Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Epic rant

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 24 Aug 12 9:49 PM | 188 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix 		Msg. 09513 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 09505 by Cactus Flower)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

The funny thing about sharia's influence on American law is ...

American law is largely based on English law.

English law was strongly influenced by Norman and Angevin legislators in the eleventh-thirteenth centuries.

The Normans were influenced by sharia law, via their conquest of Sicily and the movement of Normans between England and Sicily.

Certain tenets of sharia law (Maliki school) seem to have ended up embedded in English law. "In England, in contrast to Sicily, it seems that certain principles of Islamic law formed the basis of early common law as envisaged by Henry II. Because subsequent British legal ideas have been built upon these, at least a thread of the original (Muslim) principles survives. It is beyond the scope of this article to consider specific legal principles in detail but let's at least mention at a few hypothesized to have come into English common law from the Muslim world. Briefly, they are: the right not to testify to incriminate oneself; the outlaw of use of hearsay as evidence in trials; every person's right to trial by jury; the weight of a spoken or written contract as right to possession or transfer of property (rather than actual physical possession as sole proof of title to land, a horse, etc.); the possession of property constituting a form of ownership; the equality and consistency of laws in their application throughout a country; Ranulf Glanville's medieval definition of a valid contract based on agreement and consideration." http://www.bestofsicily.com/mag/art283.htm

For background and links, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman-Arab-Byzantine_culture

» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Epic rant
By: Cactus Flower in ALEA
Fri, 24 Aug 12 7:02 PM 		Msg. 09505 of 54959

Another one. This is Bill Maher. On paper.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/todd-akin-republicans_b_1826617.html

excerpt: "Republicans would like to pretend like Congressman Akin's substitution of superstition for science is a lone problem but it's not: they're all magical thinkers, on nearly every issue. They don't get their answers on climate change from climatologists, they get them from the Book of Genesis. Hence Sharia Law in America is a dire threat, and global warming a hoax.

Or take the issue that consumes the right these days, our sea of red ink: Republicans are united in their fervent desire to reduce the deficit, but they want to do it in some magical fashion that doesn't involve raising taxes or cutting any spending. When given a choice in polls between these two options, a majority or Republicans check "none of the above" as a way to reduce the deficit. That's like deciding to pay off your student loans by daydreaming.

Or as it's known on Capitol Hill, supply-side economics. Remember that magic beans theory? That you actually bring in more revenue by bringing in less? Ronald Reagan believed it. But at least back in the '80's it was new. The thing is, we tried it, and it doesn't work. Yet, Paul Ryan, who every shit-for-brains pundit in America keeps telling us is a "serious" guy, still believes in the supply-side theory. All the Republicans do. They all believe in something that both science and history have shown to be pure fantasy. The symbol for their party shouldn't be an elephant -- it should be a unicorn."


« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next