Britian's Future

[travelinman]

[Lew]

When I saw that article yesterday about the future of marital law in Britain, I admit I did think of Trav because he's been expouding on this issue for years. Granted this is just one person's opinion, but let me bottom-line this one before it gets out of control: when law becomes "optional," then you don't really have law at all, do you?

Granted, here in the U.S. we do have separate laws that exist on Indian reservations and military bases, but they are no optional. You have the option to live or not live on the Indian reservation, but if you do you are subject to its laws. You choose to join the military, but in so doing subject yourself to the UCMJ. You don't get to pick and choose.

And I can just hear Lan "The Federalist" Droid calling me out about forum-shopping that goes on between our federal and state courts. OK granted, in that situation, you have "pick and choose," but even then, you're often talking about concurrent jurisdiction, and it all sort of comes down to who gets to the courthouse first.

My impression about what they were proposing in England was, you can go by the national laws, or you can go by Islamic laws, and they are exclusive, not concurrent. Maybe I'm misreading that, correct me if I am.

[Sean Pa]

Luckily I still live in a country where, freedom of speech is still accepted, now you may have to face some critism for ones musings but never the less, allowed to express thought we are.


nothing has been proposed, but because of the mans stature within the church its deemed newswothy

<font color="#0000FF"><font size="1">[ February 09, 2008 07:23 AM: Message edited by: Sean Pa ]</font></font>
One mans thoughts, nothing more

<font color="#0000FF" size="1">[ February 09, 2008 07:25 AM: Message edited by: Sean Pa ]</font>