Muslims- do you support Sharia Law in the UK?

1. No and even if someone tried to set up jurisdiction in Britain, I wouldn't support it, and it wouldn't work in this current day and age. On a side note though, what is Sharia Law in your view? Honestly, this is too vague of a question to even attempt to answer properly. Sharia Law isn't something that is set in stone. There isn't even a book of 'Sharia Law'. Too often people's perception of what Sharia Law is twisted for all the wrong reasons. I'd need more details before deciding - but my perception would be what's currently implemented in Britain's courts - mainly for personal reasons such as marital/divorce matters. Not what tabloid newspaper often portray it to be lol...

2. No...because it's not -- Muslims don't even make up 5% of the population. To a further extent, I wouldn't even call it a Christian country. But I digress - it's not just Britain; I'd be embarrassed to name most of the countries in the ME in this day and age as 'Muslim' -- simply because they're not. The issues are vast, but in a nutshell, most of the Government's are corrupt to the knees, the big culprit being Saudi Arabia (see end of point 4 for more detail).

3. No*, because it'll just be a circle of violence and it will come back and bite us in the backside. The whole reason why these terrorist groups are cropping up in the middle east is from our government's own doings in interfering, destabilizing and meddling with the region post 9/11, and to a further extent, post 1970's. *Granted, as the poster above me said, it can depend on the urgency of the situation if needed.

4. Yes**, but not with Hamas, no matter how many media tabloids or politicians try and convince the public that they are a 'terrorist group', whilst turning a blind eye to atrocities committed by Israel. I just won't agree with that double standard. And yes, I am from Palestinian origin, but that shouldn't and doesn't matter (see end of paragraph 3 of point 4 to see why).

The issues is much more complicated than Hamas vs Israel - the cause of the problem goes back much further and deeper than that, but let me clarify, yes they are fighting for their freedom, but occasionally through immoral means - that is something that I won't and will never support -- just like all Palestinians I know - Hamas are far from perfect and do deserve condemnation for the innocent civilians killed in Israel -- but I wouldn't label a whole elected government by the Palestinian people a terrorist group in order to shut down any discourse around the conflict -- one reason being because not all of 'Hamas' are in militants -- yes, believe it or not, there is actually a subset of the Hamas government acting as a department of health -- are we really going to call people trying to improve the health of the public 'terrorists' now?). But on that note, outbursts of violence by the oppressed aren't something new - it's happened in history time and time again (e.g. occupations in WWII), and you just have to look at how the transgressed were 'labelled' in each scenario by the transgressor to notice a not-so-strange coincidence.

That's just some context to my decision before anyone labels me as a 'terrorist sympathizer' lol -- and I've bolded it for a reason. I don't agree with the methods often employed by Hamas, but there's more to the problem than that - people often forget it's more about simply Israel vs Hamas -- there's a root cause to the problem (i.e. mainly the illegal occupation in my view) then a recent democratically elected government.

On a side note, people who try and be neutral in situations of occupation and oppression are automatically siding with the transgressor, stamping out any voices from the occupied. Luckily though, the perception of the conflict is getting clearer, especially in recent years in Western countries -- you only had to see the protests in London in July of 2014 to see that it's not just a Palestinian plight. Much like the Iraq war, people are starting to realise the truth, albeit slowly.

By the way, I don't agree with the double standards, just like I don't agree with the fact that the West are still allies with Saudi, yet they are one of the most corrupt and worst Governments in the ME, but of course of our 'national interests' (i.e. oil), we turn a blind eye to their human rights abuse and atrocities committed against other countries such as Yemen. A few months ago, 131 Yemenese died in a Saudi airstrike in a wedding, utter media silence, no condemnation from our politicians. Just look at the reactions if it were other 'terrorist' countries in the ME that needed 'liberating'.

** I don't even know who the Khorasan are lol...

I'm not muslim but what reason would there be to label the UK as a muslim country when only 4% of the population identify as muslim???? many people are against it even being labelled as christian and christians make up 60%. seems like a stupid question to me...

Not a muslim but its wrong to force a religious law upon others, especially when muslims form such a minority. It is a compromise to the free world and democracy.

Guys, why bother posting when the thread is clearly aimed at Muslims only.

Well i just found the prospect of Sharia law utterly ridiculous and question those who think this is right

No
No
Yes
Yes

Sharia law shouldn't be implemented anywhere imo

But then again, some people might not regard me as a Muslims so idk

Yeah but the term Sharia law is quite vague- it can be argued that some of the more liberal interpretations of Sharia are already in line with Western laws and morals, while some of the more conservative Muslims' interpretations (beheading for apostates, women not being allowed to go outside on their own) are not.

Even if there are intersections between western and Sharia law, there are many laws that dont. How much of the Sharia law do you propose to impose?
Because most of the Sharia laws that comply with western laws are already place.

Laws like no pre marital sex are ridiculous because many dont even want to marry. Laws about the food we must eat, marriage and the savage punishments will not be accepted by non muslims and even some liberal muslims.

It seems to me that majority of these laws are aimed at muslims and are based on teachings of prophet mohammed.

Sharia law therefore is a threat to the free and liberal world we live in, forcing christians, atheists and all people to follow the teachings of a religion we do not practise.

I think making a thread aimed just at muslims is utterly ridiculous because most of the negative consequences of the sharia law wont be felt by muslims. Besides, many wont have an issue since they already follow it.

Why wouldn't 'some' regard you a Muslim?

But then again, some people might not regard me as a Muslims so idk

Certain things I am open to doing (but not yet done) are completely against the religion

And at the same time, this 'Sharia Law' pertains inhabitants of other faiths where they can live under Islamic protection, if such country was under 'Sharia Law'. But again, trying to rationalise what Sharia Law is in a post here is facile and wouldn't do anyone any favours. I just bought up that point because it's often one aspect people tend to forget. The prophet Mohammad PBUH had non-muslims living alongside him when they took control over Mecca.

You sound as if Islam should get some sort of credit for allowing other groups of religious people were allowed to be 'under Islamic protection'. One can only assume that based on what you're saying, Muslims have some sort of religious superiority over non Muslims under Sharia law.

We do have some idea of Sharia law as i mention in my post but they are based on Islamic teachings and fundamentally go against the liberal and free world.

If one valid argument for Sharia law is that non Muslims are accepted then that just shows how futile the whole argument is.

It's not about how valid I or you may think it is -- I was simply correcting the common misconception that non-muslims are unable to live under Sharia Law, because many of the things under Sharia Law they would be exempt from. Of course there are certains aspects of Sharia Law that go against the "liberal and free world", and whether you think that is right or wrong, is up to you.

I was simply stating a fact that people often gloss over or think otherwise, rather than trying to give 'Islam some credit' (whatever the heck that means...). I mean, I don't need to give Islam any credit bud, let a lone on a thread on a forum which will only be read by 50 people for some sort of self validation. My faith is for myself only, and as long as I am contempt with it, whether anyone wants to think otherwise, is up to them. I was just simply stating a fact