CDZ What do American Muslims want?

[Sunni Man]

Many Muslims are afraid to speak out against the minority of Muslims that want jihad.

I hear this false statement repeated many times.

Muslims are individuals and are as vocal and opinionated as any other group of people. ........

 

[Coyote]

Trust is heavily influenced by popular opinion...not always fact. And to base policy involving religious freedom and discrimination on public perception is wrong imo....

When JFK was elected, he had a huge hurdle to overcome in regards to trust because he was a Catholic and the prevailing opinions were Catholics were more loyal to the Pope (who was some kind of nebulous EVIL entity...) and they could not be trusted.

Pffft.. Do the Dems ever KNOW that Bernie is a Jew? Guarantee a lot of far left supporters would feel conflicted if they knew...

Hey - I LOVE Bernie - he got my vote! Everyone knows he's a Jew, I'm not conflicted because he, as a person has a shitload of integrity and a consistent unvarying message

Let's start on the obvious --- do you trust Scientology to handle family matters and financial settlements? You "think" MAYBE there's more going on there in matters of "religious law"? Should we be concerned? OF COURSE.

So -- what do you think a 1000 BRAND NEW syrian immigrants dropped out in Peoria might expect from their Mosque and muslim community leaders in terms of adjudicating things that IN THIS country should ALWAYS be criminal matters -- or MORE than mundane Civil disputes?

Guy beats his wife for watching Oprah on American TV or going for a driving lesson ---- think that should be a "religious mediation"?

I think I've made it clear that these religious "mediations" are ONLY for civil matters - NOT for criminal matters. Domestic abuse is CRIMINAL and should be turned over to the secular authorities without question. Just like the pedophile priests. I've never said otherwise.

Here's the thing. Big worry with Islamic religious rulings on civil situations is with domestic abuse. If it's suspected, it should be reported to the proper SECULAR authorities. But lets look at the situation in perspective.

Many religious people are reluctant to divorce because the major religions frown upon it. Women are "encouraged" to stand by their man and...violence is somehow the victims fault. Usually, the first option is to go to one's religious authority - priest, imam, rabbi for marital counseling or, if seeking a religious divorce - counseling is first suggested and it really is often helpful in working through disputes particularly if both members are religious.

There is this implied assumption that Islam is uniquely brutal to women and that therefore religious counseling can not possibly be done in such a way that benefits the woman. That's a stereotype that ignores the reality of domestic abuse in this country which is that it can occur anywhere to any person. Reporting it can occur but if the woman refuses to press charges or even go to the police - what then?

There is good religious counseling and there is bad religious counseling, and in another post - not sure if it was in this thread - it's quite clear that in Britain at least, the quality of advice given to women is all over the board. One of the common complaints - not just of Islamic counseling, but also in Catholic and Jewish groups also, is that domestic abuse is not reported and couples are encouraged to stay together because the cultural proscription against divorce is so strong.

So what are you going to do with these people and, if denied a religious avenue - what will you give them that is acceptable and not an infringement of state into religion? And I mean not just Muslim women, but Orthodox Jews and Catholics. Observent Orthodox Jewish women, even if abused are in the same position as observent Muslim women - Jewish women can not get a religious divorce without her husband providing the "get". Islamic women CAN - but, may not know it (bad advising) or they have pay money they don't have if the man controls the purse so they too are stuck.

What is a win - win situation where vulnerable women can be identified and helped, and those people who need a religious avenue can get what they need?

There are a lot of strategies that are possibly more effective then outright bans and that don't cross the freedom of religion line - for example: American Orthodox Jewish Women and Domestic Violence: An Intervention Design | University of Chicago - SSA

That "religious court" WILL BE USED AS A CRUTCH -- to avoid cultural immersion. And I simply don't TRUST that it won't because of the CULTURAL differences are to freaking enormous..

Do you have any evidence that this is causing a lack of "cultural immersion" in the US?

Cultural immersion doesn't and never has meant giving up one's religion - it means accommodating it to the cultural norms of the country you are now a citizen of and inevitably, over several generations that has happened in this country regardless of dire warnings.

Do you realize that the argument on "cultural differences" is the same one that has been used on other immigrant groups? Yet, they assimilated.

Wouldn't simply mandating that religious rulings have NO FORCE OF LAW without a secular court backing resolve the main problem which is protecting vulnerable people?

you are on the right track. And appreciate the effort to BUILD the trust that is required for tolerance of religious practices.

I could certainly produce the evidence that there are attempts to handle criminal matters as they were handled in the "old country". Unlike those Catholic authorities who didn't USE religious law to justify their decision not to report criminal or serious civil matters to authorities -- there is a clear danger that Sharia WOULD be used to counsel women (EG) to place the sanctity of the Islamic family ABOVE their rights as American citizens. OR to justify not reporting that son or daughter who has been radicalized and seeks to go fight with ISIS in the Sinai.

I'll go fetch your "evidence" after I'm done moving a couple ton of wall rock from one place to another in my yard. Consider it a religiously imposed penalty for disagreeing with you.. Hope you're happy.

umh....you can have some of my m&m's....at no charge...

I think the "not reporting" radicalization is complicated - many are not aware of what is happening until it's too late, ISIS is supremely good at "grooming" and I would liken their methods to a pedophile ring in that respect.

What needs to be done and is being done is Imams and people within their community banding together to identify vulnerable youth, come up with strategies to deflect ISIS propoganda and help young people resist it.

Another aspect is - what will happen to their children if they are reported to authorities? Are they faced with the prospect of losing them to ISIS vs losing them to the prison system? For a parent, this must be a horrible choice and, if they are immigrants from countries with corrupt and brutal regimes, they are going to have a difficult time trusting authorities.

There is not an easy answer here and my heart breaks for the parents - every time they lose a child to this group. Once they leave the US, there gone. There is no sure and safe way to bring them in that I'm aware of - it's a tricky and horrible situation.

"Your heart breaks" about the parent facing a choice of losing a child to ISIS or prison? My God -- they have to choose between their kid potentially KILLING American soldiers or being detained for questioning. Or PREVENTED from linking up with the groups were in conflict with as an American citizen. Not our decision, but anyone suppressing that knowledge is an accessory to a crime.

YES my heart breaks for them! This is YOUR CHILD! Do people seem to think it's different when the parents are Muslim??? The kids haven't killed anyone, or done anything drastic YET. What would you do if it was your child? HOW would you feel? You bet my heart breaks for them when I hear the parents and siblings talking about it. It's not just one ruined, it's a family. The fact that contacting authorities is the right thing to do doesn't make it ANY less tragic.

 

[Coyote]

The link below is a BBC special on UK Sharia Councils. I want you folks denying that there is any concern about repeating these mistakes in America when LARGE immigration flows inevitably install the same accomodations here.

Listen carefully to the "advice" these BRITISH women are getting from the councils. NEVER does the Imam point out to the 1st couple that there IS NO civil marriage. Or that the woman has ANY RIGHTS guaranteed under BRITISH law.

Or the later case when the women with the Civil marriage is AGAIN not advised of her rights under Civil law.

Or the other case where the Leyton Sharia Counsel attempts to OVERRIDE the child custody ruling determined in a BRITISH court.

It CAN happen here. And it shouldn't. Any immigrants need to be FULLY ADVISE of their legal status and options BEFORE consenting to judgements handed out in Religious proceedings.

Crimes that SHOULD be reported to the police -- SHOULD NEVER be taken as "religious law" cases. It needs to be fixed here BEFORE we get these results already seen in Europe.

I don't want to repeat myself, and I think I went over this in the Regressive thread.

I agree with what you are saying about the problems in British system and I've said this before.

The quality of the advice women get is all over the board. There is no "credentialling" system. In essence any one can be a self proclaimed authority. It IS a problem.

So, here's the question, why is only ONE religion under scrutiny when clearly all seem to have problems with this (I gave examples in an earlier post). If folks really are concerned about women's rights here, should not the the religious arbritration system be examined as a whole?

Secondly, HOW are you going to reconcile this with religious Freedom? Are you going to have the state come down and mandate what they must do WITHIN their faith? Or, only with Islam? Religious counciling overall seems pretty variable in quality but as long as the law isn't violated, how far SHOULD the state intervene?

Third, WE are not Britain, and assuming the same problems will occur is dubious given the differences in our communities.

 

[Coyote]

I looked it up.. Fraction of ORTHODOX Jews in America is about 10%. That's why quoting Talmudic law and talking about Bet Din is virtually irrelevant for comparisons in THIS country.. Fraction of Catholics subject to "orthodox religious law" I assume is greater than 90%.. So leave us out of the national discussion please.

Now in Israel ---- those numbers reverse and the minority of Jews are secular or Reform or Conservative. The vast MAJORITY is Orthodox..

And in US..what is the fraction of Muslims are conservative enough to seek religious arbritration? When it comes to abuse should not ALL women matter?

 

[Coyote]

[

Although this is not as common as in europe, you will find an American muslim voter voting liberal in this country, so they can enjoy the extended religious freedoms; and vote full blown conservative in their mother land elections
How is this fair?

How is this honest?

I certainly don't know- which American Muslim voter will you find doing that? I certainly don't know any.

I am not certain that your question is fair or honest- because I don't know of any actual examples that exist that fit your scenario.

You dont have to know any actual examples (although would certainly help to analyze),
you just simply need to look at the election results which usually end up islamists crushing seculars.

In the US, islamists have around 20% support among muslim population.
In EU, this would be somewhere around 50% and above.



Now you know...

Where do you get this 20% Islamic support from American Muslims?

 

[alpine]

[

Although this is not as common as in europe, you will find an American muslim voter voting liberal in this country, so they can enjoy the extended religious freedoms; and vote full blown conservative in their mother land elections
How is this fair?

How is this honest?

I certainly don't know- which American Muslim voter will you find doing that? I certainly don't know any.

I am not certain that your question is fair or honest- because I don't know of any actual examples that exist that fit your scenario.

You dont have to know any actual examples (although would certainly help to analyze),
you just simply need to look at the election results which usually end up islamists crushing seculars.

In the US, islamists have around 20% support among muslim population.
In EU, this would be somewhere around 50% and above.



Now you know...

Where do you get this 20% Islamic support from American Muslims?

Egyptian and Turkish presidential elections results.

I think we will see similar results for Pakistani elections, once American Pakistani able to vote.
Last time they tried, their system didnt work, as far as I know.

 

[Coyote]

The link below is a BBC special on UK Sharia Councils. I want you folks denying that there is any concern about repeating these mistakes in America when LARGE immigration flows inevitably install the same accomodations here.

Listen carefully to the "advice" these BRITISH women are getting from the councils. NEVER does the Imam point out to the 1st couple that there IS NO civil marriage. Or that the woman has ANY RIGHTS guaranteed under BRITISH law.

Or the later case when the women with the Civil marriage is AGAIN not advised of her rights under Civil law.

Or the other case where the Leyton Sharia Counsel attempts to OVERRIDE the child custody ruling determined in a BRITISH court.

It CAN happen here. And it shouldn't. Any immigrants need to be FULLY ADVISE of their legal status and options BEFORE consenting to judgements handed out in Religious proceedings.

Crimes that SHOULD be reported to the police -- SHOULD NEVER be taken as "religious law" cases. It needs to be fixed here BEFORE we get these results already seen in Europe.

I absolutely agree, and it needs to apply to ALL religious arbritration - BUT HOW?

I also think that, before a panicky rush to judgement, we need to consider:

The U.S. is not Europe. Our immigrant communities and their integration into our culture - and I think our overall acceptance of them INTO our culture is different. Maybe Europe should be learning something from us rather than us learning from them. In addition - legal systems vary, as to immigration policies (which are related to their status as former colonies) are very different.

 

[Coyote]

[

Although this is not as common as in europe, you will find an American muslim voter voting liberal in this country, so they can enjoy the extended religious freedoms; and vote full blown conservative in their mother land elections
How is this fair?

How is this honest?

I certainly don't know- which American Muslim voter will you find doing that? I certainly don't know any.

I am not certain that your question is fair or honest- because I don't know of any actual examples that exist that fit your scenario.

You dont have to know any actual examples (although would certainly help to analyze),
you just simply need to look at the election results which usually end up islamists crushing seculars.

In the US, islamists have around 20% support among muslim population.
In EU, this would be somewhere around 50% and above.



Now you know...

Where do you get this 20% Islamic support from American Muslims?

Egyptian and Turkish presidential elections results.

I think we will see similar results for Pakistani elections, once American Pakistani able to vote.
Last time they tried, their system didnt work, as far as I know.

I'm a bit confused - how does that translate into support from American Muslims?

 

[alpine]

[

Although this is not as common as in europe, you will find an American muslim voter voting liberal in this country, so they can enjoy the extended religious freedoms; and vote full blown conservative in their mother land elections
How is this fair?

How is this honest?

I certainly don't know- which American Muslim voter will you find doing that? I certainly don't know any.

I am not certain that your question is fair or honest- because I don't know of any actual examples that exist that fit your scenario.

You dont have to know any actual examples (although would certainly help to analyze),
you just simply need to look at the election results which usually end up islamists crushing seculars.

In the US, islamists have around 20% support among muslim population.
In EU, this would be somewhere around 50% and above.



Now you know...

Where do you get this 20% Islamic support from American Muslims?

Egyptian and Turkish presidential elections results.

I think we will see similar results for Pakistani elections, once American Pakistani able to vote.
Last time they tried, their system didnt work, as far as I know.

I'm a bit confused - how does that translate into support from American Muslims?

American muslims cast their votes at their consulates in the US.
They are counted and reported separate in the general election results, like a state result.
So we can see exactly how many American muslims casting their votes for the islamists.

US has a much lower % compared to EU countries, but still at around 20%.

 

[Coyote]

I certainly don't know- which American Muslim voter will you find doing that? I certainly don't know any.

I am not certain that your question is fair or honest- because I don't know of any actual examples that exist that fit your scenario.

You dont have to know any actual examples (although would certainly help to analyze),
you just simply need to look at the election results which usually end up islamists crushing seculars.

In the US, islamists have around 20% support among muslim population.
In EU, this would be somewhere around 50% and above.



Now you know...

Where do you get this 20% Islamic support from American Muslims?

Egyptian and Turkish presidential elections results.

I think we will see similar results for Pakistani elections, once American Pakistani able to vote.
Last time they tried, their system didnt work, as far as I know.

I'm a bit confused - how does that translate into support from American Muslims?

American muslims cast their votes at their consulates in the US.
They are counted and reported separate in the general election results, like a state result.
So we can see exactly how many American muslims casting their votes for the islamists.

US has a much lower % compared to EU countries, but still at around 20%.

Are they dual citizens? Expats?

Not sure if this is meaningful because the 20% would apply only to Turkish citizens in America right? And what percentage of the American Muslim community is of Turkish descent and a Turkish citizen? I think this is very misleading.

 

[alpine]

You dont have to know any actual examples (although would certainly help to analyze),
you just simply need to look at the election results which usually end up islamists crushing seculars.

In the US, islamists have around 20% support among muslim population.
In EU, this would be somewhere around 50% and above.



Now you know...

Where do you get this 20% Islamic support from American Muslims?

Egyptian and Turkish presidential elections results.

I think we will see similar results for Pakistani elections, once American Pakistani able to vote.
Last time they tried, their system didnt work, as far as I know.

I'm a bit confused - how does that translate into support from American Muslims?

American muslims cast their votes at their consulates in the US.
They are counted and reported separate in the general election results, like a state result.
So we can see exactly how many American muslims casting their votes for the islamists.

US has a much lower % compared to EU countries, but still at around 20%.

Are they dual citizens? Expats?

Not sure if this is meaningful because the 20% would apply only to Turkish citizens in America right? And what percentage of the American Muslim community is of Turkish descent and a Turkish citizen? I think this is very misleading.

Big majority would be dual citizens.

Similar results for Egyptians and Turkish, Pakistani on the way, I think 2018 we shall see those results.

I think Egypt and Turkey are 2 very representative examples. Turkey has 95% literacy rate, and have been the most secular oriented among all middle east countries, so the % you find there, should represent the lower bar. Egypt has 75% literacy rate, had long lasting secular dictatorship. Just like how it was in others.

Population wise, these are again comparable to any other middle east/north african muslim countries. The % of muslims originated from Turkey or Egypt you will find in the US, will be pretty much same for any other mid east/north african country. I should make Pakistan an exception, because of her big population compared to others.

But as I said, I dont expect Pakistan to stay as an exception in their upcoming elections, when we will be able to see the breakdown.

And honestly, 20% islamist rate is a pretty low rate among muslims. Because when you look at those countries, islamists crush the seculars by huge margins, meaning a crushing majority are in fact supporting islamists.

Much less of that huge % made their way to US, but many more made their way to the EU, which also makes sense if you think about it...

 

[flacaltenn]

That was an amazing amount of clock time and ball carry to accuse me of not being able to separate religion from Arab culture and governance. It seems to be a NECESSARY condition to have some shotgun waving total Tyrant with a government that validates and ENSHRINES Sharia Law in one form or another in order to have ANY measure of national stability in most majority Muslim countries. And since I'm definitely not fond of Tyrants and Theocracies --- please SPARE me the lectures on what I MIGHT be including in that statement that "I hate Arab culture". I recognize that there are Endangered Species of Christians and Jews still existing in those lands -- but that's an ODDITY in this day and age and Allah willing that too will end.

And you are WAAAY off the line of scrimage when you assert that "Sharia law gets incorporated in the daily life .. Arab or otherwise"... You DID read the list of Arab states I provided that CODIFY Islam into TOTAL or PARTIAL theocratic govt Authority --- did you not? Do we need to discuss the IMPLICATIONS of actually RECOGNIZED Theocratic governance?

Shows that you don't understand the massive adjustment as it applies to MOVING folks OUT of those repressive cultures to practice Islam in OPEN, Democratic, Secular states.

As far as the other "plays" you ran there. We are talking about Religious courts and tribunals. The Catholic church is a valid example. Call me a dunce ---- but I've never heard of the Protestant or Anglican churches (in modern times) continuing to run tribunals for resolutions of legal matters. So I don't understand that "lateral" on a 2nd down and 3..

 

[320 Years of History]

You DID read the list of Arab states I provided that CODIFY Islam into TOTAL or PARTIAL theocratic govt Authorit

No, I didn't see that list. What post is it in?

 

[flacaltenn]

The link below is a BBC special on UK Sharia Councils. I want you folks denying that there is any concern about repeating these mistakes in America when LARGE immigration flows inevitably install the same accomodations here.

Listen carefully to the "advice" these BRITISH women are getting from the councils. NEVER does the Imam point out to the 1st couple that there IS NO civil marriage. Or that the woman has ANY RIGHTS guaranteed under BRITISH law.

Or the later case when the women with the Civil marriage is AGAIN not advised of her rights under Civil law.

Or the other case where the Leyton Sharia Counsel attempts to OVERRIDE the child custody ruling determined in a BRITISH court.

It CAN happen here. And it shouldn't. Any immigrants need to be FULLY ADVISE of their legal status and options BEFORE consenting to judgements handed out in Religious proceedings.

Crimes that SHOULD be reported to the police -- SHOULD NEVER be taken as "religious law" cases. It needs to be fixed here BEFORE we get these results already seen in Europe.

I don't want to repeat myself, and I think I went over this in the Regressive thread.

I agree with what you are saying about the problems in British system and I've said this before.

The quality of the advice women get is all over the board. There is no "credentialling" system. In essence any one can be a self proclaimed authority. It IS a problem.

So, here's the question, why is only ONE religion under scrutiny when clearly all seem to have problems with this (I gave examples in an earlier post). If folks really are concerned about women's rights here, should not the the religious arbritration system be examined as a whole?

Secondly, HOW are you going to reconcile this with religious Freedom? Are you going to have the state come down and mandate what they must do WITHIN their faith? Or, only with Islam? Religious counciling overall seems pretty variable in quality but as long as the law isn't violated, how far SHOULD the state intervene?

Third, WE are not Britain, and assuming the same problems will occur is dubious given the differences in our communities.

I'm all for religious freedom and equal protection under the law. But it has to be American law. Not "foreign" law. The very fact that Sharia is codified INTO law in their native lands disturbs me.

ONE religion is under scrutiny because we are currently accelerating the immigration of folks who come from a culture of intolerance, religious domination of govt authority, and reliance on that authority to replace secular law. Recent Pew poll shows that recent Muslim immigrants to America believe by 60% that OUR government should play a much wider role in legislating morality., (even tho --- funny enough -- they tend to vote for the Party that MOCKS folks who want the government to legislate morality) This is the type of expectation that I see being a huge potential problem with allowing "parallel justice systems" to take hold.

These folks are NOT just another wave of Irish potato farmers. They have never experience tolerate permissive societies that treat all religions equally. To turn a blind eye WILL repeat the mistakes that our Euro buds have made. So we need to explicitly state the extent to which ALL religions can offer parallel judgement to the public legal code.

That's it. It's not evil. It's not even painful. But any accommodation or ignoring of the problem might be painful..

 

[flacaltenn]

You DID read the list of Arab states I provided that CODIFY Islam into TOTAL or PARTIAL theocratic govt Authorit

No, I didn't see that list. What post is it in?

No problem. Worth reviewing when we're fighting over US immigration policy..

Sharia Law In The USA 101: A Guide To What It Is And Why States Want To Ban It

In countries with classical Shariah systems, Shariah has official status or a high degree of influence on the legal system, and covers family law, criminal law, and in some places, personal beliefs, including penalties for apostasy, blasphemy, and not praying. These countries include Egypt, Mauritania, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, the Maldives, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and certain regions in Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, and the United Arab Emirates.

Mixed systems are the most common in Muslim-majority countries. Generally speaking, Shariah covers family law, while secular courts will cover everything else. Countries include: Algeria, Comoros, Djibouti, Gambia, Libya, Morocco, Somalia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, and Syria.

In several Muslim-majority countries, Shariah plays no role: Burkina Faso, Chad, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Albania, Kosovo, and Turkey.

Some countries have Islamic family law courts available for their Muslim minorities: Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, India, Israel, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and the United Kingdom.

In the United States, there are no Islamic courts, but judges sometimes have to consider Islamic law in their decisions. For example, a judge may have to recognize the validity of an Islamic marriage contract from a Muslim country in order to grant a divorce in America.

Some Islamic scholars argue that true Islamic belief cannot be coerced by the state, and therefore belief in Shariah should only come from the individual and not be codified by the state.

Please note that in the SHORT list of Muslim majority countries where Shariah plays no role ----- these are LARGELY beyond or on the fringes of "Arab culture". Whilst all those incorporating it into Govt authority in total or in part --- are smack dab CENTER of "Arab culture"...

I also know for a fact that several countries are misplaced in that list. For instance Gaza since the Hamas takeover or recently in Libya and Syria. Even THO there are civil courts, the folks IN CHARGE adopt law that is entirely compatible with Shariah -- so the distinction is MUTE. It's not just "family law" since the civil code itself is LARGELY Shariah based.

 

[flacaltenn]

I looked it up.. Fraction of ORTHODOX Jews in America is about 10%. That's why quoting Talmudic law and talking about Bet Din is virtually irrelevant for comparisons in THIS country.. Fraction of Catholics subject to "orthodox religious law" I assume is greater than 90%.. So leave us out of the national discussion please.

Now in Israel ---- those numbers reverse and the minority of Jews are secular or Reform or Conservative. The vast MAJORITY is Orthodox..

And in US..what is the fraction of Muslims are conservative enough to seek religious arbritration? When it comes to abuse should not ALL women matter?

What concerns me is that virtually ALL of the NEW immigrants will be "that conservative" and carrying expectations of justice and authority that do not match their new homelands.

 

[irosie91]

You DID read the list of Arab states I provided that CODIFY Islam into TOTAL or PARTIAL theocratic govt Authorit

No, I didn't see that list. What post is it in?

No problem. Worth reviewing when we're fighting over US immigration policy..

Sharia Law In The USA 101: A Guide To What It Is And Why States Want To Ban It

In countries with classical Shariah systems, Shariah has official status or a high degree of influence on the legal system, and covers family law, criminal law, and in some places, personal beliefs, including penalties for apostasy, blasphemy, and not praying. These countries include Egypt, Mauritania, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, the Maldives, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and certain regions in Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, and the United Arab Emirates.

Mixed systems are the most common in Muslim-majority countries. Generally speaking, Shariah covers family law, while secular courts will cover everything else. Countries include: Algeria, Comoros, Djibouti, Gambia, Libya, Morocco, Somalia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, and Syria.

In several Muslim-majority countries, Shariah plays no role: Burkina Faso, Chad, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Albania, Kosovo, and Turkey.

Some countries have Islamic family law courts available for their Muslim minorities: Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, India, Israel, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and the United Kingdom.

In the United States, there are no Islamic courts, but judges sometimes have to consider Islamic law in their decisions. For example, a judge may have to recognize the validity of an Islamic marriage contract from a Muslim country in order to grant a divorce in America.

Some Islamic scholars argue that true Islamic belief cannot be coerced by the state, and therefore belief in Shariah should only come from the individual and not be codified by the state.

Please note that in the SHORT list of Muslim majority countries where Shariah plays no role ----- these are LARGELY beyond or on the fringes of "Arab culture". Whilst all those incorporating it into Govt authority in total or in part --- are smack dab CENTER of "Arab culture"...

I also know for a fact that several countries are misplaced in that list. For instance Gaza since the Hamas takeover or recently in Libya and Syria. Even THO there are civil courts, the folks IN CHARGE adopt law that is entirely compatible with Shariah -- so the distinction is MUTE. It's not just "family law" since the civil code itself is LARGELY Shariah based.

there is a significant factor that you left out. That is-----
"BACK TO THE OLD TIME RELIGION TREND". Historically
muslim societies and muslim groups wherever they are located
TREND in and out of Islamic observance which includes ---more
or less---shariah. Right now---the paragon of secular society islamo-
land-----TURKEY-----is in a "back to the old time religion" trend.
Each and any significant muslim population can be caught up
in such a trend. Such trends were very prominent in the famous
MOORISH SPAIN------and impacted significantly on non muslims and
blood levels

 

[Arianrhod]

You DID read the list of Arab states I provided that CODIFY Islam into TOTAL or PARTIAL theocratic govt Authorit

No, I didn't see that list. What post is it in?

No problem. Worth reviewing when we're fighting over US immigration policy..

Sharia Law In The USA 101: A Guide To What It Is And Why States Want To Ban It

In countries with classical Shariah systems, Shariah has official status or a high degree of influence on the legal system, and covers family law, criminal law, and in some places, personal beliefs, including penalties for apostasy, blasphemy, and not praying. These countries include Egypt, Mauritania, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, the Maldives, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and certain regions in Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, and the United Arab Emirates.

Mixed systems are the most common in Muslim-majority countries. Generally speaking, Shariah covers family law, while secular courts will cover everything else. Countries include: Algeria, Comoros, Djibouti, Gambia, Libya, Morocco, Somalia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, and Syria.

In several Muslim-majority countries, Shariah plays no role: Burkina Faso, Chad, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Albania, Kosovo, and Turkey.

Some countries have Islamic family law courts available for their Muslim minorities: Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, India, Israel, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and the United Kingdom.

In the United States, there are no Islamic courts, but judges sometimes have to consider Islamic law in their decisions. For example, a judge may have to recognize the validity of an Islamic marriage contract from a Muslim country in order to grant a divorce in America.

Some Islamic scholars argue that true Islamic belief cannot be coerced by the state, and therefore belief in Shariah should only come from the individual and not be codified by the state.

Please note that in the SHORT list of Muslim majority countries where Shariah plays no role ----- these are LARGELY beyond or on the fringes of "Arab culture". Whilst all those incorporating it into Govt authority in total or in part --- are smack dab CENTER of "Arab culture"...

I also know for a fact that several countries are misplaced in that list. For instance Gaza since the Hamas takeover or recently in Libya and Syria. Even THO there are civil courts, the folks IN CHARGE adopt law that is entirely compatible with Shariah -- so the distinction is MUTE. It's not just "family law" since the civil code itself is LARGELY Shariah based.

there is a significant factor that you left out. That is-----
"BACK TO THE OLD TIME RELIGION TREND". Historically
muslim societies and muslim groups wherever they are located
TREND in and out of Islamic observance which includes ---more
or less---shariah. Right now---the paragon of secular society islamo-
land-----TURKEY-----is in a "back to the old time religion" trend.
Each and any significant muslim population can be caught up
in such a trend. Such trends were very prominent in the famous
MOORISH SPAIN------and impacted significantly on non muslims and
blood levels

While simultaneously preserving Classical literature and philosophy, and building on Classical math and science, which Christians were busy destroying and/or suppressing because they predated Jesus.

The seesawing in current Islamic philosophy is not dissimilar to the U.S. pendulum swing between what calls itself conservatism and what constitutes progressivism. The very fact that pseudo-conservatives have to invent terms such as "regressive liberals" speaks for itself.

All human constructs swing to the extremes and eventually end up in the middle.

 

[irosie91]

You DID read the list of Arab states I provided that CODIFY Islam into TOTAL or PARTIAL theocratic govt Authorit

No, I didn't see that list. What post is it in?

No problem. Worth reviewing when we're fighting over US immigration policy..

Sharia Law In The USA 101: A Guide To What It Is And Why States Want To Ban It

In countries with classical Shariah systems, Shariah has official status or a high degree of influence on the legal system, and covers family law, criminal law, and in some places, personal beliefs, including penalties for apostasy, blasphemy, and not praying. These countries include Egypt, Mauritania, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, the Maldives, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and certain regions in Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, and the United Arab Emirates.

Mixed systems are the most common in Muslim-majority countries. Generally speaking, Shariah covers family law, while secular courts will cover everything else. Countries include: Algeria, Comoros, Djibouti, Gambia, Libya, Morocco, Somalia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, and Syria.

In several Muslim-majority countries, Shariah plays no role: Burkina Faso, Chad, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Albania, Kosovo, and Turkey.

Some countries have Islamic family law courts available for their Muslim minorities: Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, India, Israel, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and the United Kingdom.

In the United States, there are no Islamic courts, but judges sometimes have to consider Islamic law in their decisions. For example, a judge may have to recognize the validity of an Islamic marriage contract from a Muslim country in order to grant a divorce in America.

Some Islamic scholars argue that true Islamic belief cannot be coerced by the state, and therefore belief in Shariah should only come from the individual and not be codified by the state.

Please note that in the SHORT list of Muslim majority countries where Shariah plays no role ----- these are LARGELY beyond or on the fringes of "Arab culture". Whilst all those incorporating it into Govt authority in total or in part --- are smack dab CENTER of "Arab culture"...

I also know for a fact that several countries are misplaced in that list. For instance Gaza since the Hamas takeover or recently in Libya and Syria. Even THO there are civil courts, the folks IN CHARGE adopt law that is entirely compatible with Shariah -- so the distinction is MUTE. It's not just "family law" since the civil code itself is LARGELY Shariah based.

there is a significant factor that you left out. That is-----
"BACK TO THE OLD TIME RELIGION TREND". Historically
muslim societies and muslim groups wherever they are located
TREND in and out of Islamic observance which includes ---more
or less---shariah. Right now---the paragon of secular society islamo-
land-----TURKEY-----is in a "back to the old time religion" trend.
Each and any significant muslim population can be caught up
in such a trend. Such trends were very prominent in the famous
MOORISH SPAIN------and impacted significantly on non muslims and
blood levels

While simultaneously preserving Classical literature and philosophy, and building on Classical math and science, which Christians were busy destroying and/or suppressing because they predated Jesus.

The seesawing in current Islamic philosophy is not dissimilar to the U.S. pendulum swing between what calls itself conservatism and what constitutes progressivism. The very fact that pseudo-conservatives have to invent terms such as "regressive liberals" speaks for itself.

All human constructs swing to the extremes and eventually end up in the middle.

I agree with your middle paragraph---but take exception to the first and last.
Try to learn a bit more. -----Classical math and science was not "preserved" and
"built upon" ---by muslims. It was held in the hands of non muslims in lands conquered by muslims. ----that would be Zoroastrians, Christians and Jews
and "pagans" "ISLAM" did not create BAGHDAD-------Baghdad was already
there---by whatever name----and was a cultural center by virtue of its scholarly ---
Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian population---------Alexandria? ---Copts and Jews. EVEN BARCELONA-----already a cultural center when muslims stormed
in ------uhm.... and Toledo and CORDOBA. Getting back to the pendulum of Islamic ISLAMICISM-----it happens and it happens DRAMATICALLY

 

[Arianrhod]

You DID read the list of Arab states I provided that CODIFY Islam into TOTAL or PARTIAL theocratic govt Authorit

No, I didn't see that list. What post is it in?

No problem. Worth reviewing when we're fighting over US immigration policy..

Sharia Law In The USA 101: A Guide To What It Is And Why States Want To Ban It

In countries with classical Shariah systems, Shariah has official status or a high degree of influence on the legal system, and covers family law, criminal law, and in some places, personal beliefs, including penalties for apostasy, blasphemy, and not praying. These countries include Egypt, Mauritania, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, the Maldives, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and certain regions in Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, and the United Arab Emirates.

Mixed systems are the most common in Muslim-majority countries. Generally speaking, Shariah covers family law, while secular courts will cover everything else. Countries include: Algeria, Comoros, Djibouti, Gambia, Libya, Morocco, Somalia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, and Syria.

In several Muslim-majority countries, Shariah plays no role: Burkina Faso, Chad, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Albania, Kosovo, and Turkey.

Some countries have Islamic family law courts available for their Muslim minorities: Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, India, Israel, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and the United Kingdom.

In the United States, there are no Islamic courts, but judges sometimes have to consider Islamic law in their decisions. For example, a judge may have to recognize the validity of an Islamic marriage contract from a Muslim country in order to grant a divorce in America.

Some Islamic scholars argue that true Islamic belief cannot be coerced by the state, and therefore belief in Shariah should only come from the individual and not be codified by the state.

Please note that in the SHORT list of Muslim majority countries where Shariah plays no role ----- these are LARGELY beyond or on the fringes of "Arab culture". Whilst all those incorporating it into Govt authority in total or in part --- are smack dab CENTER of "Arab culture"...

I also know for a fact that several countries are misplaced in that list. For instance Gaza since the Hamas takeover or recently in Libya and Syria. Even THO there are civil courts, the folks IN CHARGE adopt law that is entirely compatible with Shariah -- so the distinction is MUTE. It's not just "family law" since the civil code itself is LARGELY Shariah based.

there is a significant factor that you left out. That is-----
"BACK TO THE OLD TIME RELIGION TREND". Historically
muslim societies and muslim groups wherever they are located
TREND in and out of Islamic observance which includes ---more
or less---shariah. Right now---the paragon of secular society islamo-
land-----TURKEY-----is in a "back to the old time religion" trend.
Each and any significant muslim population can be caught up
in such a trend. Such trends were very prominent in the famous
MOORISH SPAIN------and impacted significantly on non muslims and
blood levels

While simultaneously preserving Classical literature and philosophy, and building on Classical math and science, which Christians were busy destroying and/or suppressing because they predated Jesus.

The seesawing in current Islamic philosophy is not dissimilar to the U.S. pendulum swing between what calls itself conservatism and what constitutes progressivism. The very fact that pseudo-conservatives have to invent terms such as "regressive liberals" speaks for itself.

All human constructs swing to the extremes and eventually end up in the middle.

I agree with your middle paragraph---but take exception to the first and last.
Try to learn a bit more. -----Classical math and science was not "preserved" and
"built upon" ---by muslims. It was held in the hands of non muslims in lands conquered by muslims. ----that would be Zoroastrians, Christians and Jews
and "pagans" "ISLAM" did not create BAGHDAD-------Baghdad was already
there---by whatever name----and was a cultural center by virtue of its scholarly ---
Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian population---------Alexandria? ---Copts and Jews. EVEN BARCELONA-----already a cultural center when muslims stormed
in ------uhm.... and Toledo and CORDOBA. Getting back to the pendulum of Islamic ISLAMICISM-----it happens and it happens DRAMATICALLY

I was thinking of pre-Renaissance Catholic-controlled Europe, where everything not officially sanctioned by the Church was deemed heresy and punishable by death.

It took the Church five centuries to "forgive" Galileo, for example.

As for religious extremism, let's look at the people in America who presume the right to invade strangers' bedrooms and look up their skirts in the name of "safety." They're not materially different from Shia'a imams.