Creeping Sharia - It's not just a bumper sticker

[Dr Grump]

Look you RETARD I know what the purpose of the Muslim march to Sharia is. You and your liberal buddies are giving them the knife with which to slit your own throat, though to be accurate your Godchildren throats.

Yeah, like that is going to happen.....You really need to study a little bit about modern anthropology....

...here's some homework for you.

1) Sharia 'courts' have been active in place in Britain for a while.
2) Please go find a case of stoning, beheading, genital mutilation in Britain as a result of these sessions.
3) Please go find a muslim vs muslim case in Britain, where one party didn't want to be there
4) Please go find even a single case involving a muslim vs non muslim.
5) Take your time and come back with your results...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Look you RETARD I know what the purpose of the Muslim march to Sharia is. You and your liberal buddies are giving them the knife with which to slit your own throat, though to be accurate your Godchildren throats.

Yeah, like that is going to happen.....You really need to study a little bit about modern anthropology....

...here's some homework for you.

1) Sharia 'courts' have been active in place in Britain for a while.
2) Please go find a case of stoning, beheading, genital mutilation in Britain as a result of these sessions.
3) Please go find a muslim vs muslim case in Britain, where one party didn't want to be there
4) Please go find even a single case involving a muslim vs non muslim.
5) Take your time and come back with your results...

Proving you are a retard I see. Once again dumb fuck it is a process. They have their foot in the door now and will continue to lobby for more. Like I said they take the long view.

 

[chanel]

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.

UK: New Report on Sharia Law in Britain | Women Living Under Muslim Laws

 

[logical4u]

The American Muslim Organization has been pushing for Sharia Courts for a while. They are using Native American courts and Jewish courts to argue that it's already permissable.

Native American Courts: Precedent for an Islamic arbitral system *

by Issa Smith

In the United States today, there is a system of courts which is just outside of the federal and state court systems, known as the American Indian Tribal Courts. The Tribal Courts deal with criminal, civil and family court issues, and have their own lawyers, judges, and court officials. The Muslim Community can learn from the experience of the American Indian Tribal Court System as we attempt to implement Muslim Family Law in North America.

The American Muslim (TAM)


Islamic Sharia and Jewish Halakha Arbitration Courts

by Sheila Musaji

There are a number of halakha courts representing different interpretations of Jewish law — Agudath Israel of America, Beth Din of America, etc.

All in all, it would seem that faith based arbitration is an existing part of our legal system, and that considering sharia as somehow less acceptable than halakha (or than Canon Law) has no basis in anything other than prejudice and stereotyping.

The American Muslim (TAM)

It's coming.

There are jewish courts called Bet Din that deal with issues between members of the orthodox jewish community. it doesn't supercede state or federal law. it is just a means of internal dispute resolution.... including the granting of religious divorce since they don't recognize civil divorce as effective in dissolving a religious bond.

it is no different than the catholic church granting anulments.

why would i feel threatened if the muslim community avails itself of something similar? why would you?

In UK there was a case where the defense was: killing that man was part of his religion, and here we are free to observe our own religions. The man was muslim and found innocent for that case. If you permit Shari'ah, it will be used as 'precedent' for our courts.

 

[logical4u]

Ok. So Jillian, Dr. Grump, and maineman are in favor of Sharia courts. Perhaps we should start a poll.

a poll about what? whether people should be allowed to, by mutual agreement, resolve internal dispute in the way they wish to?

you saw my response. i said what i meant. now go read grump's response.


or would you prefer to shriek about muslims?

If it were as you say "whether people should be allowed to, by mutual agreement, resolve internal dispute in the way they wish to", why would they need a court system?

 

[chanel]

There was a case in NJ where a restraining order was not granted because marital rape was permitted by the husband's "culture". It was over-ruled, but I'm certain in Sharia courts, that argument is often made.

Family courts don't just deal with divorce.

 

[jillian]

The American Muslim Organization has been pushing for Sharia Courts for a while. They are using Native American courts and Jewish courts to argue that it's already permissable.

Native American Courts: Precedent for an Islamic arbitral system *

by Issa Smith

[/B]
The American Muslim (TAM)


Islamic Sharia and Jewish Halakha Arbitration Courts

by Sheila Musaji
The American Muslim (TAM)

It's coming.

There are jewish courts called Bet Din that deal with issues between members of the orthodox jewish community. it doesn't supercede state or federal law. it is just a means of internal dispute resolution.... including the granting of religious divorce since they don't recognize civil divorce as effective in dissolving a religious bond.

it is no different than the catholic church granting anulments.

why would i feel threatened if the muslim community avails itself of something similar? why would you?

In UK there was a case where the defense was: killing that man was part of his religion, and here we are free to observe our own religions. The man was muslim and found innocent for that case. If you permit Shari'ah, it will be used as 'precedent' for our courts.

and do you really think that will fly here?

it won't. we already address cases like that here on a regular basis.

i think the hysterical drumbeat is just that... an hysterical drumbeat which a particular group is trying to use for their political gain.

you'll always find people saying ooohhh scary jews, scary blacks, scary muslims, scary libs, scary christians... doesn't make it right. and i think it's our obligation not to allow it.

 

[logical4u]

Got it. The British system is superior to the American system and the Muslim women in Canada who opposed it are Islamophobic or stupid or something.

Ignore Grump he is not even an American. Ignore Maineman he is a delusional retired Naval Officer that hasn't a clue how the real world works. As for Jillian I swear I wanna see her law degree.

All 3 are dyed in the wool leftist Liberals. They will be claiming Sharia is no threat as people are stoned to death just down the street from them.

Fuck mate, you really must live in a cave...think critically for once in your life. You really are a real life Chicken Little...

Give us examples of the great oppulent societies that practice Shari'ah, please.

 

[manifold]

 

[chanel]

There are jewish courts called Bet Din that deal with issues between members of the orthodox jewish community. it doesn't supercede state or federal law. it is just a means of internal dispute resolution.... including the granting of religious divorce since they don't recognize civil divorce as effective in dissolving a religious bond.

it is no different than the catholic church granting anulments.

why would i feel threatened if the muslim community avails itself of something similar? why would you?

In UK there was a case where the defense was: killing that man was part of his religion, and here we are free to observe our own religions. The man was muslim and found innocent for that case. If you permit Shari'ah, it will be used as 'precedent' for our courts.

and do you really think that will fly here?

it won't. we already address cases like that here on a regular basis.

i think the hysterical drumbeat is just that... an hysterical drumbeat which a particular group is trying to use for their political gain.

you'll always find people saying ooohhh scary jews, scary blacks, scary muslims, scary libs, scary christians... doesn't make it right. and i think it's our obligation not to allow it.

What some people call a "hysterical drum beat" others call a legitimate concern.

 

[logical4u]

Look you RETARD I know what the purpose of the Muslim march to Sharia is. You and your liberal buddies are giving them the knife with which to slit your own throat, though to be accurate your Godchildren throats.

Yeah, like that is going to happen.....You really need to study a little bit about modern anthropology....

...here's some homework for you.

1) Sharia 'courts' have been active in place in Britain for a while.
2) Please go find a case of stoning, beheading, genital mutilation in Britain as a result of these sessions.
3) Please go find a muslim vs muslim case in Britain, where one party didn't want to be there
4) Please go find even a single case involving a muslim vs non muslim.
5) Take your time and come back with your results...

Newsflash: Shari'ah has no records, there is no way to find out what happened in Shari'ah systems. Unless someone knows, personally, about the above, there is no documentation. It makes it really convienent, who would want to document evil?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

If there is one thing I have learned in 45 years, is never underestimate the power of leftist guilt, and it's desire to comfort it.
Sharia courts in America?
It would in no way surprise me.

 

[California Girl]

There are jewish courts called Bet Din that deal with issues between members of the orthodox jewish community. it doesn't supercede state or federal law. it is just a means of internal dispute resolution.... including the granting of religious divorce since they don't recognize civil divorce as effective in dissolving a religious bond.

it is no different than the catholic church granting anulments.

why would i feel threatened if the muslim community avails itself of something similar? why would you?

In UK there was a case where the defense was: killing that man was part of his religion, and here we are free to observe our own religions. The man was muslim and found innocent for that case. If you permit Shari'ah, it will be used as 'precedent' for our courts.

and do you really think that will fly here?

it won't. we already address cases like that here on a regular basis.

i think the hysterical drumbeat is just that... an hysterical drumbeat which a particular group is trying to use for their political gain.

you'll always find people saying ooohhh scary jews, scary blacks, scary muslims, scary libs, scary christians... doesn't make it right. and i think it's our obligation not to allow it.

The point, that may not be obvious to those who choose not to see it, is that there was a time when people in the UK said exactly the same thing 'It won't happen here'. Well, it does happen here - and they are not much different to us.... You may choose to dismiss genuine concerns as 'hysterical drumbeats'.... I personally see no 'hysteria' - but I do see a few heads in the sand.

And as for 'particular groups' using it for 'political gain'.... well, we learned that from the guys who invented it.... that's your 'side', mo chara. Pots should not call kettles black. Don't criticize tactics that the left have used for decades. It makes you look partisan, and I don't think you are.

 

[California Girl]

In UK there was a case where the defense was: killing that man was part of his religion, and here we are free to observe our own religions. The man was muslim and found innocent for that case. If you permit Shari'ah, it will be used as 'precedent' for our courts.

and do you really think that will fly here?

it won't. we already address cases like that here on a regular basis.

i think the hysterical drumbeat is just that... an hysterical drumbeat which a particular group is trying to use for their political gain.

you'll always find people saying ooohhh scary jews, scary blacks, scary muslims, scary libs, scary christians... doesn't make it right. and i think it's our obligation not to allow it.

What some people call a "hysterical drum beat" others call a legitimate concern.

It's a tactic designed solely to demean the legitimate concerns of others, simply because it's hard to actually face it as a concern. Much easier (and a tad stupid) to dismiss the messenger, than to actually face the message.

 

[Kalam]

The stupidity of kafir alarmism never ceases to amaze me. If I had kept a tally of the incorrect statements made about Shari'ah in this thread alone, I would have run out of paper before I got past the second page.

 

[Queen]

If there is one thing I have learned in 45 years, is never underestimate the power of leftist guilt, and it's desire to comfort it.
Sharia courts in America?
It would in no way surprise me.

You're out of your fucking mind.

Liberals are the only ones fighting to defend the constitution these days.

It's the right who wants to dismantle our laws and take up new ones to punish Mexicans and others who aren't white Christian males.

 

[xotoxi]

You are correct.

The religion of peace is build on the tenet that every non-muslim must be killed.

This is wrong...therefore we can NEVER rest until every muslim is killed!

 

[Queen]

The stupidity of kafir alarmism never ceases to amaze me. If I had kept a tally of the incorrect statements made about Shari'ah in this thread alone, I would have run out of paper before I got past the second page.

It's the conservatives. They are very afraid of anything not like themselves. They are scared little chickens, living in the land of the free and the home of the brave. They are anything but brave. They live in fear and vote for the politicians that campaign on fear. They crave safety and security and would burn the constitution to get it. They are right wing weenies.

 

[Hister]

The stupidity of kafir alarmism never ceases to amaze me. If I had kept a tally of the incorrect statements made about Shari'ah in this thread alone, I would have run out of paper before I got past the second page.

I bet you don't even have a big bushy beard, you wannabe.

 

[logical4u]

If there is one thing I have learned in 45 years, is never underestimate the power of leftist guilt, and it's desire to comfort it.
Sharia courts in America?
It would in no way surprise me.

You're out of your fucking mind.

Liberals are the only ones fighting to defend the constitution these days.

It's the right who wants to dismantle our laws and take up new ones to punish Mexicans and others who aren't white Christian males.

Our Constitution gives the feds the "authority" to protect our borders; are they doing that?
Why that answer would be NO.

Our Constitution was designed to protect the rights of the individual CITIZEN; are they doing that?
Why the answer would be NO, they are trying to void the Constitution by passing the healthcare bill, unethically and against the majority of the population. They are trying to give LAWBREAKERS all the benefits of citizens while empowering them to continue breaking the laws (that would be the ILLEGAL immigrants).

Our Constitution's Bill of Rights states that the freedom of speech shall not be infringed; did our government honor that?
Why, the answer would be NO; there is now legislation to prohibit speech under the guise of "hate crimes".

Our Constitution supports the individual.
Our government supports elevating groups (based on race, religion, sexual preference) over the rights of the individual.

Shari'ah is against individual rights and gives ABSOLUTE POWER (and we all know the saying about power) to a small group, while subjugating the rest of the population. No wonder the leftist radicals are supporting it.