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: 6
24
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   
I know Muslim women who are not at all happy that Sharia is now part of the legal system in the UK; they came here to escape it.

Now to find that they are bound again by the very thing they sought to escape is upsetting for them (to say the least).

Politicians do not think of this when they strive to be tolerant of other peoples beliefs.




posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by symmetricAvenger
reply to post by Freeborn
 


If we allow Sharia, should we also not allow Sikhs, Buddhists, Pagans, Jedi's etc also to have their own courts?

but they do?

.... the law comes be for ANY proposal that people wish to make

They do not have the house of commons and the house of lords for nothing?


I'm genuinely not being disrespectful but due to the extreme poor grammar I don't understand what point you are trying to make.



racists biggots and idiots drive me insane


Yeah, and me.
Hope you aren't implying that I am a racist....you know absolutely nothing about me yet make a sweeping statement like that based on one post.



done with this thread keep your stupid fear mongering to you self..


Seems you don't like anything or anyone with a different opinion.
Who is the bigot?



God help you if you ever go on holiday to another country


I am what I suppose would be considered by most as pretty wide travelled and also have many friends from various ethnic and religious origins etc.
I have always respected other cultures.
What is wrong with expecting the same in return?

You seem to have a lot to say for yourself yet say it in a somewhat strange style which makes it difficult for me to understand.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   
I'm a bit disappointed with all the ad hominem in this thread. Daily Mail too. Surprise surprise. Fear & hate: always sells. I'm all for devolution of justice to local communities. Get it away from the out of touch twerp judges. But shari'ah? Regardless that the violent punishments could never be legal in the uk, it's sexist & borderline racist. Still, so's the torah & bible. But we did deal with domestic abuse before. Police were instructed to prosecute regardless of victim statements & social services helped out. We'll have to tackle muslim attitudes to women eventually.
You know tho? F**k the whole lot: islam, judaism, christianity, isis worship, whatever. Since when did we recouple religion & law? Religious law was superceded cos its crap: by definition out of date. This just legitimises it.
Ah, I remember when! The 80s when Thatcher & Co started lecturing us on family values. All of a sudden the religious crawled out of the woodwork to spout off, even if not a few years before they'd have been mocked into oblivion. Too late now... Still, no need to ban such courts. What we need is more devolution: secular local community courts. Let religious drivel stand on its own 2 feet side by side with ordinary people debating the issues.
Oh, we've got this thread to see what'd happen, eh? Oops... Haven't thought that 1 through!



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


adds to the fun


sorry for the short answer



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


no its called devolution look it up



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
The jewish commnunity can do this also, whats the problem, how is it effecting you?

If your not from that part of the community it wont apply to you. Stop spreading fear about Muslims


muslim law does not apply under western laws. why don't muslims learn to live within the country they move to?...it's because they don't give a damn about our laws and customs, and thus do not respect western culture, as they keep saying they do. they have been lying to us westerners for years, all the while trying to slowly change our laws and customs, claiming religous freedom. they hate western culture and western laws, due to the fact that they keep imposing their own rules, instead of imbracing ours. it is still baffleing why westerners don't see this.
this is why religion is dangerous and should be feared. it is the ultimate mind control. c,mon...hundreds of millions of people bowing five times a day to pray? NOW THAT'S CONTROL!!!! no free-thinking allowed, no logic involved, crictical thinking punished.

[edit on 29-6-2009 by jimmyx]

[edit on 29-6-2009 by jimmyx]



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   
What of those Muslims that have rejected secular Islam and claim to still be Muslims but no longer claim to belong to one of the sects like Kurdish, Sunni, or Shea.
Do these courts have any right to try them for anything.

In the US there is a growing number of christians that call themselves christian
Deist.
We reject the organised christian Churches but are still christian.

There are a few that call themselves Jewish Deist that have rejected the Jewish sects.

There are likely a number of Muslims that have also rejected the Muslim sects.

And i do know of one Muslim that calls himself a Muslim Deist. but he lives a VERY low profile life because he has threats against his life by main stream Muslims.(traditional Islamic death penalty for heretics)

www.formermuslims.com...
www.jihadwatch.org...
islamicrationalism.com...

Then you have to deal with the fact that there are 73 sects and that would mean that Britain would have to act as a arbitrator in conflicts between Muslim sects and NO sharia court would have jurisdiction over someone from a sect other then there own.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ANNED
 


Interesting post which illustrates the folly of looking at Muslims as a cultural monolithic bloc. But I have to repeat what has been said before. These Sharia 'Courts' are arbitration bodies who, like any other arbitration body, have to operate within English law and need the consent of those using them to function. The majority of posts ignore these facts which even the Daily Mail article explained.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
The jewish commnunity can do this also, whats the problem, how is it effecting you?

If your not from that part of the community it wont apply to you. Stop spreading fear about Muslims


Uhh, but EVEN IF YOU ARE part of that community, it SHOULD NOT affect you.

Therein lies the concern, I believe.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
Lets make one thing clear,it is for domestic issues...british law still reigns supreme.It is simply giving muslims some leeway in the courts like jewish law already has in Britain.And the daily mail...who wudda thunk it


[edit on 29-6-2009 by Solomons]


That's the same issue in Australia. The sharia courts would be only for laws applicable within islam, and that do not conflict with the law of Australia. Australian law would overrule any law involving rape, subjugation, discrimination, et al.

And up and until this is forced on members of the muslim community who do not wish to participate in this, I have no objection to it. It's not different, really, to a family setting rules on their children - no drinking, no staying out after 10pm, no boyfriends sleeping over, etc..

But - and I stress the BUT - if it starts to impinge on an individual because of their faith, who otherwise wishes not to adhere to sharia law, THEN I will really dismiss it as a corruption of the freedoms our societies offer.

2c w/ change.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by sueloujo
If you live in a country..you abide by the laws of that country. We all have to do it....no grey areas. If you dont like the laws of that country..then go back home.


I hope Im not reiterating what others may have already said, but...

It would not overrule the laws governing the host country.

It would be for domestic matters where it would be optional to take it to a legal status within the host country.

The laws of the country would still be the overruling status in criminal activity, and not overrules by these courts.

At least, this is how it is pandered to the Australian people. Hard to argue with it, but we also have Aboriginal tribal law, that DOES outweigh the legal laws put in place here.. oO

I think I'll read the thread before posting more, incase I am indeed repeating the sentiments of others, OR the thread derails into something different where my posts would not offer anything to the topic at hand.



[edit on 30/6/2009 by badw0lf]



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:38 AM
link   
So many people complaining about Sharia law without even understanding British law. How can you comment on any law if you don't even understand your own?



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by symmetricAvenger

Originally posted by Laurauk
Everyone knew this was happening in the UK. Most have just decided to turn a blind eye. Oh we do not want to discriminate against muslims, lets have a muti cultural PC Brigade society, and bring this law through the backdoor.

Sadly this is what has happenned. Thanks to this Labour GOV. By the time we get rid of them it will be too late to do anything about it



there... let me show you how it sounds to someone with an IQ


Who is that? You don't mean.... Noo.. surely not..


lets get rid of the damn Muslims before its to late!!! ...

THEM would imply the people being talking about in this thread...

who is THEM? the Muslims or just anyone you have been brainwashed to hate?



Lets see.


Thanks to this Labour GOV. By the time we get rid of them it will be too late to do anything about it


Ahh, to the one with no IQ, it appears the them is in direct relation to the subject of the preceding statement. IE; the Labour GOV.

Are they in this thread? Wow, they probably are, come to think of it, at least in part.. Nothing precludes a member of government from joining the forums, I suppose.


And the bbc only STREAMS sessions of PARLIAMENT..with your lack of understanding or willingness to READ. what is the point?


^^



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by sueloujo
If you live in a country..you abide by the laws of that country. We all have to do it....no grey areas. If you dont like the laws of that country..then go back home.


And the laws of the UK say that using these type of arbitrary bodies for civil disputes is fine, in line with similar arbitary bodies that are used for jewish people, and for everyione (look up ACAS) in areas such as employment matters, and in business contract disputes and by sporting regulatory bodies.

So no one needs to "go home".

Especially not if they were born in the UK to begin with

Come on people.

Deny ignorance.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:48 AM
link   
Why do they call them courts if they are arbitration bodies, and not courts?

Why not call them arbitration boards or something to that effect?

As for the concept of following the same set of laws, if they follow the same set of laws, then there is no need for them. By definition of their existence, there are two flavors of justice now in operation in Brittain, handing out different decisions.

One class of justice is based upon religious belief, and the other is for the non-believers.

Once you establish a religious cast system, it is not good to be a non-believer among a minority of non-believers with a seperate justice applied to your caste.

You should immediately begin praying to Allah for mercy! Allah is merciful!


[edit on 30-6-2009 by Cyberbian]



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:51 AM
link   
we talk about muslims fitting in with British Culture? But what is British Culture?
Im British, but not sure I consider i totally fit into British Culture. So when we say, people must take on the culture of Britain. What do we expect. The women start wearing short skirts, binge drink at weekends and going to the bingo!



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
we talk about muslims fitting in with British Culture? But what is British Culture?
Im British, but not sure I consider i totally fit into British Culture. So when we say, people must take on the culture of Britain. What do we expect. The women start wearing short skirts, binge drink at weekends and going to the bingo!


To fit into the culture is to be like, anyone of any other race or religion who has emmigrated to Brittain in any prior wave of emmigration in Brittain's history. It is that simple.

I only know of one other example of "Seperate but Equal" in the history of nations. It did not work out so well. It was the black man in America.

Seperate but equal will split your nation like like a mellon dropped from a roof.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cyberbian
Why do they call them courts if they are arbitration bodies, and not courts?

Why not call them arbitration boards or something to that effect?

As for the concept of following the same set of laws, if they follow the same set of laws, then there is no need for them. By definition of their existence, there are two flavors of justice now in operation in Brittain, handing out different decisions.

One class of justice is based upon religious belief, and the other is for the non-believers.

Once you establish a religious cast system, it is not good to be a non-believer among a minority of non-believers with a seperate justice applied to your caste.

You should immediately begin praying to Allah for mercy! Allah is merciful!


[edit on 30-6-2009 by Cyberbian]


If your worried about names. Some of them are called mosque committees. There are not two flavours of laws in the UK as I explained in my earlier post, these bodies operate within the bounds of English law and are subservient to it. Would you ban Industrial relations tribunals? Family Conciliation Panels? Employment Tribunals?



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by symmetricAvenger
 



Before it was devolution, Scotland had its own Legal/Law system, any cook like you should know that!

So hush up run along now. Now westminster proposes, the Scottish parliement debates, weither or not it disposes of any laws the Uk Gov outs forward it up to them not Westminster!

I will stick with my original opinion, call me racist all you wnt, no other law apart from those set out by the legister should be allowed in the UK simple as that. Do not like my opinion tuff.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


So it is fine, if Muslim females do not have a say in the matter, It is okay for females to feel that thier rights are not being heard in these so called courts? There I thought the UK Valued females rights no matter what religion or race you are.

After all those females came here to flee the injustices they were undr in other countries.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join