Sharia Law

[BlueSi13]

Well there are the one or two Catholic priests that have been very naughty boys and their boss in Rome forgives them.

Apart from that he has done no such thing.

[MC Prussian]

That was then, this thread is discussing the now. I fail to understand the need to attack another group of people who have nothing to do with this story. Atheist or not.

Not really. Sharia law has been in effect for hundreds of years, but it's only these days that it's getting so much attention.

[BlueSi13]

Not really. Sharia law has been in effect for hundreds of years, but it's only these days that it's getting so much attention.

True, apologies i was referring to another poster who was highlighting past deeds undertaken by the Catholics.

As for Sharia it isn't something that is going to go away, but as Islam grows in the west, it seems further clashes of ideologies will ensue and that one side is going to have to budge eventually.

[I am Rod Hull]

True, apologies i was referring to another poster who was highlighting past deeds undertaken by the Catholics.

As for Sharia it isn't something that is going to go away, but as Islam grows in the west, it seems further clashes of ideologies will ensue and that one side is going to have to budge eventually.

[dave the caveman]

Because if Muslim women accept it and don't want it changed then there's no point in discussing the subject as a whole.

That's ridiculous. We clearly need to liberate these women and the only way to do that is to go against their wishes and force them into accepting our version of morality because, you know, we're obviously superior and that. Doesn't matter what other people say because we're simply perfect and everybody secretly wants to be like us whether they admit it or not. Quite frankly I can't believe you an even suggest that people should be allowed freedom of choice when we've got all the baddest freedom skills already locked down.

[Captain...]

Very convincing, that will get the islamaphobia rising, but it is also a load of bollox, (At least they didn't adopt the Convert or die Christian approach in the crusades).

The only way to make the extreme islamic countries more tolerant and progressive is to embrace them as part of this world and of our societies, make them buy into the values of freedom and equality and diversity, this will never happen with people continuously stirring up anti islam emotions and peddling this crap.

This will take time, acooling has a point that if the women in these islamic countries happily accept their lot in life as effectively slaves to the patriarchs in the families then it is an uphill battle but we must still try. We must also look at our own society, the drunkenness and debauchery, the sex and the drugs, the greed and the financial disparity is one thing but must we celebrate it with programs like Geordie Shore, Big Brother, X-factor and other crap.

This will take a few generations, but with the advances in communication hopefully the current younger generation of muslims are having their eyes opened to the realities of some of the more extreme views in Sharia law, and hopefully change can be made in all our cultures to ensure we can all live happily ever after, Amen.

[Thracian]

16yr old kills herself after being forced to marry her rapist

Take it away, Tony...

Haha - there is nothing to say that hasn't already been said. As supporter of a campaign for "A Safer

World for Women" I quite often hear of the heartache caused to women and girls in such circumstances and other situations such as marital rape and forced child marriage.

[Daggers]

Because if Muslim women accept it and don't want it changed then there's no point in discussing the subject as a whole.

Do you believe it is the dream of every little Muslim girl to grow up and be made to marry her rapist by a Sharia council?

Maybe, if finding out information and reading is too tough, and you don't see the point in having a debate about it, this might not be the thread for you.

[Daggers]

Haha - there is nothing to say that hasn't already been said.

But...but...I simply refuse to believe that there's not an opinion on this subject we've not yet tapped over the years. When I read the article I instantly thought of you.

[21st Century Fox]

That was then, this thread is discussing the now. I fail to understand the need to attack another group of people who have nothing to do with this story. Atheist or not.

Depends whether you believe human rights are relative or universal.

The abuse victims of the Catholic church should be afforded the same rights as we call for from Islam. The point being that cruelty and religious acceptance isn't exclusive to brown people.

[Daggers]

That was then, this thread is discussing the now. I fail to understand the need to attack another group of people who have nothing to do with this story. Atheist or not.

I'm not sure I understand how pointing out that a large number of Catholic priests around the world sexually abused young boys and the church sanctioned cover-ups for all of them, being carried out at the Pope's wish, is "attacking". It was simply stating fact, relevant or not.

[Gold Coast Fox]

A barbaric law from a barbaric time in history, it has no place in a civilised community or country.

[Daggers]

For cooling's benefit:

• Standard letter setting out points of law and their inconsistencies with the law of the land
  
• Egyptian woman protesting about Sharia
  
• Dr Tarek Abdelhamid debunks poor research and pro-Sharia books
  
• Women Against Sharia
  
• The Iranian and Kurdish Womens' Rights Organisation
  
• and finally for tonight, Violence Is Not Our Culture - a Muslim's womens' site campaigning for fair treatment
  

You will note that there is a wealth of other resources out there, by Muslim women, decrying the imbecilic manner in which they are treated by a feudal mysoginistic mindset and that it isn't a white Western perception, it's a global perception. Happy reading.

[BoneDog]

"Most people imagine things about Sharia rule based on media reports, misinformation gathered from ignorant Muslims, their own hatred for religious rule and poor examples of religious rule in history".

"People confuse culture, tradition, customs, greed and politics with the true law and religion of beautiful Islam".

Both quotes are correct. The case of this poor girl is nothing to do with Sharia Law. Just as all the abhorrent cases of stoning have nothing to do with Sharia. Islam does not condone stoning to death. Outside forces have been at work to destroy Islam for 1400 years, just like the same forces have tried, and largely succeeded to do with Christianity. The crime for adultery in Islam is 100 lashes, not stoning. And only if you have four witnesses to the crime. It's more of a warning about the seriousness of adultery (which so many in The West seem to hold dear), than an actual action, because let's face it, who is going to get caught boinking their bit on the side by four people? Only dirty doggers do that. The stoning part was implemented (inspired by fake additions to The Bible) by the most despicable thugs and tyrants throughout Islamic countries, but has nothing to do with Sharia. The tyrants and thugs have hijacked the name. Yet everyone seems to believe that stoning to death is Islamic. Stoning to death is mentioned in The Bible and Torah, but not in The Quran.

The West's great friends, the rulers of Saudi Arabia, do not have true sharia law. Nor does Nigeria, nor Iran, so examples from those countries have nothing to do with real Islamic laws. And yet everyone waffles on as if the atrocities committed by these regimes and militias are somehow related to religion. The religious people (true followers of all religions, not the fake extremists) are the ones being persecuted all over the world, they are not doing the persecution.

Here is some real examples of Sharia rule in action and what Sharia Law entails. This is not the new baloney examples most people seem to hold as truth:

Two major guarantees are given to non-Muslims living under Sharia Law. They are:

"Under Sharia rule, people of other religions have complete freedom to practice their religion, establish their places of worship and their institutions to teach their religion to their children.

Sharia Law goes one step further by allowing non-Muslims to establish their own judicial courts to try their own civil cases, and to render and implement their judgments upon the people of their faith. Note that such permission is not given to the Muslims living in Europe or the Americas, now or earlier in history."

_______

The Eastern Christians, as British Historian Edward Gibbon showed, preferred Muslim rule, which allowed them to practice their own form of religion and adhere to their peculiar dogmas, to the rule of fellow Christians who would have made them Roman Catholics or wiped them out.

When crusaders conquered Jerusalem they killed almost all Muslims, Jews and a majority of non-Catholic Christians. When Muslims re-conquered the same city after 88 years under the leadership of Sultan Salahuddin Al-Ayyubi all non-Muslims were protected and their places of worship and institutions were also protected. No revenge was taken for what had happened 88 years earlier. Instead, Muslims helped Christians and Jews to rebuild their Synagogues and churches that were destroyed.

_______

The years between 900 and 1200 in Spain and North Africa are known as the Hebrew "golden age," a sort of Jewish Renaissance that arose from the fusion of the Arab and Jewish intellectual worlds. Jews watched their Arab counterparts closely and learned to be astronomers, philosophers, scientists, and poets. They were free to grow and thrive amongst Muslims and in their own communities under Sharia rule.

The Silver Age of Judaism was Muslim Persia (modern Iraq and Iran) according to Jewish historians. The Golden and Silver Ages of Judaism were not during the period of Jewish rule in Judea and Samaria nor under the Babylonian rulers nor under the Romans and Greeks nor in Europe under the Catholics. It was under Islamic rule.

There was absolute liberty of conscience for the Christians under Muslim rule in the Middle East; they kept their most important Churches and built new ones; the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem has always been a Christian place of worship, the only thing the Muslims did in the way of interference with the Christian's liberty of conscience in respect of it was to see that every sect of Christians had access to it, and that it was not monopolized by one sect to the exclusion of others. The same is true of the Church of the Nativity of Bethlehem, and of other buildings of special sanctity.

______

Westerners don’t know about Islamic Federalism. Unlike the one size fits all Federalism of the West, Islamic Federalism gives each state under Muslim rule, the right to rule themselves according to their own laws. As such, Christians, Jews and other communities living under Sharia Law are free to rule themselves according to their own laws and values. The first written constitution in the world was developed by Muhammad (saaw) in Medina. The restraints of Law on Muslims under Sharia Law, far surpass the restraints of law on any other population, bar none, and those Muslim Laws may not be applied to non-Muslims unless the latter opt for them. A Muslim can neither drink wine nor prohibit a Christian from drinking it in a Christian state ruled under Sharia Law.

Muslims, Christians, Jews and non religious people got on much better together under Sharia rule in Spain and The Holy Land (up until 1948) than at any other time in history. When the Catholics took control of Spain that unity was brutally ended. And since The Holy Land has been taken over in 1948 divisions have also been created there.

True Sharia is not a brutal dictatorship that oppresses women. Unfortunately most peoples views have been skewed through lack of knowledge and a media shit storm.

[acooling08]

Do you believe it is the dream of every little Muslim girl to grow up and be made to marry her rapist by a Sharia council?

Maybe, if finding out information and reading is too tough, and you don't see the point in having a debate about it, this might not be the thread for you.

There you go again, taking what somebody has said to ridiculous levels to ridicule them! If I wasn't so lazy, I'd get that gif of Sheldon shaking is head in disapproval at your constant tomfoolery.

If muslim women are not opposed to being oppressed in such a horrible way than who are we to change their laws for them?

[The Doctor]

"Most people imagine things about Sharia rule based on media reports, misinformation gathered from ignorant Muslims, their own hatred for religious rule and poor examples of religious rule in history".

"People confuse culture, tradition, customs, greed and politics with the true law and religion of beautiful Islam".

Both quotes are correct. The case of this poor girl is nothing to do with Sharia Law. Just as all the abhorrent cases of stoning have nothing to do with Sharia. Islam does not condone stoning to death. Outside forces have been at work to destroy Islam for 1400 years, just like the same forces have tried, and largely succeeded to do with Christianity.

ding ding ding - a classic el empty conspiracy on it's way!

The crime for adultery in Islam is 100 lashes, not stoning. And only if you have four witnesses to the crime. It's more of a warning about the seriousness of adultery (which so many in The West seem to hold dear), than an actual action, because let's face it, who is going to get caught boinking their bit on the side by four people? Only dirty doggers do that. The stoning part was implemented (inspired by fake additions to The Bible) by the most despicable thugs and tyrants throughout Islamic countries, but has nothing to do with Sharia. The tyrants and thugs have hijacked the name. Yet everyone seems to believe that stoning to death is Islamic. Stoning to death is mentioned in The Bible and Torah, but not in The Quran.

I thought it was stoning if you were married, lashes if unmarried?

The West's great friends, the rulers of Saudi Arabia, do not have true sharia law. Nor does Nigeria, nor Iran, so examples from those countries have nothing to do with real Islamic laws. And yet everyone waffles on as if the atrocities committed by these regimes and militias are somehow related to religion. The religious people (true followers of all religions, not the fake extremists) are the ones being persecuted all over the world, they are not doing the persecution

Sorry, but I've gotta call bullshit here. As with pretty much everything in history, no party is innocent. Religious people (particularly the more militant of them) are as guilty of persecution of those outside of their religion as the non-religious are of the religious.

As for this whole marrying rapists stuff - I don't understand why people are surprised. Bilo referenced Christian views on rape and all that from a couple of centuries ago, well compared to Christianity & Judaism, Islam is a young religion and still at that stage where they follow the sort of old testament deal shit. In a couple of centuries when they should have advanced to the point Christianity is now (i.e. stepped aside from the state, not forcing ways upon citizens), if this was still going on then I'd be shocked, but now? Pretty much the same as attitudes over here in the 1500's/1600's. We've no real right to try and hold the moral high-ground when we as a country were up to the same stuff at a similar age in our history.

[21st Century Fox]

There you go again, taking what somebody has said to ridiculous levels to ridicule them! If I wasn't so lazy, I'd get that gif of Sheldon shaking is head in disapproval at your constant tomfoolery.

If muslim women are not opposed to being oppressed in such a horrible way than who are we to change their laws for them?

You mean contrary to all the sources that Daggers provided for you.

What about young girls who go through Female Circumcision or as its more aptly titled Female Genital Mutilation, while not an exclusively Islamic practise, is this a cultural quirk that should be ignored because none of these young girls are telling us they don't enjoy it?

[ozleicester]

I dont think we can take the high moral ethical? ground whilst we still are being governed by laws that are based on religious bullsh!t.

[BoneDog]

I thought it was stoning if you were married, lashes if unmarried?

No it's lashes for married and unmarried. That's why I said the thugs and tyrants added the stoning part. The Quran clearly states 100 lashes for married and unmarried. Nowhere in the Quran does it mention stoning anybody.

Another misconception is the attitude to gays. The Quran says that what gay or straight people do in their own home is their private business. It doesn't tell anybody to harm gay people in the slightest, only if they are having sex in the streets, but that applies to men and women aswell, not just the gays!

Proper Sharia also doesn't cut off the hands of most thieves. "Many will be surprised to know that Sharia law states that if someone is caught stealing -- as a result of hunger, poverty or necessity -- their hand should not be amputated. Instead, a thorough investigation must be done as to the circumstances of the theft that caused the individual to steal. If it is found that the individual stole as a result of necessity, then instead of amputation, Sharia law dictates that well-to-do members of the community provide support for the individual. The provision of support could be in the form of financial support, employment, education and charity. The purpose is to prevent the person from becoming destitute and eliminate any reason for him to steal again."

Here's a link to all the quotes I put in bold in the last two posts. Forgot earlier.

http://www.ascertainthetruth.com/att/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=62:dispelling-myths-about-sharia-law-in-al-islam-part-1-&catid=64:understanding-al-islam&Itemid=53

[BoneDog]

Sorry, but I've gotta call bullshit here. As with pretty much everything in history, no party is innocent. Religious people (particularly the more militant of them) are as guilty of persecution of those outside of their religion as the non-religious are of the religious.

Which religious people are guilty of persecuting others? I can't think of any real examples. The Crusaders weren't religious people. The leaders pretended to be, like so many that seem to dupe the people into believing they are religious. The Crusaders fought many Christians on their way to The Holy Land. It was European so-called Christians fighting against Eastern Christians whilst on their way to fight Christians, Muslims and Jews in Jerusalem. The Catholics in Spain also persecuted Chritians, Jews and Muslims and many had to leave. I don't believe that the leaders of any of these atrocities or wrong doings are religious in the slightest.

[The Year Of The Fox]

Third world law for third world countries. And some Muslims want Sharia Law in this country!

[Finnegan]

lol "it's NOT stoning, they're not ****ing barbarians!! ... it's a hundred lashes!"

Okay then, that's perfectly fine! I take it all back! Just about any 100lb young woman could take a hundred lashes and purely laugh it off, barely a punishment that is.

[Daggers]

There you go again, taking what somebody has said to ridiculous levels to ridicule them! If I wasn't so lazy, I'd get that gif of Sheldon shaking is head in disapproval at your constant tomfoolery.

If muslim women are not opposed to being oppressed in such a horrible way than who are we to change their laws for them?

I don't need to do a thing to ridicule you, you manage that all by yourself every time you post.

Go read Post 63, child, and then you can go outside to play.

[Daggers]

You mean contrary to all the sources that Daggers provided for you.

Hmmm. The poster always used to be a rather crap WUM, it doesn't look like an awful lot has changed while I've been off the forum.

I dont think we can take the high moral ethical? ground whilst we still are being governed by laws that are based on religious bullsh!t.

I don't believe that not being perfect bars you from criticising others who are far worse - otherwise I may as well close my account and not bother with forums

[Jon the Hat]

Which religious people are guilty of persecuting others? I can't think of any real examples. The Crusaders weren't religious people. The leaders pretended to be, like so many that seem to dupe the people into believing they are religious. The Crusaders fought many Christians on their way to The Holy Land. It was European so-called Christians fighting against Eastern Christians whilst on their way to fight Christians, Muslims and Jews in Jerusalem. The Catholics in Spain also persecuted Chritians, Jews and Muslims and many had to leave. I don't believe that the leaders of any of these atrocities or wrong doings are religious in the slightest.

You are making the assertion that under all the exploitation, manipulation, violence and hatred there is some kind of pure religious righteousness, and that everything else which has always come with religion is a somehow separate outside force trying to destroy that religion. That separation does not exist. The only real separation here is those who are using religion to manipulate, and those who do not realise they are being manipulated or are powerless to do anything about it.