Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts

Osman · **Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

Gordon Brown's new minister for race relations has attacked sharia courts, insisting that the Muslim community in Britain is not “advanced” enough to have its own legal system.

Sadiq Khan, whose comments will have added impact because he is a Muslim himself, has also warned that the growing number of tribunals based on Islamic codes could entrench discrimination against women.

Khan, who became minister for community cohesion in the government reshuffle this month, said: “The burden is on those who want to open up these courts to persuade us why they should do it.”

His comments contrast with those of figures such as Lord Phillips, the lord chief justice, who said in July that Islamic law could be used to settle marital and financial disputes.

Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, has said the establishment of sharia courts in the future “seems unavoidable” in Britain.

In a wide-ranging interview on race and immigration, Khan, 38, the Labour MP for Tooting, south London, also: Warned that an economic downturn could fuel ethnic tensions. Demanded an increase in benefits for immigrants with larger families. Admitted that government anti-terror laws had caused “problems” in race relations. Called on public bodies to cut translation services to encourage immigrants to learn English.

Khan’s outspoken remarks on sharia courts are likely to cause the most controversy.

The Sunday Times last month revealed that the government had quietly sanctioned a network of sharia judges, empowering them to issue legally binding rulings on disputes including finance, divorce, inheritance and domestic violence.

Supporters of sharia courts point to the “beth din” courts long used by the Jewish community to resolve family disputes. However, Khan said sharia courts could not be compared with the beth din.

“I have seen good examples of Jewish courts,” he said. “I would be very concerned about sharia courts applying in the UK. I don’t think there is that level of sophistication that there is in Jewish law.

“Jewish law has a long history. There are not the same areas of concern that there are with sharia law. At some stage in the future I do not rule out the possibility that the Muslim diaspora in this country may be advanced enough. But now is not the right time.”

Khan said he was aware such blunt criticism of his own community would lead to controversy, but he insisted: “Mass migration [among Asian Muslims] started 30 years ago. Jewish migration started 500 years ago.

“It sends the wrong message at a time when I am trying to say to all citizens, ‘learn English, get involved in your community’.

“You should practise your faith, eat halal food, fast, have planning permission for a mosque, be buried in the Islamic way, you can have your son circumcised. What is the purpose – what is the loophole that sharia courts are closing?”

Khan said he believed the tribunals would only exacerbate the unfair treatment of Muslim women.

“There is unequal bargaining power between men and women in this country,” he said. “Women can be abused and persuaded to do things that they shouldn’t have to do.”

Until now, Khan, formerly a human rights lawyer, has perhaps been best known as the MP who was bugged by the police when he visited a constituent in prison.

He told how the incident, first reported by The Sunday Times in February, led to arguments with Muslim friends. “People said: ‘You have been lecturing us and even you are being bugged. What chance have we got?’”

Related Links

Source

Osman · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

A different side to the coin. Comments, please?

barney · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

I'd agree with him, with the exception of saying that the Bethdin courts were superior. The Bethdin courts are also not needed or wanted or democratic.

Osman · 06:24 PM

Thanks Barney. Are you aware of the English arbitration law which states that two sides can agree to a third party to arbitrate in a dispute?

What's your take on that? Do you think that law should be abolished?

**aamirsaab** · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

Since this country is not an Islamic state, we shouldn't (and cannot) have sharia law in the UK (unless of course it's the existing stuff, which everyone is fine with anywho cus it's stuff like nikah etc - no actual laws). First and foremost, we have to get practicing Islam properly. If we can't even do that, then there is little point in sharia law in the UK - we must lead by example, then others will follow.

Osman · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

aamirsaab,

Quote:

Originally Posted by aamirsaab

(unless of course it's the existing stuff, which everyone is fine with anywho cus it's stuff like nikah etc - no actual laws).

It's the existing stuff that we're on about here, and everyone is definitely not fine with it.

As for the rest of your post, I agree with it.

**aamirsaab** · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osman

aamirsaab,

It's the existing stuff that we're on about here, and everyone is definitely not fine with it.
....

Oh, I thought they were referring to adding more sharia laws into the UK. Hmm, I'll have to let this one unfold a bit more before I can make any more comments.

Osman · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

It's pretty much the same thing that has been unfolding since February this year. You know...the whole Archbishop of Canterbury thing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7232661.stm

barney · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

Yup, but i dont agree with it applying to the case of Sharia.

Settling dispuits through Marriage counsellers or soliciters or a discussion group isnt the same as settling dispuits according to the immutable word of the creator of the universe and all universes not yet known

Marriage counsellers can discuss and debate things, they allow for progress (change).
Sharia cant be discussed or debated or progress.
It also represents in my veiw a return to the morals of the ancients, always a bad thing.

Skye Ephémérine · 08:37 PM

It will be met with litany, but eventually it will settle. I believe that as per prophecy
"You will invade the Arabian Peninsula and God will grant it. Then Persia and God will grant it. Then you shall invade Ar-Rum (Europe) and God will grant it. Then you shall attack the Antichrist and God shall give him to you"The Messenger of God was then asked "which of the two cities will be conquered first - Constantinople or Rome?" and the Holy Prophet PBUH replied : " The city of Heraclius (Constantinople) will be conquered FIRST"

so I think this is actually a auspicate of Muslim rule even if it starts small..
If there will be 'injustice' toward women, I assume it is because someone didn't study jurisprudence properly or are themselves wicked and wish to deny women their due rights not that it is anything with sharia law itself. I reckon someone like Britteny spears whose paying thousands to he rx- husband in alimony would be thrilled with sharia law, which would not only guarantee he can't touch her money but forces him to pay alimony even if he makes the smaller income ..

the west is the last to talk of injustice, aside from that, they really should concentrate on their own affairs with their moral degeneracy and economic collapse..

I am not sure why everything is met with so much resistance, you'd think they were living in some sort of utopia to shake their disapproving fingers.. I disagree that we have to wait for the rise of the Muslim empire.. I believe to get there we must take small steps, and this is a good small step!

Osman · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

Hi barney,

Quote:

Originally Posted by barney

Yup, but i dont agree with it applying to the case of Sharia.

Settling dispuits through Marriage counsellers or soliciters or a discussion group isnt the same as settling dispuits according to the immutable word of the creator of the universe and all universes not yet known

Marriage counsellers can discuss and debate things, they allow for progress (change).
Sharia cant be discussed or debated or progress.
It also represents in my veiw a return to the morals of the ancients, always a bad thing.

Sure, but why should any of that matter if both parties agree to using Sharia as a mediator? Shouldn't they be free to make that choice?

Regards

barney · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

Then they should fill their boots, if you acknowlage the expression. But the decison should not be recognised in English Law. It should hold the same weight as two neighbours who have a chat over a cup of tea with a mutual freind and their freind decideds what they should do.

I dont want to start waxing large about womens rights and injustices because I'm certain I can use all that blather for another thread. Simply put, special interest groups should have no say in actual enforcable law. Otherwise My religion says I can rob banks with Impunity and i'm going to be tried by the high preist. The high preist is my Dad and the jury is my pet dog. Dont diss it. Its my religion.

Aaron85 · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by barney

Then they should fill their boots, if you acknowlage the expression. But the decison should not be recognised in English Law. It should hold the same weight as two neighbours who have a chat over a cup of tea with a mutual freind and their freind decideds what they should do.

I dont want to start waxing large about womens rights and injustices because I'm certain I can use all that blather for another thread. Simply put, special interest groups should have no say in actual enforcable law. Otherwise My religion says I can rob banks with Impunity and i'm going to be tried by the high preist. The high preist is my Dad and the jury is my pet dog. Dont diss it. Its my religion.

No one of us thought so far that choosing that muslim as MP was a great trick made by the labour. The muslim MP seems to be completely assimilated, more brittish than native Brittons. But as a muslim it is easier for him to say such things about sharia law which was expected from the Goverment.
Sometimes we forget that people who built such great country like England cant be stupid. Moreover, they are very clever men(except some leftist radicals) and this may be one of these examples.

Skye Ephémérine · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-12-2008

Shouldn't you use examples from actual religious laws before coming up with your usual inventive scenarios?
The law you so enjoy was written by a bunch of white fogies in funny wigs and pantyhose and that for some inexplicable reason is better than divine law? and we have all seen just how wonderful it is indeed!

Only two religions have jurisprudence as part of creed -- Jesus didn't hang around long enough to let you how to run a country politically or in a judicial manner..
Islam did, and worked rather well for centuries and insha'Allah it will be implemented again!

If civil suits don't concern you, on the account you are not Muslim, I am not sure why it is so upsetting?
England has imposed its stupidity and imperialism on the world long enough, it is about time they gave something back.. it would also be nice if they could just shut up about it.
Talk about a worthless little island I'd love to flick off with my index finger-- or the finger next to it!

wth1257 · **Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts -** 10-13-2008

[quote=Skye Ephémérine;1024857]Shouldn't you use examples from actual religious laws before coming up with your usual inventive scenarios?
The law you so enjoy was written by a bunch of white fogies in funny wigs and pantyhose and that for some inexplicable reason is better than divine law? and we have all seen just how wonderful it is indeed![quote]

Actually, If British Law is anything like American law it may have origionated with 18th century enlightenment thinkers, but it's present state is the result of years and years of popular debate, discourse, and collective decision makeing that has fashioned a government more or less in line with the will of the sovreign popular.

You may consider "divine law" better than law from the democratic process, however the latter enjoys a universal accesability that the former does not and is ammendable to the will of the people.

Quote:

Only two religions have jurisprudence as part of creed -- Jesus didn't hang around long enough to let you how to run a country politically or in a judicial manner..
Islam did, and worked rather well for centuries and insha'Allah it will be implemented again!

Well, if I had to choose between Bush and Mohammad for President I would, without the slightest hesitation, pick Mohammad however you need to be specific which variant of Islamic law you feel worked so well. Islamic law certianly is interesting and very advanced for it's time however I am willing to be any school you pick would have certain components that modern secular people would not like.

Quote:

If civil suits don't concern you, on the account you are not Muslim, I am not sure why it is so upsetting?

Perhapse he feels uncomftorable with multiple court systems geared to specific religious groups that may further isolate and alienate the British Muslim population from the rest of the country (no idea if that;'s true, just a hunch)

Quote:

England has imposed its stupidity and imperialism on the world long enough

England has also exported quite a bit of brilliance over the past few centuries. You have them to thank for the computer you are typing on. Particularly an English gay man who ended up killing himself with a poison apple after being forced into hormone treatments via Englands religiously motivated anti-gay laws.

Quote:

it is about time they gave something back.. it would also be nice if they could just shut up about it.

They have every right to debate their country's court systems.

Quote:

Talk about a worthless little island I'd love to flick off with my index finger-- or the finger next to it!

How lovely.

	(#1 (permalink))
Osman Account Disabled Status: Offline Posts: 3,571 Reputation: 16416 Rep Power: 0 Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Warrington, England Gender: Way of Life: Muslim	Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 Gordon Brown's new minister for race relations has attacked sharia courts, insisting that the Muslim community in Britain is not “advanced” enough to have its own legal system. Sadiq Khan, whose comments will have added impact because he is a Muslim himself, has also warned that the growing number of tribunals based on Islamic codes could entrench discrimination against women. Khan, who became minister for community cohesion in the government reshuffle this month, said: “The burden is on those who want to open up these courts to persuade us why they should do it.” His comments contrast with those of figures such as Lord Phillips, the lord chief justice, who said in July that Islamic law could be used to settle marital and financial disputes. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, has said the establishment of sharia courts in the future “seems unavoidable” in Britain. In a wide-ranging interview on race and immigration, Khan, 38, the Labour MP for Tooting, south London, also: Warned that an economic downturn could fuel ethnic tensions. Demanded an increase in benefits for immigrants with larger families. Admitted that government anti-terror laws had caused “problems” in race relations. Called on public bodies to cut translation services to encourage immigrants to learn English. Khan’s outspoken remarks on sharia courts are likely to cause the most controversy. The Sunday Times last month revealed that the government had quietly sanctioned a network of sharia judges, empowering them to issue legally binding rulings on disputes including finance, divorce, inheritance and domestic violence. Supporters of sharia courts point to the “beth din” courts long used by the Jewish community to resolve family disputes. However, Khan said sharia courts could not be compared with the beth din. “I have seen good examples of Jewish courts,” he said. “I would be very concerned about sharia courts applying in the UK. I don’t think there is that level of sophistication that there is in Jewish law. “Jewish law has a long history. There are not the same areas of concern that there are with sharia law. At some stage in the future I do not rule out the possibility that the Muslim diaspora in this country may be advanced enough. But now is not the right time.” Khan said he was aware such blunt criticism of his own community would lead to controversy, but he insisted: “Mass migration [among Asian Muslims] started 30 years ago. Jewish migration started 500 years ago. “It sends the wrong message at a time when I am trying to say to all citizens, ‘learn English, get involved in your community’. “You should practise your faith, eat halal food, fast, have planning permission for a mosque, be buried in the Islamic way, you can have your son circumcised. What is the purpose – what is the loophole that sharia courts are closing?” Khan said he believed the tribunals would only exacerbate the unfair treatment of Muslim women. “There is unequal bargaining power between men and women in this country,” he said. “Women can be abused and persuaded to do things that they shouldn’t have to do.” Until now, Khan, formerly a human rights lawyer, has perhaps been best known as the MP who was bugged by the police when he visited a constituent in prison. He told how the incident, first reported by The Sunday Times in February, led to arguments with Muslim friends. “People said: ‘You have been lecturing us and even you are being bugged. What chance have we got?’” Related Links Sharia courts are extending their reach UK’s first official sharia courts Source

	(#2 (permalink))
Osman Account Disabled Status: Offline Posts: 3,571 Reputation: 16416 Rep Power: 0 Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Warrington, England Gender: Way of Life: Muslim	Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 A different side to the coin. Comments, please?

	(#3 (permalink))
barney Account Disabled Status: Offline Posts: 2,477 Reputation: 8201 Rep Power: 0 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: England Gender: Way of Life: Agnostic	Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 I'd agree with him, with the exception of saying that the Bethdin courts were superior. The Bethdin courts are also not needed or wanted or democratic.

	(#4 (permalink))
Osman Account Disabled Status: Offline Posts: 3,571 Reputation: 16416 Rep Power: 0 Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Warrington, England Gender: Way of Life: Muslim	Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 Thanks Barney. Are you aware of the English arbitration law which states that two sides can agree to a third party to arbitrate in a dispute? What's your take on that? Do you think that law should be abolished? Last edited by Osman; 10-12-2008 at 06:24 PM.

	(#8 (permalink))
Osman Account Disabled Status: Offline Posts: 3,571 Reputation: 16416 Rep Power: 0 Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Warrington, England Gender: Way of Life: Muslim	Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 It's pretty much the same thing that has been unfolding since February this year. You know...the whole Archbishop of Canterbury thing. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7232661.stm

	(#9 (permalink))
barney Account Disabled Status: Offline Posts: 2,477 Reputation: 8201 Rep Power: 0 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: England Gender: Way of Life: Agnostic	Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 Yup, but i dont agree with it applying to the case of Sharia. Settling dispuits through Marriage counsellers or soliciters or a discussion group isnt the same as settling dispuits according to the immutable word of the creator of the universe and all universes not yet known Marriage counsellers can discuss and debate things, they allow for progress (change). Sharia cant be discussed or debated or progress. It also represents in my veiw a return to the morals of the ancients, always a bad thing.

	(#10 (permalink))
Skye Ephémérine Yes I am Grouchy! Status: Offline Posts: 7,855 Reputation: 52913 Rep Power: 88 Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: In the Rictus of Revenge Gender: Way of Life: Muslim	Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 It will be met with litany, but eventually it will settle. I believe that as per prophecy "You will invade the Arabian Peninsula and God will grant it. Then Persia and God will grant it. Then you shall invade Ar-Rum (Europe) and God will grant it. Then you shall attack the Antichrist and God shall give him to you"The Messenger of God was then asked "which of the two cities will be conquered first - Constantinople or Rome?" and the Holy Prophet PBUH replied : " The city of Heraclius (Constantinople) will be conquered FIRST" so I think this is actually a auspicate of Muslim rule even if it starts small.. If there will be 'injustice' toward women, I assume it is because someone didn't study jurisprudence properly or are themselves wicked and wish to deny women their due rights not that it is anything with sharia law itself. I reckon someone like Britteny spears whose paying thousands to he rx- husband in alimony would be thrilled with sharia law, which would not only guarantee he can't touch her money but forces him to pay alimony even if he makes the smaller income .. the west is the last to talk of injustice, aside from that, they really should concentrate on their own affairs with their moral degeneracy and economic collapse.. I am not sure why everything is met with so much resistance, you'd think they were living in some sort of utopia to shake their disapproving fingers.. I disagree that we have to wait for the rise of the Muslim empire.. I believe to get there we must take small steps, and this is a good small step! __________________ *For the skeptic, no amount of proof will be enough, and for the believer, no amount of proof is necessary.* Tous articles prohibés sont sujets à saisie Last edited by Skye Ephémérine; 10-12-2008 at 08:37 PM.

	(#12 (permalink))
barney Account Disabled Status: Offline Posts: 2,477 Reputation: 8201 Rep Power: 0 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: England Gender: Way of Life: Agnostic	Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 Then they should fill their boots, if you acknowlage the expression. But the decison should not be recognised in English Law. It should hold the same weight as two neighbours who have a chat over a cup of tea with a mutual freind and their freind decideds what they should do. I dont want to start waxing large about womens rights and injustices because I'm certain I can use all that blather for another thread. Simply put, special interest groups should have no say in actual enforcable law. Otherwise My religion says I can rob banks with Impunity and i'm going to be tried by the high preist. The high preist is my Dad and the jury is my pet dog. Dont diss it. Its my religion.

	(#14 (permalink))
Skye Ephémérine Yes I am Grouchy! Status: Offline Posts: 7,855 Reputation: 52913 Rep Power: 88 Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: In the Rictus of Revenge Gender: Way of Life: Muslim	Re: Muslims rebuffed over sharia courts - 10-12-2008 Shouldn't you use examples from actual religious laws before coming up with your usual inventive scenarios? The law you so enjoy was written by a bunch of white fogies in funny wigs and pantyhose and that for some inexplicable reason is better than divine law? and we have all seen just how wonderful it is indeed! Only two religions have jurisprudence as part of creed -- Jesus didn't hang around long enough to let you how to run a country politically or in a judicial manner.. Islam did, and worked rather well for centuries and insha'Allah it will be implemented again! If civil suits don't concern you, on the account you are not Muslim, I am not sure why it is so upsetting? England has imposed its stupidity and imperialism on the world long enough, it is about time they gave something back.. it would also be nice if they could just shut up about it. Talk about a worthless little island I'd love to flick off with my index finger-- or the finger next to it! __________________ *For the skeptic, no amount of proof will be enough, and for the believer, no amount of proof is necessary.* Tous articles prohibés sont sujets à saisie