If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.

T O P I C     R E V I E W
ALLEY CAT	New Jersey Court Rules Spousal Abuse Acceptable Under Islam This judge held that the defendant could not be held responsible for the violent sexual assaults of his wife because he did not have the specific intent to sexually assault his wife, and because his actions were "consistent with his [religious] practices." In other words, the judge refused to issue the permanent restraining order because under Sharia law, this Muslim husband had a "right" to rape his wife. View Source: http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/2010/10/go-ahead-beat-your-wife-just-dont-leave-a-mark.php
idive	I remember a news story some time back... Without getting too graphic here, there was a middle eastern man at a baseball game with his daughter. She was sitting on his lap and another baseball game attendee noticed this man "caressing" his daughter. They reported the incident to authorities who came and arrested the guy. The guy explained he did not know he was doing anything wrong because in his country, that was how they showed love. Charges were dropped because his actions were "consistent with his [religious] practices." Sorry dude. You're in THIS country now. You abide by OUR laws! You want to do that sh!t, GTF out of THIS country!
BeWare	This politically correct crap in our country has to stop. I guess if the guys religion says he can kill his wife if he wants to and his religion says he is allowed, then he would also get a pass on that. You live in our country you live by our laws. Plain and simple. Separation of church and state. Church laws do not circumvent state or federal laws. What do you want to bet the judge is a liberal?
BeWare	The Superior Court of NJ apparently overruled the judge. Nowhere could I find the name of the original judge. http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=in%20njco%2020100723325.xml&docba se=cslwar3-2007-curr We find it inappropriate, when restraints are civilly required, for a Family Part judge to rely on restraints issued in a parallel criminal proceeding. This is particularly the case because the need to protect the victim-spouse may outlive the termination of the criminal action. As a final matter, we find that the judge failed to give sufficient measured consideration to the imminence of the birth of the couple's child — an event that the judge acknowledged would bring the two into contact and almost inevitably be a source of conflict. In this regard, we note that defendant's previous misconduct consisted not only of sexual acts that were unlikely to be repeated given the couple's estrangement, but also acts of assault and harassment that were more likely to be repeated in the future. Viewing the evidence as a whole, we are satisfied that the judge was mistaken in determining not to issue a final restraining order in this matter in order to protect plaintiff from future abuse and in dismissing plaintiff's domestic violence complaint. We therefore reverse and remand the case for entry of such an order. Reversed and remanded. This message has been edited by BeWare on 10-21-2010 at 11:21 PM
ALLEY CAT	The judge in that case was Judge Joseph Charles. Another similar story of a father running over his daughter, who later died, after she became 'too westernized'. According to the father in his defense, he said his religion allowed for him to kill her for her actions against their religion. http://abcnews.go.com/WN/US/westernized-muslim-daughter-dies-run-father/story?id=89831 98 This message has been edited by ALLEY CAT on 10-22-2010 at 09:32 AM