heard today that a Pa judged, recent convert to Islam, decided a case in Muslim, not US Law!
Case involved an Athiest was in a parade as a Zombie Muhhamed, another was A zombie Pope...
The Athiest was attacked by devoted Muslim, was beat pretty severely...
Finally went to court, and the judge decided for the Muslim, and he lectured the Athiest about the Muslim was "forced by his religion" to attack him, and that he would have been forced to also,being now
a devout Muslim too!
Should American judges be using Shari law?
Should we still call islam a "religion of peace", when they beat down some inthis case, and when TWO Korans were destroyed, rioted and killed a dozen people?
The report said that Muslim convert lectured the Athiest, and that the Muslim should have gone to jail for assault/battery, but decided to let him off and give other a lecture!
No argument with what you've written here; but your opening post and subsequent posts were about a judge invoking sharia law, which wasn't true and therefore was inflammatory. And you were shown multiple times by multiple people (other than me) that your OP was incorrect, but instead of fessing up, you're switching the argument to a discussion of islam.
He is suggesting that the judge ignored facts of the case and suggested that according to Muslim Law the Muslim was within their rights to attack this atheist.
Freeatlast posted a similar thread down in the News section; he included a link. In that article is a link to another article by the group Above The Law; that article explains that the charges brought against the muslim were for criminal assault, which requires that the individual show intent or pre-meditation to cause harm. In this case, the individual acted on the spur of the moment, and therefore the judge ruled that there was insufficient evidence to prove criminal assault. Totally and wholly US constitutional law.
The article also disproves the accusation that the judge is a muslim; he's lutheran, and has been for something like 40 years.
The article does concur that the judge's language and berating of the victim was cause for concern; but in the end, sharia law was not used to determine this case.