Huh? Sharia Courts.... ?

wait a minute, did no one notice the line about the Jewish courts?

it means that there has been a parallel legal system for 100 years and no one seems to have complained? :confused:
 
Mohinder said:
Sounds fair enough to me. I don't see any reason why civil matters between Muslims shouldn't be dealt with by a Sharia court.
Click to expand...

Because sharia is an anachronistic and often vicious set of laws supposedly decided by God.

Encouraging this is a step against liberty, law should be decided on the basis of justice rather than religious edict.

This represents an attempt to regress, to abandon a section of society to its ignorance simply because it is perceived as too much effort to bring them from their delusion. It's disgusting that sharia should be censured by the state.
 
Dolph said:
Move along, nothing to see here.
Click to expand...

Indeed - nothing to see here, go back to bed, watch TV, do a crossword, pick the contents of your navel... our country is being changed before our eyes and its easier for the people in charge to do it if you convince yourself not to pay attention to it.

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist"

So here's a few more channels on TV, don't think about the political changes within your country. Or better yet, convince yourself to approve.
 
Last edited:
Dolph said:
It is a duplicate thread, and once again, fundamentally, it's a religious based mediation service, of which there's already several for other religions in the UK. It does not override UK law, it provides a means for alternative dispute resolution should both parties agree in civil cases.

Move along, nothing to see here.
Click to expand...



Thank you :)

You just said pretty much everything I was, and in a more concise manner:p

I hate these threads.
 
bandit said:
wait a minute, did no one notice the line about the Jewish courts?

it means that there has been a parallel legal system for 100 years and no one seems to have complained? :confused:
Click to expand...
You forgot that if anything contains muslim or islam, the content is instantly 'OMG/TERRIFIED/GENERALISE/SCREAM!' worthy.

Dolph summed it up perfectly . . nothing to see here, move along. You'll find its the same old bunch with worthless arguments :)
 
Werewolf said:
I hate these threads.
Click to expand...

It makes it harder to ignore if people are constantly bringing attention to change...

dark_shadow said:
Dolph summed it up perfectly . . nothing to see here, move along. You'll find its the same old bunch with worthless arguments :)
Click to expand...

It seems to me that those saying "there's nothing to see" are frightful of the reaction of others when they do pay attention.
 
Last edited:
Strife212 said:
You are just repeating the same stuff over and over instead of actually providing points to back up what you are saying...
Click to expand...

That's because I am not arguing against anything, I'm merely highlighting the fact that people here have convinced themselves to approve and are scared of the reactions of those who do not - they'd rather they didn't pay attention to it, because the problem is obvious to everyone - except those that don't want to admit it and are encouraging others to ignore it.
 
CBS does have a point - it has to be said that not all religious courts are the same as the Sharia ones. Aside from which the Muslim population is far higher (at least according to the government census information).

Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons.

The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts.

In the six cases of domestic violence, Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment.
Click to expand...

Perhaps this is also why there is concern amongst posters here? It looks from these reports that there is a gender bias in the system.
 
sr4470 said:
CBS does have a point - it has to be said that not all religious courts are the same as the Sharia ones. Aside from which the Muslim population is far higher (at least according to the government census information).



Perhaps this is also why there is concern amongst posters here? It looks from these reports that there is a gender bias in the system.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the system only works on mutual consent. If one party does not wish to go through the mediation process, standard british law applies.

It's effectively an arbitration process, nothing more, and subject to all the normal restrictions that are associated with it. I don't care if people want to be arbitrated by the cast of Rainbow if everyone agrees to abide by the decision given...
 
cleanbluesky said:
Because sharia is an anachronistic and often vicious set of laws supposedly decided by God.

Encouraging this is a step against liberty, law should be decided on the basis of justice rather than religious edict.

This represents an attempt to regress, to abandon a section of society to its ignorance simply because it is perceived as too much effort to bring them from their delusion. It's disgusting that sharia should be censured by the state.
Click to expand...

Is Judge Judy a step against liberty?
 
Dolph said:
Yes, but the system only works on mutual consent. If one party does not wish to go through the mediation process, standard british law applies.

It's effectively an arbitration process, nothing more, and subject to all the normal restrictions that are associated with it. I don't care if people want to be arbitrated by the cast of Rainbow if everyone agrees to abide by the decision given...
Click to expand...

I think he was saying that the system is biased and sexist, and basically women could be threatened/pressured into doing it through shariah courts.
 
yantorsen said:
I think he was saying that the system is biased and sexist, and basically women could be threatened/pressured into doing it through shariah courts.
Click to expand...

And all they have to do to prevent it is report it and the arbitration is void. We can only offer freedom from discrimination, we can't force people to take it.
 
Dolph said:
Yes, but the system only works on mutual consent. If one party does not wish to go through the mediation process, standard british law applies.
Click to expand...

I haven't disputed that at all. It is the results I was bringing up for the discussion. The integrity of the courts is in question.

Also, there have been Muslims here for at least a few decades, yet this supposed demand for Sharia courts only popped up recently. I'm pretty sure most Muslims were capable of respecting the laws of the UK (they're even obliged to, just as the rules for interest on money don't apply in non-Muslim countries).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom