Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
CAIR Suing Oklahoma Over Sharia Law Ban
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ez bake" data-source="post: 1348539" data-attributes="member: 229"><p>Did anyone actually read the text of the state questions?</p><p></p><p>They were absolutely idiotic. They didn't really say anything at all and to be honest, 755 didn't even mean anything because there is no real precedence of international law being cited in criminal court if it wasn't already an established local/state/federal law and actually being taken seriously.</p><p></p><p>Civil court system aside (because apparently, nothing in the way of rules matters in civil court), this state question was stupid. The wording of most of the state questions (if you actually read the state questions in their entirety, they say things like "this must happen... unless it can't, in which case, it doesn't have to, or some other thing can happen".</p><p></p><p>Check out even the short-wording of 746 (proof of ID when voting):</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So basically, you have to have proof of ID with an expiration date. Or if you don't, a voter ID card. Or if you don't, you can make a sworn statement (don't lie, or its a felony).</p><p></p><p>Several state questions were written like that.</p><p></p><p>Awesome job State legislators.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ez bake, post: 1348539, member: 229"] Did anyone actually read the text of the state questions? They were absolutely idiotic. They didn't really say anything at all and to be honest, 755 didn't even mean anything because there is no real precedence of international law being cited in criminal court if it wasn't already an established local/state/federal law and actually being taken seriously. Civil court system aside (because apparently, nothing in the way of rules matters in civil court), this state question was stupid. The wording of most of the state questions (if you actually read the state questions in their entirety, they say things like "this must happen... unless it can't, in which case, it doesn't have to, or some other thing can happen". Check out even the short-wording of 746 (proof of ID when voting): So basically, you have to have proof of ID with an expiration date. Or if you don't, a voter ID card. Or if you don't, you can make a sworn statement (don't lie, or its a felony). Several state questions were written like that. Awesome job State legislators. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
CAIR Suing Oklahoma Over Sharia Law Ban
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom