But isn't the question under the state RFRA what the individual plaintiff sincerely believes, not what sharia (or the talmud, or the Bible, or the Pope) says?
Art Spitzer In a message dated 11/10/10 3:55:31 PM, ste...@ajc.org writes: > Oklahoma has enacted a state RFRA. The new constitutional provision would > seem to forbid Muslims –and Muslims only- from invoking that law in a case > involving sharia law, i.e., any claim of religious liberty advanced by a > Muslim. (it would also bar, I assume, any claim in the Oklahoma courts by a > Muslim inmate under RLUIPA).Why is not the rendering of Muslims outlaws > with regard to religious liberty sufficient harm to create standing? >
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
