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.

 

Jedi Courts next?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Wiki entry
8 year old article
390000 jedis in 2001 census


Jedi cODE

The mantra

One of the key portions of the Code was a four-line mantra. Several versions of the mantra exist, though the older version was:

Emotion, yet peace.
Ignorance, yet knowledge.
Passion, yet serenity.
Chaos, yet harmony.
Death, yet the Force.

The refined version established by Odan-Urr is perhaps the best known:

There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
(There is no chaos, there is harmony.)(*)
There is no death, there is the Force.
—The Jedi Code (Based on the meditations of Odan-Urr)

(*)The fourth line "There is no chaos, there is harmony," is removed in some Jedi texts. At the Funeral of Mara Jade Skywalker, for instance, this line was omitted.

The Jedi Code was rewritten by Grand Master Luke Skywalker upon reestablishing the Jedi Order in the Galaxy:

Jedi are the guardians of peace in the galaxy.
Jedi use their powers to defend and to protect.
Jedi respect all life, in any form.
Jedi serve others rather than ruling over them, for the good of the galaxy.
Jedi seek to improve themselves through knowledge and training.

[edit] Meaning

* There is no emotion, there is peace

Emotions are a natural part of living. As the great sagas have shown us, Jedi are not immune to feeling emotions. Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi and Master Yoda both openly express their sorrow when they discover the death of younglings at the newly-appointed Darth Vader's hand. This tenet is not to say that emotion does not exist but that it ought to be set aside. Emotions must be understood first, and it is a young Jedi's duty to explore his feelings. Unless a Jedi can confront his thoughts and feelings, he will never achieve peace. Emotions, then, are not to be overcome or denied, but rather understood and dealt with. A'Sharad Hett reminds the young Anakin Skywalker of this during their campaigns together during the Clone Wars. Hett points out that Anakin's anger is understandable, but he must face it. This tenet could be modified to read "Emotion cannot take away my peace."

* There is no ignorance, there is knowledge

A Jedi must be circumspective and try to understand the world that is surrounding him. That ignorance does not exist is, of course, a flat-out lie or gross misunderstanding. Ignorance is a part of life but it must not be feared. For more knowledge to light their way, the Jedi Temple Archives contains possibly the single largest source of information in the galaxy, but this tenet also reminds the Knight that knowledge can be taken from the most unusual places. The great Master Yoda demonstrated this to the young Luke Skywalker on Dagobah when he acted like a fool, and when he acted childish in front of younglings. This performance was meant to teach Luke and the younglings the simple fact: even the foolish can be wise. Indeed, while instructing younglings, Master Yoda was often heard to remark that "Truly wonderful the mind of a child is." This tenet is what gives the Jedi his open mind and ability to accept what other beings would tend to see as unacceptable. In other words, this tenet points out that often a Jedi must use not only his rational mind but also his intuitive mind in order to ascertain the truth of a situation. This tenet is embodied by Qui-Gon Jinn's statement to Anakin Skywalker to "feel, don't think." Dexter Jettster would further demonstrate this notion: "I should think you Jedi would have more respect for the difference between knowledge and wisdom."




posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   
* There is no passion, there is serenity

This tenet is essentially a repetition of the first. But this refers more directly to situations of extreme stress in which a Jedi might be tempted to react strongly. That a Jedi must draw his weapon only in defense is an expression of this tenet. While emotions and intuition must be understood and utilized in a Jedi's daily life, he must never act rashly. Passionate use of power leads to the dark side. A Jedi must always act with a calm hand and an even temper.

* There is no chaos, there is harmony

This statement reflects the cosmology of the Jedi Order. Whereas uninitiated beings see the universe as a chaotic and disconnected place, a Jedi realizes that all things are interconnected and, more importantly, interdependent. While an uninitiated being sees sorrow and tragedy in the workings of the universe, through the Force, a Jedi is able to interpret and understand even the most painful of life's events. Without this cosmology, surely the first tenets of the Jedi Code would be meaningless. After all, how could one possibly forsake love and compassion if he did not understand the truth of the universe: there is no chaos, there is harmony. Every event has a purpose. As the great Jedi Master Yoda told Anakin Skywalker once, "Death is a natural part of life." Minor inconveniences such as failure, disappointment, and disagreement are also inevitable and should be taken in stride. Jedi do not deny the fact that tragic and terrible things happen; they merely point out that tragedy is simply another part of life.

Without this tenet, all other tenets of the Jedi Code would be meaningless.

* There is no death, there is the Force

A Jedi, like many ancient feudal knights of various empires, must always be ready for death. As a warrior not only in combat but also in day-to-day life, it is easy to fail and fall. As Qui-Gon Jinn pointed out to the young Anakin Skywalker, it is quite possible to kill a Jedi, and it happens often. The sense of loss is often even greater for one who feels it with the Force. Death, however, is not a tragedy and is merely a part of the life cycle. Without death, life could not exist. The Force in us, still lives on after we die. This tenet represents a darker side of the Jedi Order, the side that accepts, indeed embraces, death, rot and corruption of corporeal forms. As such, Jedi do not fear death nor do they mourn it overmuch; a Jedi, after all, must celebrate death if he is to also celebrate life. While sources disagree on this point, it is noteworthy to point out that this tenet does not support vegetarianism among the Jedi but, some scholars argue, it does in fact support omnivorism among Jedi. This could also refer to living forever as a force ghost.


[edit on 23-10-2008 by adamclement]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Miscellaneous tenets

Here can be read a number of miscellaneous tenets which are not mentioned in the Code, but should be known for all Jedi.

* The Jedi are the guardians of civilization, yet not allow civilization to destroy needlessly.
* A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for aggression or personal gain.
o A corollary of the Code was "A Jedi does not act for personal power."
* The lightsaber is the symbol of the members of the Jedi Order.
* Jedi do not marry (with some exceptions), in order to avoid attachment and—according to Vergere—so as not to create dynasties of those strong in the Force. However, in many periods of the Order's history, such as the era prior to Exar Kun and in Luke Skywalker's reformed Jedi Order, marriage was not forbidden.
* Jedi respect each other, and all other life forms.
* Jedi must put the needs of the community above the needs of individuals.
* A Jedi must protect the weak and defenseless from evil.
* Jedi must always cooperate in battle or crisis.
* Jedi must not have wants; self-reliance must be shown.
* Jedi are forbidden from ruling others, although by the end of the Republic there was some debate over whether or not this was part of the actual Code.
* A Jedi Master may not have more than one Padawan. This particular rule developed after the Old Sith Wars, as most ancient Masters such as Arca Jeth, Thon, Vodo-Siosk Baas and Krynda Draay did not have to abide by it. The Jedi Exile also trained many apprentices at the same time due to their Force-sensitivity and the galaxy's dire need for Jedi. However, one apprentice per master seemed to be the standard around 32 BBY. But due to the lack of numbers in Luke Skywalker's Academy, several padawans per master was forced, as seen in Jaden Korr and Rosh Penin training under Kyle Katarn
* While the Code did not mention a maximum age for taking Padawans, Jedi Master Simikarty wrote influential interpretations of the Code that inserted such limits; over time, his interpretations of the Code became conflated with the Code itself. In Revan's era, apprentices were taken from early childhood. After the end of the New Sith Wars, it became policy to take apprentices from infancy, which proved controversial with those outside the Order. Conversely, Nomi Sunrider started her training as an adult, as did the apprentices of the Jedi Exile and many of the New Jedi Order.
* A Jedi will not kill an unarmed opponent, such as the way Anakin Skywalker executed Count Dooku.
* A Jedi will not take revenge, such as did Anakin against the Tusken Raiders
* A Jedi does not cling to the past.
* The Jedi do not believe in killing their prisoners.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Following the code

"The Jedi shackle themselves in chains of obedience: obedience to the Jedi Council; obedience to their Masters; obedience to the Republic. Those who follow the light side even believe they must submit themselves to the Force. They are merely instruments of its will, slaves to a greater good."
―Darth Bane, comparing the Jedi Code to the Sith Code[src]

[edit] Self-discipline

Self-discipline was one of the key concepts of Jedi behavior, and Jedi Padawans were taught this from a very early age. The lessons started off similar to what might be taught to an ordinary student; however, as the student progressed, so did the complexity of the lessons.[1]

Conquer Arrogance

"The acceptance of others is not a guarantee. Like everyone else, a Jedi is accepted or not based on his behavior. The Jedi who believes that he is more important than others only demonstrates that his opinion is to be ignored."
―Dooku[src]

Jedi were required to learn that, although they were able to use the Force, they were no better than those who could not. Jedi were taught that they were only Jedi because some had taken the trouble to teach them, not because they were superior to others, and that a Jedi Master was only a Jedi Master because he had disregarded his own sense of self-importance and embraced the will of the Force.[1]

Conquer Overconfidence

"Overconfident thinking is flawed because the Jedi does not take all possibilities into account. He may understand the task at hand, the support of his fellows, and the ramifications of his success, and he may have even planned for unanticipated factors—but he has failed to understand his own capabilities. He has planned only for success, because he has concluded that there can be no failure. Every Jedi, in every task, should prepare for the possibility of failure."
―Vodo-Siosk Baas[src]

Many young Jedi students, while learning the ways of the Force, began to believe that they could accomplish anything. Many young Jedi died taking on tasks that were far too difficult for them, not realizing that the Force was only truly limitless to those who had limitless understanding.[1]

Conquer Defeatism

"Try not! Do, or do not. There is no try."
―Yoda[src]

Young Jedi also learned that defeatism was just a dangerous as overconfidence. Although it might have seemed contradictory to the goals of conquering overconfidence, a Jedi would first plan for success, then for failure. Jedi who always plan for failure expected to lose, and usually only used minimal effort—enough to say that they had tried.[1]

Conquer Stubbornness

"Do not see a lightsaber duel as a choice between winning and losing. Every duel can have many, many outcomes. When you concentrate solely on winning—in lightsaber duels as in everything else—you sully your victory. Winning becomes worse than losing. It is better to lose than to win badly. And it is always better to end a duel peacefully than to win or lose"
―Rekpa De[src]

Jedi would always have been ready to accept defeat if the cost of winning was greater than the cost of losing. Jedi were taught that it was always best to end things peacefully than to win or lose.[1]

Conquer Recklessness

"Learn to recognize when speed is not important. Race when being first is important; move at your own pace at all other times. It is not necessary to always strike the first blow, to provide the first solution, or to reach a goal before anyone else does. In fact, it is sometimes vital to strike the last blow, to give the final answer, or to arrive after everyone else."
―Wiwa[src]

Many young Jedi lacking in self-restraint were always ready to ignite their lightsabers and plunge straight into battle. They perceived a goal and rushed towards it, without any consideration for unseen dangers or other options. And so Jedi were taught that speed did not necessarily lead to success.[1]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Conquer Curiosity

"Use the Force to satisfy the will of the Force—not to satisfy your own curiosity."
―Odan-Urr[src]

Many inexperienced Force-sensitives used the Force to satisfy their curiosity, probing into the business of others. Intruding gave the clear message that the Jedi felt they were above others' privacy. Jedi were taught that although using the Force to discreetly undercover the secrets of others may have been occasionally necessary, it should never become a matter of course, as it would cause great distrust of the Jedi in general.[1]

Conquer Aggression

"A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack."
―Yoda[src]

A sizable number of Jedi, in training, confused the meanings of attack, defense and aggression. Thus Younglings were taught that it was possible for a Jedi to strike without aggression, so long as they acted without recklessness, hatred or anger. A Jedi was permitted to kill in self-defense—only if there was no other option. However, Jedi instructors taught their students that killing, no matter what the circumstances, was not to become commonplace. To conquer aggression, even in combat, a Jedi must have explored every other option, including surrender, before resorting to using lethal force. Jedi who depended on murder were close to the Dark Side of the Force.[1]

Conquer External Loyalties

"A Jedi is a Jedi, first and foremost, and only. For a Jedi to divide his attention between the will of the Force and the will of others is to invite disaster."
―Hoche Trit[src]

Each Jedi was expected to remove as many external distractions from his or her life as possible. For that reason, the Order only accepted potential Padawans while they were still young children; they were too young to have already formed strong relationships and forbidden them forming attached relationships later in life. Jedi were not allowed to marry without special dispensation,[1] like in the case of Cerean Jedi Ki-Adi-Mundi, who was allowed to marry several Cerean women because of his people's low birth rate.[2] Jedi were forbidden from taking a political appointment or to accept gifts. They were taught that their loyalty was to be to the Jedi Order, and to nothing else.[1]

Conquer Materialism

"I wear my robe so that I am warm; I carry my lightsaber so that I am safe; and I keep enough credits for my next meal, so that I am not hungry. If the Force wants me to have more, it finds a way of letting me know."
―Kagoro[src]

Jedi were forbidden from keeping more than a few essential belongings. There were two reasons for this; first because they distracted a Jedi from the Force, and second because, as they emerged through the ranks, Jedi were required to leave for missions with extremely short notice, and so having many objects was a burden. It was rare for a Jedi to possess more than they could carry on their person at one time.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by AGENT_T
 


You should read up on what the Sharia court in the UK is, and how it works.

It is not a separate legal system, but a more restrictive legal system that contains the entire actual legal system. It is optional, and not for criminal proceedings.

People are acting like it's something that it isn't. The amount of ignorance on this topic is staggering.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 08:10 AM
link   
reply to post by dave420
 


Spending 5 years in the middle east did that for me thanks.


Though rare, some British Muslims have used these courts as an alternative to English criminal law. Ayda-rus Yusuf, a youth worker from Soma-lia, told BBC Radio 4 last year that a stabbing case was decided upon by an unofficial “court” sitting in Woolwich, southeast London.

www.timesonline.co.uk...

Maybe YOUR ignorance on the subject has just been reduced.


No need for thanks,It's what we're all here for.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 08:19 AM
link   
Well, its impossible for anyone to be a Jedi Master.

To become one you need to fit criteria and some of them are impossible to attain.

The one big bopper that disqualifies everyone without exception:

"Be able to construct your own Lightsaber".

Whoops.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996.

Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.

Siddiqi said: “We realised that under the Arbitration Act we can make rulings which can be enforced by county and high courts. The act allows disputes to be resolved using alternatives like tribunals. This method is called alternative dispute resolution, which for Muslims is what the sharia courts are.”


looks like theya re using a loop hole to make it a legal and enforcable court


Jewish Beth Din courts operate under the same provision in the Arbitration Act and resolve civil cases, ranging from divorce to business disputes. They have existed in Britain for more than 100 years, and previously operated under a precursor to the act.
hadnt heard of these .. they need to go too

womensgrid.freecharity.org.uk...

so as we said its a seperate court giving official rulings and is a closed system

im doughting i could go get a divorce in a sharia court not bieng a muslim



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by noobfun hadnt heard of these .. they need to go too


Totally agree.

No exceptions.
If you're in the country you should expect to be judged by the same system.

If there are exceptions to the rules due to race/creed then I vote for Jedi courts.It's MY registered religion.

I'll build a freaking lightsabre..
It might not be pretty and I might have to chain together 40 car batteries to power it,but it'll light up and be sabre-ish.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by AGENT_T

I'll build a freaking lightsabre..
It might not be pretty and I might have to chain together 40 car batteries to power it,but it'll light up and be sabre-ish.


wait wait with the force being a constant in the universe but not a creating or controlling force that means i can be an atheist jedi ^_^

woohooo U2U me the light saber plans please



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by AGENT_T
 


I agree with dave, you really should check out what you're talking about. These courts are for civil cases, or in cases when both parties agree to it. Used for stuff like divorces, marriages, etc. It's nothing new, Beth Dins have been around and recognised for a while now. You can't tell the police "I demand to be tried under my own religious law for this crime!".

The article you quoted about the stabbing case even mentioned it was done in an unofficial court, not the same as the system they've set up now. The article itself explains that Criminal Law cannot be dealt with privately!

noobfun could not get a divorce in Sharia court, not because he's not a muslim, but because the marriage was (very likely) contracted under normal UK law.

Deny Ignorance!


[edit on 23-10-2008 by babloyi]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by babloyi
 
which means it is a racist instituion and i shall imediatley begin law suits against it until they agree to give me a divorce !

a muslim wedding is still legaly a wedding under uk law so it doesnt matter if i got married in a mosque church my back garden or in a cival ceremony to my gay lover a divorce is a divorce

i demand the same rights

hahaha dam wish i was married and gay right now that would really annoy someone 'gay divorce in sharia court' what a head line




[edit on 23/10/08 by noobfun]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by noobfun
reply to post by babloyi
 
which means it is a racist instituion and i shall imediatley begin law suits against it until they agree to give me a divorce !

[edit on 23/10/08 by noobfun]


no it isn't.....

in the same way, you can't go to catholic school if you're not a catholic. Maintaining cultural traditions is not racist........why would you even want to be tried there.....?

panic-mongering ingnorance at its worst.....oooh those nasty muslims are trying to destroy our way of life....no they're not its us that's trying to destroy thier culture.......live and let live, that is the jedi way.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by adamclement

in the same way, you can't go to catholic school if you're not a catholic. Maintaining cultural traditions is not racist........why would you even want to be tried there.....?

panic-mongering ingnorance at its worst.....oooh those nasty muslims are trying to destroy our way of life....no they're not its us that's trying to destroy thier culture.......live and let live, that is the jedi way.


no offence but your extremly wrong on pretty much every point except the jedi way comment

it is illegal for a faith based school to not accept people of other faiths, if you match the schools crieteria and have passed the academic requirments you have by law as much right for that school to accept you as anyone else and that applies to not only catholic schools but all schools private and public despite its religeous denomination

how do i know .. i looked it up to double check if they changed the law, that and i know several people who went to catholic school and had not a single catholic relative and didnt lie about it saying yes im catholic


now back to the scare mongering

under british law, any man woman or child regardless of race creed religeon or financial status has a right of access of the uk law system

as 5 sharia law courts have found a loop hole which allows them to be legal bodies


The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.


there fore bieng a citizen of great britian i have a legal right to access the arbritation tribunal (sharia law court) and seek a divorce from my legal partner as they are empowered to handel divorces

the type of marriage ceremony or the sex of my legal partner has no legal bearing on this

if i am refused access to this court for any reason it is therfore unlawful and as they only have finitie possible reasons to not allow me access and pretty much all of those would pertain to race/religeon or sexual preferance making it a refusal on racist grounds

like i say imagine the headlines if a gay couple decided to get divorced in a sharia court the daily star would wet its pants with excitment

but sod them its equality or bust, so either we all should have legal accees to them or none should



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by noobfun
 

It is odd that you don't understand this:

A shariah court cannot instigate a divorce if the marriage was not contracted under the shariah court (ie. done under normal UK law).

A person can obtain a divorce without using a the shariah court (through normal UK law), even if the wedding was contracted under the shariah court.

Normal UK law supercedes the Shariah court in the UK.


Another thing you seem to not understand (at least from what I see of your comment on arbitration tribunals):

When BOTH PARTIES agree to follow the ruling of the shariah court voluntarily, then it can be applicable to them. You can't rob a bank and say you want to be judged in shariah court when you get caught.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by AGENT_T
 


You should read up on what the Sharia court in the UK is, and how it works.

It is not a separate legal system, but a more restrictive legal system that contains the entire actual legal system. It is optional, and not for criminal proceedings.

People are acting like it's something that it isn't. The amount of ignorance on this topic is staggering.



The question is why there needs to be any shariah law at all?
What possible reason is there for it to exist?
What on earth is wrong with muslims just using the existing law like everybody else?



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by noobfun
 

It is odd that you don't understand this:
i do lets go slowly


A shariah court cannot instigate a divorce if the marriage was not contracted under the shariah court (ie. done under normal UK law).
i am not allowed a divorce if my marriage was not a muslim wedding ceremony (there by sanctioned under sharia law)? this excludes me access to part of the british legal system on the grounds that my wedding is not islamic becasue i am not a muslim which is both racist and against my legal rights to access of british law


A person can obtain a divorce without using a the shariah court (through normal UK law), even if the wedding was contracted under the shariah court.
this is as it should be everyone has access irelavant of race/religeon/colour/financial situation


Normal UK law supercedes the Shariah court in the UK.
the 5 sharia law courts using the loop hole are part of british normal law they are a legal tribunal which have powers to deal with certain legal issues such as divorce the example i am choosing to use


When BOTH PARTIES agree to follow the ruling of the shariah court voluntarily, then it can be applicable to them.
?? ive said nothing for or against this fact .... sorry my bad i should have said me and my partner agree to a divource and both agree sharia is the way to go

there is no such things as contracted under sharia law ...... if a marriage(any marriage) is recognised under uk law the people have a right to divorce each other in ANY legal court that deals with divorce

this would include the 5 sharia law courts that have a legal standing

your bank robbery thing is a nice distraction attempt but robbing a bank is neither ground for a divorce or part of the procedings and criminal law has nothing to do with divorce law

[edit on 23/10/08 by noobfun]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by noobfun
 

No, I still don't think you get it.


Originally posted by noobfun
i am not allowed a divorce if my marriage was not a muslim wedding ceremony (there by sanctioned under sharia law)? this excludes me access to part of the british legal system on the grounds that my wedding is not islamic becasue i am not a muslim which is both racist and against my legal rights to access of british law

A shariah court in the UK does not have the legal authority to grant a divorce to a marriage that was contracted outside of the shariah court, unless it is granted by normal UK Law. I am utterly amazed and agape at how you turned that into "it is racist and against my legal right to access of british law".

Please explain how the superceding of normal UK Law to the shariah court is racist and against you legal right to access of british law.


Originally posted by noobfun
there is no such things as contracted under sharia law ...... if a marriage(any marriage) is recognised under uk law the people have a right to divorce each other in ANY legal court that deals with divorce

Yes, in the UK there is such a thing as contracted under sharia law. This doesn't mean that it isn't accepted and legal in normal UK Law. Marriage in sharia court is different to that in normal UK Law, as are many other muslim legal issues. Hence the demand for a shariah court. Since you are not a muslim, such issues would not affect you. Since shariah court is islamic, it has no rulings or relevancy relating to you (or your hypothetical wife, who I'm assuming is not muslim), and would thus be incapable of handling any divorce case from you.

Just because you decided you were talking about divorce, how does that mean that I can't give another example? The way you were going on about chopping of limbs and stoning people, I reasoned that you didn't understand it. They are not 'two independant systems': normal UK law supercedes the shariah court, and the shariah court can only be used for civil cases.

[edit on 23-10-2008 by babloyi]



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by babloyi
 



ok lets make this simple

can a sharia law court grant a divorce of any kind to a marriage?

my understanding is it can grant a divorce without the parties involved having to under go a divorce in a mianstream uk court hearing .. correct?



now do me a favour define a marriage contracted under sharia law


[edit on 23/10/08 by noobfun]




top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join