British Government Takes Over Muslim School Whose Books Approve Of Men Raping Their Wives

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: EvillerBob

"Prior to R v R, there was a risk that the prosecution for rape would fail, so they looked for anything else that could fit."

That's the very definition of a plea bargain i'm afraid.

No it isn't.

The prosecutor should not be pursuing an indictment if they feel that there was no prospect of success. Prosecutors are also expressly forbidden from loading on the counts, or including more serious counts, simply in order to force a guilty plea to lesser offences.

"Plea bargaining" ostensibly doesn't happen in the UK system. Realistically, and as a matter of pragmatism, situations may arise that look similar. This was not one of those situations.

In any event, without looking at the specifics of the original case, it's entirely possible to include alternative counts. In other words, they could have prosecuted for rape or, if rape was not found, for the lesser offence of assault.

a reply to: EvillerBob

Prosecutors, P.F or there English equivalency take what they can get.

The specifics are really nether here nor there, it's all about presidents and statistics, no matter the crime.

End of the day these people take what they can get to get so as to enter people into the system and get them off the streets should the be perceived to be a threat to the public.

Right or on many an occasion wrong, "They" work with what they have or perceive to be persuadable in a court of law sometimes to the deprament of justice, sometimes to the benefit of the public.

Such is the way of life.

a reply to: AMPTAH
the problem is that sometimes, there are valid reasons to refuse.
and, I am not talking about hurt feelings ect...
real valid medical reasons.
ya, the bible says for men to love their husbands, but no man has love to perfection, and some have some really perverted concepts of what love is... and as far as I can see, it seems that the bible doesn't seem to care really, doesn't matter, wives are still supposed to obey and submit. seems to me that the one thing that separates chrisitanity and islam is that christianity has accepted to be separate from civic rules which is something that it seems that some christians might be hoping to change..

originally posted by: growlerps the bible endorses the beating and rape of women

That's completely false. There are some passages that one may not understand in the context it was written. Deuteronomy and Numbers both have a few confusing bits if one doesn't study the bible and the culture of it's day. Like "an eye for an eye." It doesn't mean if someone hurts you, then hurt them back. It means, if some from another village kills a girl from yours don't take revenge by slaughtering everyone in theirs. Limit oneself to a just punishment. Of course, even that was under the old covenant.

Even if Islam teaches what is claimed, the government should only get involved by disallowing religious based schools in their public schools. Make them create their own private schools and fight the ideology elsewhere.

originally posted by: JanAmosComenius
a reply to: AMPTAH

The question then is: Was the virgin consenting?

The bible views "virgin consent" the same way we view "underage sex consent" today.

It doesn't matter, whether the virgin consented or not. They "can't consent" to have sex with anyone but their husbands.

That's the law. Just like a minor can't consent to have sex with an adult in our times.

The courts wouldn't recognize the minor consent as "valid". Neither did the antient civilizations recognise the virgin consent as valid. The man must have co-erced her into sex. Because nobody wanted to marry a woman who was not still a virgin, in those times. So, she would lose something "valuable" by consenting. Therefore, must not have been in her right mind. And the man took advantage of that..etc..

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
I think you'll find it is the quran that promotes the beating and raping of women.

The quran.

I'm also sure that ALL MUSLIMS follow the quran.

Pretty sure that 100% of islamic schools teach islam, this should come as no surprise.

I also love how they say it was a state-funded school which has now been taken over by the state. Like what does that even mean... does the government still sponsor Islamic schools? I'm betting yes, knowing the absurdity of the UK.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Well we still sponsor Trident most lightly at the expense of our national health service.

So i cant see why the belligerent bastards would not do the same for Islamic schools at the expense of the rest.

a reply to: AMPTAH

I imagine that it would matter to the virgin??
and, was her consent relevant after marriage? I don't think it was...
and well, it probably mattered to her after marriage that she had no right to refuse!!!

marriage in biblical old testament times wasn't the same as what it is today.
if was more of a contractual agreement, often times where the women or girl had very little say and love had nothing to do with it really...

originally posted by: dawnstar

marriage in biblical old testament times wasn't the same as what it is today.
if was more of a contractual agreement, often times where the women or girl had very little say and love had nothing to do with it really...

Right. Marriage was more about duty. It's still that way in some parts of the world. Kings and Queens didn't get to marry for love, they had to marry a suitable spouse from a noble family, with the right "characteristics" to bear children to carry on the reign. What's love got to do with it?

Love God, but marry the woman. To fulfill god's command to "be fruitful and multiply."

The parents often picked the spouses for their children. Still, in many parts of the world, this is the practice even today.

Hollywood has sold us all on this idea of "Love" and "Romance" ..which in modern times, is nothing but "Lust" and "Imagination".

a reply to: toysforadults

That would do it.

a reply to: AMPTAH

and yet, wasn't it you who was bringing up the fact that husband's should love their wives...
while of course, the wives were to be obedient and submissive to their husbands???

and no it wasn't hollywood that sold us all on the idea of love and romance...
that started back in the 17th-18th century...

One of England’s first state-funded Muslim secondary schools, the Al-Hijrah School in Birmingham, has been taken over by the British government after one child died at the school and the school’s library was found to have books approving of men beating and raping their wives.

From the article, it sounds like a problem was found and solved, although there is some sort of shaky possible conspiracy involving other Muslim schools.

I'm interested to know what conservatives would think if the government shut down a Christian school for not having modern values, although I don't think there are state-funded religious schools in the U.S., there are in England.

I did some research on the subject.

There are around 140 Muslim faith schools in the UK, twelve of them being state-funded. These schools regularly outperform those of other faiths.

Islam in the United Kingdom

More research reveals that these are schools associated with Islam, and they are for Islam students who choose to go there. So this would be similar to a Catholic school in the U.S. (except in England the state can give them funding).

Wikipedia: Faith Schools

It is not surprising that they promote Islamic values. I'm all for clearing the library of books like the ones mentioned in the O.P., especially if the school has state funding.

However, most conservatives I suspect should think twice before endorsing government censorship of religion or faith-based reasoning in schools.

For example, does creationism have a place in publicly funded schools in the U.S.?

originally posted by: toysforadults
I was going to post this in European Political Madness forum but it doesn't exist yet.

WTF....?

One of England’s first state-funded Muslim secondary schools, the Al-Hijrah School in Birmingham, has been taken over by the British government after one child died at the school and the school’s library was found to have books approving of men beating and raping their wives.

Well...

No idea what to make of this.

Accident or no??

The quran??

a reply to: darkbake

I'm interested to know what conservatives would think if the government shut down a Christian school for not having modern values, although I don't think there are state-funded religious schools in the U.S., there are in England.

Well I wouldn't really label myself conservative but I'm sure you know where I stand based on my posts. My position would be that all public schools should never push any religious views, they should be taught scientific facts and leave it for weekend church to learn about religion if they want. It actually surprises me to see that any liberals would promote state funded religious schools, seems like a very backwards idea and not very progressive to me... but ya gotta bend over backwards for those Muslims because that's what a culturally enlightened person would do right?

originally posted by: growler
there shouldn't be any single faith schools.
its 2017 not 1717.

ps the bible endorses the beating and rape of women, not just the koran

Two things...

1. New Testament
2.reformation

Many people who want to bash Christianity or make off the wall comparisons forget these things....

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
My position would be that all public schools should never push any religious views, they should be taught scientific facts and leave it for weekend church to learn about religion if they want. It actually surprises me to see that any liberals would promote state funded religious schools, seems like a very backwards idea and not very progressive to me..

Religion should be taught in schools. I don't think "pushing" the religion is the right way to think about this. I had classes in "Comparative Religion" in high school. I was taught about all the major religions, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.. the idea was to make students aware of the existence of religious views in the world, which determine people's actions and behavior, and to discuss and debate the similarities and differences between them. That should be the position of the school on religion. Let the parents decide "which religion" their kids should follow, but let the schools open the minds of these same kids to "other" religions that are out there, because they are going to have to "interact" with these other folks during their lifetime in the workplace and in the society in general.

a reply to: AMPTAH

I don't see anything particularly wrong with that, where the issues arises is when a publicly funded school focuses on only one religion and teaches it as the only valid truth. There's clearly something wrong with that premise regardless of what religion the school subscribes to.

Seemingly, to be of a religious persuasion your IQ has to be about 75, which means that the majority of believers are mentally handicapped. This seems plausible given our current scientific knowledge and advancements. What do you think, could this be likely?

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: growler

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: growler

That's because they are called "councils".

But they do exist and they do hand out unlawful religious orientated judgements which unfortunately a significant percentage of the poor people who place stock in such mumbo jumbo follow.

Where are they? That would be all over the place.

ah ye olde ukip line, everywhere but we can't show you one.

There are no Sharia law courts as they would not be recognised, yet these 'councils' do exist and do pass judgements within their communities.
fullfact.org...

They work like the Beth Din courts.

They provide arbitration in civil disputes.

Their judgements do not have the force of law but will be taken into account if the matter escalates to formal legal action.

Nothing more sinister than that, whether your name is Dave Cohen or Irfan Mohammed.