Dr Williams wants some aspects of Sharia law with in the UK legal system.
- Thread starter alexb123
- Start date
Umm Jordan is an Islamic country. They have a sharia court.
Mu understanding is that the King has the last word and that the law is essentially the same as in most Western countries. Jordan looks to the West which makes sense if you look at where their rulers were educated. There may be some sharia influence but, if there is ,I cannot imaginre it would promote the equality of women.
Which should tell you just exactly what sharia is, ie whatever it is determined to be in any Islamic society by the ruler/government
I couldn't care less as long as it is confined to Muslim countries, where it belongs. Any attempt tyo introduce it into a country which has fought tooth and nail to rid itself of the shackles of superstition is an affront to our society.
Muslims decided to come here and have children here. That is not a problem as we are a tolerant society. But wanting to introduce an alien system of jurisprudence is an entirtely a different matter.
It doesn't matter what you think. You have the choice of fly by night imams abusing their privileges or a legal system open to scrutiny. The fact that Muslims in the UK are adopting the hijab while those in Jordan are shedding it should be an indication of which is better.
That all sounds fine and dandy but can you explain why the penalty for apostacy, the right to think for onself, is death. And how about adultery and homosexuality ?
Again, more adaptations from other cultures. Zina requires four witnesses which makes it practically unprosecutable except as solicitation.
Death for apsotacy is based on laws created under certain political regimes and has nothing to do with religion, homosexuality is from rejecting the Jewish interpretation of the story of Lot and adopting the Christian one. Also from Arabs being demonised as sodomites, which made them fall to the other end of the extreme.
edit:
Last edited:
A couple of nights ago I saw two Egyptian being in terviewed in a tv documentary, They had decided to become Christian , as a result of which they were subjected to all sorts of threats, including death. From what you say, this has nothing to do with religion. How do you explain the prevalence of such despicable behaviour in MUslim countries. The bottom line seems to be that Muslims are not Muslims wherever one finds them,
You'll probably find the same behaviour in any place where education is not a priority. Try going to redneck USA and becoming an atheist.
I’ll tell you what is barbaric: protecting murderers, terrorists, professional criminals, drug traffickers, paedophiles and punishing innocent people. The whole legal system favours the criminal, victims do not have a voice, the whole system ignores their fears and worries, I think that is pretty sick and barbaric. Seriously, this is probably the best time in history to be a criminal – this is the criminal’s paradise! Do you actually think criminals have any fear of the law here? I know people that have lived a life crime both here (the West) and in countries out of Europe, which do you think they prefer?
Yes, Shariah law means lots of different things to different people. There are those that immediately think of beheadings and floggings when Shariah law is mentioned, this is often just a prejudiced or misleading position held by those with very little understanding of Shariah law.
Yes, Shariah law is harsh against criminals and yes it can deliver harsh penalties to convicted criminals but I believe that is what is best for society.
Shariah law brought order, stability and peace to Afghanistan during the reign of the Taliban, compare Afghanistan during the time it was ‘controlled’ by warlords and to when the Taliban took over. The Islamic Courts in Somalia brought order and stability through the introduction of Shariah law. When you introduce Shariah law, the innocent are emboldened, murderers, thieves, gangsters, drug traffickers etc. pay attention, they know fear! That is what every society requires.
Sorry for veering off topic.
There are different opinions amongst scholars, however I cannot say who is right and wrong. Islam is not black and white, there could be many different scholars Worldwide with traditional scholarships however they could have slightly different opinions, views (individual differences) etc. there is nothing wrong with that, Islam embraces these differences.
That's beside the point. I think rednecks are uneducated disgusting people. I believe there are such types everywhere. Here in the UK we have racists who have their little parades, shouting about England for the English. Fortunately most people see them for what they are; ignorant bigots . Also, its an offence to incite others to racial hatred, so they have to be very circumspect or they find themselves in court.
None of that excuses what was happening in Egypt. I was very surprised as I regarded Egypt as leaning towards secularity because of womens' casual dress, nightclubs and so on.
I vote and that`s that. Looks like for the most part people agree with me.
A few Liberal acedemics visiting from Britian (these are the people who usually support this sort of thing) were talking openly about how enough is enough. Their assertion was that Muslims are becoming a problem group in society. Not Africans, not Chinese, not Indians, not Buddhists, not Wiccan, not New Age, not even Xians! just this "Muslim" group.
Watch for the backlash in Europe.
interracial ??? Muslim is not a race.
I don't, and I note that societies adopting this version of "best" seem to bear out my negative judgment.ghost said:
You make sharia law sound like the Mafia code.ghost said:
I thought the Russians brought better order to Afghanistan, and no less stability, than the Taliban.
Is it your contention that the Russians should have brought more fear ?
Yes but it cannot claim to be other than a series of rules or guidelines open to subjective interpretation. I have no quarrel with that as long as it is not referred to as law.
Its time like these that peoples ignorance shows its ugly face again. You do know that Sharia courts have been active, legally, in the UK for over 30 years right? You also know that law in the UK, where I am studying it, is not as clear cut as you want to paint it right? There are various degrees of interpretations on various cases and rulings handed out by variuos judges in the courts and House of Lords. Saying that Sharia does not stand in comparison because it is down to interpretation is very wrong. Rape was not defined in a marriage until the case of R v R in 91 iirc. And so there are many where the various interpretations of the judges presiding over the cases vary.
Shariah law as practiced in some instances in Saudiland is unislamic and is only given the cover of Shariah Law while it in fact just a brutal dictatorial regime oppressing any dissidents. Shariah Law is harsh on crime, hence the crime rate being low in countries practising it. Most people forget that the core of Sharia is the Quran. Anything against the Quranic teachings is automatically unislamic and not allowed in Sharia. But then again, torture is illegal according to US law and guess what happens to "terrorist suspects"
Shariah law as practiced in some instances in Saudiland is unislamic and is only given the cover of Shariah Law while it in fact just a brutal dictatorial regime oppressing any dissidents. Shariah Law is harsh on crime, hence the crime rate being low in countries practising it. Most people forget that the core of Sharia is the Quran. Anything against the Quranic teachings is automatically unislamic and not allowed in Sharia. But then again, torture is illegal according to US law and guess what happens to "terrorist suspects"