I have formed the view that a lot of Muslims living in the west would like to be governed by sharia law. In fact I seem to recall calls from some Muslims in the UK to be allowed to govern themselves by sharia law. Watching TV this morning and saw a report of the edict issued by the SAWT valley Taliban to judges and lawyers ordering them not to attend court telling them there is no place for them in sharia law (see above link) and I wondered how it would work in a non-tribal society. I can see that the SWAT area (apart from cell phones and kalashnikovs) looks and probably functions pretty much as it did in 7C Mecca and because of that it may be possible to function with sharia law but could it really work in a 21st century society? It starts by stopping the current legal structure (courts, judges etc) because now the local Imam is the judge. Next you scrap the ministry of the interior because the police service or whatever replaces it comes under the direction of the local imam. Now justice is dispensed according to the local Imams interpretation of the sharia law. I can’t believe that any educated 21st century person would want to live under such a nebulous, unstructured and unjust regime. I can’t believe that any educated female Muslim would want to live under a regime that would deny them all the freedoms they enjoy outside of such a system. If there’s anyone out there that would like to live under such a regime I’d love to hear your reasons.
Which has also been explained. The difference between the UK/US and sharia law is this:
* one completely ignores gender roles
* one doesn't.
Islam recognises that there are differences between men and women. Historically, pscyhologically and sociologically men are considered to be the more dominant (in terms of responsibility at least) of the sexes. Sharia doesn't aim for equality as such but it does aim for justice through EQUITY.
For simplicity, take heed of the following analogy:
A snickers bar is different to a mars - but they're both classified as chocolate bars; one has nuts, the other doesn't.
But for the sake of this conversation, I say a snickers bar is as good the mars bar. Who's right then?
This has been explained thouroughly , women do get less, but are not expected to pay bills.
Of course, this is still dixtriminatory, not only to women but to men as well.
The post from Nikky appears to indicate that wives get less but I presume that there's a formula somewhere and I'd like to know what it is. If you know where I can read it - point me to it>
The post from Nikky appears to indicate that wives get less but I presume that there's a formula somewhere and I'd like to know what it is. If you know where I can read it - point me to it>
before even having a good and harmonious discussion,the person you're having it with must be an open minded person,a person who is not engulfed by misconceptions.....when this ignorance will end i dont know ....they called us the mohammedans in the 20th century simply because they stupildy thought that mohammed was our divine lord,because of their false belief that christ was their lord and thus calling themselves christians they thought it also applied to us....mohammed is a figure we cherish so we must be the worshippers of mohammed...thus giving us the name mohammaedans......,but now there's a new batch of misconceptions b4 christianity went through reformation,women werent allowed to speak in the churches,they had to veil themselves and the women was the property of her husband and so on, the list of shinnanigans is as long as elephant trunks....the westerner implemented these injustices on their women and after the reformation it has all changed and so when they see a muslim man with his veiled wife...
....they think we are following the same steps of backwardness and so we need a reform...but they say this with know knowledge of islam......................... 'if the westerner was in darkness b4 then so are we' thats how they think........its easier to come to an understanding and an agreement if ye read the scriptures
the thread starter has relentless hatred for the shariah law its obvious he doesnt want discussion maybe im wrong but the thread title gives it away....why you may ask? we are on an islamic forum and we have this great ''thinker'' asking a muslim crowd a sarcastic question....'the shariah....do you 'REALLY' want it?'...what kind of question is that we are muslims and we believe shariah to be the divine law given to us by allah...so why ask a muslim do your REALLY want it? it doesnt make sense......or maybe im just chatting it? i dont know
the thread starter has relentless hatred for the shariah law its obvious he doesnt want discussion maybe im wrong but the thread title gives it away....why you may ask? we are on an islamic forum and we have this great ''thinker'' asking a muslim crowd a sarcastic question....'the shariah....do you 'REALLY' want it?'...what kind of question is that we are muslims and we believe shariah to be the divine law given to us by allah...so why ask a muslim do your REALLY want it? it doesnt make sense......or maybe im just chatting it? i dont know
Yes, the intentions of the thread starter doesnt sound too good.
The believer has four characteristics: if he is afflicted by any misfortune, he remains patient and steadfast. If he is given anything, he is grateful. If he speaks , he speaks the truth. If he passes judgment on any issue,he is just .
Although you may be a Muslim living in a country which is not governed by sharia law, would it be right that a good Muslim should apply the sharia law to themsleves where they can? . . . . . . . . .
From what I have read it appears that men can divorce their wives at will and without reason whereas women cannot divorce their husbands without the permission of the courts and they are unlikley to grant permission unless the husband contravenes Islamic teachings.
After a wife is divorced she can keep her dowry and the children until the are ‘weaned’ and the husband must support the child during the weaning period. After the child is weaned it would normally go to the husband.
After that the wife is not entitled to half the assets, any of her husbands salary and other earnings or pension.
If that is correct do you believe that a good Muslim women living in a country which is not governed by sharia law should volunteer (upon divorce) only to take what the sharia law entitles her to? To take it further, would she be contravening Islam by not applying sharia law to what she take upon divorce?
Yes, the intentions of the thread starter doesnt sound too good.
Why do you question my intentions? My initial question was simple, I could not believe that anyone would want to be governed as the taliban govern the people in the areas they control. I got lots of replies saying that they would but they were all from men. So I asked what do the women think. How, from that, do you gleen that I have questionable intent? Do you believe that we shouldn't ask questions that are difficult to explain?
Mysterious UK . . . . . . you are living in the UK, if you divorce from your husband you are entitled to the children and at least 50% of everything, if that unfortunate situation befalls you will you be refusing 50% and just taking your dowry?.
From what I have read it appears that men can divorce their wives at will and without reason whereas women cannot divorce their husbands without the permission of the courts and they are unlikley to grant permission unless the husband contravenes Islamic teachings.
Where did you read that?
After a wife is divorced she can keep her dowry and the children until the are ‘weaned’ and the husband must support the child during the weaning period. After the child is weaned it would normally go to the husband.
So? When the child grows up it can choose who to stay with. In the UK the mother gains custody is that fair on the husband?
After that the wife is not entitled to half the assets, any of her husbands salary and other earnings or pension.
Why would she be? They have no relationship, Islamically a womens brothers, father, sons, uncles etc should provide for her if she is single
Why do you question my intentions? My initial question was simple, I could not believe that anyone would want to be governed as the taliban govern the people in the areas they control. I got lots of replies saying that they would but they were all from men. So I asked what do the women think. How, from that, do you gleen that I have questionable intent? Do you believe that we shouldn't ask questions that are difficult to explain?
Mysterious UK . . . . . . you are living in the UK, if you divorce from your husband you are entitled to the children and at least 50% of everything, if that unfortunate situation befalls you will you be refusing 50% and just taking your dowry?.
You're clearly twisting things to suit yourself, when did anyone say they wanted to be governed the way the taliban do?
so what are you implying ? that western women become muslims and stay with a religion that beats their freedom and liberation senseless ??? if you want to fully understand islam and its laws you have to take a holistic approach and not seperate small bits while analyzing with your preconditioned brain filled with misconceptions...which will only lead you to do false analysis that would then make you bite your finger nails in agitation ''oh!! the taleban...'
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
'
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks