The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

jonjon123
Dude, seriously 29th June 2009. I mean if it was a real issue don't you think it would have been dealt with now. I mean firstly the youtube video, the guy is out of the uk and banned.

Anjem Choudary left the UK? I saw him on newnight a few days ago. Has he lost his dole money or is he on holiday? They only just banned his group Islam4uk this week, but that won't stop him talking.
Casse
Long waiting times, expensive lawyers maybe. I'm no expert.

So it's not a question of delivery of justice.
Reply 82
Lord Hysteria
So it's not a question of delivery of justice.


There is that to. Muslims may just prefer to have the divorce, inheritance and marriage disputes sorted according to their religion. The same way Jews would like to solve these disputes according to their laws and other faiths to theirs. I am not aware of any other faiths having their own tribunals but I don't see a problem with any religion having their own tribunals that try to solve their disputes, be it Muslim, Jew, Hindu or Sikh.
jonjon123
If your not pro choice than why go to a sharia court. There is only 85 of them this to cater for the rising number of muslims.

Pro choice is a term that means pro abortion usually by the way.

But to answer your question, it is easy for women, especially if they are young, uneducated, don't speak English and have perhaps only recently arrived from Pakistan, to be persuaded that they must go to a sharia court - they may not even know the alternatives. And its easy to pressure them to accept the ruling, if they are surrounded by patriarchal imams and men of their family and in-laws.

Its potentially very prejudicial to their interests and rights. Choice is just a word, without detailed scrutiny by the public and the British judiciary how can we even claim women will be given anything like choice in such matters.
I didn't really read the article - are the courts legal or illegal?
Reply 85
Lord Hysteria
Why? What is wrong with the common law legal system?


Nothing, but some are more religous so they just like to do religous things.

Spoiler

Casse
There is that to. Muslims may just prefer to have the divorce, inheritance and marriage disputes sorted according to their religion. The same way Jews would like to solve these disputes according to their laws and other faiths to theirs. I am not aware of any other faiths having their own tribunals but I don't see a problem with any religion having their own tribunals that try to solve their disputes, be it Muslim, Jew, Hindu or Sikh.

There shouldn't be Jewish courts either.

The issue is not choice, but equality before the law, that everyone have the same rights, not that some people have different and potential weaker rights as a member of a particular religion or cultural group.
Reply 87
Ah.Cheesecake.
I didn't really read the article - are the courts legal or illegal?


perfectly legal under the Arbitration Act 1996
There are a few issues here which need teasing out.

The first is the knee-jerk reaction along the lines of "Bearded baddies want to chop off your hands" stylee, which doesn't help anyone.

The second is the issue of individuals voluntarily going to someone/somewhere to arbitrate over a dispute.

The third is the "fairness" issue of the arbitration process and whether it is compatible with English law.

The fourth is the issue of intimidation. i.e. people being forced to go to, and accept the rulings of such panels under threat of violence.

Fifth - Has criminal law been broken? If so, the only competent body to deal with that is the state.

Sixth - Transparency of the arbitration process - I never have been a fan of communities isolating themselves from everyone else on grounds of things like religion or ethnicity. This makes it harder to hold those "at the top" to account.
Ah.Cheesecake.
I didn't really read the article - are the courts legal or illegal?
Casse
perfectly legal under the Arbitration Act 1996

I would say that they are legal, but that they do illegal things.

I.e. that it is currently legal for them to operate under the arbitration act, but that their judgements and principles are most likely illegal in the sense that if they were ever appealed to an English court they would be quashed as not in accordance with principles of equity.
Reply 90
pendragon
Pro choice is a term that means pro abortion usually by the way.


Yes I knew that just didn't want to type out pro choice regarding abortion.

pendragon
But to answer your question, it is easy for women, especially if they are young, uneducated, don't speak English and have perhaps only recently arrived from Pakistan, to be persuaded that they must go to a sharia court - they may not even know the alternatives. And its easy to pressure them to accept the ruling, if they are surrounded by patriarchal imams and men of their family and in-laws.

Its potentially very prejudicial to their interests and rights. Choice is just a word, without detailed scrutiny by the public and the British judiciary how can we even claim women will be given anything like choice in such matters.


I am sure it's not that prejudiced. I mean people coming to UK always no which area has a large number of their ethnic minorities, and which have none or a few. If a person wasn't really religious and had previous knowledge of the sharia law than they can move areas and go to a normal court because some people may say that if they stay in an area where there is a large number of their ethnic group than they would be subjected to death because of apostasy. I mean if Sharia and Islam where so prejudice than why is it that 'for every 1 male convert to Islam, 4 females convert to Islam'.

Source: Google that quote and you shall see a number of sources I believe.
Sharia Courts in the UK?

LOL. That's how seriously this issue needs to be treated. Their laws are futile here. They couldn't overall ANY British rule or judgement in the country so frankly their existance here is a petty nuance that shouldn't be taken seriously. Sharia Law.....lol
Reply 92

I asked can you explain, not can you regurgitate. If you don't understand a topic, don't try to make points about it.
jonjon123
Yes I knew that just didn't want to type out pro choice regarding abortion.



I am sure it's not that prejudiced. I mean people coming to UK always no which area has a large number of their ethnic minorities, and which have none or a few. If a person wasn't really religious and had previous knowledge of the sharia law than they can move areas and go to a normal court because some people may say that if they stay in an area where there is a large number of their ethnic group than they would be subjected to death because of apostasy. I mean if Sharia and Islam where so prejudice than why is it that 'for every 1 male convert to Islam, 4 females convert to Islam'.

Source: Google that quote and you shall see a number of sources I believe.

The questions that you ask are bound together.

The reason more women convert is because they marry Muslim men, and because Muslims do not allow their women to date or marry non-Muslim men, if they can't date or easily meet non-Muslim men without their family's approval (not likely to be forthcoming) then how do they even give prospective non-Muslim suitors the chance to know them and convert in order to marry them? Its blindingly obvious that Muslim men can more easily date non-Muslim women as they are not subject to as strict controls by their family, and then if the woman is willing to convert in order to marry them they are likely to get family approval at that stage. So its not because Islam is somehow more popular with non-Muslim women than non-Muslim men, its because Muslim girls are far more controlled in their behaviour and in their marriage and dating choices within a framework where conversion of anyone you marry to Islam is deemed essential while Muslim young men are far more free to travel, to work, to meet non-Muslim girls and to pursue them prior to marriage.

Whatever Islamists have to say on the subject sharia is a man made system constructed after Muhammad's death, generally speaking as applied it is worse than what is actually specified in the Qu'ran, but even if you read the Qu'ran women's testimony is clearly valued at half of that of a man's, limited beating of your wife is suggested as permissible, and women's rights to inheritance as wives and daughters allow them lesser shares than men. I don't see how this can be reconciled with English legal principles.

To assume that if someone is from a more religious or ethnic area that they will be happy to choose sharia does not follow, if a woman who has just arrived from Pakistan having married an older man whom her parents arranged for her to marry, doesn't speak English has no notion of the laws of the UK, and rarely leaves the house - how is she to know that she has any real choice not to go to the sharia court and accept its judgement (even if she did know she would be in a very difficult and vulnerable situation).
Reply 94
Casse
There is that to. Muslims may just prefer to have the divorce, inheritance and marriage disputes sorted according to their religion. The same way Jews would like to solve these disputes according to their laws and other faiths to theirs. I am not aware of any other faiths having their own tribunals but I don't see a problem with any religion having their own tribunals that try to solve their disputes, be it Muslim, Jew, Hindu or Sikh.


:congrats:

I swear this post is repeated every other month. People get over Islam and live your lives:cool:
Reply 95
Bobifier
I asked can you explain, not can you regurgitate. If you don't understand a topic, don't try to make points about it.


What did I regurgitate you spaz

You asked me which direction the population was headed, and I provided a link. Woe betide if you can't use a little interpretation. You can actually read, right?
Reply 96
Yuppie20
What did I regurgitate you spaz

You asked me which direction the population was headed, and I provided a link. Woe betide if you can't use a little interpretation. You can actually read, right?


"Muslim population is rising ten times faster than the rest of society"

" 35,000 people converted to Islam last year in the UK"

Let me guess you think the UK is being secretly overtaken:rolleyes: Even with those doubtful statistics, Islam wouldn't be the major religion for another 45~55 years.
Reply 97
Yuppie20
What did I regurgitate you spaz

You asked me which direction the population was headed, and I provided a link. Woe betide if you can't use a little interpretation. You can actually read, right?

I asked you to explain, you offered me an article that someone else wrote. That's regurgitation. You make my point for me - I asked for a direction, and you directed me to what someone else had told you. If you had any idea about the topic, you'd be able to explain your ideas for yourself.
Reply 98
Democracy
This is seriously uncool. This country needs to be secularised, with immediate effect.
Their arbitration and conciliation courts based on Sharia. CIVITAS is a neo-conservative outfit. Douglas Murray is hardly objective when it comes to Muslims.
Reply 99
So much negativity about Islam, but there deffinately wont be Sharia law in the uk, it is all ********

Latest