The Islamic Future of Britain

[lawros left foot]

What misrepresentation BF.
1400 groomed in Rotherham, grooming in Oxford, Derby, Bradford, Keighley, Odham etc, or the beheading of Drummer Rigby, the 85+ Sharia Courts, the poll showing over 30% of British Muslims want Sharia Law, the beheading of one or soon to be two British citizens, the killing of 7/7/2005......what misrepresentation do you mean?

Funnily enough,all the child abuse carried carried out by Roman Catholic priests was by practicing Roman Catholics,and the persecution of Jews, was carried out by mainly Nazi sympathisers, during the 30s and 40s in Germany, but we dont cndemn all Germans or all Roman Catholics, there are bad people in every society, the trick is, don't let them win, and by condemning ALL moslems, the bad guys are akready half way there

 

[Soulman]

Worrying, or nothing to worry about?. From today's London Evening Standard.
"London children as young as ten being 'trained to be junior jihadis,' warns Deputy Mayor, as extent of extremist threat in the capital is revealed
Deputy Mayor Stephen Greenhalgh said that the way some children were being radicalised was “horrendous” as he revealed that both he and Boris Johnson have been briefed on cases in which primary pupils have been subjected to propaganda and “extremist ideology” by their families."
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...unior-jihadis-warns-deputy-mayor-9728606.html

 

[terryberry1]

Very worrying. Yet judging by some of the comments on this thread it will be seen as an over reaction by the newspaper

 

[gregbrighton]

Funnily enough,all the child abuse carried carried out by Roman Catholic priests was by practicing Roman Catholics,and the persecution of Jews, was carried out by mainly Nazi sympathisers, during the 30s and 40s in Germany, but we dont cndemn all Germans or all Roman Catholics, there are bad people in every society, the trick is, don't let them win, and by condemning ALL moslems, the bad guys are akready half way there

Exactly. It doesn't stop the far-right racists on this board to politicising the muslim child abuse for their own sick agenda. Thousands of children have been abused by catholic clergy across the world.

It is time that religion, all religions should be stopping their adherents and leaders from sexually and physically abusing children in their care/trust.

 

[wellquickwoody]

Does it really matter what the majority religion is in a country!? Personally I couldn't care less what the religion of the UK is.

Change the word from religion to 'culture'. Do you still have a couldn't care less attitude?

 

[pastafarian]

Exactly. It doesn't stop the far-right racists on this board to politicising the muslim child abuse for their own sick agenda.

crumbs!Nazi racist propagandists on NSC!

rather than a flippant remark any chance you can name and shame these people with evidence of their far right postings?

 

[father_and_son]

I completely disagree. Everyone in the country should use the same legal processes as everyone else. There was an interesting programme about these courts a while back - and it was not always the two willing parties you wish to think.

Why? Lots of people resolve disputes without going through the courts. Should everyone who has ever negotiated on a price, terminated a contract or disputed a will go to court even if they could come to an agreement without the court?

No one is getting the better of you! No one is getting away with a crime! No one is getting their hands chopped off! Two people who disagree over something have chosen this method of resolving the dispute.

Not everyone going through the conventional courts is doing so willingly! People are sued, divorced, bankrupted, etc and are generally very unhappy about it, but they then respect the decision of the court.

If either party disagrees with the decision of the Sharia Court they can still use all the conventional legal resources open to them, the decision passed by the Imans has no legal weight in this country, but in almost all cases, they don't because of their religious beliefs.

You can argue until your are blue in the face over whether those religious beliefs are based on fact or superstition (and I will be on the side of the latter) and whether they are right or wrong (in the case of gender equality, for instance, again I fall for the latter), but the faithful do accept all of the religious doctrines (good and bad) and so respect the court.


Park your prejudices for a moment and look at the cold, hard facts and give one cogent argument why two people shouldn't voluntarily have a dispute mediated by a third party. Then explain to me why it is any different if that third party is a religious scholar.

 

[GT49er]

It doesn't stop the far-right racists on this board to politicising the muslim child abuse for their own sick agenda.

Geez! You have to be a far right racist to be against the sort of things that have been going on in Rotherham and other places now? Enjoy living in your strange world...............

 

[El Presidente]

Is there a Muslim link to the two Brits who have been murdered in Thailand?

 

[keaton]

Yes. If you live in this country you have the right to be protected by the law. The same law that applies to all your fellow citizens.

Are people who use a Sharia court unable to use legal means later?

 

[El Presidente]

Are people who use a Sharia court unable to use legal means later?

It's an alternative, no one has to use it.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Are people who use a Sharia court unable to use legal means later?

I use Sharia law with all sorts of people, all the time. It's just that i have renamed it 'deciding between yourselves based on your moral values' or failing that, 'getting someone you both trust and who shares your moral values to decide'. If that doesn't work, then we go to court. (I don't go to court very often).

I have found that by renaming it, all sorts of people can use it, regardless of faith. Shows what re-branding can do

 

[keaton]

It's an alternative, no one has to use it.

I know. But some people seemed to think that Sharia courts leave people with less legal rights and I don't see how?

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I know. But some people seemed to think that Sharia courts leave people with less legal rights and I don't see how?

I would do some further investigation then.

 

[keaton]

I would do some further investigation then.

Why?

If someone is unhappy with what happens in a Sharia Law court, they can still use all legal means open to anyone? (just like they have been able to in relation to jewish religious courts for centuries).

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Why?

If someone is unhappy with what happens in a Sharia Law court, they can still use all legal means open to anyone? (just like they have been able to in relation to jewish religious courts for centuries).

Why are we even entertaining these places here anyway. Some people don't get the choice especially women who have come to this country.
I might add, watch the BBC Panaroma programme.

 

[keaton]

Why are we even entertaining these places here anyway. Some people don't get the choice especially women who have come to this country.

We have done it with Jewish religious courts for years and i'm sure followers of all religions or groups ask their leaders to arbitrate on occasions. They are unfair but I don't see what banning them would achieve. Most are apparently unofficial and therefor if they were banned, they would carry on as usual.

What I would like to see is work done to let people who are being oppressed or pressured by their communities or religion given information and help to access proper legal support where necessary.

 

[father_and_son]

Why are we even entertaining these places here anyway. Some people don't get the choice especially women who have come to this country.

So chuck out the baby with the bath water?

There are some entrenched and unpalatable attitudes that persist in certain cultures that have come to this country with the immigrants from those cultures. But hey, its not like we don't have a few unpleasant attitudes persisting here already, not least the prejudiced undertones of some of the posts in this thread. That is no reason to stop religious mediation courts from operating.

And before you tell me to do my research, I have used Sharia Courts for contractual disputes and have studied Sharia Law (as it relates to certain financial transactions) for my job. They are cheaper, quicker, easier and generally a more effective way of doing business within many Islamic communities than the domestic courts, with broadly the same overall outcome.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

We have done it with Jewish religious courts for years and i'm sure followers of all religions or groups ask their leaders to arbitrate on occasions. They are unfair but I don't see what banning them would achieve. Most are apparently unofficial and therefor if they were banned, they would carry on as usual.

What I would like to see is work done to let people who are being oppressed or pressured by their communities or religion given information and help to access proper legal support where necessary.

I agree on that part. However everyone should follow our laws regardless of religion. All we have done in this country like other countries in the EU is created extra problems because of it.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

It's an alternative, no one has to use it.

Tricky if one side is able to force the process (by whatever means) on another party.