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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So all rape victims should be stoned to death?

    Cut off our hands if we steal?

    Put us in prison if we show our arms in public?

    Excellent.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by coolworld37)
    So all rape victims should be stoned to death?

    Cut off our hands if we steal?

    Put us in prison if we show our arms in public?

    Excellent.
    (Original post by lilangel890)
    Nah I'd just love to see people having their hand chopped off for stealing. And love to see people die because the law says certain people can't give organs. And I'd really REALLY love to see Muslims killed for apostacy, denying God and murder.

    WOOOOOOT. :rolleyes: Do you even know the slightest thing about Islam?
    Did you even read the OP?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    If the contract is opt-in, i.e., voluntary, there is no need to be worried about the equality of women... if they feel they're being treated badly they will simply not agree to use Islamic law.
    Do you honestly think a muslim woman will be 100% free to make that decision?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thud)
    Do you honestly think a muslim woman will be 100% free to make that decision?
    Perhaps not, but that is a failure of the Muslim community to adapt to Liberty and not a failure of said political doctrine. This comes down to the question of whether you can trust Muslims with freedom and I do think that the disadvantages of Muslims not being trustworthy do not outweigh the disadvantages of abolishing freedom.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by coolworld37)
    So all rape victims should be stoned to death?
    You can't seriously believe that Sharia law demands that rape victims be stoned to death, surely?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Absolutely, when I am given consent to erect the first synagogue of Mekkah.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    I can't stand racist and sectarian bigots coming up with mythical fictions to justify their bigotry, no. Moreover, I don't like people proffering options grounded solely in ignorance, when the wonders of the internet allow you to actually educate yourself to a reasonable degree on a subject within moments.
    How is stating "everyone should be equal before the law, despite ethnicity, background or religion" racist?

    Also, to be racist is to believe a particular race is superior to another - which has not been demonstrated in ANY of my posts, so stop using the racist card.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    If the contract is opt-in, i.e., voluntary, there is no need to be worried about the equality of women... if they feel they're being treated badly they will simply not agree to use Islamic law.
    I get that point - but clearly across the world and throughout history women have been/are treated badly and simply accept it. They may not even view their subordination as wrong because culture has engrained in them, for instance, that a woman's role is to follow the will of her husband. (Note I am not just talking about Islam, pretty much all cultures have subscribed to this view of women).

    Clearly the law is there to protect everyone. In this country everybody is given certain rights under the law - even if they do not believe they themselves are entitled to them. (e.g. untill the 1990s special provision in the legal system was not made for victims of domestic violence which was previously viewed as a 'private matter' between man and wife, women didn't used to be able to testify agains their husbands until changes were made. Of course women were not/are not the only persecuted group that the law in this country aims to protext, I am just thinking of examples of the top of my head)

    In this instance the law should protect vulnerable women/women who have been, for want of a better word 'brainwashed' in to thinking they are lesser than men.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Nah didn't read what the OP said but its an interesting discussion. I'm sure Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would become best friends with Gordon Brown.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tristanperry)
    Nope.

    If Muslims don't like our law (civil or otherwise), they don't have to be here.

    Just as if I (as a Christian) didn't like the law (civil or otherwise) in a Muslim country, I wouldn't have to stay there.
    Yeah, this. There's no need for us to bend over backwards to change our system, and I wouldn't expect a Muslim country to do the same for me (and I'm sure they wouldn't even consider it).
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amy***)
    In this instance the law should protect vulnerable women/women who have been, for want of a better word 'brainwashed' in to thinking they are lesser than men.
    And, bearing in mind that the road to serfdom is lined with good intentions, how would you propose doing this?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    And, bearing in mind that the road to serfdom is lined with good intentions, how would you propose doing this?
    By prohibiting the use of Sharia law in courts, presumably.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thud)
    Do you honestly think a muslim woman will be 100% free to make that decision?
    It is, quite properly, the starting point of civil law that all people who agree are doing so freely. Otherwise our whole legal system would quite quickly collapse.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    And, bearing in mind that the road to serfdom is lined with good intentions, how would you propose doing this?
    Probably by respecting people's religious and cultural traditions but within that ensuring (through our education system or perhaps media campaigns) that women know that, regardless of the culture of their parents/husbad, they are entitled to equality of treatment. Perhaps encouraging women to question their position in society and within the family? This would be a massive change from the views about women that are currently conveyed by the mass media.

    Obviously this is a huge task and I don't for a second believe it would be universally successful. But I do think it is a necessary that feminism is recognised and embraced by far more people than it currently is. (In contrast to the ignorant view often displyed by apparently intelligent individuals that feminism is about female supperiority/just for fat lesbians or something...).

    I don't see my 'vision' as being so different from, what I see as, you wanting to educate people that Islam is, in general, really not how it is portrayed by the Daily Mail.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    Did you even read the OP?
    Um yes. Did you?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BJack)
    You can't seriously believe that Sharia law demands that rape victims be stoned to death, surely?
    No the actual law states that for it to be rape, 5 people have to witness the crime. And if that isn't the case, the woman is seen to be a harlot. The penalty for which is death by stoning.

    Makes perfect sense doesn't it?:rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amy***)
    I get that point - but clearly across the world and throughout history women have been/are treated badly and simply accept it. They may not even view their subordination as wrong because culture has engrained in them, for instance, that a woman's role is to follow the will of her husband. (Note I am not just talking about Islam, pretty much all cultures have subscribed to this view of women).

    Clearly the law is there to protect everyone. In this country everybody is given certain rights under the law - even if they do not believe they themselves are entitled to them. (e.g. untill the 1990s special provision in the legal system was not made for victims of domestic violence which was previously viewed as a 'private matter' between man and wife, women didn't used to be able to testify agains their husbands until changes were made. Of course women were not/are not the only persecuted group that the law in this country aims to protext, I am just thinking of examples of the top of my head)

    In this instance the law should protect vulnerable women/women who have been, for want of a better word 'brainwashed' in to thinking they are lesser than men.
    I completely agree. However, the law, as it stands, currently fails vulnerable women. Any woman who, under my system, may be forced into an 'unfair' Sharia judgment, would certainly not, under the present system, be allowed by her husband to plead her case in a 'normal' county court. So I assert that my system is, at the very least, no worse than what happens now.

    I don't even think Sharia law is necessarily misogynistic. Certainly, the "woman's evidence is worth half that of a man's" is neither clearly specified in the Koran, nor used by all Sharia courts. Supporting Sharia courts, and, in particular, liberal Sharia jurisprudence may have the effect of allowing Sharia to throw off some of its more misogynistic aspects.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    quite simply - NO
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arrogant Git)
    I completely agree. However, the law, as it stands, currently fails vulnerable women. Any woman who, under my system, may be forced into an 'unfair' Sharia judgment, would certainly not, under the present system, be allowed by her husband to plead her case in a 'normal' county court. So I assert that my system is, at the very least, no worse than what happens now.

    I don't even think Sharia law is necessarily misogynistic. Certainly, the "woman's evidence is worth half that of a man's" is neither clearly specified in the Koran, nor used by all Sharia courts. Supporting Sharia courts, and, in particular, liberal Sharia jurisprudence may have the effect of allowing Sharia to throw off some of its more misogynistic aspects.
    Definately - this is probably the best argument for endorsing a system like this. Although, I do feel it would be difficult to 'police' sharia courts to ensure they weren't carrying out iliberal interpretations of Sharia
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by Mr Nonsense)
    quite simply - NO
    Yeap Nonsense
 
 
 
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    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

    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.