholic cleric orders you to do 55 Hail Marys to repent, he can't get a court order to enforce that verdict. From the OTHER perspective of using civil law to intercede in religious law, -- As a female in the Orthodox Jewish congregation, you cannot put together a civil rights case that allows you to sit with the men in the synagogue..

Sharia seems to cover economic contractuals a lot more than the Babtist church does. Their economic agreements according to Sharia are NOT based on US civil law and therefore are alien to our court system.

A voodoo cleric that makes a doll in your image can be quite powerful in some cultures, so be careful out there.

Last edited by flacaltenn; 05-02-2011 at 11:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-02-2011, 11:48 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
I only feel bound by my word once I give it, I don't fulfill obligations because some guy in uniform will be banging on the door if I don't.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:24 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.