/* */

PDA

View Full Version : A group is calling for the Sharia law to be removed from Britain



Rhubarb Tart
06-17-2010, 09:41 PM
A group is calling for the Sharia law to be removed from Britain completely.
I do not if I am allowed to post this as admins may regard it as anti Islamic. They have given several points why they think of the Sharia law, the one currently in place in Britain. Remove this if admins think this is anti islamic but I just wanted to let people know.

A new report by One Law for All has found Sharia Councils and Muslim Arbitration Tribunals to be in violation of UK law, public policy and human rights (see report here).

The report is being launched to coincide with a 20 June 2010 rally on the issue of Sharia law.

Based on an 8 March 2010 Seminar on Sharia Law, research, interviews, and One Law for All case files, the report has identified a number of problem areas:

- Sharia law’s civil code is arbitrary and discriminatory against women and children in particular. With the rise in the acceptance of Sharia courts, discrimination is being further institutionalised with some UK law firms additionally offering clients advice on Sharia law and the use of collaborative law.

- Sharia law is practiced in Britain primarily by Sharia Councils and Muslims Arbitration Tribunals. Both operate on religious principles and are harmful to women although Muslim Arbitration Tribunals are wrongly regarded as being of more concern because they operate as tribunals under the Arbitration Act 1996, making their rulings binding in law.

- Sharia Councils, on the other hand, claim to mediate on family issues but in practice often this differs little from arbitration: they frequently ask those appearing before them to sign an agreement to abide by their decisions; they call themselves courts, and the presiding imams, judges. Their decisions are then imposed and regarded as having the weight of legal judgements.

- There is neither control over the appointment of “judges” in Sharia Councils or Tribunals nor an independent mechanism for monitoring them. Clients often do not have access to legal advice and representation. The proceedings are not recorded, nor are there any searchable legal judgements, nor any real right of appeal.

- Sharia law cannot be compared to secular legal systems because it is considered sacred law that cannot be challenged. There is no scope to look at the interests of the individuals involved, as required by UK family law.

- These legal processes ignore both common law and due process, far less Human Rights, and provide little protection and safety for women in violent situations.

- There is a general assumption that those who attend Sharia courts do so voluntarily and that unfair decisions can be challenged in a British court. Many of the principles of Sharia law are contrary to British law and public policy, and would in theory therefore be unlikely to be upheld in a British court. In reality, however, women are often pressured by their families into going to these courts and adhering to unfair decisions, and may lack knowledge of English and their rights under British law. Moreover, refusal to settle a dispute in a Sharia court can give rise to threats and intimidation, or at best being ostracised.

According to Maryam Namazie, spokesperson of the One Law for All Campaign and an author of the report, “The existence of a parallel legal system that is denying a large section of the British population their fundamental human rights is scandalous. Our findings show that it is essential to abolish all religious courts in the UK. Their very existence and legitimisation puts pressure on vulnerable women not to assert their civil rights in a British court. As long as Sharia Councils and Tribunals are allowed to continue to make rulings on issues of family law, women will be pressured into accepting decisions which are prejudicial to them and their children.”

The report recommends that Sharia courts be closed on the grounds that they work against rather than for equality, and are incompatible with human rights. Recommendations include:

1. initiating a Human Rights challenge to Muslim Arbitration Tribunals and/or Sharia Councils
2. amending the Arbitration Act under which the Muslim Arbitration Tribunals operate in a similar way to which the Canadian equivalent of the Arbitration Act was amended in 2005 to exclude religious arbitration
3. launching a major and nationwide helpline and information campaign to inform people of their rights under British law
4. proposing legislation under the EU Citizens Rights Initiative to address the issue EU-wide, and
5. strengthening secularism and the separation of religion from the state, the judicial system and education, in order to more fully protect citizenship rights.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
aamirsaab
06-18-2010, 11:20 AM
Fail at the ex-muslim spokesperson and her ''arguments''

I can't be asked to do a point for point (the amount of fail is too much), so I'll leave it at this; the group is clearly biased and has the knowledge of a facebook application. I'd treat them much the same as BNP and their ilk. Big mouths, small brains.
Reply

aadil77
06-18-2010, 04:01 PM
the hypocrites have failed to mention jewish courts
Reply

Supreme
06-18-2010, 04:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by aadil77
the hypocrites have failed to mention jewish courts
A perfectly valid point. You can't go on about the Sharia courts without noting the equal ill treatment of women and the like perpetuated by the Beth Din courts also operating in the UK. However, neither court has the power to enforce rulings against British law, such as death, or lashes.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Rhubarb Tart
06-18-2010, 09:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Supreme
A perfectly valid point. You can't go on about the Sharia courts without noting the equal ill treatment of women and the like perpetuated by the Beth Din courts also operating in the UK. However, neither court has the power to enforce rulings against British law, such as death, or lashes.
Exactly! The sharia "law" in place in Britain is not even a law in Britain. So they are baking at the wrong tree or shall I say baking at thin air. It is merely there as a choice, muslims can choose whether they want it or not. And what this sharia law enforces can not go against the Bristish law in place. But this group in particular is against all religion and also think it should be removed from education system including Christainity. But apparantly they want to sort out the sharia "law" (bwt I use this term loosely) first.
Reply

Amadeus85
06-18-2010, 10:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Supreme
A perfectly valid point. You can't go on about the Sharia courts without noting the equal ill treatment of women and the like perpetuated by the Beth Din courts also operating in the UK. However, neither court has the power to enforce rulings against British law, such as death, or lashes.

So the choice is simple, either a secular state with legal jewish and islamic and sikh and mormon courts or a catholic state. Prince Harry calls himself a dictator, erase parliament and with support of army creates a truly indendent, souvereign state. Ahh, dreaming ;D
Reply

Supreme
06-18-2010, 11:00 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Amadeus85
So the choice is simple, either a secular state with legal jewish and islamic and sikh and mormon courts or a catholic state. Prince Harry calls himself a dictator, erase parliament and with support of army creates a truly indendent, souvereign state. Ahh, dreaming ;D
A Catholic state which responds every few years to a Papal request for a Crusade, where Protestants and other theists are forced into hiding and where you erect 50 foot models of the Virgin Mary on every street corner?

No thanks, I'll stick with secularism for now :D
Reply

Nirvana
06-19-2010, 03:22 AM
A see that nowadays there are a lot of ex-Muslims who have discovered they can make a decent living as "consultants" and "spokesmen" or "advisors" for anti-Muslim organisations. There are some who are paid handsomely for being the public face of anti-Muslim campaigns. Muslim-haters can see the value in having someone called "Ali" or "Khan" or "Abdul" to insult Islam. It makes it look like they are speaking about a subject they know very well. But none of these ex-Muslim advisors and consultants were ever scholars. They are normally people who had bad experiences from their family or community and have now rejected Islam because they confuse culture with religion.
Reply

aadil77
06-20-2010, 11:30 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Nirvana
A see that nowadays there are a lot of ex-Muslims who have discovered they can make a decent living as "consultants" and "spokesmen" or "advisors" for anti-Muslim organisations. There are some who are paid handsomely for being the public face of anti-Muslim campaigns. Muslim-haters can see the value in having someone called "Ali" or "Khan" or "Abdul" to insult Islam. It makes it look like they are speaking about a subject they know very well. But none of these ex-Muslim advisors and consultants were ever scholars. They are normally people who had bad experiences from their family or community and have now rejected Islam because they confuse culture with religion.
I doubt these ex - 'muslims' were ever muslims to begin with, most of them would have been faasiqs who would have wanted to live the kuffar lifestyle. Then people like these who know nothing about islam start spewing hatred and create groups to 'help' people leave islam. I think this is one of the reasons apostates are meant to be killed, they go out in the public and spread fitna for other muslims, they then give our deen a bad name to non-muslims.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
06-20-2010, 03:59 PM
since when was shariah law implemented in Britain to begin with :hmm:
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
06-21-2010, 02:30 PM
^why is it every post i read of yours, there seems to be some kind of drama queen attitude used to get your points across :hmm:
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
06-21-2010, 03:17 PM
There are differences of opinions on that particular issue. Most scholars agree that those who left Islam out of ignorance or because they have been mistreated by people in name of Islam, when it isn’t then death should be avoided. This can be applied to those who have created this website, so I don’t necessarily agree with abdi. E.g. if one was forced to marry in name of Islam by families and friends, or those that have been beaten by their husband in unjust manner or those who have witnessed unjust murder in the name of Islam etc... These people can leave Islam for these reasons and they do so out of ignorance. Others believe it should only apply to those who left the religion during a war because s/he may help the enemies.
Reply

aadil77
06-21-2010, 03:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by questioner8
What's this, suport for killing apostates!
Just where are the 'moderates' of islam?
Its a part of our faith, even 'moderates' cannot deny whats written in the authentic hadith

But before you get all excited this punishment is only carried out by law enforcemnt in muslim states, and only to people dumb enough to anounce they're apostates


Lets see what the bible says about apostacy:

Deuteronomy 13:6-9 "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people."
Reply

Pygoscelis
06-21-2010, 03:52 PM
If apostates are to be murdered in a true muslim nation, then what more impetus do we need to halt any attempts at people creating a true muslim nation? And how could a true muslim nation claim to be "of peace"?

Also note that pointing at the bible and showing its ugly side does nothing to diminish the ugly side of the Quran.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
06-21-2010, 03:57 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
If apostates are to be murdered in a true muslim nation, then what more impetus do we need to halt any attempts at people creating a true muslim nation? And how could a true muslim nation claim to be "of peace"?

Also note that pointing at the bible and showing its ugly side does nothing to diminish the ugly side of the Quran.

note to mods: umm why is this person with these ugly opinions still here?
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
06-21-2010, 04:02 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
If apostates are to be murdered in a true muslim nation, then what more impetus do we need to halt any attempts at people creating a true muslim nation? And how could a true muslim nation claim to be "of peace"?

Also note that pointing at the bible and showing its ugly side does nothing to diminish the ugly side of the Quran.
Hey!

Read this: http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...-apostasy.html

I think you would have better understanding if you read this thread. and no it not as clear cut as abdi makes out.

bye, sweet106
Reply

Zafran
06-21-2010, 04:03 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by aadil77
Its a part of our faith, even 'moderates' cannot deny whats written in the Quran.

But before you get all excited this punishment is only carried out by law enforcemnt in muslim states, and only to people dumb enough to anounce they're apostates


Lets see what the bible says about apostacy:

Deuteronomy 13:6-9 "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people."
what verse are we talking about here in the Quran??
Reply

Rhubarb Tart
06-21-2010, 04:07 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Zafran
what verse are we talking about here in the Quran??
I read there isnt any verse in the quran? it is only mentioned in hadith.

http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...ml#post1340810
Reply

Zafran
06-21-2010, 05:48 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sweet106
I read there isnt any verse in the quran? it is only mentioned in hadith.

http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...ml#post1340810
salaam

Yeah so whats aadil77 talking about

peace
Reply

aadil77
06-21-2010, 06:10 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Zafran
salaam

Yeah so whats aadil77 talking about

peace
chill I meant hadith
Reply

aadil77
06-21-2010, 06:16 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
Also note that pointing at the bible and showing its ugly side does nothing to diminish the ugly side of the Quran.
theres nothing ugly about the quran and it makes sense to point out verses from the bible to someone who trys to justify them
Reply

kite runner
06-22-2010, 10:44 AM
There is no ugly side to the Quran...don't compare it to the bible of today
Reply

aadil77
06-22-2010, 11:58 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by questioner8
This is from the Old Covenant in the Old Testament!
so its been abolished has it? do christians no longer believe in the old testament?
Reply

Ramadhan
06-22-2010, 03:40 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by questioner8
So the way you deal with people whose opinions you don't like is to what, ban them!


Obviously brain power is not your strongest suit, so here let me explain to you:

Differences in opinion is clearly allowed here, otherwise you would had been kicked out of this forum right after your first post.
BUT, blasphemy of Allah SWT, Islam, its prophets and messengers, and Qur'an is definitely NOT allowed.
And Pygoscelis clearly has broken this rule by saying that the Qur'an has ugly side, and without even elaborating why or giving reasons or justifications, and a long time member calling for him to be kicked out from this forum in my opinion is still quite reasonable.

Capische?
Reply

Pygoscelis
06-22-2010, 04:10 PM
If you spit fire, don't wear a flammable shirt.
Reply

Ramadhan
06-22-2010, 04:24 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
If you spit fire, don't wear a flammable shirt.
You can discuss why you don't like passages of the Qur'an in the appropriate threads or you can even make your own, that is if you have the guts to do it.

You don't make your hosts angry by spitting in their faces. That is a basic in morality.
Oh wait, you atheists have no moral standards.
Reply

Amadeus85
06-22-2010, 10:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by aadil77
so its been abolished has it? do christians no longer believe in the old testament?
Only muslims and some protestants follow or try to follow all jewish rules, good or bad, wise or stupid. Catholics and orthodox christians agreed at the very beginning (with the words of St. Paul) that OT has not only God's wisdom included but also many things from a normal everyday life of an ancient tribe called Israel. Jews in OT made many mistakes, many crimes and not ALL things from OT come from God. OT is NOT literal word of God, but its inspiried by God, but not everything from 1st to last page.

In future I will make thread (unless its rejected) why actually muslims and protestants play jews.
Reply

Pygoscelis
06-23-2010, 01:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by naidamar
You can discuss why you don't like passages of the Qur'an in the appropriate threads or you can even make your own, that is if you have the guts to do it.

You don't make your hosts angry by spitting in their faces. That is a basic in morality.
Oh wait, you atheists have no moral standards.
Pot, meet kettle. Don't spit in peoples' faces if you don't want to be spat at. And note, I didn't spit at anybody the way you are right here.
Reply

جوري
06-23-2010, 02:42 AM
rules of thumb those concerned about sharia law:

1- If you are not studied in the law then don't speak about it.. if you aren't studied in Islamic law, then you have even less a right to speak about it, least of which to voice a concern for it doesn't affect you personally and we all know you can't stand Muslims to feign interest as to whether the law is just or not when it comes to running their own affairs.

2- Sharia'a law doesn't affect you personally as in it is made only to govern Muslims, then you should butt all the more out, since it is really no concern of yours.. unless the concern of course is some irrational fear that your moral less society will prosper better in regions run by Islamic law and that frightens you somewhat that it will be the supreme law of the land (which it shall insha'Allah) in which case the puny protests will do nothing since in a 'democratic society' it is the majority rule that reigns supreme.. if the majority at some point desire Islamic law and you are unhappy about it, then you can go weep about it some where else and to other like minded twits!
Reply

Ramadhan
06-23-2010, 04:01 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
Pot, meet kettle. Don't spit in peoples' faces if you don't want to be spat at. And note, I didn't spit at anybody the way you are right here.
You were spitting at the muslims by calling the Qur'an has ugly side.
Or do you want to retract that statement now?

If you are not going to retract your statement, then elaborate why/how the Qur'an has ugly side.

On the other hand, muslims members of this forum have discussed thoroughly and pointed out the ugliness in the bible in many many threads.
Reply

marwen
06-23-2010, 10:55 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by questioner8
Are you sure there is nothing in Islam against Democracy?
Reader comment on item: The Citizen of the 21st Century: How Far, How Fast?


Submitted by Karl Ericson (United States), Jul 18, 2002 at 17:21
You wrote: "there is nothing in Islam that necessarily contradicts democracy". Tell that to the Muslims.

Sheik Omar Bakri Muhammed, as of 12/4/01 is the judge of the Shari'ah court for the United Kingdom, the Secretary General of The Islamic World League, the principal lecturer of the London school of Shari'ah, the Leader of Al-Muhajiroun & the Spokesman of The International Islamic Front. On his web page The Humiliation of Muslims by America he criticizes the UN for propagating the Kufr (non-believer) ideology of Democracy.

Abul A'la Mawdudi, founder of the Jamaat-i Islami in India, has argued that if democracy is conceived as a limited form of popular sovereignty, restricted and directed by God's law, there is no incompatibility with Islam, but Mawdudi concluded that Islam is the very antithesis of secular Western democracy based solely on the sovereignty of the people. (Quoted in Esposito and Piscatori, Democratization and Islam, p. 436. See also Abul A'la Mawdudi, A Political Theory of Islam, in, Donohue and John Esposito, eds. Islam in Transition: Muslim Perspectives (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982), pp. 253-54.) On the other hand, Sayyid Qutb, a leading traditionalist theoretician of the Muslim Brotherhood, executed by the Egyptian government in 1966, objected to the idea of popular sovereignty altogether: Qutb believed that "the Islamic state must be based on the Quranic principle of consultation or shurah [on the interpretation of Shari'a], and that the Islamic law or Shari'a is so complete a legal and moral system that no further legislation is possible or necessary." (Quoted in Hudson, "After the Gulf War," p. 436. For more on Qutb's views on Islam, see John L. Esposito, ed., Voices of Resurgent Islam (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983))

In addition Jamie Glazov in an article titled Why Islam Hates Democracy wrote:

In the eyes of Islam, the very notion of democracy is demonized. In Islam, after all, Allah is sovereign, which means that humans constructing their own laws is sinful. The Koran and Sharia Law give Muslims all the laws they need...

In Islam, democracy, as well as the very notion of the freedom of human conscience, represents a dangerous deviation from the Koran and the Sharia. Elections are seen as a form of blasphemy. They are Satan's vehicle to destroy the Koran

Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech to the House Government Reform Committee on September 20, 2001, also argued that hatred of democracy fuels hatred of the West. He explained: "The soldiers of militant Islam do not hate the West because of Israel, they hate Israel because of the West. They see it as an island of Western democratic values in a Muslim Arab sea. This is why they call Israel the Little Satan, to distinguish it clearly from the country that has always been and will always be the Great Satan -- the United States of America."

Armand De Decker, president of the Belgian senate, in regard to the Belgium's 350,000 Moslems said: "We've got to defend our values, our liberty, our democracy with open eyes, knowing that they most certainly intend to destroy them."

I do not think it is a coincidence that the one democracy in the Muslim world, Turkey, is a secular democracy.
Thank you for this detailed post.

But the article here has the same wrong idea about muslims. The same superficial idea all non-muslims have because they don't want to learn about islam from the inside, they want to learn about islam from other non-muslims who don't know what islam is. It's like the blind who is guiding another blind (if this makes sense).

Now, who said muslims look at Democracy as a demonized system, or as a blasphemy ? did muslims say that ? no!

In Islam, democracy, as well as the very notion of the freedom of human conscience, represents a dangerous deviation from the Koran and the Sharia. Elections are seen as a form of blasphemy. They are Satan's vehicle to destroy the Koran
lol, this is as funny as stupidly said.
It describes muslims as a stupid medieval community that is illogically explaining every new thing they discover. Or like the prehistoric man in movies who discovered fire and thought it was a demonized power.

Muslims think democracy is a good value. Muslims even used democracy to choose the muslim leader in first islamic khilafas, and now with the recent form of democracy muslims have no problem applying democracy. But there is just 3 reasons why some muslims think democracy will not be useful :
1) the real application of democracy is not as correct as expected, even in western or secular countries, they claim they have democracy, but in reality there is many cases where democracy is ignored.
2) Democracy is not always good (not in 100% of the cases), we can't say that if the biggest part of people are voting for something, it means that thing is correct. Before we discovered the earth is round, the whole world was thinking it's flat, but just one man thought it's round. And it turned out that the whole world was wrong and just one scientist was correct.
3) in a 100% muslim country, all the people are following islamic laws. And the muslim leader is following islam, so democracy will not needed as a political system as every one is following the same rules. But democracy can still be used to chose the leader who will correctly apply islamic rules.

So that's it. No demonized concepts. And no anti-democracy ideas exist in islam. It's just muslims don't think a secular democratic political system won't be that efficient in a muslim world.
Reply

aadil77
06-23-2010, 12:02 PM
Among Muslims, only the Turks have experienced any form of self-rule and that was the result of a remarkable man, Ataturk, who literally forced them to accept westernization. In doing so, he imposed a strict divide between Islam and the governing of Turkey. This has been maintained only because the Turkish military has judiciously stepped in time and again to crush any Islamist party seeking to impose the Islam's system of rule.

The religion of Islam and democracy are totally incompatible. Only the separation of church and state, only the rule of civil law can grant Muslims-the vast majority of whom are good, decent people---the freedom they want and many Muslims, such as those in Iran, do want it.
Look how the kuffar praise the man that destroyed the khilafa - another one of their puppets
Reply

جوري
06-23-2010, 12:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by questioner8
Since when does islam accept democracy?

Since you know nothing about Islam, or Islamic jurisprudence I suggest you simply shut up!

all the best
Reply

Karl
06-23-2010, 12:38 PM
How could Sharia law get any traction in Britain anyway? Britain is a Chardonay Socialist nation now, even the Christians have no say. Athiests rule there now with capitalism for the rich and socialism for the poor.
To have Sharia in Britain now would be like pushing Jewish law back in Nazi Germany.
Maybe if Britain had a massive majority of Muslims and they had the power, Sharia law would be feasible.
And all is as Allah wills, so there is no point getting all worked up about it.
Reply

aamirsaab
06-23-2010, 01:05 PM
So many posts.

So little time.

So I will just lock this thread.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!