Turn on thread page Beta

Can you think of any other ideology that has such political protections as Islam? watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    In every community there are people who break the law. It should be obeyed whether they immigrated here or whether they were here all along. And in case you haven't noticed not all Muslims are immigrants, not even all radical Muslims.

    You know nothing about my parents or their backgrounds, way to make assumptions.

    If the law permits a minority of Muslims to use their right to free speech to call for Shariah, nothing can be done about it. They're not exactly making progress.



    MY GOD IN HEAVEN hahahahaha.


    I'll rap it up here darling. Liberalism has poisoned you and I hope Jesus christ opens your eyes to your mistakes.


    "In every community there are people who break the law. It should be obeyed"



    LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOO
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Z-Zinan)
    MY GOD IN HEAVEN hahahahaha.


    I'll rap it up here darling. Liberalism has poisoned you and I hope Jesus christ opens your eyes to your mistakes.


    "In every community there are people who break the law. It should be obeyed"



    LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOO
    No thanks, I could do without Jesus Christ or any of that other religious drivel. I'm happier without it.

    Calling for Shariah isn't disobeying the law, as these are words and not actions.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    No thanks, I could do without Jesus Christ or any of that other religious drivel. I'm happier without it.

    Calling for Shariah isn't disobeying the law, as these are words and not actions.

    "Calling for Shariah isn't disobeying the law, as these are words and not actions."

    There are already 4 sharia courts in London

    "as these are words and not actions"

    LMAO, you really are deluded.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Z-Zinan)
    "Calling for Shariah isn't disobeying the law, as these are words and not actions."

    There are already 4 sharia courts in London

    "as these are words and not actions"

    LMAO, you really are deluded.
    The decisions of these Shariah courts are not legally-binding, like the Jewish Halakhah courts. This is why they are allowed to exist. They are also limited in the areas which they can or can't deal with. The ultimate decision lies with the real civil courts. Maybe you should learn a thing or two about how the system works.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    The decisions of these Shariah courts are not legally-binding, like the Jewish Halakhah courts. This is why they are allowed to exist. They are also limited in the areas which they can or can't deal with. The ultimate decision lies with the real civil courts. Maybe you should learn a thing or two about how the system works.


    You're the one who needs to learn about the system and government.

    Sharia courts ARE legally binding to the muslims that patronise them. They use them to settle divorce cases and other matters. You've shown the world your ignorance once again.


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...hock-core.html


    " Shariah courts are not legally-binding"




    ok
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Z-Zinan)
    You're the one who needs to learn about the system and government.

    Sharia courts ARE legally binding to the muslims that patronise them. They use them to settle divorce cases and other matters. You've shown the world your ignorance once again.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...hock-core.html


    " Shariah courts are not legally-binding"

    ok
    So you use a Daily Mail article to prove that they are binding? OK.

    They can only settle divorce cases if you are talking about one of those "marriages" that are not officially registered, hence not legally recognised as a marriage. A real marriage can only be dissolved by civil courts. So no, their decisions are not legally-binding and yes, you need to become more familiar with the system.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    So you use a Daily Mail article to prove that they are binding? OK.

    They can only settle divorce cases if you are talking about one of those "marriages" that are not officially registered, hence not legally recognised as a marriage. A real marriage can only be dissolved by civil courts. So no, their decisions are not legally-binding and yes, you need to become more familiar with the system.
    If you actually read the article you would realise that it's not just divorce cases they settle. LOL.

    They are not legally recognised as a marriage?

    Says who, you?

    Islamic marriages are legally registered in the UK, so how do you know the people who use shariah courts aren't legally married?


    Yes you really need to learn the system
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Z-Zinan)
    If you actually read the article you would realise that it's not just divorce cases they settle. LOL.

    They are not legally recognised as a marriage?

    Says who, you?

    Islamic marriages are legally registered in the UK, so how do you know the people who use shariah courts aren't legally married?


    Yes you really need to learn the system
    Islamic marriages are legally recognised in the UK if they are officially registered. For those that are not registered and where the couple only got a certificate from the mosque they are not recognisance by law. These are the only "marriages" a Shariah court can dissolve because they are not real marriages. They are not husband and wife on paper, their children are not recognised as legitimate and they get none of the insurance, pension or other privileges that married couples get.

    I have no time for a Daily Mail article, I already know how the Shariah courts work. They have no legal powers and if a Muslim chooses to enter into a contract with one of these "courts", it is only binding as far as any other contract can be.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Islamic marriages are legally recognised in the UK if they are officially registered. For those that are not registered and where the couple only got a certificate from the mosque they are not recognisance by law. These are the only "marriages" a Shariah court can dissolve because they are not real marriages. They are not husband and wife on paper, their children are not recognised as legitimate and they get none of the insurance, pension or other privileges that married couples get.

    I have no time for a Daily Mail article, I already know how the Shariah courts work. They have no legal powers and if a Muslim chouses to enter into a contract with one of these "courts", it is only binding as far as any other contract can be.


    Anjem Choudray gets welfare from the british government and also talked about his health insurance on twitter. Please explain this as he is not only a man who uses Sharia courts, he presides over cases.

    I'm not trying to insult or belittle you now, I'm genuinely asking for an explanation.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Z-Zinan)
    Anjem Choudray gets welfare from the british government and also talked about his health insurance on twitter. Please explain this as he is not only a man who uses Sharia courts, he presides over cases.

    I'm not trying to insult or belittle you now, I'm genuinely asking for an explanation.
    Even you did try to insult and belittle me you would fail miserably, as you are undoubtedly clueless.

    I was talking about insurance, pensions and other benefits in the context of a married couple, not individuals. A married couple gets additional benefits that a couple whose marriage has not been officially registered would not be entitled to.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Even you did try to insult and belittle me you would fail miserably, as you are undoubtedly clueless.

    I was talking about insurance, pensions and other benefits in the context of a married couple, not individuals. A married couple gets additional benefits that a couple whose marriage has not been officially registered would not be entitled to.


    I mean him and his family. It's not my fault you lack basic reading comprehension skills.

    Explain how his family has all these benefits.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Z-Zinan)
    I mean him and his family. It's not my fault you lack basic reading comprehension skills.

    Explain how his family has all these benefits.
    Do you have evidence that:
    a) his marriage is not officially registered and
    b) he and his wife have the specific benefits that are unique to married couples?

    Didn't think so.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    Hardly. Antisemitism is about prejudice against certain lineages, not just disliking ideas
    Yet it has been broadened into Zionism as a political idea.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Do you have evidence that:
    a) his marriage is not officially registered and
    b) he and his wife have the specific benefits that are unique to married couples?

    Didn't think so.

    I have evidence of the second one but how the hell am I supposed to get the first one?

    Do you specialise in talking through your ass?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Z-Zinan)
    I have evidence of the second one but how the hell am I supposed to get the first one?

    Do you specialise in talking through your ass?
    If you don't have evidence of both then your point doesn't stand.

    You don't seem to understand that not all benefits are the same. Some can be claimed by any person who is eligible but there are others that are specific to married couples. How on Earth would you get evidence that he is receiving the latter?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    If you don't have evidence of both then your point doesn't stand.

    You don't seem to understand that not all benefits are the same. Some can be claimed by any person who is eligible but there are others that are specific to married couples. How on Earth would you get evidence that he is receiving the latter?


    There is a video of him on youtube talking about the welfare him and his family receive from the UK Government.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Z-Zinan)
    There is a video of him on youtube talking about the welfare him and his family receive from the UK Government.
    And he didn't specify the type of welfare, did he?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Yet it has been broadened into Zionism as a political idea.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    When the far right or left start going on about how Jews are all money hoarders who run the world like some kind of cult, you may call that antizionism but it is also antisemetic.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    When the far right or left start going on about how Jews are all money hoarders who run the world like some kind of cult, you may call that antizionism but it is also antisemetic.
    Undoubtedly that would be antisemitic (given it has little to do with Israel or Zionism, I'd question whether it could meaningfully be called anti-Zionism though), but that's not really what I'm getting at.

    Zionism is a nationalist ideology and Israel is a heavily ethnocentric state, very much defined as existing for Jews as an ethnic group. Now, that in itself isn't unique, there have been many other such states in the modern era, including some which continue to exist today. But while those other states have generally been regarded as racist or veering on racism, for Israel it is regarded as anti-semitic to oppose such ethnocentrism.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Frank Underwood)
    Have you ever been to a predominantly Muslim country, and mixed with the locals? It's not the authoritarian terrorist stronghold you think it is.
    I would argue a Muslim majority country is far more accepting, tolerant and peaceful than the likes of the U.K. for example
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

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

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