Author Topic: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"  (Read 2669 times)

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #90 on: July 07, 2008, 12:27:49 PM »
Actually, you're the only one who's posted no conclusive and accurate argument in support of this position. Just a rambling series of misread and misinterpreted articles that have been quite thoroughly debunked (whether deliberately, or out of sheer panic-induced ignorance) and flippant one-liners that you think are sufficient to say "THAT'll show him," until another hole is opened in the sieve that's draining the legitimacy of your case, forcing you to dredge up some other misinformed argument that's no more solid or convincing than any of the others.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2008, 12:29:38 PM by Saxman »
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline ZetaNine

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1685
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #91 on: July 07, 2008, 12:33:03 PM »
Actually, you're the only one who's posted no conclusive and accurate argument in support of this position. Just a rambling series of misread and misinterpreted articles that have been quite thoroughly debunked (whether deliberately, or out of sheer panic-induced ignorance) and flippant one-liners that you think are sufficient to say "THAT'll show him," until another hole is opened in the sieve that's draining the legitimacy of your case, forcing you to dredge up some other misinformed argument that's no more solid or convincing than any of the others.



actually......I'm presenting factual news stories........and you and your pals are showing how well conditioned you all are at explaining things away in an almost automatic..well trained manner.  this is not only astounding.........it's sad. don't hate me.......I'm just the messenger.

The HIGH ROAD.......it's more than just a way of life.....

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #92 on: July 07, 2008, 12:40:04 PM »
pure factual ?

No way ,even the thread tittle was misleading as noted by dmf !

Offline ZetaNine

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1685
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #93 on: July 07, 2008, 12:43:39 PM »
pure factual ?

No way ,even the thread tittle was misleading as noted by dmf !



selective reading skills?  take your semantics argument to the london telegraph .....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2242340/Muslims-in-Britain-should-be-able-to-live-under-Sharia-law,-says-top-judge.html

Offline Megalodon

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2272
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #94 on: July 07, 2008, 01:01:02 PM »
I think its funny, many of our laws/values and English laws/values have roots in the sharia.

Examples:
"The Waqf in Islamic law, which developed during the 7th-9th centuries, bears a notable resemblance to the trusts in the English trust law.For example, every Waqf was required to have a waqif (founder), mutawillis (trustee), qadi (judge) and beneficiaries.Under both a Waqf and a trust, "property is reserved, and its usufruct appropriated, for the benefit of specific individuals, or for a general charitable purpose; the corpus becomes inalienable; estates for life in favor of successive beneficiaries can be created" and "without regard to the law of inheritance or the rights of the heirs; and continuity is secured by the successive appointment of trustees or mutawillis." The trust law developed in England at the time of the Crusades, during the 12th and 13th centuries, was introduced by Crusaders who may have been influenced by the Waqf institutions they came across in the Middle East. The introduction of the trust, or "use" was primarily motivated by the need to avoid medieval inheritance taxes. By transferring legal title to a third party, there was no need to pay feudal dues on the death of the father. In those times, it was common for an underage child to lose many of his rights to his feudal overlord if he succeeded before he came of age.

The precursor to the English jury trial was the Lafif trial in classical Maliki jurisprudence, which was developed between the 8th and 11th centuries in North Africa and Islamic Sicily, and shares a number of similarities with the later jury trials in English common law. Like the English jury, the Islamic Lafif was a body of twelve members drawn from the neighbourhood and sworn to tell the truth, who were bound to give a unanimous verdict, about matters "which they had personally seen or heard, binding on the judge, to settle the truth concerning facts in a case, between ordinary people, and obtained as of right by the plaintiff." The only characteristic of the English jury which the Islamic Lafif lacked was the "judicial writ directing the jury to be summoned and directing the bailiff to hear its recognition." According to Professor John Makdisi, "no other institution in any legal institution studied to date shares all of these characteristics with the English jury." It is thus likely that the concept of the Lafif may have been introduced to England by the Normans and then evolved into the modern English jury.

The earliest known prohibition of illegal drugs occurred under Islamic law, which prohibited the use of Hashish, a preparation of cannabis, as a recreational drug. Classical jurists in medieval Islamic jurisprudence, however, accepted the use of the Hashish drug for medicinal and therapeutic purposes, and agreed that its "medical use, even if it leads to mental derangement, remains exempt" from punishment. In the 14th century, the Islamic jurist Az-Zarkashi spoke of "the permissibility of its use for medical purposes if it is established that it is beneficial."According to Mary Lynn Mathre, with "this legal distinction between the intoxicant and the medical uses of cannabis, medieval Muslim theologians were far ahead of present-day American law."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
Okay..Add 2 Country's at once, Australia and France next plane update Add ...CAC Boomerang and the Dewoitine D.520

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #95 on: July 07, 2008, 01:05:44 PM »
Speaking of selective reading....

Topic of the Article: Muslims in Britain should be able to live under Sharia

Topic of the Thread: Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain

These titles have two ENTIRELY different interpretations. The London Times title is somewhat more neutral, though would have been better presented as something like, "Justice affirms English Law rules, but Muslims should be able to apply Sharia to civil life." Either way, if I had read the subject the first time I would have interpreted it no differently than saying Jews or Christians in Britain should be able to live by the Ten Commandments.

Your subject is inflamatory, and immediately suggests drastic social upheaval and that Lord Phillips is advocating Islamic theocracy in the UK.

This has led to a case of selective HEARING, in which you've repeatedly disregarded the 90% of this thread which proves your statements to be reactionary, probably prejudiced, and DEFINITELY paranoid. The other 10% has been you posting more garbage which doesn't do anything except further confirm to me that which I stated previously in this same paragraph.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline ZetaNine

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1685
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #96 on: July 07, 2008, 01:06:19 PM »
I think its funny, many of our laws/values and English laws/values have roots in the sharia.

Examples:
"The Waqf in Islamic law, which developed during the 7th-9th centuries, bears a notable resemblance to the trusts in the English trust law.For example, every Waqf was required to have a waqif (founder), mutawillis (trustee), qadi (judge) and beneficiaries.Under both a Waqf and a trust, "property is reserved, and its usufruct appropriated, for the benefit of specific individuals, or for a general charitable purpose; the corpus becomes inalienable; estates for life in favor of successive beneficiaries can be created" and "without regard to the law of inheritance or the rights of the heirs; and continuity is secured by the successive appointment of trustees or mutawillis." The trust law developed in England at the time of the Crusades, during the 12th and 13th centuries, was introduced by Crusaders who may have been influenced by the Waqf institutions they came across in the Middle East. The introduction of the trust, or "use" was primarily motivated by the need to avoid medieval inheritance taxes. By transferring legal title to a third party, there was no need to pay feudal dues on the death of the father. In those times, it was common for an underage child to lose many of his rights to his feudal overlord if he succeeded before he came of age.

The precursor to the English jury trial was the Lafif trial in classical Maliki jurisprudence, which was developed between the 8th and 11th centuries in North Africa and Islamic Sicily, and shares a number of similarities with the later jury trials in English common law. Like the English jury, the Islamic Lafif was a body of twelve members drawn from the neighbourhood and sworn to tell the truth, who were bound to give a unanimous verdict, about matters "which they had personally seen or heard, binding on the judge, to settle the truth concerning facts in a case, between ordinary people, and obtained as of right by the plaintiff." The only characteristic of the English jury which the Islamic Lafif lacked was the "judicial writ directing the jury to be summoned and directing the bailiff to hear its recognition." According to Professor John Makdisi, "no other institution in any legal institution studied to date shares all of these characteristics with the English jury." It is thus likely that the concept of the Lafif may have been introduced to England by the Normans and then evolved into the modern English jury.

The earliest known prohibition of illegal drugs occurred under Islamic law, which prohibited the use of Hashish, a preparation of cannabis, as a recreational drug. Classical jurists in medieval Islamic jurisprudence, however, accepted the use of the Hashish drug for medicinal and therapeutic purposes, and agreed that its "medical use, even if it leads to mental derangement, remains exempt" from punishment. In the 14th century, the Islamic jurist Az-Zarkashi spoke of "the permissibility of its use for medical purposes if it is established that it is beneficial."According to Mary Lynn Mathre, with "this legal distinction between the intoxicant and the medical uses of cannabis, medieval Muslim theologians were far ahead of present-day American law."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia


interesting read........but purely opinion and conjecture....from Wikipedia no less.  "Crusaders who may have been influenced by the Waqf institutions"

"medieval Muslim theologians were far ahead of present-day American law"......... I won't even glorify that with a response.

Offline ZetaNine

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1685
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #97 on: July 07, 2008, 01:09:30 PM »
Speaking of selective reading....

Topic of the Article: Muslims in Britain should be able to live under Sharia

Topic of the Thread: Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain

These titles have two ENTIRELY different interpretations. The London Times title is somewhat more neutral, though would have been better presented as something like, "Justice affirms English Law rules, but Muslims should be able to apply Sharia to civil life." Either way, if I had read the subject the first time I would have interpreted it no differently than saying Jews or Christians in Britain should be able to live by the Ten Commandments.

Your subject is inflamatory, and immediately suggests drastic social upheaval and that Lord Phillips is advocating Islamic theocracy in the UK.

This has led to a case of selective HEARING, in which you've repeatedly disregarded the 90% of this thread which proves your statements to be reactionary, probably prejudiced, and DEFINITELY paranoid. The other 10% has been you posting more garbage which doesn't do anything except further confirm to me that which I stated previously in this same paragraph.



again with the "should" semantics game......this is weak.  it's said three different ways by the end of the first paragraph......take your pic......or take it to the telegraph.

you're bingo ammo


Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #98 on: July 07, 2008, 01:20:40 PM »
Quote
"medieval Muslim theologians were far ahead of present-day American law"......... I won't even glorify that with a response.

Probably because you don't have one that wouldn't completely undermine your prejudiced and ill-constructed arguments.

Quote
...or take it to the telegraph.

Why not actually READ the article, not just the subject? From the same story you linked:

"There is already scope in English law for some communities to use their own religious codes to resolve disputes. Orthodox Jews can use the Beth Din rabbinical courts to decide on matters including divorce."

Why no hostile thread about "Beth Din SHOULD be used in Britain?"
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Dead Man Flying

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6301
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #99 on: July 07, 2008, 01:33:44 PM »
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2242340/Muslims-in-Britain-should-be-able-to-live-under-Sharia-law,-says-top-judge.html

I'm here to help................

No, that article says that the judge thinks that Muslims should BE ABLE to live under Sharia Law where it does not conflict with British law.

There's a big difference between SHOULD BE ABLE and SHOULD.  One suggests choice while the other does not.  Can you understand the difference?

-- Todd/Leviathn

Offline ZetaNine

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1685
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #100 on: July 07, 2008, 01:41:34 PM »
Probably because you don't have one that wouldn't completely undermine your prejudiced and ill-constructed arguments.

Why not actually READ the article, not just the subject? From the same story you linked:

"There is already scope in English law for some communities to use their own religious codes to resolve disputes. Orthodox Jews can use the Beth Din rabbinical courts to decide on matters including divorce."

Why no hostile thread about "Beth Din SHOULD be used in Britain?"




"hostile thread"?

look .....you would not still be here in my thread if you were not trying so hard to make a face saving exit of some kind........I ignored the comments directed to me......rather than the topic at hand.......but I don't play the "go off in another direction" game well......and you seem to dig that a lot....so much so that you're repeating your posts in earlier pages now.

short and sweet........Britain as you know it...... is doomed.......  that cracking sound you hear is the last remnants of a backbone your country used to have.......which is now snapping due to bending over so far to accomodate........  you cannot please all the people........all the time......and the fact that you are trying to......will be your end.   like I said........that saddens me......you were once a great and powerful ally of ours......and we will miss you.  good luck in the future........but I honestly see things unraveling for you in another 4 to 5 years......




aptly quoting sir alec guiness in the bridge on the river kwai...you will one day soon be repeating his words.... ""My God, What have I done?"

I wish you well.......the last word is yours....

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #101 on: July 07, 2008, 01:54:02 PM »
So you have nothing to say about the quote regarding Orthodox Jews using Beth Din the same way Muslims would use Sharia? It's NO different from what Lord Phillips is saying, excepting the religious identity of the party involved.

That you have no response to that other than those who disagree with you are only in the thread to "save face" only proves the point that what you take exception to is NOT the use of religion to resolve disputes without involving the English court system, but that it's about MUSLIMS using their religion to do so; a right as the article notes is already being exercised by Christians and Jews.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16333
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #102 on: July 07, 2008, 02:00:25 PM »
Saxman isn't british, Zeta.
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #103 on: July 07, 2008, 02:15:57 PM »
Observation Skill Check: Fail

You'd have thought he'd have noticed my "Babe-on-the-Bat" avatar. :D
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Slamfire

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 413
Re: UK JUDGE: "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain"
« Reply #104 on: July 07, 2008, 04:30:48 PM »
They don't. There is one legal system in England and Wales, and it operates under English law.

Ok - so is it the case that the Regular Courts are NOT BOUND by decisions reached in Sharia Court ?

If so, then I have no problem with it.

BTW In other western countries, it is often the case that Regular Courts ARE bound by decisions reached in Sharia Court (ie: certain provinces in Canada).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Chief Marshal, Elite Top Aces
----------------------------------------------------------------------