Growing use of Sharia by UK Muslims

[serena77]

we can't help who we are related to.... won't hold it against you brother.
Serena

 

[Maryan0]

Ah... I suppose I should not mention that I am actually related to Newt Gingrich. By both blood and marriage, apparently. :hmm:

I'm actually very closely related to someone that I consider not a very good person who is well known among certain groups in my country.You can't choose your relatives...
Salam

 

[GuestFellow]

Salaam,

Even if they ban it, it's not enforceable. You can't stop people from solving their own personal problems in private. Geez. The courts would prefer people to solve their own problems as they have more important cases to deal with.

 

[Who Am I?]

True. You can pick your nose, but you can't pick your family, and if you try to pick your family's noses, well that says stuff about you that I don't even want to think about. ;D

Thanks, guys.

 

[Tyrion]

Ah... I suppose I should not mention that I am actually related to Newt Gingrich. By both blood and marriage, apparently.

Think you could tell him to go away?

 

[Who Am I?]

Think you could tell him to go away?

I wish. That's my dad's side of the family, and we don't have anything to do with them.

 

[yahia12]

Sharia emphasizes equality and justice among people and is ofcourse the law of Allah swt. Why fearing implementing these laws unless they have something to hide

 

[Who Am I?]

Sharia emphasizes equality and justice among people and is ofcourse the law of Allah swt. Why fearing implementing these laws unless they have something to hide

I might take some heat for this, but I despise censorship in all forms, and Sharia would in my opinion bring censorship. I think that people should be allowed to make their own decisions based on facts, and not because somebody else tells them what to do or how to think. This is the problem that I have with the current educational system and the mass media in the USA. There is a definite agenda to "dumb down" the populace and push certain ideologies, to make the people easier to control by the government. I refuse to be a robot.

 

[Sothis Girl]

May Allah destroy the IKWRO women in life and hereafter if they dont stop their emotional rant.

No. the right one is : "May Allah shows and lights them to the right path of His!"
After all, they haven't know Islam yet....

 

[Pygoscelis]

Sharia emphasizes equality and justice among people and is ofcourse the law of Allah swt. Why fearing implementing these laws unless they have something to hide

Depends entirely on what you mean by "impliment". If we're talking the Sharia type arbitration we've got going on right now in Ontario, for muslims who opt into it, I have no problem with that. But I dam sure would fight pushing Sharia law on all of us.

 

['Abd-al Latif]

Depends entirely on what you mean by "impliment". If we're talking the Sharia type arbitration we've got going on right now in Ontario, for muslims who opt into it, I have no problem with that. But I dam sure would fight pushing Sharia law on all of us.

I wish you would think before posting biased views. The title of this thread says "Growing use..." not "Enforced use...".

You know what really baffles me? It's the extent of Islamic Law that the western world has taken to make the laws it has today, from governance to commerce; and yet you think Shari'a is something bad based on some nonsense news reports.

Oh you don't believe me? Look up the British Common Law, and then look up Islamic origins of the Common Law, the Magna Carta, The Discovery of Freedom, and finally the second Declaration of Independence is almost completely taken from what the Islamic Law has upheld since the last 1400 years. I can even break down the second Declaration of Independence with Islamic proof, sentence by sentence, if you are still in denial.

 

[Pygoscelis]

I wish you would think before posting biased views. The title of this thread says "Growing use..." not "Enforced use...".

How on earth do you get this "biased" view from me after reading what I posted? I specifically gave two alternatives and gave my thoughts on each. You focus only on the latter.

I have no issue with people opting into arbitration through whatever means is mutually chosen, be that Sharia law, Rabinical law, or flipping a coin.

and yet you think Shari'a is something bad based on some nonsense news reports.

I didn't say Sharia "is bad based on some nonsense news reports", though I have recently come to a much clearer picture of what passes for Islam around here after experiencing that other thread with the one muslim wishing death on people, mods saying its no big deal, and other muslims more concerned with cartoons. That does make me weary of subjecting any of our legal system to the influence of the Islam this board represents.

Even if we're talking about a much friendlier version of Islam and interpretation of Sharia, such as that held by my real life muslim friends (and a select few on this board), I would not want to live under any sort of theocracy; not christian, not islamic.

 

['Abd-al Latif]

How on earth do you get this "biased" view from me after reading what I posted? I specifically gave two alternatives and gave my thoughts on each. You focus only on the latter.

I have no issue with people opting into arbitration through whatever means is mutually chosen, be that Sharia law, Rabinical law, or flipping a coin.



I didn't say Sharia "is bad based on some nonsense news reports", though I have recently come to a much clearer picture of what passes for Islam around here after experiencing that other thread with the one muslim wishing death on people, mods saying its no big deal, and other muslims more concerned with cartoons. That does make me weary of subjecting any of our legal system to the influence of the Islam this board represents.

Even if we're talking about a much friendlier version of Islam and interpretation of Sharia, such as that held by my real life muslim friends (and a select few on this board), I would not want to live under any sort of theocracy; not christian, not islamic.

Oh God please don't start this again. :heated:

I have a project that I am busy with and I am unable to spend too much time on the forum. I only come on for a few mins to check what's going on and then leave, hence why my posts are usually so very short. I haven't and never hace approved of any such thing and I'm not going to start this convo again.

Can we please just stick to the topic?

 

[Who Am I?]

I wish you would think before posting biased views. The title of this thread says "Growing use..." not "Enforced use...".

You know what really baffles me? It's the extent of Islamic Law that the western world has taken to make the laws it has today, from governance to commerce; and yet you think Shari'a is something bad based on some nonsense news reports.

Oh you don't believe me? Look up the British Common Law, and then look up Islamic origins of the Common Law, the Magna Carta, The Discovery of Freedom, and finally the second Declaration of Independence is almost completely taken from what the Islamic Law has upheld since the last 1400 years. I can even break down the second Declaration of Independence with Islamic proof, sentence by sentence, if you are still in denial.

I would very much be interested in seeing that, brother.

As I said, I am against censorship in all forms, and I see Sharia as imposing censorship and too strict with rules. I suppose this is my Western rebellious self speaking.

 

[GuestFellow]

I didn't say Sharia "is bad based on some nonsense news reports", though I have recently come to a much clearer picture of what passes for Islam around here after experiencing that other thread with the one muslim wishing death on people, mods saying its no big deal, and other muslims more concerned with cartoons. That does make me weary of subjecting any of our legal system to the influence of the Islam this board represents.

He was wishing death on people who wanted to eradicate religion, not just any people. Of course that was not acceptable. You ought to have reported his posts if you found it offensive. If you believe a moderator is doing a poor job governing this forum, then you should complain to the administrators, rather than derailing this topic.

 

[Pygoscelis]

He was wishing death on people who wanted to eradicate religion, not just any people.

Wrong. He wrote plainly a number of times that he wished death on anybody who hopes for or would like to see religion cease to exist.

Of course that was not acceptable.

It was accepted. Few objected to it (though they did object to drawings). Two admins/mods ridiculed objection to it. Getting them to condemn it is like pulling teeth. We even had one specifically say that his silence doesn't mean he agrees (but being very careful not to say he disagrees either). This plays directly into a talking point of Sam Harris (ironically linked to in that thread) that muslims seem to have an unwritten rule forbidding them from criticizing fellow "brothers" in the face of a kafir. I am left wondering if that is part of Sharia, which we are talking about the use of in this thread. That is why the two threads are related and why what I wrote is on topic (if you read my entire posts instead of just picking out one sentence you'll see that).

rather than derailing this topic.

I did not derail this topic. I gave my view on the topic, and the difference in my views if the Shariah is opted-in or were it to have any sway over the legal system at large. I was specifically told in this thread that I believe Sharia is bad because of bad newscasting media. I wrote to correct that faulty assumption and to explain why I would oppose Sharia having any sway over our overall legal system. That thread was a good example of why. If we are going to let muslims and muslim law have sway over our society, and if this forum and that other thread are in any way representative of Islam at large, we non-muslims are apparently in for some pretty horrible times. Even if it is not representative of most muslims, and I don't think it is, theocracy itself (even in small doses) is something I see as inherently dangerous and would oppose, and that includes Christian theocracy as well as muslim.

If on the other hand we are just going to let muslims use arbitrators to resolve disputes amongst themselves that concord with overall laws and that look out for the rights of minors and other persons not able to consent or subject to duress then as I stated above, I have no problem with it. We have such "sharia courts" here in Ontario, which alarmed a lot of people south of the border who didn't understand the opt-in nature of it. I have spent a lot of time on other forums explaining the situation to placate their understandable concerns.

Anyway, I think I've had my fill of this place for a while. I'll go back to lurking.

 

[GuestFellow]

Wrong. He wrote plainly a number of times that
he wished death on anybody who hopes for or would like to see religion cease to exist.

He was wishing death on people who wanted to eradicate religion, not just any people.

How am I wrong? We actually agree here I think.

It was accepted. Few objected to it (though they did object to drawings). Two admins/mods ridiculed objection to it. Getting them to condemn it is like pulling teeth. We even had one specifically say that his silence doesn't mean he agrees (but being very careful not to say he disagrees either). This plays directly into a talking point of Sam Harris (ironically linked to in that thread) that muslims seem to have an unwritten rule forbidding them from criticizing fellow "brothers" in the face of a kafir. I am left wondering if that is part of Sharia, which we are talking about the use of in this thread. That is why the two threads are related and why what I wrote is on topic (if you read my entire posts instead of just picking out one sentence you'll see that).

They were moderators, not administrators. That is why I'm saying you should complain if you are still upset about what happened in the previous topic.

I did not derail this topic. I gave my view on the topic, and the difference in my views if the Shariah is opted-in or were it to have any sway over the legal system at large. I was specifically told in this thread that I believe Sharia is bad because of bad newscasting media. I wrote to correct that faulty assumption and to explain why I would oppose Sharia having any sway over our overall legal system. That thread was a good example of why. If we are going to let muslims and muslim law have sway over our society, and if this forum and that other thread are in any way representative of Islam at large, we non-muslims are apparently in for some pretty horrible times. Even if it is not representative of most muslims, and I don't think it is, theocracy itself (even in small doses) is something I see as inherently dangerous and would oppose, and that includes Christian theocracy as well as muslim.

This forum represents Muslims that are trying to practice Islam. To understand Islam properly, you ought to read the scriptures. What Muslims do, does not necessarily reflect the scriptures, like the Qur'an. The members, moderators and administrators here are not perfect. We make offensive comments at times but this does not mean Islam supports it. We have a complaint system, so if your upset, you should complain.

You also made a huge generalisation. A few comments made you generalise an entire legal system, in this case, the Sharia.