Advertisement

Archive for Friday, May 11, 2012

Day 90: Legislature attacks Sharia law, United Nations Agenda 21, but no resolution on budget, redistricting

May 11, 2012

Advertisement

— State legislators Friday approved bills taking aim at Islamic Sharia law and United Nations Agenda 21.

Meanwhile, legislators remained far apart on reaching agreement on the state budget, taxes, redistricting and other issues as the deadline for the 90-day session was set to end.

Leaders conceded that the session would extend into overtime next week.

The Senate approved a bill that bans Kansas courts and administrative agencies from basing rulings on foreign laws or legal systems.

The measure doesn't mention Sharia law, but several senators said that was their concern.

"They stone women to death in countries that have Sharia law," said state Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita. "If you vote to not adopt (the bill), it's a vote against women," she said.

But state Sen. Tim Owens, R-Overland Park, said the bill was unnecessary because courts already are ruled by United State laws and the U.S. Constitution. He said the bill was based on intolerance and fear and would make people think only those with a Christian, religious-right perspective were welcome in Kansas.

The measure easily passed, 33-4, after winning approval in the House, 120-0.

Earlier Friday, the House gave final approval to a resolution that recognizes "the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21."

The House approved the resolution 76-41.

The measure criticizes U.N. Agenda 21 as a covert plot to destroy the

American way of life through extreme environmentalism, social engineering and global political control.

Critics of the resolution described it as a right-wing conspiracy theory. Agenda 21 states its purpose as seeking global cooperation to improve the environment and reduce economic disparities between countries. It came out of discussions on sustainable development at the U.N. Conference of Environment and Development in 1992.

Comments

0day 2 years, 4 months ago

Agenda 21 is the end of the US as we know it.

0

asixbury 2 years, 4 months ago

Why? Because it wants to promote environmentalism and create less of a disparity between countries' economies? I do not see how this could be bad. Please explain so I can try to understand your point of view.

0

ksjayhawk74 2 years, 4 months ago

Because USA #1. Jesus is an American.

0

Leslie Swearingen 2 years, 4 months ago

I think Jesus is sick and tired of people assuming they know what he would or would not do in any given situation. If he were here he would tell you to your face you're some kind of sinner.

0

jafs 2 years, 4 months ago

That's funny.

Your first sentence trumps your second one.

0

Leslie Swearingen 2 years, 4 months ago

jafs, true that, thanks for pointing that out, lol!

0

pace 2 years, 4 months ago

I think oday was being sarcastic.

0

Jimo 2 years, 4 months ago

"State legislators Friday approved bills taking aim at Islamic Sharia law and United Nations Agenda 21."

Why is the agenda of today's radical GOP plagiarized directly from the front-page of The Onion? Does Stephen Colbert write the strategy briefs for the Republicans? (Where do bears stand on the threat level ranking?)

Every year there's a competition for Stupidest State. Why does Kansas seem intent on regaining the crown in 2012?

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Liberalism and heads in the sand and more name calling!

0

Hooligan_016 2 years, 4 months ago

When was the last time an "evil environmentalist" was at your front door to take your light bulbs or slash your car tires?

Were you in court recently and they made you swear on the Koran?

Seriously, get over yourself. These are ridiculous agenda items to reinforce intolerance and incite fear.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Liberalism and heads in the sand and more name calling!

0

JayhawksandHerd 2 years, 4 months ago

Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!

0

Hooligan_016 2 years, 4 months ago

Let's give 'em a hand, folks! Encore! Encore!

I'm sure glad the Kansas economy has been Brownie's and KSCongress' #1 priority since taking office due to an Obama/Democrat "referendum" election in 2010, oh wait ....

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

There is a tax cut bill headed for Brownback's desk-that should be a start- I didn't see much on that front from Sebelius and Parkinson!

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

The tax cut you point to is great but later trumped when her henchmen Parkinson signed the state wide sale tax increase.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Hm. The same sales tax increase that Gov. Brownback wants to keep in place rather than allow its expiration in 2013?

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

What name calling...what are you talking about?

0

Betty Bartholomew 2 years, 4 months ago

I am a woman, and I think the bill based on fear of Sharia law is idiotic. Do they seriously think it is or would become a problem in this country and state? So stupid.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

It has been a problem elsewhere that is why it is being brought up. You need to look at comments by Supreme Court justice Ginzberg and happenings in Michigan.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

No, it is not a problem elsewhere.

Additionally, this just opens up Kansas to more lawsuits as similar laws have been struck down.

http://tinyurl.com/7qw8htf

You want to screech about your religious freedoms being violated (even though yours aren't at all)? Other groups have many more valid reasons to be concerned about their religious freedoms to be violated because of people like yourself.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

I have seen more animosities expressed toward religion except when evangelicals or conservative Roman Catholics!

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

I don't think you completely understand what you just posted and how it validates what I posted.

Freudian slip is Freudian.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

It is also interesting that you talk about animosities being expressed. You don't seem to be interested in actual discrimination. Christians are not being discriminated against. Other religions are discriminated against quite often and many Christians of your particular brand encourage it.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

This is not correct there are hundreds of cases every year in which the legal rights of Christians are violated. Visit the ACLJ website! Also just recently Obama and his Administration have been trying to force Christian religious organizations and hospitals to distribute contraceptives and be involved with abortion.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

ACLJ? You mean this group?

"As a non-profit organization, the ACLJ does not charge for its services and is dependent upon God and the resources He provides through the time, talent, and gifts of people who share our concerns and desire to protect our religious and constitutional freedoms." http://aclj.org/our-mission

This group? "CURRENT CALLS TO ACTION

Oppose D.C. Circuit Court Nominee, Caitlin Halligan Oppose Judicial Nominee, Caitlin Halligan
Call on Secretary of State Clinton to Save Christian Pastor in Iran Save Christian Pastor in Iran
Egypt Crisis! Don't let radical Islam shape the future Support a Truly Democratic Eygpt
The Time is Now: Help Save the Lives of Unborn Babies Petition to Defund Planned Parenthood and ObamaCare
Petition to Protect Israel, Not Terrorists Petition to Protect Israel, Not Terrorists'

http://aclj.org/get-involved

Run by this guy? "At the beginning, no one could have predicted that what began as a mission to protect religious liberty in this country would involve an international outreach. In a world where Christians face discrimination, violence, and even death for practicing their faith, it soon became clear that there was work to be done abroad." http://aclj.org/jay-sekulow

This group? "The Chicago Tribune concluded that the ACLJ has "led the way" in Christian legal advocacy. TIME Magazine named Jay Sekulow one of the "25 Most Influential Evangelicals" in America and called the ACLJ "a powerful counterweight" to the ACLU." http://aclj.org/jay-sekulow

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Hospitals are not religious organizations. They are to serve everybody, particularly they are non-profit as hospitals affiliated with the Catholic church.

You sure do like to bear false witness against our President and have little understanding of the recent decisions regarding contraceptives. It simply requires the insurance company to provide contraceptives to women who wish or need to use them. This is not forcing Christian religious institutions to distribute contraceptives and it certainly does not force them to be involved in abortion.

Additionally, if you wish to accept taxpayer monies for your services, you need to comply with all the other regulations that all other organizations that accept taxpayer monies.

Show us some actual cases of common discrimination against Christians. Cite some court cases.

Do you think you can find a case similar to the surveillance of NY Muslims that involve Christians?

How about resolutions passed to block the use of Biblical law in U.S. courts?

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Wow.

The more I poke around in the ACLJ"s website the more I find that substantiates my assertion that the legal rights of Christians have not been harmed.

http://aclj.org/our-mission/jaysekulow-supremecourt

This guy mainly files amicus briefs in support of the pro-life protestors, religious displays on public property, Bible clubs at school, etc.

Most of the cases were not in his (or his side's favor). Nor were these cases involving actual discrimination against Christians.

Please get over your martyr syndrome. You are not Jesus.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

ancient landmarks attacked and religion is driven from public life---it is anti- Christian religious bigotry.

0

hujiko 2 years, 4 months ago

Face it, you are only interested in expanding your rights as a Christian over any non-Christian elements in society. You do not care if the measures taken are discriminatory or disenfranchising for minority groups; and further - anytime a group different than your own seeks equal treatment you consider it an attack on your faith.

Perhaps you are the bigot here.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Where was your outcry against ancient landmarks being attacked and religion driven from public life?

http://tinyurl.com/7zj2vsj http://tinyurl.com/8y2w6yx

The ACLJ says nothing about the religious freedom of those groups.

Perhaps you could also provide an example of an "ancient landmark" that was attacked here in the U.S.? You know, the country that you are so worried about being taken over by Sharia law?

0

coloradoan 2 years, 4 months ago

Religion driven from public life?? Religion is not supposed to be a part of government, because it would then be a question of whose religion is it that we follow in government.

It does not stop you from practicing your faith in your church of choice and in your home. You just cannot have prayer services at work and coerce your employees to participate.

Get over it.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Religious organizations like hospitals and health clinics do serve everyone! They r the churches witness of Christ to this world.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

The key thought there is "serve everyone". This means regardless of their sexual orientation, religious affiliation or their race.

It also means that you can't force others to adhere to your beliefs. Particularly when it comes to issues such as hospitals or health clinics where there is not much choice if you need treatment immediately.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

First of all "sexual orientation" should not be a protected category...it is a moral choice not a ethnic or racial group or status...secondly, serving everyone does not preclude religious institutions from maintaining their religious identities and values...

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Your opinion is not one based in fact. Sexual orientation is not a choice. If that is the case, what age did you make the choice to be a heterosexual?

Serving everyone means exactly that. If you able not able to maintain your religious identity or values while serving everyone, then perhaps you should not be in the business (because that is what hospitals and health clinics are) of serving people and you most certainly should not be accepting taxpayer monies which are supposed to be used for all people.

0

hujiko 2 years, 4 months ago

If being a heterosexual or homosexual is a choice, than so is being a Christian or a Muslim or any given faith. Your personal beliefs do not give you the right to discriminate against those you disagree with.

0

coloradoan 2 years, 4 months ago

They cannot witness to the point of refusing medical services if they take Federal funding.

0

overthemoon 2 years, 4 months ago

I always think when stuff like this takes up time in our legislature that it's really a building block for Christianist law to sneek in the back door.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Just what is "Christianity law"...this sounds like anti- Christian bigotry.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Wow. You see the boogyman everywhere. I don't think you comprehend (and probably don't care as it doesn't serve your agenda) the difference between Christianity and Christianists.

"Not to be confused with Christianity.

Christianism had various definitions over the years. It was originally defined as "the Christian religion" or "the Christian world".[1] In recent years, Christianism (or Christianist) has also been used as a descriptive term of Christian fundamentalists, mostly in the United States, for the ideology of the Christian right, meant as a counterpoint to "Islamism".[2][3] Writing in 2005, the New York Times language columnist William Safire attributed the term (in its modern usage) to conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan, who wrote on June 1, 2003:

I have a new term for those on the fringes of the religious right who have used the Gospels to perpetuate their own aspirations for power, control and oppression: Christianists. They are as anathema to true Christians as the Islamists are to true Islam."[2]"

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Re-read there is no name calling...

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

identifying or suggesting bigotry does not mean I'm calling him a name or making a specific identification. I said it "sounds like" anti-Christian bigotry...re-read. Specific to general hyperbole...not name calling...

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

I don't think you understand what the word "hyperbole" means.

You aren't identifying bigotry.You are certainly suggesting it that the poster is a bigot by "suggesting" that his post is bigotry. You can imply and suggest all you want but your behavior is no different than outright stating to him that he is a bigot.

It really is amazing the lengths you are willing to go to justify you doing the same thing that you complain others are doing.

http://bible.cc/matthew/7-3.htm

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

I said it sounds like anti -Christian bigotry. "sounds like" unspecific...dealing with the comment the writer made about "christianist law".

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 4 months ago

Next on the agenda: A proclamation that Kansas recognizes Sanjaya as the true winner of the 6th American Idol.

0

ksjayhawk74 2 years, 4 months ago

Ain't Sanjaya one of them Sharians? No thanks!!!

0

lawslady 2 years, 4 months ago

Resolutions are laws?? Of course not! They are simply a public statement of sentiment. And each such resoluation spends (wastes) valuable tax dollars and time. Take a look at all the resolutions that got drafted, re-drafted, discussed, debated, and worked this year. www.kslegislature.org . Now mulitply each one by what you think is the fair value $ market of the time/paper/effort spent. That is the wasteful mentality of the people elected to represent us. Is that how you expect your tax dollars to be used?

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 4 months ago

at least it momentarily distracts them from destroying the State.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

resolutions can be tools to educate the public.

0

lawslady 2 years, 4 months ago

If education is truly the goal, why not use far less expensive tax funded methodologies? Like holding press conferences, sending out letters by US mail (signed by all lawmakers who care to sign), speaking at public events, etc.? Resolutions have been, are and always will be a waste of money. Especially in times where (they claim) there is less and less money to go around for other governmental endeavors. Funny how the lawmakers want everyone else to tighten their belts, and yet they keep spending money on things without any return to the public.

0

chootspa 2 years, 4 months ago

I'd rather we fund schools to do that.

0

tomatogrower 2 years, 4 months ago

Oh my god!!!! Do your real job. What is the matter with you? Vote out any moron involved with this crud. Budget - District maps. That is your job. If some judge or prosector tries to implement Sharia law, then the lawyers will take care of it. Do your job. And no, the UN isn't getting ready to confiscate your land or whatever it is your afraid of. Are you really that stupid? Really?

0

gccs14r 2 years, 4 months ago

And (some) people wonder why rural Kansas is depopulating.

0

Steve Bunch 2 years, 4 months ago

Oh for the days when the Kansas legislature busied itself with liquor by the drink and bingo. Have I mentioned lately that we live in a moronocracy?

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

I'm so tired of liberal name- calling address the issues involved like diminishment of Constitutional liberties like property rights.

0

asixbury 2 years, 4 months ago

Spoken (or this case typed) by the same poster who name-calls all the time. But I guess that's ok since it was directed toward people who disagree with you. Don't make me give examples, it will just embarass you.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Here's one. He calls another poster irrational.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/may/07/pharmacists-could-refuse-dispense-contraception-ba/#c2038644

How about "heads in the sand"? That's in this thread. http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/may/11/day-90-legislature-attacks-sharia-law-united-natio/#c2041789

Called Tom Holland a "party hack". http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/may/09/senate-president-shelves-anti-abortion-bill-citing/#c2041685

Quotes the Bible to call those who don't believe in his God "fools". http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/may/09/obama-tells-abc-interviewer-he-supports-gay-marria/#c2041275

Gay folks are equivalent to adulterers and pedophiles. http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2012/may/do-you-think-president-obamas-stance-support-gay-m/#c2041261

Democrats are the party of tax and spend, lose(sic) moral values, and hatred for traditional America. http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2012/may/08/gop-redistricting-fight-could-mean-courts-make-fin/#c2038872

Additionally, he only labels it "liberal name-calling". We haven't heard a peep chastising "conservative name-calling" or "libertarian name-calling." He has only focused on those opinions with which he disagrees.

Anyhow, that's just this week's posts.

If you are so tired of name-calling (as kansanjayhawk has claimed to be) then you need to call out all name-callers.

I'm pretty the Bible has a few scriptures that address hypocrisy.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

These are general statements as opposed to specific statements calling out an individual. So get that- general as opposed to specific--also the use of general hyperbole! I'm not calling Individuals names!--each example is of that type...i have criticized specific calling of names where the name-calling is the focus rather than debating an issue.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

No, they are specific to the poster and they are not general statements.

Telling someone they are irrational is not a general statement.

Your criticism is directed to those with whom you disagree. You do not criticize those with whom you agree and have focus on name-calling rather than debating an issue.

It is also interesting that you want to decide how the debate is framed and very rarely do you follow any actual debate form (i.e. stating your opinion then backing that opinion with supportive evidence).

When asked for a source, you do not provide it. In fact, you have on numerous occasions refused to supply any documentation whatsoever of your claims (ex: abortion causes breast cancer or late-term abortions are common).

I understand that you will justify your arrogance and dishonesty because you feel you know the "Truth". I also understand you will not change that behavior.

Bullies, such as yourself, that bastardize Christianity so as to use it as a club to subdue others who do not fall lockstep with your personal beliefs will not succeed. People see you for who you really are and the Christians who follow Jesus's teachings will stop you.

0

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 4 months ago

Yep. the Christian supremacists on this board have the sole answer to all our problems: follow their faith exactly as they do. Surrender to their authority and America will return to the great nation it once was. And they'll be taking names of those who refuse or lag behind. Sharia law is nothing compared to their plans. And so along the way, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

None of those are opinion and supporting arguments.

Paraphrasing a bible verse in response to a previous commenter's post is a personal attack. It is an insult and his posts are intended to insult the commenter.

For example, it could be my opinion that you are a donkey's rear end and I state that opinion. I have supporting arguments in the form of your posts and behavior toward others that show proof of your tendency of donkey rear-endeness*

Heck, I could have all sorts of charts and even 27 - 8x10 color glossy pictures to support my opinion.

It still would be name calling.

*absolutely hypothetical. I have no opinion one way or another on whether or not you are, indeed, a donkey's rear end.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

And you have contributed what?

The only comment you have on here is a personal attack on me.

There is no distortion or conflation. I am sorry that you cannot recognize bad behavior from people with whom you agree.

You and kansanjayhawk are very much alike.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

I'm so tired of liberal name- calling address the issues involved like diminishment of Constitutional liberties like property rights.

0

Keith 2 years, 4 months ago

When they stop acting like morons, we'll stop calling them morons.

0

Geiiga 2 years, 4 months ago

Right?

This Agenda 21 nonsense...wow. I mean, there's no way to argue against the sort of psychosis that makes a nonbinding resolution by the world's least powerful political institution into a scary government plot. I'd have equal luck arguing that the planet Venus isn't made of tomato soup. Boils down to "...no. That doesn't even make sense. You're stupid for thinking that."

The sharia law stuff betrays a total lack of any understanding, by our lawmakers no less, of how law works. Which should be exactly as alarming as our legislature apparently buying in to a conspiracy theory that makes the Birthers and Truthers look rational by comparison.

And, of course, another abortion law. This one requires physicians to lie to patients seeking abortions by telling them that abortion causes breast cancer (all medical evidence of this "fact" is contained in this parenthetical), and allows doctors to withhold medical information that might lead to an abortion. So, more babies born without brainstems, presumably to be groomed for leadership positions in the Kansas Legislature.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Very Inaccurate because this abortion law seeks honesty not dishonesty!

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Mandating that doctors tell patients that abortions cause breast cancer is not seeking honesty.

Allowing physicians to lie to a patient if they believe the medical info they have will lead to the patient's termination of the pregnancy is not seeking honesty.

Allowing physicians to withhold medical info from their patients that may seek an abortion and such withholding causes injury or death of the patient or the fetus (or both) and then not allowing the family to sue for medical malpractice is not seeking honesty.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

outlining what the studies show and what the continuing research will demonstrate and has demonstrated is not dishonest...we should allow women to have "informed consent" prior to abortion. It is the pro-choice community that has over-looked the many deceptions and lies put out by Planned Parenthood and others that cover up and attempt to hide information from patients and parents!

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

The studies suggesting that abortion causes breast cancer have been debunked many times over by legitimate cancer researchers.

Why is it that you cannot link to one peer-reviewed study that shows that abortion causes breast cancer?

I don't think you understand what "informed consent" means. Perhaps English is not your first language?

"Informed consent is a legal procedure to ensure that a patient or client knows all of the risks and costs involved in a treatment. The elements of informed consents include informing the client of the nature of the treatment, possible alternative treatments, and the potential risks and benefits of the treatment.

In order for informed consent to be considered valid, the client must be competent and the consent should be given voluntarily. " http://psychology.about.com/od/iindex/g/def_informedcon.htm

"Informed consent" means giving accurate and truthful information. It does not mean lying to a pregnant patient because the physician thinks that she might get an abortion.

"Informed consent" also does not mean withholding medical information.

Not allowing families to seek recourse for willful malpractice is not honest.

I find it horrifying that you believe it is acceptable for someone in the medical field to lie to their patient and their families in order to further their own personal agenda.

0

asixbury 2 years, 4 months ago

Why do you refuse to answer the most important part of this bill that makes it completely insane: that the doctor is allowed to lie to the patient and suffer no discourse! No matter your views on abortion, this is something that never should be allowed!

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 4 months ago

Property right have expanded not contracted during the last five decades despite what fox news or the anti agenda 21 lunatic fringe claim.

0

JayhawksandHerd 2 years, 4 months ago

You want to argue property rights, then turn around and claim women shouldn't have the right to make decisions regarding their own bodies. Once again, your logic eludes me.

0

verity 2 years, 4 months ago

I think I can answer that, JayhawksandHerd. Since human beings can't be owned, it's only logical that women don't own their own bodies. Then it follows that---oh never mind.

0

asixbury 2 years, 4 months ago

He wasn't name-calling. By using your own logic mentioned above, "These are general statements as opposed to specific statements calling out an individual." He was making a generalization, just like you supposedly were every time you called the people who don't agree with you a fool, etc...

0

somebodynew 2 years, 4 months ago

The easy way to solve this is for Legislators to not be paid for "overtime" as long as they have not tackled the real job they were sent there to do. No budget - no extra pay. No redistricting - no extra pay.

Of course the problem with this solution is that the legislators would have to vote to enact it. Guess how high up on the priority list that would be. I am guessing somewhere under what the State Dog should be.

0

Tristan Moody 2 years, 4 months ago

I'm a bigger fan of a constitutional amendment stating that no bill or resolution shall be passed until a final budget for that fiscal year is passed and signed.

0

verity 2 years, 4 months ago

Suddenly Ms Wagle is concerned about a vote against women?

Can these people get any stupider? Really, Sharia Law is hiding under our beds and is going to attack us in the night? As a woman, I have much more to fear from some of the laws than these very legislators are passing than I do from Sharia Law---or the laws of any other country. My mind is just boggled.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

More name-calling! Just because you do not agree with someone else's opinion does not make that person stupid! Address the issues and you might find yourself more educated. On this issue.

0

somebodynew 2 years, 4 months ago

Ms Wagle has earned a name like that for many more reasons than just this one. She seems to come up with new things every year.

And verity does address the issue: women have more to fear with this ultra-religious Gov and Legislature than any 'foreign' law - unless she plans to go to another country and marry.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 4 months ago

"Address the issues"

That's the problem-- there is no issue here. Just idiocy and paranoia. But you seem to be attracted that sort of thing.

0

cowboy 2 years, 4 months ago

brownbackblowsalot

The single most prophetic statement of the year

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Really? Now that really addresses the issues! Actually Browback is becoming a very powerful governor and setting a new more conservative agenda!

0

JayhawksandHerd 2 years, 4 months ago

"Actually Browback is becoming a very powerful governor..."

That's what I'm afraid of.

"...setting a new more conservative agenda!"

Socially? OK, but I'm not sure that's in the best interests of most Kansans, especially women.

Fiscally? Not so much. Throwing away a $600 million surplus and running up a deficit on a hope and a prayer that new business will follow is not fiscally responsible.

0

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 4 months ago

Oooh I'm tingly. Please, do tell me more about this "new more conservative agenda" yet to come. What's next? Forced scripture readings and church attendance? Undercover fidelity stings? Re-education sessions? The "very powerful" (all and powerful?) Brownback and his minions have it all figured out it seems ~ just give us second-tier citizens the details OK?

0

JayhawksandHerd 2 years, 4 months ago

Tim, there are plenty of reasons why people thought "only those with a Christian, religious-right perspective were welcome in Kansas" long before this do-nothing bill was introduced.

0

verity 2 years, 4 months ago

I just emailed my representative---and this time I wasn't polite. Everybody who is disgusted with this, please do the same (well, you probably shouldn't be am impolite as I was, but I digress).

And remember this come election time.

V O T E !

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

I will let them know I believe they are doing a good job. There are more conservatives in Kansas than liberals!

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

I will let them know I believe they are doing a good job. There are more conservatives in Kansas than liberals!

0

Steve Bunch 2 years, 4 months ago

And there are more morons in Kansas than liberals and conservatives combined.

0

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 4 months ago

If your litmus test is that anyone the left of Rick Perry is a liberal, then your analysis might apply. When your "center" is so far to the right that Bob Dole = Liberal, you might need to "realign" your bearings. See I can use the quotes too!

0

jafs 2 years, 4 months ago

Given that we exist, not as a pure democracy, but as a constitutionally based system, with checks and balances, simply majority doesn't and shouldn't rule.

Also, of course, the world isn't simply divided into conservatives and liberals - there are moderates, independents, etc.

There are more moderates in KS than ultra conservatives, in my opinion, and we should see the results of that in the next election.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Even "moderates" in Kansas lean to the conservative side. Only a large infusion of money in the campaigns of these "moderates" can save them from defeat...and George Tiller and Kathleen Sebelius are no where to be found this cycle...

0

jafs 2 years, 4 months ago

We'll see.

I think you vastly overestimate the percentage of right wing folks in KS, and overlook the large group of moderates.

Of course, the pro conservative money will be pouring in to defeat the more moderate candidates, that's for sure.

0

Steve Bunch 2 years, 4 months ago

Tin foil hat industry = job creation. (Of course, the tin foil hats probably are being manufactured by an American corporation hiring out the work to China. It's complicated, maybe even a conspiracy.)

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

This is what initiated the freakout. http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/civil/article1158818.ece

It is no different than having a rabbinical court decide a contract (which is perfectly acceptable in our society) or letting the Amish handle their "legal" issues in their societies.

Sharia law has not been applied anywhere else and in this case, both parties agreed in the contract to arbitration by an Islamic scholar. It was a voluntary contract. No was forced to agree to this.

But if you listen to the folks such as state Sen. Susan Wagle, it becomes a whole bunch of "OMG!1!1! The Mooslems are invading!"

0

Ron Holzwarth 2 years, 4 months ago

Re: "Sharia law has not been applied anywhere else"

That's not true at all, Sharia Law is commonly used in many Islamic countries. Although, I don't think you meant that literally, instead you meant that it has not been applied in the USA. But, Sharia Law seems to be creeping into the Western Nations.

'The Telegraph' "Sharia law applied secretly in Sydney" http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-news/sharia-law-applied-secretly-in-sydney/story-e6freuzi-1226057808947

'Gatestone Institute' "You Are Entering a Sharia Controlled Zone" http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2530/denmark-sharia-hezbollah

'Leading the Future' "How Many of the 27 EU Countries Use Sharia Courts? You DON’T Want To Know …" http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2009/02/16/how-many-eu-countries-use-sharia-courts-you-dont-want-to-know/

'Brain Terminal' "The Multicultural Endgame: Sharia Law Rules Europe" http://brain-terminal.com/posts/2007/03/23/the-multicultural-endgame-sharia-law-rules-europe

This is my thoughts on Islam: Christianity has quite a history to be embarrassed about, oppression of minority groups, the Crusades, etc, but that was mostly brought to a halt with the Reformation begun by Martin Luther and his 95 Theses in about the year 1520. After that, the Roman Catholic church changed quite a lot, and Christianity became a much less oppressive religion.

That was about 1,500 years after Jesus walked the earth.

The Qur'an was written in approximately the year 700. I hope there is an Islamic Reformation, but if you assume that it will take about as long as Christianity did for that to happen, you need to start with the year 700 and add 1,500, then you will get the year 2,200 before that might happen.

That's 200 years in the future. But hopefully, there will be a Reformation of all faiths long before then, because my view is that all religions should express tolerance, mutual respect, and be a safety net for those in need.

And if you're an unbeliever, that should make no difference. You should also express tolerance, respect, and be willing to help others in need, and demonstrate that with your actions.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

This article is specifically about international and foreign law being used in Kansas Courts and administrative agencies.

Forgive me for not stating the obvious to you, particularly when I referenced the one case that "Sharia" law was referred to in the United States.

0

Ron Holzwarth 2 years, 4 months ago

PS: This is what I believe: Religions are not really truths, instead they are methods to achieve goals that we cannot understand.

0

asixbury 2 years, 4 months ago

Ron, I enjoy your comments. You seem to try to maintain a un-biased viewpoint as much as humanly possible.

0

Shane Garrett 2 years, 4 months ago

Free tin foil hats for those who think Abdulla could never be elected as a judge. Have to agree with Kansas Jay hawk on this one.

0

Shelley Bock 2 years, 4 months ago

When I first read this article, I couldn't stop chuckling. My comments would have clearly violated the terms of usage.

This is totally insane, inane and moronic. No, that's too complimentary. It is total and unmitigated garbage.

While matters of substance are unattended, they focus on these ridiculous statements?

This only proves that they are driven by pure paranoia and fear.

To say that any judge in the State of Kansas would use "Sharia Law" over and above Kansas law in any decision is an insult to judicial intelligence and ability. There is no way, under any potential scenario that this would have even a remote prospect of being considered. Fantasy, lunacy and paranoia! What drugs are they collectively using. Hope it isn't from the evidence room of the Shawnee County District Court.

To then take time to address a 20 year old UN resolution that has obviously not had any impact on life in Brownbackistan during those 20 years, is once again a complete waste of time and effort.. But, it keeps up with the standards of the previous wasted efforts.

I suppose their next act will be to congratulate themselves on protecting the State from invasion by the forces of Imperial Japan.

You're doing a great job, "Brown"backistan.

0

Steve Bunch 2 years, 4 months ago

You know, not enough attention is given to the Japanese threat. We've become so accustomed to the Hondas and Toyotas that we won't even notice the kamikazes until they hit us.

0

Steve Bunch 2 years, 4 months ago

I forgot to mention the sushi and anime. I have a bad feeling about all of this.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

That's only because the sushi was not fresh and the anime can provoke seizures.

0

Shelley Bock 2 years, 4 months ago

Don't worry, there will be an overtime session where they can address that issue. Oh, and while they're at it, they can try to evict Native Americans from their land because they didn't legally come to the US from Europe.

Legislators are multi-tasking and on a roll.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 4 months ago

"While matters of substance are unattended, they focus on these ridiculous statements?"

The really scary part is that their preferred methods of handling matters of substance are based on the same paranoia, ignorance and general idiocy.

0

Grump 2 years, 4 months ago

Agenda 21 is obviously a conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids. Oh wait, maybe that's Sharia law. Or both. (I get so confused about my precious bodily fluids.)

0

irvan moore 2 years, 4 months ago

sharia law is irrelevant is the USA, that's right, if you want to live here follow our laws, please don't think we should be bound by yours

0

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 4 months ago

Yes, but they're not quite as "American" as the Christians, right? Maybe we can reeducate them. (insert irrelevant fouding fathers' quote here) We can't be a Christian Nation unless there is supremacy!

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 4 months ago

This is no different from the hysteria over "Papal/Catholic law" not all that far back.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

0

ScottyMac 2 years, 4 months ago

So does this apply to mosaic law too? Bye bye, ten commandments!

0

verity 2 years, 4 months ago

I didn't know there were laws about mosaics. I just do mine any which way I please.

Oh---never mind.

0

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 4 months ago

Who will protect the women against the Christian supremacists?

0

verity 2 years, 4 months ago

Indeed.

I think we have to protect ourselves---V O T E in the primaries, register as a Republican to keep the moderates from being overrun by the crazies. I will have to take many showers after I do that, but it's a small price to pay for my freedom.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

Don't forget that Democrat conservatives might start running in the primaries as well!

0

jafs 2 years, 4 months ago

As far as I know, Democrats can't run in the R primaries.

0

Richard Heckler 2 years, 4 months ago

Recall Sam Brownback!

Vote in Tom Holland!

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

I disagree with you. Conservatives are very satisfied and encouraged by the work and efforts that Governor Brownback has gone too to reduce taxes, reform welfare and social services, and support for family and family values. He is a great reforming governor bringing Kansas back from the brink of bankruptcy as it was left by the democrats Sebelius/Parkinson Administrations.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

No, conservatives are not very satisfied and encouraged by what Gov. Brownback has done.

Social conservatives (which are not the same things as conservatives) are though.

0

asixbury 2 years, 4 months ago

He cut funding to social services, thereby hurting families that need it the most. How is this helping Kansas? He is not funding education at the necessary rate; how is this helping Kansas? He made it legal for doctors to lie to patients; how is this helping Kansas? Just because someone claims to be a Christian, does not mean he is the best representative for our state. Being a Christian should not be the end-all when it comes to choosing a politician.

0

guess_again 2 years, 4 months ago

I hope everyone understands that after the Kochs and Sam run off the Kansas Senate Republican moderates, that Susan Wagle will be the Senate President, and working hand in hand with Speaker O'Neal and the Governor. You think headlines have been bad so-far? Just wait.

I wonder what Sharia law says about babysitters who seduce then marry one of their clients? Or how about people who make their living from running bingo parlors. Maybe Wagle just doesn't want to get personally stoned?

0

Leslie Swearingen 2 years, 4 months ago

Isn't it obvious that Wagle is stoned? I could not help but notice that in all these comments no one saw fit to mention the budget and jobs. Will the dental clinic have to close because of a lack of funding? Do the poor even need teeth? What about the way that Walmart treats their employees? Can anything be done about that? What about the rent in this city that makes it near impossible for working class people to find a place? Should we build a rent controlled shelter for the working class and their families?

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

oh really--is that so--obvious Senator Wagle is "stoned"? This is yet another example of the kind of discourse that does not a address issues but resorts to the personal attack. Just because you do not agree with Wagle does not make her "stoned" she just believes that the use of foreign law by our U.S. Courts is a serious enough issue for the Kansas Legislature to weigh in on. I would agree with her assessment!

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Really? What exactly are the issues you think people are not discussing?

You keep talking about "issues" but never come close to defining what you believe the "issues" are.

The only purpose you seem to serve here in discussion is to white knight Gov. Brownback and those who support them.

Can you come up with a reasonable argument that would lead a person to believe that Sharia law would be a serious enough issue for the KS legislature to pass a law banning it?

Also, Sen. Wagle isn't concerned with foreign law as a whole being used in our courts. She specifically talks about Sharia law.

Also, remember that Papal law would be foreign law.

0

uncleandyt 2 years, 4 months ago

frankie wasn't claiming that Wagle is $"stoned"$, merely asking if it is obvious. Has O'Reilly taught you nothing ?

0

OzD 2 years, 4 months ago

Whew! We nearly ended the legislative session without affirming that courts should use federal and state laws to guide their decisions. That was close!

If two consenting parties agree to use rock paper scissors or a coin toss to settle a dispute, would this be opposed by Wagle, or can these methods be considered domestic rather than foreign? She can have my scissors when she lops them off my cold dead arm.

0

Fred Whitehead Jr. 2 years, 4 months ago

Whaddya mean? We already have sharia style laws in the U.S. and these republicans are boldly in favor of them all. They want to discriminate against gay and lesbian folks with their laws against gay marriage on the basis of some scripture dictated by King James I of England in 1611. They loudly procalim that they want to get government out of our lives, but do not stumble one step when trying to formulate laws to obstruct safe and legal abortion in the U.S. These facists are about as hypocritical as the voters of North Carolina. Religious laws litter the books and our lives and these tea baggers are out to make more of them.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 4 months ago

The use of foreign and international law by the Courts in the U.S. is a serious issue. No Court should be guided by anything but the Statutes and Constitutions of the U.S. and the several states that are a part of the Union! Upholding this value is important and worthy of the time that was spent on it by the Legislature! In addressing the above post--the radicals are not the voters or the Legislatures--it is the Courts that are forcing "gay marriage" upon most States. This gay marriage issue would not even be on the radar if it had not been for Obama placing it there! The majority of citizens and the voters in 31 states believe that marriage should remain the union of a man and a woman. There can be no such thing as gay marriage.

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Really?

Because this is only addressing Sharia law and does not address any other use of foreign and international law by the Courts. If it was a serious issue, wouldn't all foreign and international law be banned from use?

We refer to English Common Law in U.S. courts. In fact, much of our law is influenced by that..

Anyhow, it is clearly discriminatory and violates the Constitutional rights of American Muslims.

http://tinyurl.com/7qw8htf

0

Pastor_Bedtime 2 years, 4 months ago

"There can be no such thing as gay marriage" It already exists in several US states. Your narrow sect just doesn't like it. The Christian Supremacy movement doesn't like it, but they don't call the shots in this nation. Attempting to force your faith on others and enslaving them to your morality is un-American. And claiming anti-christian bigotry as a response to any negative reaction to your christian steamroller is comical. You should travel a bit, kjh. Meet some people outside your sect and faith and try to glean the idea that the entire nation doesn't share your world view. I know it's difficult when you're so used to getting your way....

0

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 4 months ago

You know, it's incredibly embarrassing when, on an international level, the name of your state becomes a synonym for "backward, reactionary and bigoted". Dalee Sambo Dorough, the vice chair of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, referred to the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia as "the Kansas group" because those four nations voted in the U.N. against the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. President Obama has since reversed that vote but it's a huge indication of how the rest of the world sees us. Kansas has become internationally famous. And not in a good way.

0

Ron Holzwarth 2 years, 4 months ago

"And not in a good way."

Except for this: Dorothy and Toto were very sweet, and the whole world knows all about them.

That sure was quite a dream she had,,,

It was just as weird, strange, and unbelievable as the idea of world peace.

0

Kirk Larson 2 years, 4 months ago

So let me get this straight, this law is to protect women from the abuses under Sharia law, right. Well, under Sharia women would be prohibited from utilizing contraception or abortion. So this law will guarantee these right to Kansas women, right?...Right?

0

Katara 2 years, 4 months ago

Sharia law does not make reference to those things but other Islamic documents such as the Q'uran and various hadiths, abortion generally is frowned upon but it is permissible (meaning not a punishable offense) before the 4th month of gestation. Also, while sex before marriage is forbidden, contraception for family planning is perfectly fine for married people.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/islamethics/contraception.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/islamethics/abortion_1.shtml

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.