Sharia Law in UK?

Hi All,
What I don’t get is that all Muslim immigrants come to this country for a couple of main reasons 1st to find a job to have a better living standard 2nd to escape the strict rules of Sharia, so why in the hell are we now considering this change to our laws to allow this Sharia to be implemented if they wish it to be ?????? you can argue it’s radical Muslims that want it but this was the last time I checked a secular country, so shouldn’t our own laws take president ? I mean how far will this be stretched the Koran say’s it is alright to kill the Infidel/Non believer (Please correct if wrong) so if a Muslim took this literally he would be well within his right to kill all of the non believers in this country and we couldn’t touch him because of Sharia law ?
Another example is the Koran states when a girls reaches menstruation she becomes a woman so may be taken by a man (And no I don’t know the exact wording) but believe me the basics are as I have put into word, anyway we in this country call that paedophilia but because the Koran states words to the effect it’s o.k. could this be stretched out to a defence under sharia law ? Or am I completely misunderstanding what I have seen in various documentary’s . And before you ask I am not racist and I believe immigration is good for any country so long as it is not abused.

Geoff.

My daughter goes to a C of E primary school which does base some of its ethos on christian values. The school is also inclusive where Catholics, Sikhs, Muslims etc are welcome. The syllabus includes includes learning about religions incorporating visiting mosques etc.
I wonder if islamic schools are as inclusive and spend time learning about other faiths?

The tolerating of islamic schools which alienate muslim youth from their peers and the power of imrans is continuing the problem down the generations.
I don’t know how to change the extremists but we should not tolerate female mutilation, forced marriages, the aborting of female babies and those who cause or allow this to happen should be severly punished and if possible deported.

I partly agree, but then I’m not completely on board with religious schools in general. If there were schools with politically oriented themes we’d see it as a strange practice with rather sinister connotations, but for some reason religion is a bit different (though I’m not sure why).

As for those other points, I’m glad they are illegal, even if the enforcement of the laws leaves a lot to be desired.

Unlike the US where some ethnic groups were taken from their homelands through slavery the vast majority of ethnic groups emigrated to the UK by choice. The problem was our determination to get cheap labour from the former empire has back fired. Through cultural issues many people from particularly Muslim countries refuse to accept western values.
The tolerating of islamic schools which alienate muslim youth from their peers and the power of imrans is continuing the problem down the generations.
I don’t know how to change the extremists but we should not tolerate female mutilation, forced marriages, the aborting of female babies and those who cause or allow this to happen should be severly punished and if possible deported.

Fine, that’s his opinion.

But my guess is that he’s Sikh, Hindu or Christian and as open to religious bias as many here seem to be.

Moggy

Well you might be guessing incorrectly since as a member of the Lawyers Secular Society he might be of no religion.

“
The members of the Lawyers’ Secular Society believe that legal rights and the administration of justice should be based on equality, respect for human rights and objective evidence, and that no weight should be attached to religious doctrine, belief in the supernatural or so-called cultural traditions. We seek to help individuals and organisations campaign against any religious practices or privileges which infringe the lawful rights of others.

The LSS promotes progressive law and policy making that advances equal rights for all. We raise awareness of the often inevitable conflict between equal treatment for everyone and the continuing demands of many religious institutions and individuals for special treatment and exemption from equality requirements.

The LSS is not anti-religious, and we are equally opposed to the religious or the non-religious being discriminated against. We believe that religion is a matter for private conscience, not for public advantage, and that everyone has identical legal rights and responsibilities regardless of their religion, if any. “

The important point is to treat all cases equally as required by the act .

Sadikur Rahman, …

Fine, that’s his opinion.

But my guess is that he’s Sikh, Hindu or Christian and as open to religious bias as many here seem to be.

Moggy

On the other hand, why should it be okay for individuals to discriminate on the grounds of race, gender or religion, and not employers?

At present, individuals can choose who they consort with, who they buy goods and services from and who they want to give their money to. Are you saying that equality legislation should apply to all these interactions? I don’t approve of racism or the other types of discrimination occurring, but it’s the price of freedom. Unless you want to hand the state the power to meddle with people’s lives whenever someone disagrees with the hive mind then it’s just something we have to put up with. We can still campaign against it and tackle it when it happens, but I’d rather have to do that than have an all-powerful state with the means and authority to intervene against every infraction.

It does seem a little odd that the law seems to want to question the motives of those that write a will as much as what they are doing.

I think people should be able to leave their money to whomever they wish, so long as they haven’t been coerced into their decision. To their political party, to the RSPCA, to their children, whomever. Having the state intervene whenever the motives may be questionable or out of step with societal trends seems to be going way too far imho.

Sadikur Rahman, a member of the Lawyers Secular Society and a solicitor writes interestingly today, especiually in his final paragraphs:

” Here is what the code – which all solicitors must abide by – says about equality and diversity: “As a matter of general law, you must comply with requirements set out in legislation – including the Equality Act 2010 – as well as the conduct duties contained in this chapter.”
In other words, it makes clear that solicitors cannot discriminate; yet this new guidance encourages us to facilitate discrimination in advising Muslim clients on how to draft their wills in way that is incompatible with equality legislation.
This is a dangerous precedent and legitimises a discriminatory practice that, without this guidance, clients may have been embarrassed to ask about. The Law Society’s endorsement normalises it and makes it acceptable.
That, in turn, will make it easier for calls to be made for such rules to be formalised, thereby opening the way for Sharia to permeate other areas, such as family law. The guidance should be withdrawn.”

Primogeniture anyone ? Isn’t that enshrined in English Common Law or possibly Statute Law ? If you’re Royal, that is !

How is it discrimination?

XX is a muslim, traditionally his estate passes to his eldest son knowing he’ll look after the widow. Why should the operation of the law prevent him from so arranging his will? It’s his money after all.

Moggy

On the other hand, why should it be okay for individuals to discriminate on the grounds of race, gender or religion, and not employers?

Good point.

Now all those objecting. You do realise you are saying that you approve of the government telling you who you can and can’t leave your estate to?

Or are you just saying it’s fine for ‘us’ but shouldn’t be allowed for Muslims? That seems to rather go against Trumper’s ‘equal for all’

Moggy

To all those objecting – would you still be up in arms if a Methodist wanted to leave money to family members on the condition of temperance?

I doubt it, and really this is the same thing.

. I think what we really need to be asking ourselves is should religion be allowed any influence over our laws?

No,the laws of the land should be equal to all

In the act no, but in the spirit, yes

And whether or not people “practice” is irrelevant. If an individual states they of a faith then they are. Christians who do not go to church are still Christians. Those of any of the Muslim faiths are in a very small minority in the UK.

Can we be quite clear. Nobody has proposed or enacted any ‘change in the law’

Moggy

How many of them are practicing Christians though? Most just pay what can barely be considered lip service. Most of the Muslims I have known in the UK at least pray regularly.

In the 2011 Census 59.3% were of any one of the myriad Christian religions and 4.8% Muslims. A rather significant difference which gives no justification whatsoever for changes in the law.

I would say that Islam is now the major religion in the UK, and that there are fare more practicing Muslims than there are Christians. I think what we really need to be asking ourselves is should religion be allowed any influence over our laws?

Given that, taken to the letter, the teachings of Islam are incompatible with our values, I would say no.