Posted on 07/03/2008 7:27:22 PM PDT by markomalley
Muslims in Britain should be able to live according to Sharia law, the country's most senior judge has said. The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, strongly backed Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, over his suggestion earlier this year that aspects of Sharia law should be adopted in Britain.
The archbishop's remarks sparked a national debate and led to calls for his resignation.
Risking inflaming that controversy again, Lord Phillips has said that Muslims in Britain should be able to use Sharia to decide financial and marital disputes.
The judge did add that only the criminal courts should have the power to decide when a crime has been committed and when to impose punishment.
But his suggestion that different religious groups should run their affairs according to different rules sparked warnings that community cohesion could be undermined.
In a speech at the East London Muslim Centre in east London, Lord Phillips said it was "not very radical" for Dr Williams to argue that Sharia law can be used to help govern issues like family disputes and the sale of financial products.
Lord Phillips said: "It is possible in this country for those who are entering into a contractual agreement to agree that the agreement shall be governed by law other than English law."
Therefore, he said, he could see no reason why Sharia law should not be used to settle disputes in this country.
He said: "There is no reason why principles of Sharia law, or any other religious code, should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution."
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
btt
Why has there never been all this concern for any other religious entity to have the right to live under its own laws rather than those which rule all other citizens of a nation, I wonder? What would all these people calling for Muslims to be allowed to live under sharia law say, if, for example, independent Baptists wanted to impose their strictures on their own followers? I’d love to see the scenario arise, just to hear what those who call for sharia for Muslims would say now.
A good point of departure, in my opinion, would be when they did away with treason as a crime.
That's a very good point you make, it was done away with in 1998 just after Tony Blair got in here.
I never know why Americans admired Tony Blair the guy is a traitor himself, him and his government done everything they possibly could to destroy what was left of the old Britain and it's Christian values, he's one of the reasons this ugly sharia law keeps crawling out of the sewer into the news lately.
At least in America you're a nation of gun owners should the s*** hit the fan.
Religious courts are considered a form of arbitration court. For example, rabbinic courts in New York are permitted to arbitrate matters between Jews who have agreed to submit themselves to its decisions (contracts, property distribution in divorces, etc.). HOWEVER, and here’s the significant point, their decisions are still subject to the laws of the State of New York (or whatever state they’re in) and also cannot violate federal laws or the Constitution.
The big difference with sharia is that Islam regards itself as both a religious and political governance system, and therefore does not accept the laws of whatever state or country it is in. Therefore, accepting sharia courts would mean not simply the arbitration of contractual disputes within a religious framework, but the imposition of an entirely different legal system.
I think very few people really understand the difference.
Throwing out a thousand years of English common law governing contracts shouldn’t be a problem.
We can replace it with American Howdy Doody precepts judged by Clarabell, Flub-A-Dub, Mister Bluster and the Peanut Gallery.
Can you still draw and quarter judges in England?
If you want to live under barbarism and ignorance, go back to the crapholes you left.
No,but before long they'll find a way to draw and quarter *anyone* in England who refuses to pray on Friday.
“Pink Floyd had it pegged 30 years ago... Whoa!”
God had it pegged when the first one was born: “: And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction.
12: And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren. “
Genesis 16:11
“As the father of two wonderful daughters, I hope you ladies will send this announcement far and wide to all your friends.”
I’ll have to ask my husband’s permission to do that. *SMIRK*
This is going to every military woman I know. And I know a lot of them. ;)
“A furore muslimnorum libera nos domine!”
Muslims in Britain must be able to live under Sharia law, says top judge
All Muslims in Britain must live under Sharia law, says top judge
Everyone in Britain must must live under Sharia law, says top judge
Everyone in the World must must live under Sharia law, says top judge
That is what the outraged want to believe the article implies. It does not.
The British people, like most descendants of white, Christian cultures, have been taught that their ancestors and their history are wicked and are their values are to be discarded. In their place, the British are expected to practice "tolerance and diversity", and to welcome people from other lands and other cultures. But those people don't practice "tolerance and diversity" themselves, they merely demand it of the British.
So each year, the British people recede a little, concede a little, and eventually will simply go out of existence as the majority population of their own nation.
Don't be daft.
You don't like my post: (1) you can enter into a contract with Jim Rob to pay him to ban me from his private site due to Masonic bylaws or something, or (2) you can hand a silver dollar to a hit man and forma verbal contract to have me killed Creole style.
(1) is legal in America and Britian....(2) is not.
Both are contracts among private citizens, and they can be defined by whatever logic/rules/religion/mysticism you want. But they do not supercede the law of the land.
"It's a foot in the door."
Hello? If people in British society are IN BRITAIN and willing to enter such a ridiculous contract (for 'forced' marriage, tithes for mosques, whatever***) then THEIR WHOLE BODY IS IN THE DOOR....
For crying out loud, freedom to choose is a two-way street. And people can choose to give up lots of their freedoms voluntarily.
What do you want? A chief justice coming out and saying that any voluntary contract for payment which excludes interest and appears to be drafted similar to rules of Islam is illegal? What next? Voluntary direct deposit authorizations to the Anglican church are also illegal?
*** There was an identical hubbub in an Arlington, Texas mosque recently about a mooslimb divorce settlement where the woman had signed an islamic pre-nup which said if she filed she'd get nothing. She admitted that she had entered into it unforced, so the judge upheld the prenup. I don't have time to look for the link....it's under Islamic Society of Arlington Texas.
Happy 4th! Enjoy our Republic of freedom for even peolpe we don't like to do dumb things!!!!
BINGO!!!!!!!
Sorry for the typo, I tried to combine two sentences and failed! LOL!
By conservatives you mean liberal kids and propellor hats who are now scared.
Interestingly enough, in capitalist societies bribery and cooption are very easily accomplished, infinitely more so than in the middle east. Remember Saddam’s son with their uhauls full of $100’s? Didn’t do them much good in crazyland because money doesn’t get you much if there are no outlets to spend it. On our side of the Meditterranean? Oh boy, if I was a Middle Eastern guy who loved my Middle East and wanted a big future for it, I would be stuff pockets right and left. You bet your ass I would. These clowns are bought and paid for with Islam Oil Money.
I say, Off with his head.
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.