Says the guy who has provided nothing to support his claims. Why would anyone want to live in the US besides making money?
Exactly, hence your problem. Its a hooray for the legal system, mate. Doesnt matter if its Islamic, Catholic or Jewish law blah blah blah. If, as in my example, two divorcing parties consent to some particular arbitration process they should be allowed to do so as this ensures people can obtain more suitable outcomes for themselves as well as alleviate the pressure on the always overburdened legal system to provide mediation and the avenue for legal proceedings where parties arent happy. These options nevertheless remain if participants in alternative processes, like sharia, find such a process isnt good enough for them. Even if this is true, which it isnt, women can decide that for themselves and not participate in the sharia arbitration process and utilise mainstream secular facilities. Are you saying women cant decide what is in their best interests? Dont be so sexist. Yes, they are, since they can always opt out of the alternative process if they choose it initially and simply use the mainstream, non-religious, legal process. You clearly dont understand the nature of sharia as an addition to secular state law, like any other alternative religious option in minor, non-criminal, matters. Its inclusion doesnt have to and should not include all or nothing. By incorporating specific religious custom and process into the mainstream legal options you empower people to engage in the legal system as such community values and systems are recognised and incorporated under wider state sanctioned law. This not only offloads pressure on the mainstream tax-payer funded system but provides regulatory control over specific community legal tendencies that would otherwise carry on without recognition. Making such an incorporation gives religious people the option to use independent religious arbitration. If they dont want to use such a process they dont have to.
As they should and the same when Christians try to shove their doctrine into our legal system as well and try to make biblical law American law.
There is NOTHING to support the claim that sharia is preferred over our current laws. If you want to live in some third world sand pit and abide by their laws, go ahead . . . I will be the one making money.
like I told another defender of sharia law; If you want to live in some third world sand pit then go ahead. I will be the one making money while you have zero rights
I'd much rather live in the first world and give people the opportunity for religious arbitration. So tough titties mate.
Actually I can. Shariah law can operate at a minimal level, a hybrid system of law, where secular state institutions remain dominant, for example absolute in the field of criminal law, but minor alternatives in others fields, such as divorce proceedings are available to Muslims who wish to use them. This is the same (or should be) for any other religious groups. Again, many already exist, and are entirely optional. Do you see something wrong with such hybridity? If so, please point it out.
Sharia law is not creeping into the US legal system. This is anti-Muslim hysteria. Muslim fanatics are destroying the world, but not in America, more so the Middle-East
shall we ask the Swedish about that? Seems they have nothing to say about how the mooslims runtheir courts, but seems the mooslims are telling them what's limited under sharee's law
this was your quote, is it not? Sweden is in one hell of a mess. The only news coming out of there that's worth watching is about how the Muslims are forcing their laws on Swedes. They did it in England, and they're trying to do it here. You cannot have two separate forms of justice in one country. About the first time an American protected under the American Justice System gets the death sentence from a mooslim court, you will see that war you keep hoping for. Islam can just simply go (*)(*)(*)(*) itself
You are saying that Muslim divorce courts and other arbitration caused "one hell of a mess" (what does that even mean)? Evidence of this news? Evidence? I agree. I'm not arguing for that. You clearly havent understood what I have said. You'll note I said criminal law shouldnt be touched. I know you're angry and biased but thats not an argument. Any religion would be a terrible basis for law.
oh, but you are of the opinion that civil law be exercised over us in the form of sharia law. btw: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/938 http://www.barenakedislam.com/2011/02/23/sweden-christians-and-muslims-headed-for-civil-war/ http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/muslim-refugees-and-the-cost-of-sweden-s-kindness-1.912737 here's a whole list of serious problems with mooslims and Swedes...............what problem hahahahahahahahah Your own country is clamping down on Muslims: http://www.nationalobserver.net/2005_spring_101.htm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzW1Q3YGx5U a whole list of debates........... If you really knew me, you would never say that, well at least never to my face. So hide behind your screen and keep the 10 year old foot stomping and name calling to yourself.
You act like you don't know Islam is despised by non-Muslims because it is a threat to our freedoms and way of life and that too many Muslims in a free society results in toxic levels which are unacceptable to free men. Your Dawah won't work here. Does everyone here know that Dawah is obligatory of each and every Muslim?
NO Muslims beyond a few tokens in Japan and stringent laws to assure they aren't plagued by the infestation of Muslims nor the epidemic of Islamic toxicity. Gotta admire the Japanese for that intelligence and their enlightened views.
Under Islamic law Muslim women are lower in status than slaves. Oh, I should specify, they are lower than MUSLIM MALE SLAVES. Then come free Muslim women Next come Muslim slave women. And notice that slavery is still okay in Islam.
When will you get it through your silly head that the fight you want to fight is counterproductive to our existential struggle against Islamic conquest??? A struggle we need you guys and gals to join us in? Once that is decded you will be able to fight your fight against Christianity at your leisure and with almost zero consequences to our freedoms if you win or lose??? If we lose the struggle against Islamic conquest your asses will be grass. And your beef with Christianity will seem like a day at the beach by comparison.
No. My position is that alternative processes for dispute resolution in SOME areas of civil law (and not criminal) should be recognized and incorporated ALONGSIDE existing state law and it is up to participants to decide which process to engage in. None of this disproves ANYTHING I am arguing. Where is the evidence alternative religious arbitration courts cause social problems? Have a cry mate youre still losing this debate.
I disagree. I think they are both equally threats, but only where they actively manifest themselves as such. One can be Muslim or Christian still abide by secular norms of tolerance and respect for liberty of others.
