Sooner than later?

Submitted by Michal (United States), Nov 4, 2010 at 20:13

Does anyone have any thoughts on the lawsuits being filed (via CAIR) in the State of Oklahoma for it's stance on the implementation of Sharia Law within the state? For those unfamiliar, the "Sooner" state voted on an amendment that would prohibit the implementation of International Law, to include Sharia Law, within the State, the wording of which is as follows:

"State Question 755

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.

International law is also known as the law of nations. It deals with the conduce 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?"

More than 70% approved of the amendment which is being challenged by one Muneer Awad under the guidance of CAIR.

My concern is, if in fact this amendment is found to be unconstitutional, will that force our entire judicial system into implementing Sharia law in this nation? Why? Or why not?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".