Sharia Law taking precedence in the UK? Fact or Fiction.

[davepoth]

ChiChoAndy said:

But that is my point. Would a woman, who is in an oppressive 'strict Sharia' home, would she have the say that would mean it wouldn't count? Are they even heard, and do the Sharia or Hadith notions about women come into play? What is a concern is that these courts have say over domestic violence.

Her option is to leave her home and family. Not much of an option, is it?

[Muntu]

carmonk said:

Muntu said:

Eric Mc said:

Fiction.

Next question.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece

I remember reading that a while ago. Primarily these courts are ways by which UK equality laws can be circumvented and the Islamic oppression of women upheld. They also emphasise that Muslims should not be bound by godless law of the kuffar.

No doubt the mujahideen brothers will be along shortly to tell you different

[carmonk]

Muntu said:

carmonk said:

Muntu said:

Eric Mc said:

Fiction.

Next question.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece

I remember reading that a while ago. Primarily these courts are ways by which UK equality laws can be circumvented and the Islamic oppression of women upheld. They also emphasise that Muslims should not be bound by godless law of the kuffar.

No doubt the mujahideen brothers will be along shortly to tell you different

I'll just get told I'm wrong and probably nothing more than that (aside from maybe an insult and a couple of assumptions). I wonder if there is anybody here in favour of sharia courts who has the big bearded balls to speak out...

[Countdown]

My understanding is tha this is the doing of Anjem Chaudry and his band of merry men. They have put up posters banning

Alcohol
Drugs
Pornography
Prostitution
Musicals

within the so-called "Sharia zones". This is the same Anjem Chaudry who enjoyed

Alcohol
Drugs
Pornography

whilst at uni (allegedly)

Storm in a teacup I'd say.

[davepoth]

AIUI the internet may well be Haraam for the gentlemen with the really large beards you refer to.

[pacman1]

Tadite said:

Apache said:

But who makes those laws?

There will come a time when the majority of those in power will be of moslem faith, it's only a matter of time

That's impossible. Even that most dramatic projections (by people who aren't crazy) would suggest that Eu-27 by the end of the Century would at best be 20% muslim and only 8% by 2030.

So waddya make of this then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZlOIDWnnPA&fea...

[Mojooo]

People can opt to go to a sharia 'court' just like you can opt to go to arbitration before you go to court for various matters - both of them allow an agreement that does not necessarily have to be governed by UK legislation

therefore if people want to exercise that right - the issue of course is that some people may feel pressure to go to a sharia court over a normal civil court.

[ChiChoAndy]

Mojooo said:

People can opt to go to a sharia 'court' just like you can opt to go to arbitration before you go to court for various matters - both of them allow an agreement that does not necessarily have to be governed by UK legislation

therefore if people want to exercise that right - the issue of course is that some people may feel pressure to go to a sharia court over a normal civil court.

That was sort of the point I was making. How much will familial or community pressure bear on the person to go to the Sharia court, rather than the regular line of legal practice, especially considering how the female gender is considered in certain Sharia circles.

[Mojooo]

I think it sdifficult to give a blanket answer.

Its worth pointing out there is a Govt consultation out now that is basically saying they want more mediation before things go to the small claims court so I am going to take a guess and say they will be happy if these sharia courts take the load off the court system!

[ChiChoAndy]

http://womenagainstshariah.blogspot.com/2010/07/th...

[Tadite]

pacman1 said:

So waddya make of this then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZlOIDWnnPA&fea...

Propaganda. They use basic demographic definitions to attempt to look scientific but then have no real explanation of just how extreme they had to have made their long term projections.

[Babu 01]

carmonk said:

I remember reading that a while ago. Primarily these courts are ways by which UK equality laws can be circumvented and the Islamic oppression of women upheld. They also emphasise that Muslims should not be bound by godless law of the kuffar.

Perhaps you ought to broaden the scope of your reading matter?

May I suggest you start with this Spectator piece from the time of the Archbishop of Canterbury's intervention into the Sharia debate?

A few choice snippets for you:

The Spectator said:

Our survey shows British Muslims don’t want sharia

The Spectator said:

Iraqi Shia Ayatollah Ali Sistani, one of the world’s preeminent sharia authorities, teaches that, ‘If [a Muslim] has given [a non-Muslim government] a commitment — even if indirectly (as is implied in the immigration documents) — to abide by the laws of that country, it is necessary for him to fulfil his commitment.’ If they cannot do this, they should return to Muslim territory.

The Spectator said:

At the Madina Mosque in Bolton it was pointed out to us that tens of thousands of British Muslims practise as solicitors and barristers, and have no interest in surrendering their positions to sharia advocates. A parallel system of sharia law would be a disaster for the British Muslim community, producing legal chaos, according to the barrister Aseid Malik.

Spectator source

Edited by Babu 01 on Saturday 30th July 23:13

[ChiChoAndy]

I'm sure that is true. However, Sharia courts are here, and have been since 2008. Like the Jewish courts, I personally don't think they should be allowed. Have an agreement between 2 parties in a civil case by all means if they both agree, but religious people should not be passing judgements when the laws of the land are already 'set in stome' for want of a better phrase. The only reason they are here is so their own draconian religious laws can take precedence over UK law, where it will benefit them. Sharia is not to be trusted, and certainly not a great deal for women, if Saudi is anything to go by.

"UK sharia is nothing to do with Saudi!", I hear someone shout... That may be so, but my friend tells me otherwise, and he has a massive beard.

[AJS-]

As I understand it there are Sharia "courts" which can act as a first port of call to resolve a dispute but in no way is any of it legally binding.

However I did see the article about people actually declaring certain areas Sharia law zones, which is fking ridiculous, and must delight the EDL recruiters.

I would love to see the decent, non-EDF-baboon-like middle class get a bit more assertive about things like this though. How about a pork barbeque and a few beers in the middle of one of these areas?

[dudleybloke]

theres a huge sharia zone in the middle east if they're that bothered by it.

[ChiChoAndy]

AJS- said:

As I understand it there are Sharia "courts" which can act as a first port of call to resolve a dispute but in no way is any of it legally binding.

However I did see the article about people actually declaring certain areas Sharia law zones, which is fking ridiculous, and must delight the EDL recruiters.

I would love to see the decent, non-EDF-baboon-like middle class get a bit more assertive about things like this though. How about a pork barbeque and a few beers in the middle of one of these areas?

So when the EDL are concerned about it, they are baboons, but when the middle class get concerned they are what? Concerned citizens? It seems like the EDL say what many people think, but the perception of the EDL keeps folks from agreeing.

[Asterix]

When I get back, I'm going to open a cafe outside a mosque called 'Alan's Snack Bar' with special offers on bacon butties during Ramadan.

[AJS-]

ChiChoAndy said:

So when the EDL are concerned about it, they are baboons, but when the middle class get concerned they are what? Concerned citizens? It seems like the EDL say what many people think, but the perception of the EDL keeps folks from agreeing.

I'm not entirely unsympathetic to their message, but their presentation leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. They are an unashamedly "working class" organisation, which is fine, but unfortunately that seems to go with track suits and poor English, and their protests have all too frequently ended up in brawls.

FWIW I think the Islamic and "anti-fascist" nut jobs who turn out to protest against them are every bit as bad.

So in answer, yes. If someone who is educated, coherent and less abrasive said the same things in the right way I would be much more inclined to support them.

[Pints]

Mojooo said:

People can opt to go to a sharia 'court' just like you can opt to go to arbitration before you go to court for various matters - both of them allow an agreement that does not necessarily have to be governed by UK legislation

therefore if people want to exercise that right - the issue of course is that some people may feel pressure to go to a sharia court over a normal civil court.

But what if the court of sharia found person X guilty of farting in the presence of person Y, and that they shall be put to death by stoning. Surely UK Law would intervene because that would be in violation of country's laws.

This would mock the sharia ruling, and would the sharia court even acknowledge the intervention. And assuming they don't, who is held accountable should someone "justice" be meted out in this way. (Far fetched scenario, but you see my point.)

[ChiChoAndy]

How does Sharia law courts deal with womens testimony, etc? Are they equal?