FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Sharia courts
Sharia courts
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 see how far it get 
Just my opinion though  | |||
 | |||
" If anyone wants to live under sharia law they can fuck off to any number of countries that use it but there is no place for it in the UK. "Enough said.  | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"would these be the same as the jewish courts that mediate for those of thier religion ? ah but they dont have brown skin and the dailyhiel/expresss whipping up hatred " . I don't discriminate....I hate all religions equally and they should have no bearing on a secular society, they should be considered nothing more than a hobby like fishing and if fishing people wish to get together and arbitrate outcomes based on ye oldy fishing tale I'm against that idea as well... Just in case any fishing folk have plans.... I'm onto you | |||
"would these be the same as the jewish courts that mediate for those of thier religion ? ah but they dont have brown skin and the dailyhiel/expresss whipping up hatred " Yes, they are exactly like that, Orthodox Jews have run arbitration courts in the UK since the 1920's, as with the Muslim courts they deal mainly with marital and business disputes. But neither has any place in mdern Britain, nor does the Church of England marital arbitration service that has all but fizzled out in modern times, but once handled many thousands of marital disputes and was a forerunner to the Relate organisation. | |||
| |||
 | |||
"would these be the same as the jewish courts that mediate for those of thier religion ? ah but they dont have brown skin and the dailyhiel/expresss whipping up hatred Yes, they are exactly like that, Orthodox Jews have run arbitration courts in the UK since the 1920's, as with the Muslim courts they deal mainly with marital and business disputes. But neither has any place in mdern Britain, nor does the Church of England marital arbitration service that has all but fizzled out in modern times, but once handled many thousands of marital disputes and was a forerunner to the Relate organisation. " this.. any structure or grouping will and often does have its own internal system for dealing with issue's within that group.. even your local golf club will have a committee for dealing with such.. the law of this land is rightly that which is set down in statute and that's the only 'law' that applies to the populace regardless of colour, culture or religion.. | |||
"would these be the same as the jewish courts that mediate for those of thier religion ? ah but they dont have brown skin and the dailyhiel/expresss whipping up hatred Yes, they are exactly like that, Orthodox Jews have run arbitration courts in the UK since the 1920's, as with the Muslim courts they deal mainly with marital and business disputes. But neither has any place in mdern Britain, nor does the Church of England marital arbitration service that has all but fizzled out in modern times, but once handled many thousands of marital disputes and was a forerunner to the Relate organisation. " My mum's side a jews and you are kinda misrepresenting Mosaic Law in the West. Jews have lived in Europe for a long long time and have obeyed the laws. Islam is different; It's a totally political system. Barefoot Jews are also a minority even amongst Jews. Whereas if you are a religious Muslim, you MUST aspire to the Shariah. There is no Reform lslam, unlike Judaism | |||
| |||
"Are they justifiable as a form of religious mediation or are they a step to far in multi culturalism. . Personally I'm not the biggest fan of religions and for me there the latter where the UK government needs to intervene and at the very regulate to make sure they run in convergence with UK values." Firstly, I'm not in favour of Sharia law, on any law based solely on the beliefs of one section of the community. However let's not make judgments on something before we actually know the facts. There are no Sharia Courts in the United Kingdon. There are Sharia Councils only. These councils have no legal authority in the UK and no rulings they make have any legal bases in UK law. That being said, anyone and everyone in this country has the right to free Association and to submit themselves, within the law, to the authority, rules and laws of that association. It is on this bases that some Muslims put forward grievances they have which other to these Sharia Councils. We could no more stop them from doing that than we could stop a cricket or golf club making rulings on matters or disputes brought forward by members of those associations. Finally, if any person in any association believes they have been treated unfairly, not in accordance with the rules of the association or contra to the laws of the land, they have the right to take both the matter in hand and/or the association before the courts of the land. | |||
"would these be the same as the jewish courts that mediate for those of thier religion ? ah but they dont have brown skin and the dailyhiel/expresss whipping up hatred Yes, they are exactly like that, Orthodox Jews have run arbitration courts in the UK since the 1920's, as with the Muslim courts they deal mainly with marital and business disputes. But neither has any place in mdern Britain, nor does the Church of England marital arbitration service that has all but fizzled out in modern times, but once handled many thousands of marital disputes and was a forerunner to the Relate organisation. " However Britain is and remains a Christian country. I can see no harm in a marital arbitration service run by the Church of England. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Are they justifiable as a form of religious mediation or are they a step to far in multi culturalism. . Personally I'm not the biggest fan of religions and for me there the latter where the UK government needs to intervene and at the very regulate to make sure they run in convergence with UK values. Firstly, I'm not in favour of Sharia law, on any law based solely on the beliefs of one section of the community. However let's not make judgments on something before we actually know the facts. There are no Sharia Courts in the United Kingdon. There are Sharia Councils only. These councils have no legal authority in the UK and no rulings they make have any legal bases in UK law. That being said, anyone and everyone in this country has the right to free Association and to submit themselves, within the law, to the authority, rules and laws of that association. It is on this bases that some Muslims put forward grievances they have which other to these Sharia Councils. We could no more stop them from doing that than we could stop a cricket or golf club making rulings on matters or disputes brought forward by members of those associations. Finally, if any person in any association believes they have been treated unfairly, not in accordance with the rules of the association or contra to the laws of the land, they have the right to take both the matter in hand and/or the association before the courts of the land." . That's not quite right a golf club or cricket club would require to show a genuine selection process for membership and specifically to fall under the single characteristic association. On that basis how do you see a sharia "council" showing a genuine selection process and also this would in effect move them out of religious status and on to association status(that might be tricky on the tax issue). . . Apart from that, what does it say for integration when you in effect come here but don't really fancy the laws of the land and would prefer to use your own via the back door?.......a bit like a UK citizen making home brew in Saudi Arabia | |||
| |||
"would these be the same as the jewish courts that mediate for those of thier religion ? ah but they dont have brown skin and the dailyhiel/expresss whipping up hatred Yes, they are exactly like that, Orthodox Jews have run arbitration courts in the UK since the 1920's, as with the Muslim courts they deal mainly with marital and business disputes. But neither has any place in mdern Britain, nor does the Church of England marital arbitration service that has all but fizzled out in modern times, but once handled many thousands of marital disputes and was a forerunner to the Relate organisation. However Britain is and remains a Christian country. I can see no harm in a marital arbitration service run by the Church of England. " As Church of England attendance numbers plunged in the 1970's so did their marital arbritration service attendees, because of this the church themselves took steps to refer marital disagreements to Relate. They rightly thought that it was the best move to keep families together if at all possible, in the best interests of any children involved. | |||
"would these be the same as the jewish courts that mediate for those of thier religion ? ah but they dont have brown skin and the dailyhiel/expresss whipping up hatred Yes, they are exactly like that, Orthodox Jews have run arbitration courts in the UK since the 1920's, as with the Muslim courts they deal mainly with marital and business disputes. But neither has any place in mdern Britain, nor does the Church of England marital arbitration service that has all but fizzled out in modern times, but once handled many thousands of marital disputes and was a forerunner to the Relate organisation. My mum's side a jews and you are kinda misrepresenting Mosaic Law in the West. Jews have lived in Europe for a long long time and have obeyed the laws. Islam is different; It's a totally political system. Barefoot Jews are also a minority even amongst Jews. Whereas if you are a religious Muslim, you MUST aspire to the Shariah. There is no Reform lslam, unlike Judaism" The Orthodox Jewish faith in the UK still to this day has Arbitration Councils that settle marital and many small business disputes, very much like Sharia Councils.....neither fits in with a modern British society.....so that's not misrepresenting anything, it's a fact. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I have no problem with any organisation setting up arbitration councils or courts provided it is with the understanding that they have no legal authority. I have serious issues when any such organisation demands legal authority from the state. As I understand it the demand being made by the Muslim Council is that in areas where Muslims make up the largest demographic sharia law should take precedence over English law, this I find very disturbing. Further I find it highly offensive that our parliament would even consider this in any form or even discuss the issue. " I have had a look to see if the Muslim Council of Britain do want sharia councils to become courts, but couldn't find any evidence of this, do you think you could give us a link? I did find this statement though relating to the investigation: 'We should not discount the positive role played by the religious institutions and processes of all faiths, be that Sharia arbitration panels, or the Jewish Beth Din process. They are a voluntary method of alternative dispute resolution that can and should operate well within the boundaries set by UK law. Those who use these institutions do so out of free will. Where there are concerns of discrimination and illegality, these should be dealt with under the full force of the law. If required, Sharia councils or panels should be given support to build capacity, thereby allowing them to offer a service to resolve disputes referred to them by parties in a manner that accords with other similar institutions. Whilst we have no issue with the government investigating Sharia councils, we do wonder why Muslim institutions are being singled out for scrutiny only. There needs to be firm evidence to justify the focus on one particular faith group for investigation. Thus far, there has been much heat but little light shed on Sharia councils, much of it generated through rumours or one-off incidents promoted by ideologically-driven and misinformed journalists or politicians. In today’s society, we do not believe that broad-brushed accusations targeting a specific community without the relevant evidence, bodes well in our common goal of a more cohesive society’. | |||
"As has been said, its NOT law, is a form of dispute resolution. If you think it is law, then take this opportunity to educate yourself on the matter from a source more reliable than a swingers forum. There are multiple resolution and mediation services that are used rather than courts. These can take the form of ombudsmen (of which we have many), complaints commissions (police & press for example), internal organisational procedures like cricket clubs & political parties etc. Has a anyone here been forced to use such a council and feel that they were somehow mistreated by the process? " . Sharia is the law dictated by Allah and those who directly spoke to or had command from Mohammed... It's not a fucking tribunal dispute it's the very essence of theocracy over democracy, those who wish to follow theocracy over UK democracy need to either go somewhere else to live or give up on sharia, it's nothing like cricket clubs or the police ombudsman, all those things change practices and rules by democratic will or public evolution ie golf clubs and female membership.... There will be no change in sharia due to public disliking.... Jesus Christ man have a look what's going on in the middle East, it's the very essence of a fight over sharia against secularism, there's a very large section of the Muslim world who don't want sharia but are afraid to speak out, for all the media focus on right wing nuts killing left wing mps maybe you missed the right wing nut Muslim who silenced the moderate Muslim newsagent?.... The Muslim community is bound by a common belonging but the moderates are out there..... We just need to give them a little help to be free | |||
| |||
"would these be the same as the jewish courts that mediate for those of thier religion ? ah but they dont have brown skin and the dailyhiel/expresss whipping up hatred Yes, they are exactly like that, Orthodox Jews have run arbitration courts in the UK since the 1920's, as with the Muslim courts they deal mainly with marital and business disputes. But neither has any place in mdern Britain, nor does the Church of England marital arbitration service that has all but fizzled out in modern times, but once handled many thousands of marital disputes and was a forerunner to the Relate organisation. My mum's side a jews and you are kinda misrepresenting Mosaic Law in the West. Jews have lived in Europe for a long long time and have obeyed the laws. Islam is different; It's a totally political system. Barefoot Jews are also a minority even amongst Jews. Whereas if you are a religious Muslim, you MUST aspire to the Shariah. There is no Reform lslam, unlike Judaism The Orthodox Jewish faith in the UK still to this day has Arbitration Councils that settle marital and many small business disputes, very much like Sharia Councils.....neither fits in with a modern British society.....so that's not misrepresenting anything, it's a fact." You are misrepresenting. Look at the numbers of haredi courts and how many would use them. Jews have a FAR FAR better history of integration that Muslims. I am living example. | |||
"As has been said, its NOT law, is a form of dispute resolution. If you think it is law, then take this opportunity to educate yourself on the matter from a source more reliable than a swingers forum. There are multiple resolution and mediation services that are used rather than courts. These can take the form of ombudsmen (of which we have many), complaints commissions (police & press for example), internal organisational procedures like cricket clubs & political parties etc. Has a anyone here been forced to use such a council and feel that they were somehow mistreated by the process? . Sharia is the law dictated by Allah and those who directly spoke to or had command from Mohammed... It's not a fucking tribunal dispute it's the very essence of theocracy over democracy, those who wish to follow theocracy over UK democracy need to either go somewhere else to live or give up on sharia, it's nothing like cricket clubs or the police ombudsman, all those things change practices and rules by democratic will or public evolution ie golf clubs and female membership.... There will be no change in sharia due to public disliking.... Jesus Christ man have a look what's going on in the middle East, it's the very essence of a fight over sharia against secularism, there's a very large section of the Muslim world who don't want sharia but are afraid to speak out, for all the media focus on right wing nuts killing left wing mps maybe you missed the right wing nut Muslim who silenced the moderate Muslim newsagent?.... The Muslim community is bound by a common belonging but the moderates are out there..... We just need to give them a little help to be free" But none of it is law, there is only one law and that is the same law that applies to the whole nation. | |||
" You are misrepresenting. Look at the numbers of haredi courts and how many would use them. Jews have a FAR FAR better history of integration that Muslims. I am living example." You know that sounds an awful lot like "my religion is better than your religion", right? | |||
| |||
" You are misrepresenting. Look at the numbers of haredi courts and how many would use them. Jews have a FAR FAR better history of integration that Muslims. I am living example. You know that sounds an awful lot like "my religion is better than your religion", right? " How is a court system to do with religion? By saying this you are admitting that Shariah is indeed political and a law. I do think Judaism is better than lslam. Mohammed just copied and pasted Jewish and Christian beliefs and added some pagan stuff too. | |||
| |||
" You are misrepresenting. Look at the numbers of haredi courts and how many would use them. Jews have a FAR FAR better history of integration that Muslims. I am living example. You know that sounds an awful lot like "my religion is better than your religion", right? How is a court system to do with religion? By saying this you are admitting that Shariah is indeed political and a law. I do think Judaism is better than lslam. Mohammed just copied and pasted Jewish and Christian beliefs and added some pagan stuff too. " Where did I say that?   | |||
"Personally I don't think any religious institution should have any form of it's own law courts - even if they are restricted by the government, in a Western Society. This extends to Christian, Jews, Sikhs, Muslims ect. I take the same stance to schools and education too." So you are happy with the current situation then, as they are not courts. | |||
"I have no problem with any organisation setting up arbitration councils or courts provided it is with the understanding that they have no legal authority. I have serious issues when any such organisation demands legal authority from the state. As I understand it the demand being made by the Muslim Council is that in areas where Muslims make up the largest demographic sharia law should take precedence over English law, this I find very disturbing. Further I find it highly offensive that our parliament would even consider this in any form or even discuss the issue. I have had a look to see if the Muslim Council of Britain do want sharia councils to become courts, but couldn't find any evidence of this, do you think you could give us a link? I did find this statement though relating to the investigation: 'We should not discount the positive role played by the religious institutions and processes of all faiths, be that Sharia arbitration panels, or the Jewish Beth Din process. They are a voluntary method of alternative dispute resolution that can and should operate well within the boundaries set by UK law. Those who use these institutions do so out of free will. Where there are concerns of discrimination and illegality, these should be dealt with under the full force of the law. If required, Sharia councils or panels should be given support to build capacity, thereby allowing them to offer a service to resolve disputes referred to them by parties in a manner that accords with other similar institutions. Whilst we have no issue with the government investigating Sharia councils, we do wonder why Muslim institutions are being singled out for scrutiny only. There needs to be firm evidence to justify the focus on one particular faith group for investigation. Thus far, there has been much heat but little light shed on Sharia councils, much of it generated through rumours or one-off incidents promoted by ideologically-driven and misinformed journalists or politicians. In today’s society, we do not believe that broad-brushed accusations targeting a specific community without the relevant evidence, bodes well in our common goal of a more cohesive society’." and also pretty much inline with what I said right back near start of the thread.
Whilst most, if not all, would agree that radical Islam is a danger that we all must confront, these claims about Sharia and Sharia Courts having any legal authority in this country are, at best, based on ignorance of both Islam and UK law or, at worst, another seditious attempt by those who want to spread division, mistrust and fear amongst the peoples and nations of this country, to create feelings of paranoia, hatred and loathing of any that don't fall into their perceived view of what being British is.
| |||
"I have no problem with any organisation setting up arbitration councils or courts provided it is with the understanding that they have no legal authority. I have serious issues when any such organisation demands legal authority from the state. As I understand it the demand being made by the Muslim Council is that in areas where Muslims make up the largest demographic sharia law should take precedence over English law, this I find very disturbing. Further I find it highly offensive that our parliament would even consider this in any form or even discuss the issue. I have had a look to see if the Muslim Council of Britain do want sharia councils to become courts, but couldn't find any evidence of this, do you think you could give us a link? I did find this statement though relating to the investigation: 'We should not discount the positive role played by the religious institutions and processes of all faiths, be that Sharia arbitration panels, or the Jewish Beth Din process. They are a voluntary method of alternative dispute resolution that can and should operate well within the boundaries set by UK law. Those who use these institutions do so out of free will. Where there are concerns of discrimination and illegality, these should be dealt with under the full force of the law. If required, Sharia councils or panels should be given support to build capacity, thereby allowing them to offer a service to resolve disputes referred to them by parties in a manner that accords with other similar institutions. Whilst we have no issue with the government investigating Sharia councils, we do wonder why Muslim institutions are being singled out for scrutiny only. There needs to be firm evidence to justify the focus on one particular faith group for investigation. Thus far, there has been much heat but little light shed on Sharia councils, much of it generated through rumours or one-off incidents promoted by ideologically-driven and misinformed journalists or politicians. In today’s society, we do not believe that broad-brushed accusations targeting a specific community without the relevant evidence, bodes well in our common goal of a more cohesive society’. and also pretty much inline with what I said right back near start of the thread.
Whilst most, if not all, would agree that radical Islam is a danger that we all must confront, these claims about Sharia and Sharia Courts having any legal authority in this country are, at best, based on ignorance of both Islam and UK law or, at worst, another seditious attempt by those who want to spread division, mistrust and fear amongst the peoples and nations of this country, to create feelings of paranoia, hatred and loathing of any that don't fall into their perceived view of what being British is.
"lt's not radical lslam: lt's just lslam. People like lsis are living closer to the way Mohammed did. | |||
"I have no problem with any organisation setting up arbitration councils or courts provided it is with the understanding that they have no legal authority. I have serious issues when any such organisation demands legal authority from the state. As I understand it the demand being made by the Muslim Council is that in areas where Muslims make up the largest demographic sharia law should take precedence over English law, this I find very disturbing. Further I find it highly offensive that our parliament would even consider this in any form or even discuss the issue. I have had a look to see if the Muslim Council of Britain do want sharia councils to become courts, but couldn't find any evidence of this, do you think you could give us a link? I did find this statement though relating to the investigation: 'We should not discount the positive role played by the religious institutions and processes of all faiths, be that Sharia arbitration panels, or the Jewish Beth Din process. They are a voluntary method of alternative dispute resolution that can and should operate well within the boundaries set by UK law. Those who use these institutions do so out of free will. Where there are concerns of discrimination and illegality, these should be dealt with under the full force of the law. If required, Sharia councils or panels should be given support to build capacity, thereby allowing them to offer a service to resolve disputes referred to them by parties in a manner that accords with other similar institutions. Whilst we have no issue with the government investigating Sharia councils, we do wonder why Muslim institutions are being singled out for scrutiny only. There needs to be firm evidence to justify the focus on one particular faith group for investigation. Thus far, there has been much heat but little light shed on Sharia councils, much of it generated through rumours or one-off incidents promoted by ideologically-driven and misinformed journalists or politicians. In today’s society, we do not believe that broad-brushed accusations targeting a specific community without the relevant evidence, bodes well in our common goal of a more cohesive society’. and also pretty much inline with what I said right back near start of the thread.
Whilst most, if not all, would agree that radical Islam is a danger that we all must confront, these claims about Sharia and Sharia Courts having any legal authority in this country are, at best, based on ignorance of both Islam and UK law or, at worst, another seditious attempt by those who want to spread division, mistrust and fear amongst the peoples and nations of this country, to create feelings of paranoia, hatred and loathing of any that don't fall into their perceived view of what being British is.
". Nobody said it did have power of authority, although to many Muslims is does, that's why they exist?. The real question is how much legal authority they want, I mean polls indicate the majority of Muslims feel homosexuality should carry a prison sentence, that's not radical Islam, that's mainstream, most feel drawing cartoons of the prophet and blasphemy should carry a prison sentence, over 20% think salman Rushdie should be executed!. Radicals don't get anywhere without some mainstream backing for their theology as a product of n Ireland I can guarantee you that bit! | |||
"I have no problem with any organisation setting up arbitration councils or courts provided it is with the understanding that they have no legal authority. I have serious issues when any such organisation demands legal authority from the state. As I understand it the demand being made by the Muslim Council is that in areas where Muslims make up the largest demographic sharia law should take precedence over English law, this I find very disturbing. Further I find it highly offensive that our parliament would even consider this in any form or even discuss the issue. I have had a look to see if the Muslim Council of Britain do want sharia councils to become courts, but couldn't find any evidence of this, do you think you could give us a link? I did find this statement though relating to the investigation: 'We should not discount the positive role played by the religious institutions and processes of all faiths, be that Sharia arbitration panels, or the Jewish Beth Din process. They are a voluntary method of alternative dispute resolution that can and should operate well within the boundaries set by UK law. Those who use these institutions do so out of free will. Where there are concerns of discrimination and illegality, these should be dealt with under the full force of the law. If required, Sharia councils or panels should be given support to build capacity, thereby allowing them to offer a service to resolve disputes referred to them by parties in a manner that accords with other similar institutions. Whilst we have no issue with the government investigating Sharia councils, we do wonder why Muslim institutions are being singled out for scrutiny only. There needs to be firm evidence to justify the focus on one particular faith group for investigation. Thus far, there has been much heat but little light shed on Sharia councils, much of it generated through rumours or one-off incidents promoted by ideologically-driven and misinformed journalists or politicians. In today’s society, we do not believe that broad-brushed accusations targeting a specific community without the relevant evidence, bodes well in our common goal of a more cohesive society’. and also pretty much inline with what I said right back near start of the thread.
Whilst most, if not all, would agree that radical Islam is a danger that we all must confront, these claims about Sharia and Sharia Courts having any legal authority in this country are, at best, based on ignorance of both Islam and UK law or, at worst, another seditious attempt by those who want to spread division, mistrust and fear amongst the peoples and nations of this country, to create feelings of paranoia, hatred and loathing of any that don't fall into their perceived view of what being British is.
.
Nobody said it did have power of authority, although to many Muslims is does, that's why they exist?.
The real question is how much legal authority they want, I mean polls indicate the majority of Muslims feel homosexuality should carry a prison sentence, that's not radical Islam, that's mainstream, most feel drawing cartoons of the prophet and blasphemy should carry a prison sentence, over 20% think salman Rushdie should be executed!.
Radicals don't get anywhere without some mainstream backing for their theology as a product of n Ireland I can guarantee you that bit!"And UKIP want the death penalty, we have the law and there is one way to change that which is through parliament. | |||
"I have no problem with any organisation setting up arbitration councils or courts provided it is with the understanding that they have no legal authority. I have serious issues when any such organisation demands legal authority from the state. As I understand it the demand being made by the Muslim Council is that in areas where Muslims make up the largest demographic sharia law should take precedence over English law, this I find very disturbing. Further I find it highly offensive that our parliament would even consider this in any form or even discuss the issue. I have had a look to see if the Muslim Council of Britain do want sharia councils to become courts, but couldn't find any evidence of this, do you think you could give us a link? I did find this statement though relating to the investigation: 'We should not discount the positive role played by the religious institutions and processes of all faiths, be that Sharia arbitration panels, or the Jewish Beth Din process. They are a voluntary method of alternative dispute resolution that can and should operate well within the boundaries set by UK law. Those who use these institutions do so out of free will. Where there are concerns of discrimination and illegality, these should be dealt with under the full force of the law. If required, Sharia councils or panels should be given support to build capacity, thereby allowing them to offer a service to resolve disputes referred to them by parties in a manner that accords with other similar institutions. Whilst we have no issue with the government investigating Sharia councils, we do wonder why Muslim institutions are being singled out for scrutiny only. There needs to be firm evidence to justify the focus on one particular faith group for investigation. Thus far, there has been much heat but little light shed on Sharia councils, much of it generated through rumours or one-off incidents promoted by ideologically-driven and misinformed journalists or politicians. In today’s society, we do not believe that broad-brushed accusations targeting a specific community without the relevant evidence, bodes well in our common goal of a more cohesive society’. and also pretty much inline with what I said right back near start of the thread.
Whilst most, if not all, would agree that radical Islam is a danger that we all must confront, these claims about Sharia and Sharia Courts having any legal authority in this country are, at best, based on ignorance of both Islam and UK law or, at worst, another seditious attempt by those who want to spread division, mistrust and fear amongst the peoples and nations of this country, to create feelings of paranoia, hatred and loathing of any that don't fall into their perceived view of what being British is.
.
Nobody said it did have power of authority, although to many Muslims is does, that's why they exist?.
The real question is how much legal authority they want, I mean polls indicate the majority of Muslims feel homosexuality should carry a prison sentence, that's not radical Islam, that's mainstream, most feel drawing cartoons of the prophet and blasphemy should carry a prison sentence, over 20% think salman Rushdie should be executed!.
Radicals don't get anywhere without some mainstream backing for their theology as a product of n Ireland I can guarantee you that bit!"It's not just Muslims that think homosexuals and blasphemes should be locked up. Try visiting some Christian fundamentalist sited if you don't believe me. Fortunately we're protected from most of these extreme views by the law, which applies equally to all. That law also gives all and any, including Muslims, the right to free association and the right, within the law, to settle disputes using any arbitration they choose as long as all parties to the matter agree. If that happens to be a Sharia Council, that's their right and choice. It's nothing to do with anyone else. | |||
"Are they justifiable as a form of religious mediation or are they a step to far in multi culturalism. . Personally I'm not the biggest fan of religions and for me there the latter where the UK government needs to intervene and at the very regulate to make sure they run in convergence with UK values." Islamophobia is flavour of the month at the moment and so irrational fears of ISIS terrorists being in our midst, Muslim child groomers lurking on every street corners and Sharia Law taking over the country are being stoked by certain media sources. The truth is that community Sharia Law courts have existed for years in the U.K. and they enable communities to resolve small civil matters. These things are only now being highlighted because of the fears that we are all being subjected to byca media that seems to enjoy frightening people. | |||
"I have no problem with any organisation setting up arbitration councils or courts provided it is with the understanding that they have no legal authority. I have serious issues when any such organisation demands legal authority from the state. As I understand it the demand being made by the Muslim Council is that in areas where Muslims make up the largest demographic sharia law should take precedence over English law, this I find very disturbing. Further I find it highly offensive that our parliament would even consider this in any form or even discuss the issue. I have had a look to see if the Muslim Council of Britain do want sharia councils to become courts, but couldn't find any evidence of this, do you think you could give us a link? I did find this statement though relating to the investigation: 'We should not discount the positive role played by the religious institutions and processes of all faiths, be that Sharia arbitration panels, or the Jewish Beth Din process. They are a voluntary method of alternative dispute resolution that can and should operate well within the boundaries set by UK law. Those who use these institutions do so out of free will. Where there are concerns of discrimination and illegality, these should be dealt with under the full force of the law. If required, Sharia councils or panels should be given support to build capacity, thereby allowing them to offer a service to resolve disputes referred to them by parties in a manner that accords with other similar institutions. Whilst we have no issue with the government investigating Sharia councils, we do wonder why Muslim institutions are being singled out for scrutiny only. There needs to be firm evidence to justify the focus on one particular faith group for investigation. Thus far, there has been much heat but little light shed on Sharia councils, much of it generated through rumours or one-off incidents promoted by ideologically-driven and misinformed journalists or politicians. In today’s society, we do not believe that broad-brushed accusations targeting a specific community without the relevant evidence, bodes well in our common goal of a more cohesive society’. and also pretty much inline with what I said right back near start of the thread.
Whilst most, if not all, would agree that radical Islam is a danger that we all must confront, these claims about Sharia and Sharia Courts having any legal authority in this country are, at best, based on ignorance of both Islam and UK law or, at worst, another seditious attempt by those who want to spread division, mistrust and fear amongst the peoples and nations of this country, to create feelings of paranoia, hatred and loathing of any that don't fall into their perceived view of what being British is.
.
Nobody said it did have power of authority, although to many Muslims is does, that's why they exist?.
The real question is how much legal authority they want, I mean polls indicate the majority of Muslims feel homosexuality should carry a prison sentence, that's not radical Islam, that's mainstream, most feel drawing cartoons of the prophet and blasphemy should carry a prison sentence, over 20% think salman Rushdie should be executed!.
Radicals don't get anywhere without some mainstream backing for their theology as a product of n Ireland I can guarantee you that bit!
It's not just Muslims that think homosexuals and blasphemes should be locked up. Try visiting some Christian fundamentalist sited if you don't believe me. Fortunately we're protected from most of these extreme views by the law, which applies equally to all. That law also gives all and any, including Muslims, the right to free association and the right, within the law, to settle disputes using any arbitration they choose as long as all parties to the matter agree. If that happens to be a Sharia Council, that's their right and choice. It's nothing to do with anyone else.". Firstly I didn't say Islam or only Muslims held those views, I said there the only ones That the view is held by the mainstream majority, radical Christians of course do but the radical Christians are not majority!. The council itself admits it gives advice on sharia for ALL of life's ills, all. It doesn't matter what your problem is, divorce, child access, business, mental health.... The sharia has the answer!!. Now make your mind up, if it's an arbitration court it has legal binding powers, if it isn't it doesn't. It's all very well for you to say ahh sharia councils what they do is upto them but let's face some facts female Muslims, gay Muslims, trans Muslims will not be treated with equal value by the courts therefore they will not be subject to the same laws as everybody else and if you've been a good Muslim all your life and been told to live by sharia to continue to be good you'll put with this bullshit!. . . As for there's no difference between Jewish and Christian law courts, well there's a massive difference, look around the world today you can see the battle being drawn, some Muslims wish to live with a much less "hardcore" Islam and some want to make it more hardcore..... Sharia is by and large the hardcore version, personally speaking I wish to help the less fundermental Muslims lead less fundermental Islamic lives with more western influence, I'm not ashamed to say its called assimilation and it may require us as a society to look more careful at the Islamic world, but if the Jewish world suddenly starts tearing itself apart with a reformation then I'd be more than willing to do the same for Jewish courts | |||
| |||
