Skip to comments.
Sharia to be enforced by Canadian courts
From the right ^
| 11/25/03
| Lawrence Auster
Posted on 11/25/2003 1:42:03 PM PST by veronica
The former nation of Canada seems to be moving toward the practical establishment of Islamic law. Normally Moslems are required to obey the Sharia, the law that obtains in Moslem societies, but if they live under a non-Moslem government, as hundreds of thousands of them do in Canada, they are excused from that obligation. According to the Canadian Law Times, recent changes in the Canadian Arbitration Act have radically changed all that. Here are the key passages from the article:
Syed [Mumtaz Ali, who in in 1962 became the first lawyer in Canada to swear his oath of allegiance on the Koran] explained that until recent changes in the law, Canadian Muslims have been excused from applying Shariah in their legal disputes. Arbitration was not deemed to be practical because there was no way to enforce the decisions. Syed said the laws have recently changed with amendments to the Arbitration Act.
Now, once an arbitrator decides cases, it is final and binding. The parties can go to the local secular Canadian court asking that it be enforced. The court has no discretion in the matter.
So, the concession given by Shariah is no longer available to us because the impracticality has been removed. In settling civil disputes, there is no choice indeed but to have an arbitration board.
In other words, if two Canadian Moslems get into a dispute with each other, over property or marriage or a business contract, and they take the problem to a Moslem arbitrator and reach an agreement that involves Sharia, the terms of that agreement will now be overseen and imposed by Canadian courts. Canadian courts and police thus become the enforcers of Islamic law on Canadian citizens. And the obligation goes both ways. Since Moslems are required to follow Islamic law if it is practicable to do so, and since it has now become practicable to do so in Canada, that is what Canadian Moslems must do. The Moslems are required by Moslem law to seek Sharia-based solutions to their private disputes, while Canadian courts are required by Canadian law to enforce these privately reached agreements between Moslems. I would add that under this official state multiculturalism, there is no inherent reason for publicly enforced Sharia to apply only to private, arbitrated disputes. What would stop entire Moslem Canadian communites from covenanting to live under Islamic law, which would lead to Canadian courts being required to order Moslem-style sanctions, not just for violations of private contracts among Moslems, but for violations of Moslem criminal law as well?
In any case, even as the traditional cultures, religions, and moral understandings of the West are being relegated to a merely private sphere, Moslem customs and laws are becoming a part of the official and public law of the West. The Naked Public Square is turning into the Mohammedan Public Squareat the very moment that it is also turning into the Homosexual Public Square. We could imagine a Canadian judge who in the morning orders one of the partners in a homosexual marriage to pay alimony and child support to his estranged partner, and who in the afternoon lets off an accused Moslem rapist because his Moslem victim was unable to produce four witnesses; or orders the stoning to death of the same woman after she had had given birth to a child that had been conceived by the rape; or commands that a woman who killed in defense of her honor be executed; or orders a Moslem man, who had killed an enemy, to abstain from food as punishment for his crime.
TOPICS: Canada; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
1
posted on
11/25/2003 1:42:05 PM PST
by
veronica
To: veronica
A look at Canada and western Europe reveals what the Dims have in store for us.
To: veronica
What's the problem? Two Moslems agree to seek arbitration from another Moslem, who applies the principles of his faith and renders a decision. Under the terms of the existing agreement, they both agreed to waive their right to sue in Crown Court.
If two Catholics agree to arbitration under Catholic Canon Law, it's the same principle.
3
posted on
11/25/2003 1:45:45 PM PST
by
Poohbah
("Beware the fury of a patient man" -- John Dryden)
To: veronica
I'll believe this when they start chopping off hands.
4
posted on
11/25/2003 1:46:26 PM PST
by
balrog666
(Humor is a universal language.)
To: veronica
Sometimes native law is used in the villages in Alaska. About the harshest they get is banishment, which means the criminal will show up in town.
5
posted on
11/25/2003 1:49:26 PM PST
by
RightWhale
(Close your tag lines)
To: veronica
This is madness.
6
posted on
11/25/2003 1:49:59 PM PST
by
Rummyfan
To: Poohbah
In what world?
I've yet to see Canon Law given the force of the State in civil disputes.
Nope, never. Sharia law and Canon law are not comparable.
7
posted on
11/25/2003 1:51:09 PM PST
by
OpusatFR
(You want to see terror? Mess with my kids and find out. I'm primitive at bestheadA Mother at worst)
To: balrog666
Right, this is basically a conflict of two completely different sets of laws.
So, if Canadian muslims start to 'execute' honor killings, the regular laws don't apply?
8
posted on
11/25/2003 1:52:42 PM PST
by
spoiler2
To: At _War_With_Liberals
Naw, can't happen here. Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause would prevent it. But then, there is nothing to prevent the court from re-defining the word, 'equal' to mean 'un-equal.' Look what the Mass. short-circuit Court just did.
9
posted on
11/25/2003 1:53:27 PM PST
by
Eastbound
To: Calpernia
placeholder
10
posted on
11/25/2003 1:56:56 PM PST
by
Calpernia
(Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does.)
To: Poohbah
Canon law doesn`t cover commercial disputes. Islamic law and jurisprudence do.
11
posted on
11/25/2003 1:57:42 PM PST
by
Loyalist
(Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Amchurch.)
To: veronica
Now, once an arbitrator decides cases, it is final and binding. The parties can go to the local secular Canadian court asking that it be enforced. The court has no discretion in the matter. Squawking, sniveling, running around in circles who cares alert.
If both parties agree so what?
12
posted on
11/25/2003 1:59:22 PM PST
by
Mike Darancette
(Proud member - Neo-Conservative Power Vortex)
To: veronica
Applying Sharia on me results in facing a Mossberg.
13
posted on
11/25/2003 2:00:28 PM PST
by
Dan from Michigan
("Today's music ain't got the same soul. I like that old time Rock N Roll" - Bob Seger)
To: Poohbah
This is just a little hysteria to pass the day.
14
posted on
11/25/2003 2:00:32 PM PST
by
justshutupandtakeit
(America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
To: OpusatFR
In what world?In a world where people voluntarily agree on how to settle their disputes, without a need to drag in the goobermint at each and every single step of the way. Shocking concept, I realize.
15
posted on
11/25/2003 2:00:39 PM PST
by
Poohbah
("Beware the fury of a patient man" -- John Dryden)
To: veronica; Valin; tubavil; Stopislamnow; SJackson; BayouCoyote; nuffsenuff; Helms; Taiwan Bocks; ...
New ping list for Islamic Jihad and terrorism. 3 pings per day, every day. Some from my old ping list are on by default.
On or off let me know by freepmail.
Easy on, easy off, via freepmail.
16
posted on
11/25/2003 2:02:04 PM PST
by
dennisw
(G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
To: Mike Darancette
"The parties can go to the local secular Canadian court asking that it be enforced."
The STATE is recognizing that there is a separate, completely VALID set of laws not based on Canada's jurisprudence in Common Law or in its Constitution, and it is giving a RELIGION the force of the STATE.
17
posted on
11/25/2003 2:03:40 PM PST
by
OpusatFR
(You want to see terror? Mess with my kids and find out. I'm primitive at bestheadA Mother at worst)
To: veronica
The Naked Public Square is turning into the Mohammedan Public Squareat the very moment that it is also turning into the Homosexual Public Square. Bingo.
18
posted on
11/25/2003 2:04:30 PM PST
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: Poohbah
What does that reply have to do with Canon Law since it doesn't cover civil disputes?
19
posted on
11/25/2003 2:04:59 PM PST
by
OpusatFR
(You want to see terror? Mess with my kids and find out. I'm primitive at bestheadA Mother at worst)
To: Poohbah
Also, if they voluntarily agree, why do they need the State to enforce it?
20
posted on
11/25/2003 2:05:58 PM PST
by
OpusatFR
(You want to see terror? Mess with my kids and find out. I'm primitive at bestheadA Mother at worst)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson