difficult job

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kaffiristan (Australia), Nov 6, 2010 at 05:49

Michal writes: "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?"

Don't fret.

Read the text of the paragraph carefully. The statements made are rational and considered and the question finally asked is reasonable and the answer is clear. So the state relies on its own and federal laws as guidance in judicial matters. It does not even rely on international laws between civilized nations.

...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..."

Mr Awad will be seen as a vexatious litigator. But if for some stupid reason he does get to court - the defence should make the point that the State does not even defer to International law - laws agreed upon between civilized countries.

Mr. Awad has a snowball's chance in hell of proving that muslim countries are truly civilized - let alone that sharia belongs anywhere else other than 7th century arabia.

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".