Sharia law in the UK

[G4Z]

Ok, so did anybody notice this little news item...?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle4749183.ece

Really not sure what I make of it, need a few more minutes to get my thoughts together really but I am initially thinking this could possibly be the worst precedent ever and a serious step backwards for our western civilisation.

Thoughts?

[fuddam]

that is BADDDDD!!!!

[Steve B]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_din
what about these?

[G4Z]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_din
what about these?

Well, yes its the exact same situation and I really can't say I agree with arbitration by religious courts being enforced by our judicial system. I think its a step too far, if people want a real legally binding agreement then really they should stick to our own judicial system or appointed arbitrators. I think there is so much scope for peer pressure or pressure from a spouse to allow any kind of legally binding judgements to be handed down from these kind of kangaroo courts. The fact is that a lot of people will have influence over these clerics and rabbis and will be able to get judgements that suit them because of 'who they know' or where they stand in the community or more likely simply because they are Male.

Aside from that, they simply do not adhere to our standards of fairness, this being our country and our culture I think any immigrant culture should be bound by those same standards. The example with the 3 son's inheriting double what the two daughters did is a case in point.

[360bhp]

LOL Jewish courts of law have been around for a while, thats fine. Put a Muslim court of law up people going crazy!.. Probably front page on the sun too im guessing lol

[G4Z]

LOL Jewish courts of law have been around for a while, thats fine. Put a Muslim court of law up people going crazy!.. Probably front page on the sun too im guessing lol

I for one am against any kind of religious law. Its all founded on ideas that frankly are not rational, old and insane its nothing to do with islam in particular.

[Agent]

Who honestly didn't see this coming after the The Archbishop of Canterbury opened his mouth?

[moogle]

I'm not for it but it's not that bad is it?

provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.

Yes I know every case should be tried through the same system to get the fair results but this will only happen if those people agree to it. Hey it's their choice.

[staffsMike]

Aside from that, they simply do not adhere to our standards of fairness, this being our country and our culture I think any immigrant culture should be bound by those same standards. The example with the 3 son's inheriting double what the two daughters did is a case in point.

Indeed.

I hate how women are treated by their laws. I suppose if they are OK with it, then fine. But the domestic violence cases mentioned are more worrying to me. Anger management.. Second chances.. blimey. I'd expect every bit of typical punishment if I ever hit the Mrs.. not to mention what she would do to my goodies.

[shadowmaster]

Basically from what I can gather it's a religious based mediation service, of which is already employed by various other religions (Beth Din ) in the UK. It does not override UK law, it provides a means for alternative dispute resolution (in civil cases only) should both parties agree.

So what's the big deal?

[Lanky123]

Yes I know every case should be tried through the same system to get the fair results but this will only happen if those people agree to it. Hey it's their choice.

But in domestic violence cases it's not too hard to imagine someone being pushed into using these courts against their will, or going because it's become the norm in their community and they don't feel they can go against that.

I agree that it could be worse and it's unlikely that their powers will escalate in the foreseeable future, but I really don't like the idea of our judicial system enforcing decisions like that inheritance case.

[staffsMike]

But in domestic violence cases it's not too hard to imagine someone being pushed into using these courts against their will, or going because it's become the norm in their community and they don't feel they can go against that.

Well that is what I was thinking.

I'm not that experienced with matters such as this, but probably more than most unless you are directly involved with one. Anyway, you would be suprised how little choice some people really have, or at the very least, feel they have when family matters are concerned.

I'm not getting into specifics but it can be hard and frustrating to hear when you know they have a choice but they seem to know (or at least think) they don't.

[shadowmaster]

But in domestic violence cases it's not too hard to imagine someone being pushed into using these courts against their will, or going because it's become the norm in their community and they don't feel they can go against that.

I agree that it could be worse and it's unlikely that their powers will escalate in the foreseeable future, but I really don't like the idea of our judicial system enforcing decisions like that inheritance case.

I see your point, the times article above did however forget to mention whether the girls in the inheritance case agreed to use sharia? If they did, then I can’t see why it’s a problem. UK law already provides equality to women, but we can’t force that upon people. If women choose to use sharia then there is nothing we can do about it.

My only concern would be in ensuring that both parties understand the rules used by the arbitration panel and consent to it.

I fear a huge backlash will come about from this, judging by the comments under the times article, quite a few people believe that this country is slowly being taken over by Muslims.

[Lanky123]

My only concern would be in ensuring that both parties understand the rules used by the arbitration panel and consent to it.

That would certainly make it more acceptable.

I fear a huge backlash will come about from this, judging by the comments under the times article, quite a few people believe that this country is slowly being taken over by Muslims.

I agree, any headlines in The Sun or Daily Mail will probably be vastly over exaggerated and unwarranted.

However, my point of view is this; why are these needed? What are the advantages of introducing them? I can't see any but please correct me if you think there are. In that inheritance case, if it had been tried in a normal court those daughters could have transferred the money back if they'd wanted to and complied with sharia law. In other cases there was never anything to stop people resolving their disputes by going by the advice of a religious elder if they chose to. It was the same situation of choice but it wasn't legally binding; any possible problems of unfairness being upheld by the law weren't present, but the freedom of choice that people are defending it with was always there. I see no reason for this to have taken place, even if it does work fine.

[G4Z]

I'm not for it but it's not that bad is it?



Yes I know every case should be tried through the same system to get the fair results but this will only happen if those people agree to it. Hey it's their choice.

Well, I think what you are missing is that they have to agree to it before the ruling after which point they are going to be legally bound to abide by it.

[x2o]

Problem with all this making changes to help other cultures is if we went to their country they would not make the same ammendments.

If they want to live here they should abide by our laws, rules and culture.

Anyway that's my opinion right or wrong.

x2o