Posted on 07/01/2009 12:07:07 PM PDT by Ooh-Ah
There are many reasons to find problems with sharia law. In its full form, it contains numerous provisions that are barbaric and irreconcilable with any advanced society: stoning married adulterers, flogging the unmarried, throwing homosexuals from roofs or steep hills, amputating limbs for theft, and much more.
But sharia is much wider than that. It moves seamlessly from the public to the private realm, and it is in the latter that we find demands that a measure of sharia be introduced to this country. Such demands have been made, not just by Muslims, but even by an astonishingly naïve Archbishop of Canterbury. Sharia is only marginally about how a believer prays, fasts, pays the alms tax, or performs the pilgrimage. For the individual it carries obligations and penalties that cut deep into personal life. Here is a very simple example. If a Muslim man in a fit of temper uses the triple divorce formula, even if his wife is not present, the law considers the couple divorced. But if he comes to his senses, he cannot simply resume relations with his wife. In order to remarry, she must wait three months to determine that she is not pregnant. Thereupon, she is obliged to marry another man and to have sex with him, and this man must then divorce her (or not, if he decides to keep her). She must then wait another three months, after which her first husband may remarry her – see also Ask Imam). This revolting practice, known as halala, demeans the woman. In British law, it would be considered a form of coercion into unwanted sexual relations. Is this what the archbishop wants?
But sharia has already entered the UK through a back door. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
>In its full form, it contains numerous provisions that are barbaric and irreconcilable with any advanced society: stoning married adulterers, flogging the unmarried, throwing homosexuals from roofs or steep hills, amputating limbs for theft
Hm, is it really irreconcilable?
— Stoning adulterers; we currently shun and ostracize adulterers... if they are doing nothing wrong then why is this? If they ARE doing something wrong, is death NOT an appropriate punishment? Why?
— Flogging the unmarried? For the crime of being unmarried... that does seem harsh, especially for newborn children.
— Who DOESN’T want to throw Frank off a Sears Tower? ;)
— Again, with all the theft and incompetence being currently shown in Congress, they’d be LUCKY to get away alive, much less ONLY maimed if they push the people too far.
The arguments, as presented, FAIL!
It's hard to tell what your intentions are. Serious, or parody? It seems to be a mix of both. For that reason, whether serious or not, your post is a colossal FAIL.
And with Koh as the lawyer for State Department and Sodamajor on the SC, we will be in the count down to when Sharia replaces the constitution. I wonder how the feminists will like being made true 2nd class, nay, 3rd class citizens.
ha la la la la roflmao
Well, it is a bit of both.
There are assumptions made, which aren’t labeled as assumptions, the problem with which is: those assumptions could be construed to deny any law (or action-consequence system) of its validity [IE they are the same assumptions, or very near to them, that moral-relativists might use]. Further, I see, those assumptions as treated in the emotionally-guised-as-rationality manner with which the media likes to employ.
If you think I am wrong, then please tell me why.
Yes, one would think the feminists would oppose sharia, but I have seen no evidence of it.
Sorry to say this Britain, but the truth is, you asked for it.
Probably because they can't even bring themselves to comprehend what it is...plus they have faith that Obama will somehow 'save' them from these Muslim bigots.
Talk about dumb.
PING
In my years the one thing that I have learned about the fairer sex is that what women want, and what they SAY they want, are two very different things.
http://www.tldm.org/News11/RadicalFeminismPsychologicalDisorder.htm
I suspect there may be a trend among Muslim women: the ugly ones like Sharia Law and the pretty ones don’t.
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.