It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sharia courts operating in Britain

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Anderi
 

I suppose it is fear that drives your rant (as you call it). Fear that others will have more control on your life and activities.

1. When British colonized Asia and Africa, they did not assimilate or absorb native culture, law, heck not even food. Instead they insisted on importing British values, systems and law. One may argue that it did benefit the local population by giving them parliament, railways and factories. But it misses the point that the native society was able to live just fine for thousands of years before colonization. The point I make is, Europeans do the same when they settle in other countries. In fact worse, look at the state of aboriginals, by introducing alcohol to a society prone to addiction an entire race has been wiped out. Not to mention what happened to Red Indians.

2. Islamic law recognizes civil laws of other religions. If you live in a state ruled by sharia, and you are a non-muslim then your civil disputes will settled by your own religious court. If you take the matter to sharia court they will either decline or pass judgment in accordance with your own religious laws. Criminal matters affect society as a whole and usually it is done according to majority laws. In Britian, as long as Christians are a majority, there is no way sharia courts can enforce criminal laws.

3. Colonization was done for economic reasons. It is pretty much similar to the economic migration that occurs today. Regarding your father, though a practicing muslim, I suspect his value system is more close to asian culture than Islam. For example, North Indian Hindu women cover their heads too. if British did not give up their religion or ways even after 200 years in India, SAfrica or Zimbabwe, why should you voluntarily give up your father's way unless you are convinced that his way is inferior to your chosen way ? The world economy is in severe crisis. If it collapses, the new powers of the world will be the massively populated countries of Asia. So if your son or daughter migrates to one of those countries should they then revert back to the values you have discarded? You did say an economic migrant must assimilate and give up his old values?




posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by C.C.Benjamin
 




Hi Dave

I don't suppose you happen to have a handy list of the number of white Chrisitians working in high positions in the Saudi Arabian government do you?

For comparison purposes, obviously.

George Bush??? Dick Cheney?.....The rest of the Administration?

I could post all kinds of pictures of these guys making out with the Saudi princes.(they do kiss a lot for a bunch of dudes)



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Ironclad
 




Heh.

Wonder what the British government will do when they start putting teenage girls to death for having sex out of wedlock.

So hard not to crack Sarah Palin jokes....elevating discourse.....*cough*....



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Tolerance?

When you accept and do not react to the actions of others which hinder you temporarily then you are tolerant. When someone does something that only temporarily hinders another's life then that action demands tolerance. When someone does something that demands a non-temporary and non permitted hindrance to the lives of others then tolerance must not be given for such an action is a crime.

Look around you. What do you consider to be criminal? When someone trespasses into your own bubble without providing any apology or impressing any suggestion that the trespass was unintended and temporary then I am sure you would treat the trespass contemptuously with a deserved proportionate response. Wouldn't you? Deny that you wouldn't for any reasons other than cowardice else to hide and keep safe some other more important item.

When we allow and promote for civil disputes to be privately mediated by a person's peers then we also allow for society to grow and develop. But those peers must not come from outside of the society the mediation and trespass affects and must not have a different agenda to that of the society within which it is supposed to be set.

We allow "trained" councilors (social workers) to mediate and assist in private disputes. We have civil courts that (and magistrates who) mediate between private disputes. Most people permit for members of their group to mediate over their disputes (for example: a parent between two siblings, a school headmaster between the parents of two rival pupils). This is fantastic and only good for society.

By formalizing and legitimizing "courts" for sectors of society that are within society then we are quickly moved ever closer toward mini-states within a majority elected state.

How long before these religious courts ask to "try" (prosecute) cases between a member of its own faith and a member of a different (even no) faith? When will members of a religion that has its own legally recognized court decide they will not recognize the legitimacy of a parent nation's true courts? How soon before these non-mainstream mediation courts have catchment areas over which they preside?

Islam does not permit other ways of existence when those ways are not Islamic.

[edit on 15/9/08 by Rapacity]



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by DJMessiah
 


As a Christain

a) You are right =, i dont want Islam in this country, at all. and i'm not going to worry about what people think about that. That doesnt mean i hate anyone though, in the slightest.

b) No i don't support invasions.

secondly i didnt see Muslims up in arms when we helped the muslims in Bosnia or when we helped out kuwait.

mmm



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by darkwing08
 


what??

are you in an enclosed room or something?

Racist????

from Miriam Websters

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

Prejudice

Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin praejudicium previous judgment.

(1): preconceived judgment or opinion (2): an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge

I am sick to death of PC comments. Im oppsed to Islam. Full stop.

So what??? i am entitled to an opinion, just as you are. Society would rather conform than to think for itself.

My faith is irrelevant in this as there is a much wider issue.

david



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by drevill
 




According to the Gospel of John, the Pharisees, in an attempt to discredit Jesus, brought a woman charged with adultery before him. Then they reminded Jesus that adultery was punishable by stoning under Mosaic law and challenged him to judge the woman so that they might then accuse him of disobeying the law. Jesus thought for a moment and then replied, “He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her.” The people crowded around him were so touched by their own consciences that they departed. When Jesus found himself alone with the woman, he asked her who were her accusers. She replied, “No man, lord.” Jesus then said, “Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more.”

It would be rather....uh, "Christian" of you to think a little harder about who you judge. The whole Christians are right and everybody else is wrong tactic really turns a lot of people off of your religion.

And no, I am not a Muslim. I think you are all a bit wrong....



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Sarcasm here by the way:
I have an idea, why won't the American and British forces allow freedom of Sharia law in Iraq? I mean they could set up new new Sharia courts there if they like, like how they are doing in England.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by drevill
Racist????

from Miriam Websters

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

Prejudice

Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin praejudicium previous judgment.

(1): preconceived judgment or opinion (2): an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge

Don't pay any attention drevill. Cries of "racism" are so liberally (and innaccurately) employed that the words 'boy', 'who', 'cried' and 'wolf' come to mind. If everyone understood the actual definition of the word then it needn't even have been uttered in this entire thread. And know that it is the first resort of the ignorant to use 'carpet bomb' style descriptions such as 'racism' for views and issues that they do not have the capacity to debate. How many times has a worthwhile, non-racist discussion been shot dead at the first hurdle because mindless liberals have swarmed in and thrown the 'R' word around without considering its actual relevance.

I'm a proud anti-racist, but it's getting to the point now where I might as well accept the label of 'racist' when it is thrown my way, simply for having pan-nationalistic beliefs that go against our excessively-liberal, politically correct, multicultural, pseudo-progressive mindset.

[edit on 15/9/2008 by Cythraul]



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Sharia law should NOT be allowed to happen in the UK, not because i have any problems with muslims or any other group for that matter...

But, this is Britain... Imagine if the Brits commited a crime in Afghan, Pakistan, indonesia, Iraq or wherever..... would we be allowed a fair trial with our own rules?

NO! of course not....

So, the Muslims should adhere to our rules, our rules that have served our island for thousands of years. Yes, they might not be perfect, but we should not allow exceptions to any minority group, lest they walk all over our proud heritage and tradition. This applies to anyone.

Seriously, the last few days, my usually liberal attitudes have hit a brick wall in a sense that these people do seem to want an islamic take over.
This in my eyes would be trampling over everything my grandfather and his buddies fought for... To prevent us becoming a fascist state, ruled by ruthless law and brutality.

I'm all for multiculturism, but at the end of the day, this is the UK and not Pakistan. If a woman dared to walk around Pakistan without a veil, then she would no doubt be raped or sentenced to some barbaric punishment...

In my eyes, Sharia law is backwards and somewhat barbaric.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   
What is it with you brits? If someone scares you do you just roll up into a ball and go along with the beating. Kick them out of your country if they refuse abide by your laws. Who the hell wants them there anyway. I have many friends that moved to the French countryside to get away from their OWN COUNTRY. Not like France is much better/



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   
It seems to me that many muslims operating in the UK would not know the word ´tolerance´ if they had it on a sandwich.
A halal sandwich that is.
As for certain posters on this thread being accused of racism-muslim is an ´opinion based on speculation and conjecture´ and not a geographical location.

[edit on 01/12/01 by karl 12]



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Grafilthy
 


well it always makes me laugh a little when a non Christian tells me not to judge,


Christ is telling them that they are not able to exact punishment, not only that he knew what they were up to regarding himself, it was entrapment.

we are told to judge, as in discern, peoples words and actions against Gods will in the Bible, but not the ultimate slide rule that is their hearts as only that person and God know what is inside.


david



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by TXMACHINEGUNDLR
What is it with you brits? If someone scares you do you just roll up into a ball and go along with the beating. Kick them out of your country if they refuse abide by your laws. Who the hell wants them there anyway. I have many friends that moved to the French countryside to get away from their OWN COUNTRY. Not like France is much better/


The problem with most of us Brits is that we have a monarchy. That doesn't sound too much like a problem many might say but..add to the ingredients the feelings "worship of.." and "inferiority to.." mixed in with a bit of (well, a lot of..) "stuck in the dark ages" and you might understand that most Brits follow authority blindly.

Our society has survived for so long because of our understanding that authority can be a good thing when properly conducted and observed. Authority understands that the masses' little indiscretions must be allowed because doing so promotes society's adaptation to our ever changing environment.

Those in authority understand that the masses will follow them even when we mentally reject their lead just because of the perceived "correctness" of their judgment as bestowed by the authority elected to them.

Should we have a new leader tomorrow, one with a more anglo-saxon centric stance, were that leader to tell the populace to eject or round-up all Muslims (or other group) then the British people would do it simply because a person with authority instructed it and thereby took responsibility for it.

I might now be berated by my fellow Brits for stating the above. I'm not bothered. The more it hurts, the more true it must be for the baraters.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by TXMACHINEGUNDLR
 


we cannot kick them out due to EU law and human rights, i believe everyone has the right to practice their own faith in their own home

However that should be the end of it. There should be no mosques in Britain,IMHO, this is a protestant land old lizzy one would be rolling in her grave.

of course my opinion is not pc so im a racist????? try the other foot in Saudia Arabia, blimey i couldn't even take my Bible to the Maldives.

yet people say that when in rome etc etc.

david



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Rapacity
 


the problem is that if someone stands up for England and does it with passion and conviction then they are archaic, old fashioned, out of touch and en extremist.

You can still have a policy of welcome arms as long as the migrating people ALWAYS follow the rule of the land and not whine and expect to be treated favorably and then demand their own culture be pampered to.

I would expect it the same.

david



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by drevill
secondly i didnt see Muslims up in arms when we helped the muslims in Bosnia or when we helped out kuwait.


When Muslims take arms to help other Muslims, what does the media portray them as?

Iraqi insurgents are doing exactly what you recommended by fighting invaders from their land, and what kind of light has the media placed them in?

[edit on 15-9-2008 by DJMessiah]



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


I fully agree

to be patriotic is not racist or prejudice

imagine Hindu law in Saudia Arabia
Christian Law in Pakistan
the Pope ordering the people of Iran around?
Italy handing out sentencing in China
China punishing people in Canada

not happening

Britain has fought all comers from the romans to the spanish
and now because of the spineless gits in parliament and the leech that is the EU the country is losing its historic cohesion and strength

people without the historic background are hardly likely to stand up for it are they? In general of course.

david



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by DJMessiah
 


as i said in a previous post i DIDNT condone invasions, any indigenous people fighting against a force it doesn't want is always going to fight, you are not free until you are rid of it.

saying that how would it look if that happened here in the UK? different story i bet. If the English stood up against muslims here, there would be an outcry. you only have to look at the threads here on ATS. As soon as you voice opposition to Islam you become a bigot??????

david



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join