Inside Britain's SHARIA courts

It is an entirely voluntary system between various people; so as long as its judgement do not contravene British laws (no chopping off hands or stoning for instance), every one involved is involved voluntarily and with knowledge they have right to settle the issue in an actual court, and there is no evidence of coercion against any involved party (if there is any of these law enforcement should step in), where exactly is the problem?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36738935

Although the court's rulings aren't legally binding, most Muslims will voluntarily accept its rulings. It gets its laws from the Quran, not Britain's laws.

Personally I think these council's should be banned, but what do you guys think?

There's just no need for it- also, it promotes misogyny (women aren't always given 'permission' for an Islamic divorce) and the fact that it promotes a different way of life and different values to British values just makes the idea of a Sharia court stupid.

I read the bbc article which says they often discriminate against women. It mentioned forcing women to go to mediation with men even though they've been abused by them. That's so sad for these women.
My issue is that if these courts rules differently to British law, the men can say that they will listen to their ruling and theirs only, ignoring what British laws say. In society it shouldn't be 'one rule for us, one rule for everyone else'

I agree there's no need; and religious laws are in general stupid but what stupid stuff people do voluntarily is no one else's business; if people want to play dress up with their ancient book without harming anyone else they should be free to. If the woman wants divorce and sharia court 'refuses', she can just go to an actual court and get it sorted.

'Way of life'/ 'British values' thing is silly however, British way of life isn't some set in stone mythical thing, it is merely collection of ways of life of people living in Britain just like every other area's way of life. As long as no actual harm is being caused - just let people have delusions.


Then the police go 'nuh uh', and enforce British laws from actual courts like they'd with anyone violating British laws regardless of their reasons.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36738935

Although the court's rulings aren't legally binding, most Muslims will voluntarily accept its rulings. It gets its laws from the Quran, not Britain's laws.

Personally I think these council's should be banned, but what do you guys think?

She should go to an actual British court only, it's not even an argument, so don't defend it.

If she wants to go to a Shari'a court first, them she should emigrate immediately to a country that practices the shari'a, plain and simple.

I agree there's no need; and religious laws are in general stupid but what stupid stuff people do voluntarily is no one else's business; if people want to play dress up with their ancient book without harming anyone else they should be free to. If the woman wants divorce and sharia court 'refuses', she can just go to an actual court and get it sorted.

'Way of life'/ 'British values' thing is silly however, British way of life isn't some set in stone mythical thing, it is merely collection of ways of life of people living in Britain just like every other area's way of life. As long as no actual harm is being caused - just let people have delusions.

Then the police go 'nuh uh', and enforce British laws from actual courts like they'd with anyone violating British laws regardless of their reasons.

But I would argue there is harm caused. If the husband insists on dragging a battered wife through the sharia courts, where they intimidate her, make her face him in mediation and ask her very uncomfortable, personal questions, then it is harming her.

In theory yes, in which case what was the point of going through the sharia courts other than to traumatise the poor woman?

But in practise, I wonder 1) if the women will go to a British court after the ruling. After all, if lots of women find it hard to leave abusive relationships, why make it harder for them by having two separate court rulings 2) There could be an immense amount of peer pressure from family and friends for them to accept the sharia court's ruling. To many people, religion trumps British laws.

I think realistically there'll be no difference whether we ban these courts or not. Some people will still only listen to religion. They could just ask their religious leader instead.

If these courts were not banned, devout Muslims could still follow the rulings of imams and sheikh overseas, no one would be able to stop them. So no, banning them is counter-productive.

Besides, a real court order cannot be disobeyed in favour of one from a Shariah court. Anyone who tries to do this will face appropriate repercussions. Not to mention that these courts can only issue rulings on limited matters.

Yeah, the obvious solution can ofcourse only be to let them continue. We wouldnt want to do anything "counter-productive" after all, right?

Anyone who subscribes to religious law in any form or shape should immediately move a country that has the appropriate religious laws. One does not come to the west to enjoy the freedoms of advanced societies while secretely sh*tting on the domestic legal system.

Saudi Arabia is a good place to go.

why should there not be courts based on the teachings of the Flying Spaghetti Monster ?