Breaking news: British government run by morons. (Sharia courts operating in Britain)

JillSwift
Superfan
JillSwift's picture
Posts: 1758
Joined: 2008-01-13
User is offlineOffline
Breaking news: British government run by morons. (Sharia courts operating in Britain)

Sharia courts operating in Britain

 

What the hell is this? Religious courts carrying the same legal weight as the real thing? What retarded fuckwit came up with this idea, and why is he still alive?

This is proof that "multiculturalism" is poison. Other countries seem to be sniffing about the edges of doing this same thing for Muslims, we really must stomp on a few feet to wake 'em up.

"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2397
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is onlineOnline
Oh Canada!!!!!!

 

            We had the same question in Ontario Canada;   Sharia law was voted down;  it is not valid in an intelligent socienty.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


mrjonno
Posts: 726
Joined: 2007-02-26
User is offlineOffline
I think you will find this

I think you will find this sort of thing legal in most western countries including the  US.

If two groups of people want to 'voluntary' sort of their differences using whatever private legay system their wish to as long as it doesnt go agains the national law its legal, in fact its the general basis of most business.

Of course you can argue whether any one involved in these courts if voluntary given the socety you come from but thats a different matter


JillSwift
Superfan
JillSwift's picture
Posts: 1758
Joined: 2008-01-13
User is offlineOffline
mrjonno wrote:I think you

mrjonno wrote:
I think you will find this sort of thing legal in most western countries including the  US.

If two groups of people want to 'voluntary' sort of their differences using whatever private legay system their wish to as long as it doesnt go agains the national law its legal, in fact its the general basis of most business.

Of course you can argue whether any one involved in these courts if voluntary given the socety you come from but thats a different matter

Leagal schmeagal.

Sharia law is an ugly, primitive, monsterous thing. Tolerating it in any form undermines real civilization.

"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3388
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
JillSwift wrote:mrjonno

JillSwift wrote:

mrjonno wrote:
I think you will find this sort of thing legal in most western countries including the  US.

If two groups of people want to 'voluntary' sort of their differences using whatever private legay system their wish to as long as it doesnt go agains the national law its legal, in fact its the general basis of most business.

Of course you can argue whether any one involved in these courts if voluntary given the socety you come from but thats a different matter

Leagal schmeagal.

Sharia law is an ugly, primitive, monsterous thing. Tolerating it in any form undermines real civilization.

fuckin' right.  you did not want to meet me on the sidewalk the day the story broke that turkey was starting to capitulate to the hardline muslims about wearing burqas in state buildings.  i always championed turkey as the near east's model secular society.  kemal ataturk must be spinning in his grave.  now the idea that such things are making in-roads into europe, the birthplace of secularism, is frightening.  and you know who the fuckin' christians back home in the states blame that shit on?  atheists!  "oh, europe is becoming so atheistic that the muslims are gonna take it over."  any atheist with a fucking BRAIN should be firmly against ANY religious expression in ANYTHING even remotely touching the government, and that includes the judicial system.  there should NEVER be any law but the STATE law, PERIOD. 

you know whose fault it really is?  all those wishy-washy, pluralistic, quasi-spiritualist, agnostic hippy FUCKTARDS who take "free expression" to ridiculous lengths.  "oooh, but man, if they wanna shame women for showin' their hair that's, like, their culture, man.  you can't, like, suppress that."  we have plenty of those in europe, and somehow they always get lumped in with the atheist community.  the only thing i have to be thankful for is that, at least according to all the panicking christians here in slovakia, our good neighbor the czech republic is thinking about taking away the legal validity of church weddings.  you could have a church wedding, but you wouldn't be legally married without a civil ceremony.  now THAT is a step in the direction of civilization!

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


anniet
Silver Member
Posts: 325
Joined: 2008-08-06
User is offlineOffline
I admit I don't know much

I admit I don't know much about how the U.K. legal system works, but sharia law codifies discrimination against women, right?  Do Brits not have some sort of civil rights law(s) that would make this illegal?  Why aren't civil rights overruling the arbitration agreement here?  How is this legal?

"I am that I am." - Proof that the writers of the bible were beyond stoned.


Sleestack
Sleestack's picture
Posts: 172
Joined: 2008-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Looks like the fruits of

Looks like the fruits of Political Correctness are starting to get ripe.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3388
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
anniet wrote:I admit I don't

anniet wrote:

I admit I don't know much about how the U.K. legal system works, but sharia law codifies discrimination against women, right?  Do Brits not have some sort of civil rights law(s) that would make this illegal?  Why aren't civil rights overruling the arbitration agreement here?  How is this legal?

civil rights are a double-edged sword, you know?  as i said above, albeit mockingly, there are a lot of liberal morons here in europe who believe some sort of cultural autonomy is a civil rights issue.  honestly, i think it stems from a latent racism inherited from europe's colonialist past: the old cultures of the middle east, north africa, india, etc., are "quaint," like little antique pieces, and should be preserved for the enjoyment of the whites.  anyone who truly believes in human dignity for all should believe in social progress for all, and that includes liberation of women.  so fuck sharia up its allegorical urethra with a glass rod and shatter it.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


mrjonno
Posts: 726
Joined: 2007-02-26
User is offlineOffline
anniet wrote:I admit I don't

anniet wrote:

I admit I don't know much about how the U.K. legal system works, but sharia law codifies discrimination against women, right?  Do Brits not have some sort of civil rights law(s) that would make this illegal?  Why aren't civil rights overruling the arbitration agreement here?  How is this legal?

I doubt if it is very much different  from US , Canadian or Australian law. If an group of people want to determine a dispute between individuals (like who wants to run for president for example) and all people involved in the dispute agree to the method of arbitration then its generally legal if it does not break any laws of the land.

sharia is vile but if a woman 'voluntary' elects to be subject then the state has difficulties getting involved.

Like most laws they tend to get changed when people start to abuse them but there is no new law  in the UK that allows sharia (ignore the daily mail it really is vile)

 

 


ZoltanKemeny
Posts: 9
Joined: 2008-03-02
User is offlineOffline
It wouldn't be as bad if it

It wouldn't be as bad if it were confined to civil suits only, but it also involves any kind of domestic abuse case as well.


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
I was watching MSNBC last

I was watching MSNBC last night and I believe it was on Rachel Maddow's show they had a guest on talking about energy policy. From what I gathered from the guest the Middle East is interested in Sharia law implementation in western countries in order to facilitate oil purchase transactions.

I couldn't believe that oil producing countries think they have that much control over our economies that we would bow to their whims and set up sharia courts. Well, I hope THEY are the crazy ones for thinking any rational western country could or would set up courts dealing with such barbaric ideals.

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS