Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Hawker25 on September 15, 2008, 03:36:50 PM
-
This is a travesty. The British have decided to let the Sharia courts rule in cases of Muslim cases. I hope all you Brits are outraged and tell you officials about it. This sets the stage for all kinds of legal problems and costs. Here is the link www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,422661,00.html
-
The takeover begins. :mad:
-
This is a travesty.
It is not new law.
Jewish Beth Din courts operate under the same provision in the Arbitration Act and resolve civil cases, ranging from divorce to business disputes. They have existed in Britain for more than 100 years, and previously operated under a precursor to the act. - Times UK
-
So, honor killings are legal now? :O
(http://www.islam-watch.org/Assets/Sharia_Muslim_Women.jpg)
-
It should most certainly be reversed!
If a muslim commits a crime in England. England should be the country to prosecute them. Not some unknown from the Middle East who will most likely cut them loose giving them a pat on the back with a whisper, "Do it again!"
-
So now it's OK in the UK to have your daughter or sister raped and murdered if she hangs out with unmarried men? :rock
So, what if a Muslim commits an act against me that is a crime under secular law but is allowed under Sharia law, and I behead him which is legal under my religion because I (hypothetically) follow one of those religions that thought the crusades were a good idea? Do I get a pass, praise, or prison?
-
It should most certainly be reversed!
If a muslim commits a crime in England. England should be the country to prosecute them.
Calm down everybody.
Both parties to a legal conflict must agree to have arbitration. Both parties must agree on the arbitor. It has been done in the UK for 100 years.
Arbitration is even done here in the USA!
-
Coming to a Football (translation: Soccer) Stadium near you! :O
(http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/11_04/lawDM2611_228x296.jpg)
-
oh noes!! :mad:
i'm becoming more muslim with every waking hour...must.... resist.........DEATH...TO.... ..AMREEKA! It's of noes use! I can't help myself!
-
Mosquito akhbar.
:devil
-
Jews have used religious law to settle their disputes in the UK for many years. So long as the legal decision according to sharia is not illegal under UK law, it shouldn't be a problem. Obviously, honor killings and rape are out of the question.
-
So now it's OK in the UK to have your daughter or sister raped and murdered if she hangs out with unmarried men? :rock
So, what if a Muslim commits an act against me that is a crime under secular law but is allowed under Sharia law, and I behead him which is legal under my religion because I (hypothetically) follow one of those religions that thought the crusades were a good idea? Do I get a pass, praise, or prison?
What religion is that? You cant be talking about Christianity because no-one at the time thought the Crusades was a "good idea". Nor did anyone with any sense think they were " a good idea to make money on".
Actual history reveals The Crusades were purely defensive actions against a religious movement that was sweeping west into Europe putting non-believers to the sword and stealing for their ownselves. The truth is since the days of Mohamed, Islam, has always been a religion of conquest. The Christian Church, Kings, Princes..ect who back the Crusades all lost money big time, and only one crusade had any success anyways. The first one.
But thats another historical make believe that has swept the world. That Christians of the day engaged in the Crusades to get rich and to persecute another religion. What a crock! The Crusades were a last ditch attempt to save what was left of Christianity from an enemy that was swiftly conquering the western world.
-
Calm down everybody.
Both parties to a legal conflict must agree to have arbitration. Both parties must agree on the arbitor. It has been done in the UK for 100 years.
Arbitration is even done here in the USA!
For the first time in a long time... I agree with you, Holden.
The Mega-knee jerk to the idea by most, is displaced. It is mostly a result of inbred misinformation and lack of thought. Many americans are now prone to this.
-
Calm down everybody.
Both parties to a legal conflict must agree to have arbitration. Both parties must agree on the arbitor. It has been done in the UK for 100 years.
Arbitration is even done here in the USA!
You are correct, and this has also been gone over here before. It really is a non issue.
-
Death by a thousand cuts is still death. One sliver at a time you are taken. Apathy makes your resistance fleeting. You are taken without struggle.
-
Death by a thousand cuts is still death. One sliver at a time you are taken. Apathy makes your resistance fleeting. You are taken without struggle.
The British people have been allowed to settle disputes via an arbiter (as long as both sides agree to it) for some time now. In this particular case the judge wasn't even on duty[/b] when he clarified that muslims can settle their disputes via Sharia law as long as both parties agreed to it. Otherwise the case would go to British courts.
-
Some people obviously didn't read the article or not very closely because in the second line it talks about how the sharia court could deliberate on cases of domestic violence. Now that is not just a simple arbitration issue. Considering that most sharia courts treat women more like property than people i think this is sad news for the UK. Now on the issue of have different arbitration methods under Jewish or Islamic or any other religion, I think that this also should be changed. Laws should be based on reason not religion.
-
Some people obviously didn't read the article or not very closely because in the second line it talks about how the sharia court could deliberate on cases of domestic violence. Now that is not just a simple arbitration issue. Considering that most sharia courts treat women more like property than people i think this is sad news for the UK. Now on the issue of have different arbitration methods under Jewish or Islamic or any other religion, I think that this also should be changed. Laws should be based on reason not religion.
I agree there. Unfortunately, around 70% or higher, of the people on this rock use religion for both. Until that changes, it will pervade issues such as law, where it should not.
-
Some people obviously didn't read the article or not very closely because in the second line it talks about how the sharia court could deliberate on cases of domestic violence. Now that is not just a simple arbitration issue. Considering that most sharia courts treat women more like property than people i think this is sad news for the UK. Now on the issue of have different arbitration methods under Jewish or Islamic or any other religion, I think that this also should be changed. Laws should be based on reason not religion.
If both parties agree, there is no reason they shouldn't be allowed to choose whichever arbiter they desire. The catch is....both parties have to agree on the arbiter.
-
Gee, why does this thread sound familiar....
Oh yeah, because we had the EXACT SAME BLOWN OUT OF PROPORTION ALARMIST THREAD IN RESPONSE TO A MISREAD ARTICLE on the exact same subject about 3-4 months ago.
Search Button. It's not just for the Wishlist anymore. :rolleyes:
-
Gee, why does this thread sound familiar....
Oh yeah, because we had the EXACT SAME BLOWN OUT OF PROPORTION ALARMIST THREAD IN RESPONSE TO A MISREAD ARTICLE on the exact same subject about 3-4 months ago.
Search Button. It's not just for the Wishlist anymore. :rolleyes:
:lol
-
I thought this was an old thread. You mean the gross stupidity and general knee spasms in the previous thread were not one offs?
Oh noes!
For the (second) time. Arbitration can be sought using any code you want, but the judgement must not be outside English law. You could even use Jedi law if you want. Therefore hysterical posts about stoning and hangings at footy matches are a tad... hysterical. UK law looks down on that sort of carry on.
-
Deleted
-
Gee, why does this thread sound familiar....
Oh yeah, because we had the EXACT SAME BLOWN OUT OF PROPORTION ALARMIST THREAD IN RESPONSE TO A MISREAD ARTICLE on the exact same subject about 3-4 months ago.
Search Button. It's not just for the Wishlist anymore. :rolleyes:
Yeah, but whenever a fisherman has a favorite bait that works well in a particular pond... :lol
-
Bear in mind it's only the press that are calling these "courts". The organisation behind them is the "Muslim Arbitration Tribunal". You can see their website at http://www.matribunal.com/index.html
I can't see them calling their panels "courts" anywhere, that's just a media invention. Even the Times points out (although Fox does not):
Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996.
Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.
The US has a similar law, the Federal Arbitration Act, and there are Jewish "courts" operating under it. There's nothing to stop Muslims doing the same.
-
There's nothing to stop Muslims doing the same.
Nothing except the irrational fear of something or someone different that gives rives to BS like this thread.
-
the peoples court? european style!
-
I havent but.
Has anyone bothered to look at the laws concerning this type of thing works?
Common sense tells me they dont get carte blanche to do things a any way they like.
That there are some guidlines that need to be met.
-
The British people have been allowed to settle disputes via an arbiter (as long as both sides agree to it) for some time now. In this particular case the judge wasn't even on duty[/b] when he clarified that muslims can settle their disputes via Sharia law as long as both parties agreed to it. Otherwise the case would go to British courts.
It clearly doesnt matter how long arbitration has gone on. Point is that one iota of your legal system has been infiltrated by sharia law (religion and worse a foreign religious influence). Apparently the era of the 'Virgin Queen' taught you English nothing.
-
It clearly doesnt matter how long arbitration has gone on. Point is that one iota of your legal system has been infiltrated by sharia law (religion and worse a foreign religious influence). Apparently the era of the 'Virgin Queen' taught you English nothing.
I'm not English......and the English legal system is not my own......
Heck, the English probably wouldn't have me anyways, just ask Dowding and Nashwan. :D
-
oh noes, religious courts. :rolleyes:
-
Sorry Elfies didnt mean you when I said 'you' I meant the people that allowed this.
I foresee the Salem Witch trials all over again with lots of hangings and beheadings and witch burnings.
-
hey.. if we did that in a stadium with a rock band warm-up and tossed in a chariot race and a few dungeons and dragons pagans being chased around by monks with swords we could prolly sell tickets.
-
Sorry Elfies didnt mean you when I said 'you' I meant the people that allowed this.
I foresee the Salem Witch trials all over again with lots of hangings and beheadings and witch burnings.
And that's the NON-Muslims.
:p
-
LOL @ the reaction from the country that awards millions of dollars in damages for coffee that's to hot.
-
did the dingo eat yer baybaye again?
-
You got your countries mixed up there Hang! We have the Baby eating dingoes over here, they just have boiling mud and sheep over there.
(God gave them sheep 'cos you can't shear boiling mud)
-
(http://www.islamreview.com/articles/glimpse/stoningDM_468x406.jpg)
Sharia in Action...
ALLAHUWAKBAR!!!