Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is Sharia Law vs British Law - Which is more moral? Watch

  • View Poll Results: Which is better for an equal, moral justice system?
    British - It is far superior than Sharia, I do not want Sharia at all. It is not good at all. We must continue with British law and shun foreign laws based on religion.
    82.03%
    Sharia - It is superior, more moral. People should be more open minded to the idea. They may even begin voting for it themselves.
    17.97%

    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    To be fair, those that get the most from the State are getting it for free, their tiny contribution is far, far less than they take from the State.
    actually, there is a case to be made against free public services : it encourages waste, and is deeply unjust (since the State pays for everyone, including those who can afford them)

    on the contrary, people should pay for public services : from very little for those who don't earn much, to more for those who earn a lot

    it should be progressive
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EMassey)
    Morality is personal at its core, not religious.
    are you sure you know what you're talking about? have you ever studied ethics/philosophy because from what you're saying, it seems not!
    If I deem it immoral to murder a baby, then that is that to me. As you believe your god has deemed it immoral to murder a baby, then that is that to you.
    independent of what anyone thinks (the definition of objective), isn't it just wrong to murder a baby, plain and simple?

    I can class it as objective because that means weighing up the pros and cons basically.
    those pro's and con's would be dependent on you, thus not objective but subjective.
    On one hand, I killed baby because it cried and annoyed me=noise gone, happy me; on the other hand, I killed an innocent creature that had its whole life ahead of it. Hmm...that seems like a pretty basic choice. Where the objectively comes from is completely beside the point.
    Anyone can be objective
    if they want to. It's stupid to suggest that only God can be objective.
    once again, i think you're missing the point, objective means independent of us.

    On the contrary, what we believe is core to the "objective truth" as you put. You only believe something because you have been told it (or read something that made you think that way). Likewise someone who has a completely different approach even within the same religion has been told it at some point-making what a person think absolutely essential.
    No, I base my beliefs upon logic and reason (im a mathematician). i think once again you're missing the point, to be objective is to be independent of us.

    Your version of objective truth does not exist to me.
    once again missing the point, to be objective is to be independent of what we believe. It doesn't matter what you think exists or doesnt exist, the truth is what it is, it is by definition objective and independent of us, nor does it need to be recognised nor require justification, as it is.

    You mean an all powerful unquestionable truth. I'm sorry but as I don't believe in religion this is bullsh*t. Question everything or you'll never learn.
    I've studied philosophy and continue to question. which is exactly what ive been doing here.

    Truth is not independent of us, we can express truth or lies.
    once again, i think you're missing the point entirely and you're just wrong. a^2 + b^2 = C^2, is the irrefutable truth and exists independent of us, ect, ect.

    No one else can. God doesn't actually have an existential form so they can't give truth either.
    well prophets would debate that.
    In my opinion, you follow the beliefs of a book written by someone a long time ago that thought some stuff up.
    not a very objective approach, and indeed, in your opinion, not an objective truth.

    Good for you, but for me? What good is a life that is totally fixed. Live a little.
    i live plenty, you dont know me.
    I can decide for myself what is true and not true since as yet, pretty much nothing religious/spiritual can be proven.
    proven how, empirically? empirical evidence relies on something that can be weighed, times, measured, ect, something made of matter, but how can such evidence exist for something metaphysical? mathematics is the basis f science, and in itself is metaphysical... which is besides the point (it being metaphysical), mathematical/logic is the basis of science, therefore should be the basis for our beliefs because it is in itself more certain than science (science being inductive, maths = deductive)... and such logic/mathematics, is what i adhere to.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    actually, there is a case to be made against free public services : it encourages waste, and is deeply unjust (since the State pays for everyone, including those who can afford them)

    on the contrary, people should pay for public services : from very little for those who don't earn much, to more for those who earn a lot

    it should be progressive
    Is that not what already happens through our income tax bands though?

    And that aside, I think you'd find public services funding in a sorry state if that were impressed, after all, those that pay the most in income tax normally have their own cars, their own healthcare and so forth.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Why can one not talk about it? And does that then mean under Shariah drugs can be used?
    Because in an islamic society things which are illegal will be seen as wrong and therefore talking about committing crimes isnt going to help is it?

    If someone wants to do drugs and does them privately then the person will be breaking the law but as long as the person turn himself in then the authorities cant do anything about it. But if caught buying, selling and doing drugs publicly then punishment is given. Reason being is the shariahs top priority is to protect society against what shariah prohibits, the only way society can be harmed by those things is if they are done publicly but if done privately then only those committing the act will have the consequences and society will not know about it and therefore won't be harmed.

    There are accounts of people drinking alcohol in their homes when shariah was implemented but it was done privately.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by posthumus)
    I also consider myself a foreigner in Britain. Get out of your country ? There are countries which are free from western powers. Go there mate... or go to the 'Muslim lands' and fight for freedom and independence then.

    Yes damn I should have said capitalism !!!

    Anyways I'm done... you are clearly a brainwashed kid. I've been in too many of these arguments. Its the way you people are brought up, and you just won't ever gain common sense.

    Then you say it's the way the westerners are brought up and that's the issue... if people can be so influenced by their surroundings and upbringing - then what does that say about your beliefs in Islam and Shariah? Get a grip of reality.

    I'm done.

    I have already answered why I do not live in a muslim country, so please stop repeating yourself. Please name one muslim country that is free of western powers, just one? And I dont just mean physically but also economically, every country is basing their currency on the dollar and most have taken loans from IMF which isnt helping them and in economic terms are being influenced by western powers.

    Its a great way to end a debate, you can't be asked to tackle the issues I brought up so just say I'm brainwashed, good one mate! Just because I hold a different view I don't have common sense :confused:. It is because of my common sense I was able to argue your points and in return you had nothing to say to them.

    Yes you should've said capitalism, because thats what the system is, maybe learn a bit more about it before calling it socialism and then also learn about shariah before talking about it.

    The issue isn't the way people are brought up, although it does have an effect. I was born and raised in England, so in a way I too can be called a westerner but that doesnt mean I find the capitalist system to work. The issue is the fact that you can't accept the problems in your own system yet you are ready to call shariah worst then communism. The first thing you said was that you like to live in a free society, I explained to you how this free society is failing and you havent answered any of my arguments so I see failure right there.
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by malikabdullah96)
    I have already answered why I do not live in a muslim country, so please stop repeating yourself. Please name one muslim country that is free of western powers, just one? And I dont just mean physically but also economically, every country is basing their currency on the dollar and most have taken loans from IMF which isnt helping them and in economic terms are being influenced by western powers.

    Its a great way to end a debate, you can't be asked to tackle the issues I brought up so just say I'm brainwashed, good one mate! Just because I hold a different view I don't have common sense :confused:. It is because of my common sense I was able to argue your points and in return you had nothing to say to them.

    Yes you should've said capitalism, because thats what the system is, maybe learn a bit more about it before calling it socialism and then also learn about shariah before talking about it.

    The issue isn't the way people are brought up, although it does have an effect. I was born and raised in England, so in a way I too can be called a westerner but that doesnt mean I find the capitalist system to work. The issue is the fact that you can't accept the problems in your own system yet you are ready to call shariah worst then communism. The first thing you said was that you like to live in a free society, I explained to you how this free society is failing and you havent answered any of my arguments so I see failure right there.
    You tell me why out of all countries your parents decide to migrate here and you decide to stay here and embrace a capitalist society at the same time your trying to delude yourself that you are some sort of moral being or rebel for that matter who is against the 'system'.

    Oh nice one I made a mistake of saying socialist and now you will use that as an argument, get over it.

    Yes I can't be bothered with you people by now. You too can be called a westerner ? So your saying merely your upbringing hasn't influenced your ignorant views. Let me guess... you were raised a Muslim by Muslim parents, face it that's the only reason you consider yourself 'Muslim' And that is the ONLY reason you support Shariah.
    Isn't it a coincidence or what?
    Because how on earth someone can think it is more appropriate to run a diverse and tolerant country with a system which is based on a particular religion, is beyond me.

    The 'system' you hate so much here is one that can be influenced any time by anyone. It's a system which encouraged progress.
    What's the difference you want to change things, change the system because that's what we have here a democratic one - where the people can make changes themselves. The need to involve religion is beyond me - religion only causes conflict and segregation. It doesn't encourage united brotherhood between people of different faiths and backgrounds.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by posthumus)
    You tell me why out of all countries your parents decide to migrate here and you decide to stay here and embrace a capitalist society at the same time your trying to delude yourself that you are some sort of moral being or rebel for that matter who is against the 'system'.

    Oh nice one I made a mistake of saying socialist and now you will use that as an argument, get over it.

    Yes I can't be bothered with you people by now. You too can be called a westerner ? So your saying merely your upbringing hasn't influenced your ignorant views. Let me guess... you were raised a Muslim by Muslim parents, face it that's the only reason you consider yourself 'Muslim' And that is the ONLY reason you support Shariah.
    Isn't it a coincidence or what?
    Because how on earth someone can think it is more appropriate to run a diverse and tolerant country with a system which is based on a particular religion, is beyond me.

    The 'system' you hate so much here is one that can be influenced any time by anyone. It's a system which encouraged progress.
    What's the difference you want to change things, change the system because that's what we have here a democratic one - where the people can make changes themselves. The need to involve religion is beyond me - religion only causes conflict and segregation. It doesn't encourage united brotherhood between people of different faiths and backgrounds.
    You tell me why out of all countries your parents decide to migrate here and you decide to stay here and embrace a capitalist society at the same time your trying to delude yourself that you are some sort of moral being or rebel for that matter who is against the 'system'.
    I already talked about this so I dont think I need to repeat myself.

    So your saying merely your upbringing hasn't influenced your ignorant views. Let me guess... you were raised a Muslim by Muslim parents, face it that's the only reason you consider yourself 'Muslim' And that is the ONLY reason you support Shariah.
    My ignorant views? I have based everything I said based on the society I see around me and comparing it to what shariah says, all you have done is talk about how you like a "free" society, if anyone is ignorant here it would be you, as instead of learning about shariah or asking about it you jumped straight to conclusions like women are oppressed in Islam.

    I know why I support shariah and its not soley because of my parents and upbringing, in fact most muslims who have migrated here or live here are very distant from the political side of islam and dont even teach it to their kids and I am one of them, I only started learning about it a couple of years ago so your claim that my up bringing has anything to do with it is false as the only reason I accept it is because it makes more sense to me than a capitalist society and I have told you enough times why.

    Because how on earth someone can think it is more appropriate to run a diverse and tolerant country with a system which is based on a particular religion, is beyond me.
    Because secularism has failed, look around you, u told me to get a grip of reality, well from reality this system is going down. So its not appropriate to run a diverse society without a particular religion either. Actually no, sorry I am wrong. Religion and politics shouldnt mix because religions dont have laws to govern a state. But Islam isnt a religion, its an ideology as is capitalism and communism. It has its own economic system, social system and can and also has run a successful diverse and tolerant empire, its all in history.

    religion only causes conflict and segregation. It doesn't encourage united brotherhood between people of different faiths and backgrounds.
    Oh really? So all these artificial borders that have been made up, what are they meant for? To unite different types of people? Don't think so, shariah does not recognise borders as its the borders which separates different types of people and creates wars. The two world wars happened under secular reasons not religious reasons so I think your secularist views have more to do with war. So again this claim of yours makes no sense, like most of what you have said.

    Lastly I would just like to mention a quote of Michael Hart who ranked Muhammad the prophet of Islam as number 1 in his book called The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History, he was a christian but put Jesus a few places after Muhammad, this is what he said about it:

    "My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the secular and religious level...it is this unparalleled combination of secular and religious influence which I feel entitles Muhammad to be considered the most influential single figure in human history."

    The secular influence Michael Hart talked about was partly of the political framework that he set which is the shariah. The shariah which was implemented in an Islamic State was run for about 1300 years, longer than capitalism, communism and also the christian rule. This shows the success and it wasnt only the fact that this system stayed in one place, throughout ages the state expanded with people embracing it in masses and still do because it makes sense and also works.

    I'm out now, I think I have said enough, if you have any sincere questions I am happy to answer them but other than that I am not going to reply now.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by malikabdullah96)
    secularism has failed, look around you, u told me to get a grip of reality, well from reality this system is going down.
    in your dreams, perhaps
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by malikabdullah96)
    The shariah which was implemented in an Islamic State was run for about 1300 years, longer than capitalism, communism and also the christian rule.
    I would say that the last 200 years of the Caliphate were absolutely nothing to write home about

    impact with modernity resulted in a resounding failure for the "Islamic State"
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    those that pay the most in income tax normally have their own cars, their own healthcare and so forth.
    exactly

    so, why give them also free healthcare, free transport, free energy, free water etc etc

    making public services entirely free would only encourage waste, and would support not only the poor, but also rich people who don't need any support
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Why cant the thread be called

    British Law for every Sharia Law country.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by malikabdullah96)
    a quote of Michael Hart who ranked Muhammad the prophet of Islam as number 1 in his book called The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History,
    I am amazed that Muslims take Hart's book so seriously

    Hart is basically an astronomer, and rather a fringe figure: in any case, he holds very unconventional ideas (to put it mildly)

    e.g. he considers that Muhammad wrote the Quran himself, and that Shakespeare's works were written by some English Lord (baron De Vere)

    according to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_H._Hart , "Hart organized a conference held in Baltimore in 2009 with the title, Preserving Western Civilization. It was billed as addressing the need to defend "America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and European identity" from immigrants, Muslims, and African Americans"

    so, rather a marginal figure, I would say

    why should we give such importance to what he says ?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    exactly

    so, why give them also free healthcare, free transport, free energy, free water etc etc

    making public services entirely free would only encourage waste, and would support not only the poor, but also rich people who don't need any support
    But it's the rich that currently finance these, if it cost the rich more and were optional, they simply would not pay, making those services unviable or a lot more expensive to the common man :lolwut:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    in your dreams, perhaps
    Please read my other posts before coming into the convo. I cant be asked to explain this again.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    I would say that the last 200 years of the Caliphate were absolutely nothing to write home about

    impact with modernity resulted in a resounding failure for the "Islamic State"
    What on earth are you talking about? Please explain what you are trying to say.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jordan-James)
    Why cant the thread be called

    British Law for every Sharia Law country.
    There is no shariah law country at the moment
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by malikabdullah96)
    There is no shariah law country at the moment
    Are you telling me there are no countries practicing sharia law, and so this whole thread is based on a completely non-existant law?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jordan-James)
    Are you telling me there are no countries practicing sharia law, and so this whole thread is based on a completely non-existant law?
    THere is no such state implementing shariah law, it was implemented during the caliphates which was destroyed in 1924 but muslims still want its return. This thread is in shariah law vs british law, there isnt any country mentioned for shariah is there.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I have to agree with this and i am Christian and do not eat pork. Strictly following the bible christians are not meant to eat pork either.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by malikabdullah96)
    THere is no such state implementing shariah law, it was implemented during the caliphates which was destroyed in 1924 but muslims still want its return. This thread is in shariah law vs british law, there isnt any country mentioned for shariah is there.
    shariah had stopped being implemented in the Ottoman Caliphate long before its abolition in 1924

    the tanzimat reforms in the 19th century - starting from about 1830 - were an effort at modernizing the failing Caliphate (already in deep crisis since at least 100 years) in order to try and catch up with the "infidel" West.

    The jizyah was abolished, elections were held, homosexuality was decriminalized, universal conscription was introduced, civil and penal codes were adopted etc eventually, even slavery was abolished... but reforms didn't stop the decay. If possible, the rate even accelerated.

    By the time Ataturk abolished the Caliphate, it was just an empty shell - and, most surely, it hadn't been an "Islamic State" for quite some time.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.