New Threat From Muslim Sharia Patrols

[BecauseIKnow]

Btw, this nonsense is only coming from conservative Americans. This isn't a discussion Europeans came up with. Sharia law is rarely used in European courts for divorce cases. That's completely normal and within standards of European law. So I suggest you people shut up.

 

[Connery]

Btw, this nonsense is only coming from conservative Americans. This isn't a discussion Europeans came up with. Sharia law is rarely used in European courts for divorce cases. That's completely normal and within standards of European law. So I suggest you people shut up.

Of course the Europeans came up the discussion....In fact, the European Court of Human Rights, "considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it". According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia...particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts."

http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyre..._Cancado_Trindade_BIL__opening_legal_year.pdf

 

[Connery]

Oh wow, copy paste, you sure proved it......

You first had a problem with the source I used. Now you have a problem that I quoted a source at all.

The burden is upon you to disprove it, however, you have failed at that as well.

Your source is hate site. Just to look at a few articles they have, and all they do is mention israel.

Rebut the information, BIK, otherwise you fail.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Btw, this nonsense is only coming from conservative Americans. This isn't a discussion Europeans came up with. Sharia law is rarely used in European courts for divorce cases. That's completely normal and within standards of European law. So I suggest you people shut up.

Of course the Europeans came up the discussion....In fact, the European Court of Human Rights, "considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it". According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia...particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts."

http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyre..._Cancado_Trindade_BIL__opening_legal_year.pdf

Several aspects are only used in courts. And??

 

[BecauseIKnow]

You first had a problem with the source I used. Now you have a problem that I quoted a source at all.

The burden is upon you to disprove it, however, you have failed at that as well.

Your source is hate site. Just to look at a few articles they have, and all they do is mention israel.

Rebut the information, BIK, otherwise you fail.

I never said the information was false, I said the site is a hate site. And all those so called 'organizations' are only of about a 100 people. They only get attention from media and they are largely irrelevant in Europe.

 

[Connery]

Btw, this nonsense is only coming from conservative Americans. This isn't a discussion Europeans came up with. Sharia law is rarely used in European courts for divorce cases. That's completely normal and within standards of European law. So I suggest you people shut up.

Of course the Europeans came up the discussion....In fact, the European Court of Human Rights, "considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it". According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia...particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts."

http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyre..._Cancado_Trindade_BIL__opening_legal_year.pdf

Several aspects are only used in courts. And??

You did not read the materials correctly...."it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia...particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts."

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Connery leave your hogwash out and tell me what this is really about for you? You're not going anywhere with this, you're simply just rambling about Islamic law that is legal in European courts just as Judaic law can be used in courts as well. Big deal hater. It's really funny to see you people hide behind this little thing to give yourself an opportunity to demonize Islam. It's not like we don't know you hate Muslims. Ha Ha Ha! And then you're gonna tell us we should be thankful that you only criticized Islam and not the people in general. You people are something else. Quit trying to create something out of nothing. This OP never gets tired of his paranoia. Even when there is nothing to talk about relating to Muslims he tries to pull up anything possible. To feed of his hate and try to whitewash it.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Of course the Europeans came up the discussion....In fact, the European Court of Human Rights, "considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it". According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia...particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts."

http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyre..._Cancado_Trindade_BIL__opening_legal_year.pdf

Several aspects are only used in courts. And??

You did not read the materials correctly...."it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia...particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts."

And?

 

[theHawk]

The spread of Islam must be stopped. Hopefully someday the West will wake up and kick these third world barbarians out.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

^^^

What'd ya know? Another 'conservative' low grade moron. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!

 

[RoadVirus]

The spread of Islam must be stopped. Hopefully someday the West will wake up and kick these third world barbarians out.

Most of Europe is done for. They've been suffereing from White Guilt for too long, there's no chance in hell of change. Even if they do change, it'll probably be too late.

 

[Connery]

Connery leave your hogwash out and tell me what this is really about for you? You're not going anywhere with this, you're simply just rambling about Islamic law that is legal in European courts just as Judaic law can be used in courts as well. Big deal hater. It's really funny to see you people hide behind this little thing to give yourself an opportunity to demonize Islam. It's not like we don't know you hate Muslims. Ha Ha Ha! And then you're gonna tell us we should be thankful that you only criticized Islam and not the people in general. You people are something else. Quit trying to create something out of nothing. This OP never gets tired of his paranoia. Even when there is nothing to talk about relating to Muslims he tries to pull up anything possible. To feed of his hate and try to whitewash it.

I am not demonizing Islam, I agree with the court. I see a terrible abuse of women and others in sharia law, it is antiquated and unfair, there is no tolerance of anyone who does not follow Islam in sharia law, in society, not just within Islam. You call me a hater, that is you opinion I have provided facts supported by recognized tribunals and other authorities. You have yet to submit one supported rebuttal to my position.


This is an example of what I am talking about...

 

[BecauseIKnow]

And who agrees with the actions of Taliban? They come up with their own justifications for punishments and their interpretations. I agree that they shouldn't be enforcing any law since they are hypocrites in their own. I don't know where they got the idea to cut a nose. That being said, I mentioned if enforced by fair people and true people it would work. At the state it is now it does seek unfair because its exploited by certain people. I'm not playing your game, that doesn't mean I didn't offer any rebuttal. Anyone can see you're playing a continuous game. I know people like you. Don't think you caught me off guard of who you are.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Like I also said I frankly could care less about other countries laws. There are people in there who demand justice and fairness with law. You don't need to do it for them.

 

[Connery]

And who agrees with the actions of Taliban? They come up with their own justifications for punishments and their interpretations. I agree that they shouldn't be enforcing any law since they are hypocrites in their own. I don't know where they got the idea to cut a nose. That being said, I mentioned if enforced by fair people and true people it would work. At the state it is now it does seek unfair because its exploited by certain people. I'm not playing your game, that doesn't mean I didn't offer any rebuttal. Anyone can see you're playing a continuous game. I know people like you. Don't think you caught me off guard of who you are.

Too bad for you, I am not playing a game. That is why I use sources and welcome any true rebuttal; something you have not offered.

 

[theHawk]

^^^

What'd ya know? Another 'conservative' low grade moron. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!

That's rich, coming from someone who worships the false god of a pedophile prophet.

 

[Decus]

The debate in Europe is very big. In different European countries parties have risen because of their stance towards issues like Sharia. Don't let people who don't live in Europe tell you differently.

Just a few examples of the press from an array of different newspapers (no hate here):

What isn't wrong with Sharia law? | Law | guardian.co.uk

Sharia marriages for girls of 12 and the religious courts subverting British law | Mail Online

The government kicks the Sharia debate into the long grass » Spectator Blogs

English language articles abound with even more in Dutch, German, French..........

 

[BecauseIKnow]

And who agrees with the actions of Taliban? They come up with their own justifications for punishments and their interpretations. I agree that they shouldn't be enforcing any law since they are hypocrites in their own. I don't know where they got the idea to cut a nose. That being said, I mentioned if enforced by fair people and true people it would work. At the state it is now it does seek unfair because its exploited by certain people. I'm not playing your game, that doesn't mean I didn't offer any rebuttal. Anyone can see you're playing a continuous game. I know people like you. Don't think you caught me off guard of who you are.

Too bad for you, I am not playing a game. That is why I use sources and welcome any true rebuttal; something you have not offered.

Rebuttal to what? There's nothing to refute.

 

[theHawk]

Gatestone? Seriously? Now show us one reliable source.

You have a problem with the source then prove it wrong....

It's not my problem, the source is not reliable in any standards. It's a Jew pleading website and it's so obvious.

LOL, its a Jooooooooo website. Thus automatically full of lies.

 

[Connery]

And who agrees with the actions of Taliban? They come up with their own justifications for punishments and their interpretations. I agree that they shouldn't be enforcing any law since they are hypocrites in their own. I don't know where they got the idea to cut a nose. That being said, I mentioned if enforced by fair people and true people it would work. At the state it is now it does seek unfair because its exploited by certain people. I'm not playing your game, that doesn't mean I didn't offer any rebuttal. Anyone can see you're playing a continuous game. I know people like you. Don't think you caught me off guard of who you are.

Too bad for you, I am not playing a game. That is why I use sources and welcome any true rebuttal; something you have not offered.

Rebuttal to what? There's nothing to refute.

I suggest you reread my posts.