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

BAN Sharia Law and the use of Sharia courts within the UK Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by callum_law)
    Your friends will reject you, your family will reject you and your family will be rejected if you refuse to accept Sharia rulings. In such a situation, accepting some nonsensical Sharia ruling is the lesser of two evils. You might think that you are some headstrong person who would fight injustice at all costs, and perhaps you would, but there is serious pressure exerted on some people entering Sharia courts. The freedom to elect to be discriminated against, which you claim exists, is not present for those people.
    It is their choice to accept that ruling then, they are free to not accept it if they don't wish to. 'Forcing someone socially' is not something that the law should be involved with, we live in a free country where people can freely make decisions. If somebody decides they would rather keep their ****ty friends and family then that's their decision.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    It is their choice to accept that ruling then, they are free to not accept it if they don't wish to. 'Forcing someone socially' is not something that the law should be involved with, we live in a free country where people can freely make decisions. If somebody decides they would rather keep their ****ty friends and family then that's their decision.
    Right ...

    Anyway, nice chatting.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by callum_law)
    Right ...

    Anyway, nice chatting.
    Thank you for acknowledging that the state babysitting people is not a very smart or democratic idea.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    Thank you for acknowledging that the state babysitting people is not a very smart or democratic idea.
    Where did I acknowledge that? It is pretty sad that you struggle so much with arguing logically that you have to resort to ending your posts with sarcastic smileys. What the **** is going on here?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by callum_law)
    Where did I acknowledge that? It is pretty sad that you struggle so much with arguing logically that you have to resort to ending your posts with sarcastic smileys. What the **** is going on here?
    You didn't have anything to say aside from 'right....' so obviously you lost the argument. So it seems to me like you are the one who is struggling to argue logically. I love my sarcastic emojis and will keep using them, cheers.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Sharia courts exist in the UK? Never knew that, guess you learn something everyday.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    You didn't have anything to say aside from 'right....' so obviously you lost the argument. So it seems to me like you are the one who is struggling to argue logically. I love my sarcastic emojis and will keep using them, cheers.
    There was nothing to argue against. I explained the dynamics of the situation and you replied by repeating the same point you made several posts earlier even more dogmatically: "there is a choice there, so they weren't forced". Why have you sat on this thread all day when you have constructed nothing towards it? You need to get a hobby.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Erm, there aren't any Shariah courts in this country. Religious arbitration, yes, but that's not exclusive to Islam

    Religious arbitration are as judicial as Judge Judy
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by callum_law)
    There was nothing to argue against. I explained the dynamics of the situation and you replied by repeating the same point you made several posts earlier even more dogmatically: "there is a choice there, so they weren't forced". Why have you sat on this thread all day when you have constructed nothing towards it? You need to get a hobby.
    The thread has been up for 5 hours and the first time I replied to the thread was 2 hours ago so I have hardly sat on the thread all day and the reason I keep repeating myself is because you and some other people are incapable of understanding that people are capable of making their own decisions and that they don't need you to tell them what to do with their lives.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    The thread has been up for 5 hours and the first time I replied to the thread was 2 hours ago so I have hardly sat on the thread all day and the reason I keep repeating myself is because you and some other people are incapable of understanding that people are capable of making their own decisions and that they don't need you to tell them what to do with their lives.
    I never said they should be told what to do with their lives. I made the point that a premise of your argument was incorrect (i.e. adherents are free at the moment of accepting Sharia). It doesn't mean I think we should make decisions about these people's lives; it just means one of your premises is wrong.

    And you were on this thread last year, if you don't remember.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by callum_law)
    I never said they should be told what to do with their lives. I made the point that a premise of your argument was incorrect (i.e. adherents are free at the moment of accepting Sharia). It doesn't mean I think we should make decisions about these people's lives; it just means one of your premises is wrong.

    And you were on this thread last year, if you don't remember.

    thank you for telling me I have been on this thread all day and last year, I didn't know those were synonyms for '2 hours'.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    thank you for telling me I have been on this thread all day and last year, I didn't know those were synonyms for '2 hours'.
    You're welcome.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by al_94)
    Not sure what Russia has to do with this and I don't know what Putin considers a Russian but Muslims in Dagestan and Chechnya want Sharia law and independence from Russia.
    Out of 85 federal subjects, two want independence due to Islamic majority. That, my friend, is what I call as a minority.
    I just quoted Putin as the last sentence mentions 'disrespect' and that is the problem I find with adherence to Sharia law; Though not legally binding, most of its principles are directly against British values. Following it while being a citizen/PR of GB, I think, is quite disrespectful.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    How about ban footy hooligans and Britain First members from speaking in public?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teenhorrorstory)
    Are there any countries with no official state religion/are secular that allow shariah(or religious courts in general) alongside the state law?
    If so we should look at how it works in those countries and if it's practical
    In Europe - Austria, United Kingdom and Germany.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applic...country#Europe
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Signed, thanks :yy:
 
 
 
  • 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
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources
  • 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.