| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Muslims demand full sharia law; yeah it was gonna happen eventually | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Oct 16 2009, 10:54 PM (248 Views) | |
| sabre | Oct 16 2009, 10:54 PM Post #1 |
Super Spok to the rescue!
|
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/134080/Now-Muslims-demand-Give-us-full-Sharia-law " A RADICAL Muslim group sparked outrage last night as it launched a massive campaign to impose sharia law on Britain. The fanatical group Islam4UK has announced plans to hold a potentially incendiary rally in London later this month. And it is calling for a complete upheaval of the British legal system, its officials and legislation. Members have urged Muslims from all over Britain to converge on the capital on October 31 for a procession to demand the full implementation of sharia law. On a website to promote their cause they deride British institutions, showing a mock-up picture of Nelson’s Column surmounted by a minaret. Plans for the demonstration have been delivered to the Metropolitan Police and could see up to 5,000 extremists marching to demand the controversial system. The procession – dubbed March 4 Shari’ah – will start at the House of Commons, which the group’s website describes as the “very place where the lives of millions of people in the UK are changed and it is from here where unjust wars are launched”. The group then intends to march to 10 Downing Street and “call for the removal of the tyrant Gordon Brown from power”. The march will then converge on Trafalgar Square where protesters expect it “will gather even more support from tourists and members of the public, making clear in the heart of London the need for Shari’ah in society”. The group declared: “We hereby request all Muslims in the United Kingdom, in Manchester, Leeds, Cardiff, Glasgow and all other places to join us and collectively declare that as submitters to Almighty Allah, we have had enough of democracy and man-made law and the depravity of the British culture. " BTW there is much more lolz urgh religion makes my brain hurt. Edited by sabre, Oct 16 2009, 10:56 PM.
|
 |
 
|
| gingerwitch28 | Oct 16 2009, 11:53 PM Post #2 |
twenty-first century ennui
|
Tourists will support them in Trafalgar Square? Urgh, no they won't. I was in London the day of the pro-Israel march in January (during the Gaza conflict) and people started hurling abuse at them and then there were police herding us into the National Portrait Gallery and we couldn't take pictures from the top  Also, nutters! I hope every other normal Muslim person in Britain stages a counter protest with signs like "I'm with stupid."
Oh give me a goddamn break. I'm pretty sure Almighty Allah also says something along the lines of "live and let live" when it comes to religion  And at the risk of sounding like some sort of racist bogan, it's really quite simple - if you feel like the laws and mores of the country you happen to live in are completely against every fibre of your being - dare I say it? - leave! All this is doing is making other Muslims look bad and making Nick Griffin really happy. Edited by gingerwitch28, Oct 16 2009, 11:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Sayf Udeen Ismaeel | Oct 17 2009, 02:12 AM Post #3 |
Icon by meagan_chelsea @ LJ
|
Just on your topic description what was 'going to happen eventually'? Is the right to protest an absolute right in the UK? Because really their protesting for whatever they wish to protest for is lawful, and it's not to say they are 'raising awareness' or 'bringing in the numbers of supporters'. But meh, whatever sells papers. Really, the notion that Muslims around the world do desire sharia law has never been a secret, the way I see it though, personally is that we can live our own lives in compliance with Sharia, and shouldn't be inflicting it upon those who do not believe it while living in amongst a vast non-Muslim majority (just as we should not have other 'values' inflcited upon us, which socially I'm afraid is quite quickly ignored in interactions with a lot of non-Muslims, but that's another topic.) Laws, generally reflect the values of society, so as long as the UK has a majority against it, the politicians are going to try and appeal to the broader voting population. And right now, the majority of the UK's voting population seems to be those who read these articles in the same or a similar way as you do Sabre. I don't think you have anything to worry about. [PS; I'm aware that was poorly constructed as ever. Fatigue.] |
|
|
| sabre | Oct 17 2009, 10:38 AM Post #4 |
|
Super Spok to the rescue!
|
oh comon its not a protest. its a trolling attempt. they know that they will piss everybody off and the police will have to escort them round and they will waste public money and have a great laugh. sharia law is a horrible inhumane system of law that should not be in place anywhere tbh. "and shouldn't be inflicting it upon those who do not believe it while living in amongst a vast non-Muslim majority (just as we should not have other 'values' inflcited upon us, which socially I'm afraid is quite quickly ignored in interactions with a lot of non-Muslims, but that's another topic.)" no. just no. if you live in a country, you abide by its laws and values. if you want to impose extra stuff on yourself, then thats a personal choice, but in no way should you ignore the values of the country you're in. im not worried lol. before this could happen im fairly sure we'd go winston churchill and pwn everyone. |
|
|
|
| capricarius | Oct 17 2009, 04:00 PM Post #5 |
|
I know it'll never happen, but I don't support Sharia law taking over the UK. I think it's alright for them to protest, seeing as they have every right to do so, but if you're not happy with the laws of the land you're in, go elsewhere. Or at least try to contact your MPs or whatnot and form a relationship with those who are in power to make laws. Become active in politics but remember that you're wholly representative for Muslims in the UK. Protests are okay, but I've always felt they were kinda useless.Exactly. Sharia law isn't necessary for everyone to follow. It'd be nice, from a Muslim standpoint, but humans aren't perfect and they'll abuse their power all in the name of Sharia law. |
|
|
|
| gingerwitch28 | Oct 17 2009, 11:15 PM Post #6 |
|
twenty-first century ennui
|
That's exactly what he said, and exactly what I said (or implied anyway) and what Capri said as well. If people want to impose religious codes upon themselves and their way of life, then more power to them, as long as it doesn't supersede the law of the land. And my understanding is that for most people, that's exactly how they do it. What Sayf was saying about having other values inflicted upon them was likely a comment about common courtesy in respecting other peoples' values. Again, insofar as they don't interfere with the law of the land. Which I don't think they do, by and large. Edited by gingerwitch28, Oct 17 2009, 11:15 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Sayf Udeen Ismaeel | Oct 18 2009, 12:04 AM Post #7 |
|
Icon by meagan_chelsea @ LJ
|
Exactly, it has nothing to do with laws, but Sabre did say "if you want to impose extra stuff on yourself, then thats a personal choice, but in no way should you ignore the values of the country you're in." It's not always that easy to escape. As a Muslim for example (and as the vast majority of my friends are not also Muslim) I have had some dealings with things that go against my personal values time and time again. For example as I'm going home from someone's house, someone of the opposite sex wanting a hug, or people pressuring me to go to a pub or bar, or on one occasion someone asking me to stop at a bottle shop and buy them someone on the way to their house  . And another thing that gets to me is in their insistance when their is any, it almost seems like I'm being judged for not partaking and it's been to an extent were someone with little Islamic background knowledge has tried to tell me 'it's not haraam'. Blah!Causes a few break downs in social interaction. But that wasn't so on topic. Just a personal bitch.
No Sabre. It's a protest. The fact that you disagree with their cause does not mean they are trolling.
Yeah. That's what they are out to do. It was all so obvious from the beginning.  Lastly, Sabre. Excusing the fact that there is a precedent set here when it comes to you and Islam, I would bet Sharia is just another thing you have no idea about. 
|
|
|
|
| sabre | Oct 18 2009, 06:09 PM Post #8 |
|
Super Spok to the rescue!
|
lol sayf i know enough yes some parts of it fine, but then you get the wackjobs that flog people, cut off limbs, etc. and sayf, this particular group is utterly vile, so yeah i do think they are doing this for the attention |
|
|
|
| gingerwitch28 | Oct 19 2009, 02:19 AM Post #9 |
|
twenty-first century ennui
|
Sharia in Australia: sanity or shocking? October 19, 2009 - 8:48AM To many non-Muslim Australians, sharia is a deeply threatening word. One of the absurd canards used by Islamophobes is that Muslims by population growth or other means want to take over Australia by stealth and introduce sharia law. That idea duly ridiculed, I am still left with questions, given the second-class status of women and the plight of non-Muslim minorities in so many Muslim countries. But to many Muslims, naturally, sharia is something quite different: a divinely mandated system of justice and social cohesion, a code for living, which need not be repressive or punitive as it is in Saudi Arabia, Iran or Pakistan. Nobody could accuse Islamic Council of Victoria board member Hyder Gulam of trying to introduce sharia by stealth when he suggests a tribunal for Muslims to resolve differences, as I report today. In fact it’s mystifying that he would choose such an inflammatory term as “sharia court”, given that what he is proposing is merely a dispute-resolving mechanism for Muslims by mediation and conciliation, a mechanism that would be voluntary and non-binding. Possibly he felt that if he didn’t use the term “sharia court” critics would, and try to exploit the negative connotations. He might have decided it was better to confront that particular landmine directly and hope to get it out of the way so the real conversation can start. The danger is, he may not get it out of the way. Instead, his proposal could founder on those two words. They were enough to get the Islamic Council of Victoria to disown his plan, though he claims wide Muslim support. People can get almost hysterical about sharia. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams felt the full force of the emotional range when he made a similar suggestion in February last year, that there should be some recognition of the Muslim religious conscience within British law – still subordinate to the British legal system. Some people may reasonably think that one system of law for all is too important a principle to be negotiated away in the name of multiculturalism. Acerbic Spectator commentator Theodore Dalrymple spoke for many when he said “multiculturalism is not couscous; it is the stoning of adulterers”. And there are many ways in which Britain – where desire to accommodate migrants has led to parallel, independent cultures rather than Australian-style multiculturalism – is precisely what we want to avoid. As a Muslim and a lawyer, Hyder Gulam knows that sharia, with its multitude of schools and local flavours, is a much broader, more varied, flexible and complex system than even most Muslims realise. And he only wants a minor but socially useful aspect: that when Muslims on each side of a dispute want to be guided by their religion they should have access to a religious tribunal. Other groups have such mechanisms. Catholics have tribunals to deal with religious annulments of marriages. Koori courts, which actually are part of the state’s justice system, take into account the Aboriginal context in considering cases. But the most obvious parallel is the Beth Din, the religious court for the Jewish community. Mordechai Gutnick, senior rabbi of the Beth Din tells me that the Jewish court deals with divorce, religious conversion and dispute resolution – business or financial, defamation, will and inheritance. Between them, the three judges deal with several hundred cases a year. The Beth Din has no punitive powers and anyone unwilling to accept a judgment can transfer to a civil court case. Rabbi Gutnick says Beth Din judges are taking civil law into account as well as Jewish law to ensure they do not breach Australian law and because they want civil courts to uphold their judgments. That is a fairly precise image of what Hyder Gulam proposes for Muslims. At that level, it’s hard to see why it's so unreasonable. After all, Western institutions such as banks are accommodating themselves swiftly to sharia when it comes to making money from sharia-compliant financial products. One difference from the Beth Din is that Gulam hopes the government might fund it, in the same process giving its imprimateur. A counter-argument is that it’s hard to see why an Islamic tribunal is needed. If Muslims who are in dispute want an imam to mediate between them they can seek that now, with no need for a formal mechanism. They can either accept his decision or not, exactly the same as a voluntary and non-binding tribunal. If either party still feels aggrieved, he or she can pursue civil remedies. And there is a natural fear that it might institutionalise injustice. Gulam might have a very precise notion of what such a tribunal can and cannot do, but among certain Muslim communities there might be an expectation that it should function like sharia law in their former countries, in opposition to Western ideas of equality. If that idea took root it’s easy to see who the first victims would be, which is why in Western countries, the strongest opponents of allowing sharia law to operate alongside Western law have been Muslim women’s groups. Over to you, and please keep it polite. What are the arguments for or against? Is it unfair to stop what might be a good idea here because it’s a bad idea elsewhere? Will it deter or encourage integration? Is it any different from the Beth Din, which has been problem-free for Australian society? Is it the first compromise too far? |
|
|
|
| sabre | Oct 20 2009, 02:43 PM Post #10 |
|
Super Spok to the rescue!
|
im sorry but i dont get why that is against your values. a friend wanting to say goodbye??# could you maybe explain the evil please ? |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Religion · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
12:35 PM Nov 30
