U.S. District Court Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange ruled on Monday that over 70 percent of Oklahoma voters got it wrong when they passed a constitutional amendment prohibiting the use of Sharia Law when making a ruling.

Claiming the law violates his constitutional rights, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) executive director Muneer Awad said, “We are humbled by this opportunity to show our fellow Oklahomans that Muslims are their neighbors and that we are committed to upholding the U.S. Constitution and promoting the benefits of a pluralistic society.”

Just trying to be neighborly, huh? Well that sure is nice of you Mr. Adickwad, but pardon me while I trying to hold back my gag reflex.

This really looks to me like CAIR is committed to upholding Sharia Law, not the U.S. Constitution. Could it be more obvious? Maybe Adickwad should have said, “We are committed to upholding Sharia Law and if you try to steel that away from us we’ll have to cut off your hands.”

Judge Vicki ought to be an object lesson for anyone who ever considered voting for a democrat. Vote for a democrat, and this is the kind of judicial activism you can expect from the bench. Barack Hussein Obama considered her as a nominee to the Supreme Court, and probably would again if given the opportunity to make another nomination. Although, I do feel a little sorry for the Judge, as apparently when issuing this injunction against the people of Oklahoma, Miles-LaGrange failed to realize that under Sharia Law [Qur’an 33:5] she could be in big trouble for hyphenating her last name.

Maybe she thought getting stoned meant getting high.

For her, maybe it did?


2 responses »

  1. It is already illegal to base laws on religious doctrines (like Sharia). All this law did is single out Muslims and call them the enemy. The government shall “make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. You can’t make laws specifically aimed at one religion. Besides, there has never been a judicial ruling based on Sharia law in the history of this country. You might as well have made a law saying “No black men are allowed to commit murder against white men”. It is already illegal, but the law singles out one group unfairly and needlessly.

    • The point you are trying to make with your analogy would be convincing if only it were, well, analogous. You should Google “Sharia Law in New Jersey” sometime, and read about how well the Establishment Clause protected an abused wife, whose husband used Sharia Law to defend his deplorable actions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s