Thoughts on SQ 755?

[Boarder]

This measure amends the State Constitution. It changes a section that deals with the courts of this state. It would amend Article 7, Section 1. It makes courts rely on federal and state law when deciding cases. It forbids courts from considering or using international law. It forbids courts from considering or using Sharia Law.

International law is also known as the law of nations. It deals with the conduct of international organizations and independent nations, such as countries, states and tribes. It deals with their relationship with each other. It also deals with some of their relationships with persons.

The law of nations is formed by the general assent of civilized nations. Sources of international law also include international agreements, as well as treaties.

Sharia Law is Islamic law. It is based on two principal sources, the Koran and the teaching of Mohammed.

Shall the proposal be approved?
For the proposal
Yes: __________
Against the proposal
No: __________

What are your feelings on this? I'll be happy to post mine, but I don't want to taint the discussion.

Huh huh, I said taint.

[sooner_born_1960]

I'd be surprised to learn that a state court has ever relied on international of sharia law in deciding a case. But if they have, they ought to cut that out.

[saucysoonergal]

I think it is silly. The Courts in Oklahoma only follow Oklahoma Law and sometimes a little Federal stuff. This is just a knee-jerk reactionary measure. I doubt Sharia law would ever be acceptable in this great state. That being said, the electorate will vote yes.

[JohnnyMack]

I would vote against the proposal.

[Mississippi Sooner]

I'd forgotten how silly Oklahoma's state questions can be sometimes.

[OUMallen]

I think this is absolutely retarded. I'm against it. Not that OK would hardly EVER rely on international law, but I don't see the inherent problem in relying on it if there's nothing else on which to rely.

Just xenophobic really, since there's no problem existing to my knowledge.

Sure, I've been called a xenophobe, but the truth is I'm not. i honestly just feel that America is the best country and all the other countries aren't as good. That used to be called 'patriotism'.

[sooner_born_1960]

But since it made it's way to the ballot, I'd vote "yes", else some dip**** would think they could rely on int/sharia law to decide a case.

[Fraggle145]

Waste of time and money.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I agree with Mark

[Boarder]

Spoiler tags to not taint the discussion...

Supporters
Representative Rex Duncan was the chief author of the bill, and stated that Sharia law was a "cancer" in the United Kingdom because those courts enforced shariah. Duncan stated, "SQ 755 will constitute a pre-emptive strike against Shariah law coming to Oklahoma." Duncan also added, "While Oklahoma is still able to defend itself against this sort of hideous invasion, we should do so."

Representative Lewis Moore co-authored the bill and commented on Sharia law and how it shouldn't be used in court rulings: “I don’t think we should accept or encourage Sharia law in any way, shape or form."

Senator Anthony Sykes co-authored the bill and is on the record as saying, "Shariah law coming to the U.S. is a scary concept. Hopefully the passage of this constitutional amendment will prevent it in Oklahoma."

John Swails, who is the director of the Center for Israel and Middle East Studies at Oral Roberts University, stated the law is "pretty well solidified", however it is different from separate Islamic nations. Swails is for the measure, because "They'll tell you it provides religious freedom, but that's true only if you're a Muslim." Swails also stated that he sees that the law's supporters are beginning a campaign to have the U.S. embrace Sharia.

[Boarder]

Opponents
Saad Mohammed, director of Islamic information for the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City, opposes the measure. Mohammed stated that Sharia Law coincides with about 80% of the United States Constitution. This, according to Mohammed, reflects justice and equality for all and that extremists use Sharia in a distorted way. Mohammed claimed, "Sharia is more of a protection than something used to oppress."

Razi Hashmi, executive director of CAIR-Oklahoma, said there are more pressing issues in the state that need more attention from lawmakers instead of this issue. Hashmi countered claims by Rex Duncan that the CAIR wants Sharia Law in the the state and nation. Hashmi claimed, "That’s absolutely absurd. I don’t know anybody who wants Sharia here. Where is he getting that?"

Spokeswoman for the Islamic Society of Tulsa Sandra Rana said that the question is a "non-issue". According to Rana, "I don't know why anyone feels we should spend valuable time and resources on this. There are so many other important issues that need to be addressed."

[sooner_born_1960]

Yes, it's likely as non-issue, and waste of time, but there it is, on the ballot.

[Frozen Sooner]

I refer those who think courts should never look to international law to Federalist No.82 (Hamilton).

The judiciary power of every government looks beyond its own local or municipal laws, and in civil cases lays hold of all subjects of litigation between parties within its jurisdiction, though the causes of dispute are relative to the laws of the most distant part of the globe. Those of Japan, not less than of New York, may furnish the objects of legal discussion to our courts.

However, looking to any religion for a rule of decision is patently idiotic. So far as I'm aware, it's been done once in the United States by a family court judge who was promptly reversed on appeal. This bill is a solution looking for a problem.

[Boarder]

When I first saw this sq, I was amazed such a thing was using the ink of the state election board. I wondered why there was no provision for Oklahoma remaining a sovereign state if ever invaded by Mars.

Then I got angry that voters' time is being wasted on such a thing.

Then I just felt sad that fellow Oklahomans could be so wrapped up in paranoia that they would feel such a measure is necessary.

I'm voting no. I encourage everyone to get a list of all of the state questions and read them before voting. There are some real winners this election.

[saucysoonergal]

The one expanding the Judicial Nominating Commision is silly too. It works fine as is.

[Frozen Sooner]

The one expanding the Judicial Nominating Commision is silly too. It works fine as is.

Does OK work on a limited appointment model? The nominating committee gives a slate of names to the Governor who appoints from the list, then they're subject to a retention vote?

[Mjcpr]

When I first saw this sq, I was amazed such a thing was using the ink of the state election board. I wondered why there was no provision for Oklahoma remaining a sovereign state if ever invaded by Mars.

Then I got angry that voters' time is being wasted on such a thing.

Then I just felt sad that fellow Oklahomans could be so wrapped up in paranoia that they would feel such a measure is necessary.

Sounds like you were an emotional wreck that day.

[sooner_born_1960]

He should have taken a pill or something.

[Boarder]

Does OK work on a limited appointment model? The nominating committee gives a slate of names to the Governor who appoints from the list, then they're subject to a retention vote?

Yes, 3 names.

Since inception, it is an overwhelming majority of governor picks that are the same party as the governor.

Also, the retention rate is 100%, with each year voting varying about 5-6% between the candidates. I am currently working on a project that will claim retention elections are useless shams to give the illusion that the voters are involved. It's very hard to find someone who can name a state judge, past or present.

[Boarder]

Sounds like you were an emotional wreck that day.

It was a very stressful minute.