State that leads in anti-sharia legislation?

[gsvol]

Louisiana!

http://thehayride.com/2012/06/louisi...gainst-sharia/

Over the past two years no state in America has done more to prevent the infiltration of Shariah law into our legal system, culture and financial system than Louisiana.


During this time period, Governor Bobby Jindal has signed into law no fewer than 6 pieces of legislation that can be classified as attempting to guard against the Islamization of America.


The flagship legislation in this regard was American Laws for American Courts legislation signed into law by Governor Jindal in 2010.


Louisiana’s leadership to guard against the infiltration of Shariah continued in the 2012 legislative session with three more pieces of legislation signed by Governor Jindal:

• Act 369 authored by Senator Danny Martiny requires full and fair disclosure when a security offered in the state of Louisiana is governed by a religious law. This landmark bill was necessitated by the increasing presence of Shariah-Compliant Finance and the almost total lack of transparency associated with such instruments.

• Act 116 authored by Rep. Cameron Henry amends the Louisiana Racketeering Act to apply to, among other offenses, terrorism and aiding others in terrorism. By putting the material support of terrorism under the Racketeering Act, this landmark law arms state law enforcement with a useful tool with stiffer penalties and also provides for significantly increased civil penalties for individuals and organizations found to provide material support for terrorism.

• Act 207, authored by Rep. Nancy Landry, creates the crime of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in Louisiana. Many people are not aware that the barbaric practice of FGM is actually a Shariah-mandated practice that is becoming increasingly common in the US due to the influx of immigrants and refugees from certain predominantly Islamic regions. The first and most infamous case of FGM actually occurred in Louisiana back in 1972.

By signing these six bills into law over the past two years, Governor Jindal has placed Louisiana at the forefront of the fight to protect our freedoms from Islamization. No governor in America has signed more pieces of legislation into law designed to combat against Shariah and Jihad within our borders, our legal system, our education system, our financial system and our culture.

[lawgator1]

I an going to recommend to some clients that, in situations involving forced mental health treatment, they consider making the first screening question whether the subject hears voices, the second whether they think someone is following them, and the third whether they think there the country is teetering on adopting Sharia Law.

A yes answer to any results in a mandatory thirty day in house "visit."

[DynamiteMcGhee]

Congrats Louisiana. You have officially passed the most laws to prevent something that isn't a real threat, never was a real threat, and never would have been a real threat.

[milohimself]

Louisiana also incarcerates people at a higher rate than any government on the planet. So, props for that.

[orangestorm]

Louisiana School Uses Loch Ness Monster As Proof Against Evolution

[therealUT]

Originally Posted by gsvol

Louisiana!

http://thehayride.com/2012/06/louisi...gainst-sharia/

Negative.

Male circumcision is a Sharia-mandated practice; female circumcision (FGM), while not prohibited, is also not mandated.

The first case of FGM occurred in Louisiana? Interesting; I guess Herodotus was dead wrong in his reports from Egypt.

[gsvol]

Originally Posted by therealUT

Negative.

Male circumcision is a Sharia-mandated practice; female circumcision (FGM), while not prohibited, is also not mandated.

The first case of FGM occurred in Louisiana? Interesting; I guess Herodotus was dead wrong in his reports from Egypt.

Do you think maybe the first case in America?



I caught that too about it not being written in islamic law, however in practice in Egypt for example the rate is 80 to 90% which means nearly 100% for moslem girls.

Calling the barbaric procedure a circumsion is off the mark also.

Mubarak, in trying to advance Egypt into the modern scientific world and away from the backward islamic way had banned the procedure in Egypt, that is one more reason the islamists hated him.

You don't think there might be any retribution from the Obama administration which has solidly backed the muslim brotherhood and undermined Mubarak do you?

http://www.bayoubuzz.com/buzz/item/22451-while-jindal-meets-the-press-louisiana-surprisingly-loses-$859m-in-medicaid

Melinda Deslatte of the Associated Press has reported today that Louisiana's health department is working on how to cut $859 million from the state's Medicaid program for the poor and uninsured, stripping 11 percent of the funding for health services.

All the replies other than yours are too ignorant for any intelligent response.

[therealUT]

Originally Posted by gsvol

Do you think maybe the first case in America?

I highly doubt it; it may be the first reported case in the United States, though.

Originally Posted by gsvol

I caught that too about it not being written in islamic law, however in practice in Egypt for example the rate is 80 to 90% which means nearly 100% for moslem girls.

Herodotus chronicles FGM in Book II of The Histories (this is the Book where he chronicles almost everything about Egypt). Thus, this practice predates Islam by at least 1,000 years. It is a cultural phenomenon, not a religious phenomenon (which is why it is also carried out by Christians in Egypt).

The practice is not restricted to Muslims, as has often been claimed, but also carried out by Christians, who make up 10% of Egypt's population.
===============
In the rural areas of Egypt, in Upper Egypt, however there is scant respect for the law. You hear the words "tradition", "custom", "honour" uttered like a mantra when people justify their decision to circumcise their daughters.
===============
Gamila, a Christian with two young daughters, is one of her successes.

"I have had problems in my sexual relationship with my husband because of it and so when she explained about the health complications and how it is not part of religious faith, I was ready to believe her. I now don't want my daughters circumcised," Gamila said.

BBC News - Newsnight - Female genital mutilation rife in Egypt despite ban

Imagine that, it looks like this is a non-religious cultural practice that is prone to socio-economic conditions (poor, rural, and uneducated persons).

Originally Posted by gsvol

Calling the barbaric procedure a circumsion is off the mark also.

It is a circumcision, and has been labeled as such since at least 400 BCE. It is also barbaric, cruel, and unnecessary.

Originally Posted by gsvol

Mubarak, in trying to advance Egypt into the modern scientific world and away from the backward islamic way had banned the procedure in Egypt, that is one more reason the islamists hated him.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right GS?

Originally Posted by gsvol

You don't think there might be any retribution from the Obama administration which has solidly backed the muslim brotherhood and undermined Mubarak do you?

Retribution in what form? I will not be voting for Obama, one of the many reasons is due to his interventions in other nations.

Do you think there should have been retribution against Reagan for arming violent jihadists in their war against the Soviets in Afghanistan? The Soviets did build schools for girls, provided protection for women in Afghanistan, etc.

Or, maybe there should have been retribution against the U.S. when our CIA worked to oust Zulfikar Ali Bhutto from power in Pakistan; he was easily one of the more progressive premiers of an Islamic State over the past century. Yet, we had him replaced for a military government led by a much more radical leader.

[gsvol]

Originally Posted by therealUT

I highly doubt it; it may be the first reported case in the United States, though.



Herodotus chronicles FGM in Book II of The Histories (this is the Book where he chronicles almost everything about Egypt). Thus, this practice predates Islam by at least 1,000 years. It is a cultural phenomenon, not a religious phenomenon (which is why it is also carried out by Christians in Egypt).



Imagine that, it looks like this is a non-religious cultural practice that is prone to socio-economic conditions (poor, rural, and uneducated persons).



It is a circumcision, and has been labeled as such since at least 400 BCE. It is also barbaric, cruel, and unnecessary.



The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right GS?



Retribution in what form? I will not be voting for Obama, one of the many reasons is due to his interventions in other nations.

Do you think there should have been retribution against Reagan for arming violent jihadists in their war against the Soviets in Afghanistan? The Soviets did build schools for girls, provided protection for women in Afghanistan, etc.

Or, maybe there should have been retribution against the U.S. when our CIA worked to oust Zulfikar Ali Bhutto from power in Pakistan; he was easily one of the more progressive premiers of an Islamic State over the past century. Yet, we had him replaced for a military government led by a much more radical leader.

I understand female circumcision is tribal and predates islam, however it fits well with islam in that the woman is considered to exist only to pleasure man and be the vessel for children and the islamic imams not only endorce it, they demand it.

To remove the clitoris ensures that the woman will not become too excited by sexual intercourse.

Ever hear the old Arab adage; "for children a woman, for pleasure a boy, for ecstasy a warm melon at the oasis?"

I'm not sure the Christians observe that rite and have never heard of that to be true before.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right GS?

Not with me, perhaps with you.

Did you approve of Obama after his becoming president to be making his first televised speech in Cairo and getting the ball rolling to overthrow Mubarak? Do you think the new government will be an improvment in any way?

Reagan only followed the idiotic policy of his predecessor.
My dad wanted me to go in with him and raise mules to sell to the CIA to carry supplies from Pakistan into Afghanistan and even though I am a cold war warrior, and an anti-communist, I refused.

It's not that I am adverse to making easy money, it's that I knew then the threat that islam poses.

Probably the smartest man I've ever been around for any length of time enlightened me on the fact that America's next major enemy would be Arabic (and other) islamists back before the Vietnam conflict became the quasi-war it turned into.

We courted the islamists starting right after WWII.

Eisenhower entertained the head of the muslim brotherhood in the White House, surely to God he knew what kind of snake he was dealing with.

Musharaff was more radical than Bhutto? I didn't know that. Wasn't Bhutto assassinated? Are you saying we played a hand in that?

I do know that Jimmy Carter was very instrumental in the overthrow of the Shah and the Shah was the most pro-western ruler of any muslim majority country in the world, bar none. For what? A dismal seventh century islamic regime?

PS; my major difference with Reagan was when 200+ Marines were blown up while sleeping in the baracks in Lebanon, on a UN sponsored peace keeping mission, that he didn't level all the nearest hezbollah camps and leave them as smoldering ashpiles, similar to what happened in Dresden, Tokyo, Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

That and that alone is the only thing the islamists will respect, brute force, the strong horse philosophy.

BTW, should I venture off to to Knuckstown for a ball game this fall, is the number you gave me still good?

[therealUT]

Originally Posted by gsvol

I understand female circumcision is tribal and predates islam, however it fits well with islam in that the woman is considered to exist only to pleasure man and be the vessel for children and the islamic imams not only endorce it, they demand it.

Because women, throughout the history of Christianity and in the Old and New Testaments are so highly regarded and given equal rights as men, right?

Originally Posted by gsvol

To remove the clitoris ensures that the woman will not become too excited by sexual intercourse.

Ever hear the old Arab adage; "for children a woman, for pleasure a boy, for ecstasy a warm melon at the oasis?"

I'm not sure the Christians observe that rite and have never heard of that to be true before.

Well, Christians in Egypt do partake in the ritual.

Originally Posted by gsvol

Not with me, perhaps with you.

Did you approve of Obama after his becoming president to be making his first televised speech in Cairo and getting the ball rolling to overthrow Mubarak? Do you think the new government will be an improvment in any way?

I have no problem with Obama giving a speech anywhere on whatever topic he chooses. Of course, if you are for censorship, you are probably just more American than I.

Do I think the new government will be an improvement over the highly corrupt Mubarak regime? I do not know; do I think that individuals selecting their own leadership is in itself a good thing? Probably.

Originally Posted by gsvol

Musharaff was more radical than Bhutto? I didn't know that. Wasn't Bhutto assassinated? Are you saying we played a hand in that?

What does Pervez Musharraf have to do with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto?

I am saying that Zia-al-Haq was more radical than Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto was executed by Zia's government, and I am saying that the U.S. played a hand in Zia's coup because at the time we chose to side with radical Muslims rather than socialists (and, of course, the U.S. cannot simply let any nation just be).

Originally Posted by gsvol

I do know that Jimmy Carter was very instrumental in the overthrow of the Shah and the Shah was the most pro-western ruler of any muslim majority country in the world, bar none. For what? A dismal seventh century islamic regime?

I assume you understand that the only reason the Pavlavi's were in power was because we orchestrated the coup that took down Mosaddegh. Of course, Mosaddegh was a terrible rule since he nationalized the oil industry, leaving the West to pay higher prices for energy. Oh, that, and he was also a socialist...oh noes!

Mosaddegh was democratically elected; we removed him and placed the Pavlavi's in power, without the consent of the governed. Twenty-five years later, the Iranians revolted (hard to believe, right?)

Originally Posted by gsvol

PS; my major difference with Reagan was when 200+ Marines were blown up while sleeping in the baracks in Lebanon, on a UN sponsored peace keeping mission, that he didn't level all the nearest hezbollah camps and leave them as smoldering ashpiles, similar to what happened in Dresden, Tokyo, Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

Your major problem with Reagan was that he did not engage in wide-scale terror-bombing?

Originally Posted by gsvol

That and that alone is the only thing the islamists will respect, brute force, the strong horse philosophy.

Irony.

Originally Posted by gsvol

BTW, should I venture off to to Knuckstown for a ball game this fall, is the number you gave me still good?

You should. I do not live in Knoxville; I live in Boston. The number is still good, though.

[gsvol]

Originally Posted by therealUT

1. Because women, throughout the history of Christianity and in the Old and New Testaments are so highly regarded and given equal rights as men, right?



2. Well, Christians in Egypt do partake in the ritual.



3. I have no problem with Obama giving a speech anywhere on whatever topic he chooses. Of course, if you are for censorship, you are probably just more American than I.

4. Do I think the new government will be an improvement over the highly corrupt Mubarak regime? I do not know; do I think that individuals selecting their own leadership is in itself a good thing? Probably.



5. What does Pervez Musharraf have to do with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto?

6. I am saying that Zia-al-Haq was more radical than Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto was executed by Zia's government, and I am saying that the U.S. played a hand in Zia's coup because at the time we chose to side with radical Muslims rather than socialists (and, of course, the U.S. cannot simply let any nation just be).



7. I assume you understand that the only reason the Pavlavi's were in power was because we orchestrated the coup that took down Mosaddegh. Of course, Mosaddegh was a terrible rule since he nationalized the oil industry, leaving the West to pay higher prices for energy. Oh, that, and he was also a socialist...oh noes!

8. Mosaddegh was democratically elected; we removed him and placed the Pavlavi's in power, without the consent of the governed. Twenty-five years later, the Iranians revolted (hard to believe, right?)



9. Your major problem with Reagan was that he did not engage in wide-scale terror-bombing?



10. Irony.



11. You should. I do not live in Knoxville; I live in Boston. The number is still good, though.

1. Obfuscate and prevairicate, your standard MO.
Christianity has progressed, islam has regressed.
As a matter of fact under islamic sharia law a woman is mere chattel from cradle to grave, that alone is reason enough to oppose sharia being implemented in America.
Louisiana is to be applauded and other states would do well to get as many anti-sharia statutes on the books now.

2. I didn't know that, it's hard to imagine the Christian clergy would endorse it though, do you claim that to be the case?
Mubarak had made the very unpopular move of banning the barbaric procedure.

3. If Mubarak had known what was good for him he would NOT have given in to Obama's absurd demand that the outlawed muslim brotherhood leadership be allowed to attend the speech.

4. I doubt that anything good will ever come of it, it is a step back for Egypt and a step backwards for mankind.

5. Oops, I forgot about al-Hag.

6. Just as we couldn't leave Egypt alone?

7. But the Ayatollah was a good religous man, at least that's what Carter said.

8. The shah was brought down basically because both the soviet union and the USA under Carter both engineered his downfall.

9. Reagan didn't answer in any way except to withdraw from Lebanon, that was seen as a sign of weekness by the islamists.

10. Irony can be so ironic.
It's ironic that we are talking about anything it the world except anti-sharia law in this country but that is the rule of thumb for any discussion with you.

11. I might do that.