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.

 

Britain has 85 sharia courts: The astonishing spread of the Islamic justice behind closed doors

page: 11
24
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
 



The do you understand my point, that the sharia law favours the male more than the female?

Also do you understand my point, that those females who attend those abritratory meetings I wil change it from courts, might feel they cannot take thier case further incase they are threatened. Alot of what happens behind closed doors I or you or anyone else does not know, I am also referring to closed jewish abritory meetings also, incase you think I am targeting just muslims.






[edit on 1-7-2009 by Laurauk]




posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


Good points that continue to be ignored by people who think this is alright. Arbitration was designed to settle business disagreements, not allow religions to establish their authority, and that is exactly what they want.

Where can a Muslim woman turn to insure that she can go to a British court? It will make it that much more easy for the community, controlled by men, to intimidate her into accepting and unfair ruling by an Islamic court. If the Jewish courts were able to do this, than the Islamic courts will be able to as well. At least Jewish women are far more culturally integrated, and therefore more likely to know the system, and be able to stand up for themselves, while Muslim women who are immigrants will likely have no knowledge of what their rights are, and will therefore be far more easily intimidated.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


no it was your wording that is all. i can fully agree with your statement. As i said it could do with better oversight in this regard. I do not want any persons feeling they have no rights or justice.

if a man wants to impose on a woman something she feels is not right then the law should be able to deal with it in a fair manner.

So we do agree on this.. but i would also like to state that we have to be sensitive to faiths of people also.

The law is here for all of us and i know the law for i am somewhat of a geek on it in this respect and i can say NO law has been passed for sharia law in the house of commons.

Oversight yes.. protections yes.. and justice for ALL people no matter what faith..

that is my view and that is the law as i understand and observe it in the UK..



gave you a star for no hard feelings



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 03:04 AM
link   
Some points:

- All these cries of: "stop spreading hate" - Is this your way of stifling free speech? As soon as anyone in this god forsaken country questions or criticises something, they're immediately "spreading hate". Should our forefathers who faced the Nazi regime have shut up about their dislike for Hitler? Were they just spreading hate? Is criticism only valid if it's unanimous? You just don't get it - we'll never be able to resist negative changes to our society again whilst people are prevented from questioning and criticising things they deem to be a threat.

- So what if Shariah only applies to the private lives of Muslims? That's not the point. The point is that this perfectly demonstrates how segregated the Muslim community are. They have no respect for the old common laws and values of Britain which helped us to become (at one time) one of the free-ist, most prosperous nations in the world. By undermining those laws and values, we're moving backwards. And even if Shariah weren't a horrible system, its implementation still causes huge social divides, which are NOT conducive to a healthy society.

- These Shariah courts are secret to all but the Muslim community. If we Brits are supposed to accept a new law system in our country, running concurrently with our original one, shouldn't we at least be permitted full and open access to its workings?

[edit on 2/7/2009 by Cythraul]



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
This is the Daily mail, but this issue is a real one. It basically boils down to seperation of state and religion, if the two mix then things generally tend to go downhill.

They have the freedom to practice whatever religion they like in the UK, however there is ONE set of laws for all of us, so in the interest of fairness none of the Christian/Jewish/Islamic courts should be accepted as law.

I guess what I'm trying to say is things run better if religion and state law are seperate.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by symmetricAvenger
we WILL NOT ever have full blown sharia law in the UK and its stupid to think other wise

I'm sure the Pagans of Britain thought exactly the same thing when only a minority of the population had adopted Christianity.

How about when Muslims are the majority in Britain (which by the way, is on course to happen quite soon, by the government's own statistics)? Do you think they'll still prefer common British law then? See - Islam is not just a religion. It is an ideology, a community, a set of laws. Even those Muslims who currently claim they prefer to live by British law, I can guarantee, will change their mind when Muslims are the majority. Why? Because they stick together as a community and when their 'elders' call for the full adoption of Shariah law, the subjects follow.

And by the way, pretending that it's ridiculous to think Islam will ever have dominance in the UK is the kind of naivety that will lead to Britain's destruction.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


Well since Britannia was a province of the Roman Empire and the state religion of the Roman Empire became Christianity...



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 04:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by symmetricAvenger
God help you if you ever go on holiday to another country

look this word up

CULTURE

Preservation of culture is PRECISELY the reason I oppose the wholesale takeover of my country by foreign cultures. See - you'd say it's just a case of a minority upholding their home-culture, independently of the British majority. Whereas I see where this is all ACTUALLY heading. As stated by Freeborn, Islam does not stop spreading until it has become the dominant force in a country. By birthrates and migration, Muslims are set to become the majority in Britain. How's that for British culture? Or are you one of those insulting, ignorant, racist types who believes the whole world has an indigenous culture except for Britain? (note: not presuming that you are
)



Originally posted by neformore
To be honest, I'm getting tired of the hate. hate for Muslims, hate for Jews, hate for anything different or unusual, hate in politics...the only consistent thing I see these days is hate. Constructive thinking and discussion seems to have gone out of the window.

But nefermore - there's a difference between hating a person because of their race or background, and hating the ideology they follow. So far I've only seen examples of the latter in this thread. By automatically transforming people's right to reject ideologies they dislike into 'racism' and 'hate', you are - much like the British government - taking away our voice.



Originally posted by Fang
Neformore I'm sad to say that on threads like these you are wasting your breath... Trying to have a factual debate on this site is becoming as rewarding as shouting down a coal mine.

So, because people disagree with you, it must mean they're incapable of debate? Does that not seem a little arrogant to you? See - as sure as you are that you're right, your opponents are equally sure that they are right. The fact that a majority seem to disagree with your view, to the democratically-minded - would suggest that they have a point. Or not?

And this isn't simply a factual debate. Once the initial premise of the news article is established as fact, all opinions surrounding it cannot necessarily be measured as 'factual' or 'non-factual'. For example, my aversion to these Shariah courts does not rely on the assumption that they supercede British law, so no amount of proof to the contrary will invalidate my opinion.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
 


The Law might be here for us all, but there are those who would rather, extend it to thier own gains, All faiths do this, is not just one individual faith/religion.

Is why I said these laws should be stopped altogether.

Oh and I apologise for being a little heated with you during our exchanges have given you a little star also.

[edit on 2-7-2009 by Laurauk]

[edit on 2-7-2009 by Laurauk]



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by symmetricAvenger
reply to post by poet1b
 


They do not violate British law..

They are only to facilitate faith.. and we have many faiths in the UK.. MANY

but they all fall under the same LAW...passed by the house of commons NOT some faith based court.

I think you miss understand the words being used..

The main court is the law lords .. that is reviewed in the house of LORDS..

not one law has been passed to make ANY sharia law LEGAL in the united kingdom...

The only thing the courts do is to try and settle it in a faith based way...

But the over site of it is ruled by UK law..

you cant just say oh chop her head off... why? because you go to jail..

very simple. If anyone was to find out such things as forced sex or any other things. The Uk law would treat that as a violation of the human rights act..

people need to get educated on this issue and not fear it.

I take pride in my country and its laws..and it helps to understand them.


Does British law supports Polygamy?

and you really overestimate the "free will" of these women, if they choose to reject the court they're likely to be expelled from their community



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Laurauk
 


Good points that continue to be ignored by people who think this is alright. Arbitration was designed to settle business disagreements, not allow religions to establish their authority, and that is exactly what they want.



Wrong again as usual. You only wish to misrepresent.

Everyone is opting for arbitration;


RESOLVING DISPUTES WITHOUT GOING TO COURT
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION

WHAT IS THIS BOOKLET ABOUT?

Going to court or a tribunal (often called 'litigation') to solve a problem can be expensive and off-putting. But there are other options. This booklet tells you what they are, how they work, and where you can get further information.

There are many alternative ways of sorting out complaints and legal problems. Together they are often called 'alternative dispute resolution' (ADR) and include things like mediation, ombudsmen schemes and arbitration. With most types of problem, courts encourage people to try these sorts of schemes first before they resort to litigation.


www.scotland.gov.uk...




ACAS - Mediation & Conciliation

These involve an independent mediator (someone who doesn't take sides, but whose job is to help you and the other person or company find a solution to the problem).

You and your opponent, not the mediator, decide what will happen and the terms of any agreement you make. The process is voluntary, so you cannot force the person or organisation you have a problem with to take part.


www.infoscotland.com...






In Place of Strife, The Mediation Chambers, provides and manages the services of some of the most experienced and effective mediators currently practising in the UK and elsewhere.

Chambers members have a wide range of specialist skills underlying their mediation experience and our experienced clerks will be able to advise as to the Chambers member or further recommended mediator who is best suited to your case. >View our service guarantee


www.mediate.co.uk...



Just to clarify things, in the UK we have the Arbitration Act.

Any group, community, social society, hobby group, sports club or charitable org. can set up their own mediation and arbitration forumn.

You know this, it is easy to look up yet you are always inciting hatred against Muslims as this thread will attest. You are probably a Jew and you complain about criticisms of Israel and denounce it as antiSemitic while you are at it against a group of people whose religion you despise. Is this irony or hypocrisy?

Arbitration Act


www.opsi.gov.uk...


[edit on 043131p://pm3105 by masonwatcher]



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


And you spread more hate by supporting it, because as usual the most hated and abused segment of society is at the heart of this, women.
I contend it is the only true hate crime on earth as it permeates every nation, religion, culture on earth. Women are abused, oppressed, enslaved, totured more then any other group.

So to support ANY Muslim law is to continue the subjugation of women.

Without women none of you would be here. Without women there are no children, and without children there is no civilization.

Equally, without equality there is no real freedom, without freedom there will never be peace on earth.

Shari law is religious in nature, but we all live in a secular society with secular law so that all are equally represented and protected under the law.

I can see if an individual chooses to usilize their system, but should be free to opt out. And we all know they are not free to do so.

So where is the seperation of church and state? Under their law, secular law is wrong. So only they are right. We must protect their religious freedom, but who will protect the women's rights overall?

Can the Christians start courts that rely only on Ecclisiatics laws?

They would hang us.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by spiritwomyn
 


You make excellent points, and hit the nub of my problem with Islam, or any religion for that matter that behaves the same way, that those who disagree and would leave are physically prevented from doing so under threat of death. If you can't keep them by the clarity of thought and purpose then perhaps your religion isn't as cool as you think it is.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Under sharia, a male child belongs to the father after the age of seven, regardless of circumstances.

The underlying problem is that Sharia law reflects male-dominated Asian and Arabic cultures. It cannot be accepted as a legally valid basis even for settling private disagreements in a country like ours, where our law embodies the equal legal status of everyone, regardless of race, gender or religion.”

Although the majority of cases heard in the courts involve divorce or financial disputes, last year one reported case involved a gang of Somali youths who were allowed to go free after paying compensation to a teenager they had stabbed, we have no way of knowing how many escape the British Justice System.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
This has got to be the final straw for us UK "citizens" there should not be any other legal systems in place apart from British law, weather they be jewish, muslim or christian. How are females being treated in these "proceedings"?, are these courts open to the media? How much power do these courts actually have?
. Shouldnt our government be monitoring random "cases" to make sure UK law is not being infringed upon?
Because i can imagine that UK law is swept under the carpet as soon as you enter one of these 12th century shams.
Take the case last year of a middle aged muslim man endorsing if not persuading two teenage boys to whip thier own backs to clear away sin!!!!! How do we know stuff like this is not occuring.
I am dead against this.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


I think that most muslims if you ask them and i live next too one would say to you.

you gotta be kidding...


why? because if they loved it so much they would move out and go to live in some backward nation that views faith as law..

sorry mate your just scared

oh and by the way not every muslim is a practicing muslim

get my drift?



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by spiritwomyn
 


Who says women are subjugated in Islam? Maybe bigots, maybe you?

Of course there are men who happen to be Muslims that abuse women just like some men do in your own country. The likes of you then turn around and point at Afghanistan and Pakistan. Those countries are at war and US is up to its neck in it.

The last time a white, Christian and European country went to war the belligerents set up rape centres, kidnapped women for the international white woman slave trade and treated woman as subhuman in concentration camps. Do know you what is that country? Yugoslavia. It has happened in every war initiated by a country in Europe ot the West in general. Even the US did the same thing in Iraq, remember Abu Ghraib and the videos Obama will not release?

Saudi Arabia? It is not a democracy and is a US ally. Take up your concerns with Obama instead of Islam bashing.

The rights of women in the US is abused in so many ways that you can't even recognise it because you have become accustomed. In contrast, and with a bit of research you can see for himself that the ideals of Islam insist upon respect for women, the right of divorce for women, right of education, the right of a private income through work if the woman desires it, the dowry is paid to the woman as an insurance against a husband's incapacity or death, the right of inheritance from the husband. All this is at the core of Islam and is clear but you can not believe that the most faithful amongst Muslims are women and not men.

Of course you can not abide by this or will not accept it because you cultural supremacy depends on denying the truth. It probably is an attitude that makes you think that as a woman in America? you are better than any non-American woman.

The question is; which is more important to you, the rights of woman or Islam bashing? If it is women, do something about it.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by The Last Man on Earth
 


yeah they are,.., what a load of crap..

who made the sate of Israel ?

tell me please? WE DID .. god some people baffle me



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Something like the secret organizations.
But for the good.
Well it makes sense for the UK with the over flow of eastern peoples.
The US must have the same in highly populated locations.



posted on Jul, 2 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 

This doesn't really matter, you are missing the point of my post.
Europe hasn't had the crime problems that the U.S. has had, especially the U.S. in the seventies and the eighties, at least NOT YET, but it looks like the social formula is being put together to create such a problem with the Muslim population.
No, you appear to have missed my point: the rising violence problem we have in the UK is nothing whatsoever to do with islam, shari'ah, immigration & actually even current govt policy has only a little effect on it. Also it does matter because you seemed to be linking inner city violence to muslims.
It is simply not true. The violence we are seeing is committed by people from all racial backgrounds. What they do have in common is not only being poor but born to poor parents. They are often criminalised @a young age for very minor infractions (ASBO) & see no hope for any improvement in their lives, so it's no wonder they dont care about consequences. But let's be clear, this is not an ethnic issue, it is the result of massive underinvestment in education & training during the 90s coupled with a falling standard of living, which created the disenchanfrisement of their parents.
As I said, I live in an area with a lot of muslims & violent crime is conspicuously absent, this close to a city centre.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join