Mutley Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7233335.stm "Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4's World at One the UK had to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system. He said adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law could help social cohesion." Personally I think this would have the opposite effect. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 We already have Christian Papal Catholic Law Jewish Talmudic Law and Muslim Sharia Courts working in the UK fervent and devout followers of any of those religions will go to these religious courts to get an anullment or divorce as well as getting civildivorces through the courts. Otherwise they feel outcasrs ib their oiwn society and end up with limping marriages not recognised within their communities leaving children by second civil marriages illegitimate in the eyes of those societies etc As long as it works at that level I see no problem, its not new. There is another are where it should work as well. Mediation. If there is a dispute in your community, or even just amongst two individuals, what is wrong with going to an established and respected leader, a rabbi or a sheik and agree to them determining it Is it much different to the New Forest Commoners having their own courts to sort out disputes about the number of animals etc? The UK has lots of alternative "courts" or dispute resolution systems and dispute resolution bodies applying the law of the body or association, rather than English law. Its only when we start muddying the waters with race or religion that any one even thinks it is odd or starts to get worked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knoxville Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I dont know if this is the right law, but dont they stone women to death for being raped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyboarder Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Ignorance is bliss......... ; ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knoxville Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 When I want your opinion I'll give it to you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
localyokel Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 It never ceases to amaze me the draconian and completely f**king stupid religious laws that some countries abide by, and the Islamic ones seem to have some of the f**king stupidest ones out there. Thrown in jail for sitting next to a man in Starbucks They're welcome to follow any stupid law they want - hands lopped off for theft, stonings, honour killings, jailing women for the having the temerity to be raped. It just shows how stupid some people are - moving to a liberal open society and then wanting to drag it back into a moronic medieval backwater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeky boy Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 At the risk of sounding a bit mercenary, we may well be missing out on potential investment opportunity here On my way back through the Emirates recently I saw an advert for Sharia compliant investments & banking services Being a bit of a religious ignoramus I don't know the ins & outs of islamic financial laws, but given our offshore tax friendly status shouldn't we be offering some kind of financial products in this seemingly lucrative sector ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneArmedScissor Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 At the risk of sounding a bit mercenary, we may well be missing out on potential investment opportunity here On my way back through the Emirates recently I saw an advert for Sharia compliant investments & banking services Being a bit of a religious ignoramus I don't know the ins & outs of islamic financial laws, but given our offshore tax friendly status shouldn't we be offering some kind of financial products in this seemingly lucrative sector ? We already do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeky boy Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Oh good, they don't miss a trick these finance boys Better get some Halal grub on my menu We already do kosher, vegan & gluten free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 We already do kosher, vegan & gluten free What the hell's a glute? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 I think I can see what Williams is getting at - but I don't think he made his point very clearly if I understand him right. One example might be a devout Muslim who dies without making a will. I'm guessing that in this case the estate would be divided according to UK law, and not the rules of inheritance in Sharia Law. This might be an example where some citizens "do not relate well to UK law". It is easy to imagine a case such as this creating deep rifts and bitterness within a family, perhaps radicalising some, and creating anger at the 'system'. In areas such as this perhaps UK law ought to allow for some recognition of the applicability of the principles of Sharia Law in certain circumstances. For all I know it might already do so in a situation such as this, and perhaps the issue would be resolved by reference to the Human Rights Act or something of the kind. I haven't heard of a case such as this, and I think Williams would have to give some specific examples and actual cases to really make his point clear and persuasive. It is hardly new though for religious laws to not relate well to municipal law; long before the Reformation there were tensions between the Catholic Church and Crown, as can be seen by the various statutes of Praemunire at a time when England was a Catholic country. Ecclesiastical law might recognise a child born out of wedlock as legitimate even though this was not be recognised for the purposes of English law. It used to be that people entering religious orders such as monasteries would become subject only to the rules of the religious order, and would become 'civilly dead' - in effect they lost their political and civil rights under municipal law and were treated as if they died on entering the order. Those orders had their own jurisdictions and courts etc. and it seems if they wanted they could stone each other to death without it being an offence under municipal law. If that alternative were available I doubt so many would choose to become civilly dead and live solely under the Sharia Laws of their chosen sect. Maybe religious silos of this sort ought to be allowed. In any case such a notion doesn't seem as incompatible with the historical British legal system as some seem to make out. In fact Blackstone calls this part of the 'genius of English law': The civil death commences if any man .. enters into religion; that is, goes into a monastery, and becomes there a monk professed: in which cases he is absolutely dead in law, and his next heir shall have his estate. For.. such a monk, upon his profession, renounces solemnly all secular concerns . . . the genius of the English law would not suffer those persons to enjoy the benefits of society, who secluded themselves from it, and refused to submit to its regulations. A monk is therefore accounted civiliter mortuus [civilly dead] . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 It used to be that people entering religious orders such as monasteries would become subject only to the rules of the religious order, and would become 'civilly dead' - in effect they lost their political and civil rights under municipal law and were treated as if they died on entering the order. Those orders had their own jurisdictions and courts etc. and it seems if they wanted they could stone each other to death without it being an offence under municipal law. If that alternative were available I doubt so many would choose to become civilly dead and live solely under the Sharia Laws of their chosen sect. Maybe religious silos of this sort ought to be allowed. In my opinion, this would be a VERY dangerous opt-out. How many people might set up their own religious orders for nefarious purposes knowing that, whetever they did inside their 'monasteries'/'Ashrams' etc, they couldn't be prosecuted for it? Fleecing money from converts, abuse, rape, assault, child abuse, murder might all be legal as long as you do it to someone in your own religious order? Crazy stuff. To expand a little on the hypothetical example given above about sharia inheritance - what if sharia law said that the beneficiary of the will should receive 100% of the estate and the government said "OK, Muslims are exempt from capital gains tax as they cannot relate to that particular British law"? Would that be acceptable - effectively penalising people for not belonging to a particular religion? (Although the fact that UK law says that a Roman Catholic can never take the throne does provide a precedent). The bottom line is - if you don't want to live according to the laws of the country you are domiciled in then either move to somewhere where the laws are more to your taste or accept that you are going to face punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 To expand a little on the hypothetical example given above about sharia inheritance - what if sharia law said that the beneficiary of the will should receive 100% of the estate and the government said "OK, Muslims are exempt from capital gains tax as they cannot relate to that particular British law"? Would that be acceptable - effectively penalising people for not belonging to a particular religion? (Although the fact that UK law says that a Roman Catholic can never take the throne does provide a precedent). The bottom line is - if you don't want to live according to the laws of the country you are domiciled in then either move to somewhere where the laws are more to your taste or accept that you are going to face punishment. Dr. Williams wasn't talking about a seperate legal system for Muslims, just one that accounts for some of the cultural aspects of their lives. It being called Sharia 'law' is unhelpful in that it instantly implies different laws for different people, but it is actually much more a code of conduct covering all aspects of life rather than a legal system. Unfortunately, it is the stoning to death/cutting off hands parts we hear about, but those rules are not even followed in all Muslim countries and are at the rather extreme end of Sharia Law. What the Archbishop was actually getting at was things more along the lines of Islamic marriages not being recognised officially in Britain unless accompanied by a civil registration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 Dr. Williams wasn't talking about a seperate legal system for Muslims, just one that accounts for some of the cultural aspects of their lives. It being called Sharia 'law' is unhelpful in that it instantly implies different laws for different people, but it is actually much more a code of conduct covering all aspects of life rather than a legal system. Unfortunately, it is the stoning to death/cutting off hands parts we hear about, but those rules are not even followed in all Muslim countries and are at the rather extreme end of Sharia Law. What the Archbishop was actually getting at was things more along the lines of Islamic marriages not being recognised officially in Britain unless accompanied by a civil registration. Without wishing to sound racist, why should muslims be a special exception? Any religious wedding is not recognised officially in Britain without a civil registration - you have to sign the register in the church, I presume the priest/minister has a special legal status allowing him to officially register marriages - why couldn't an imam or some other official member of the muslim religion have the same legal status. But in that case why not confer the same rights onto head druids, mediums or jedi masters? Sorry but I don't think that your belief in middle-eastern fairytales (whether they are 1400 years old , 2000 years old or 3000 years old) should give you some kind of an opt out from various laws of a country. I'm an atheist - what do I get out of it? Laws should be secular and apply equally to all regardless of race, colour or creed (or lack thereof). Having special exclusions for people who believe in various supernatural beings can only be more divisive, not less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodger Posted February 8, 2008 Share Posted February 8, 2008 It never ceases to amaze me the draconian and completely f**king stupid religious laws that some countries abide by, and the Islamic ones seem to have some of the f**king stupidest ones out there. Thrown in jail for sitting next to a man in Starbucks They're welcome to follow any stupid law they want - hands lopped off for theft, stonings, honour killings, jailing women for the having the temerity to be raped. It just shows how stupid some people are - moving to a liberal open society and then wanting to drag it back into a moronic medieval backwater. "Saudi Arabia's Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, a police force of several thousand men charged with enforcing dress codes, sex segregation and the observance of prayers." This is the part that worries me, vigilanty groups acting on behalf of a sublevel of law and therefore outside of prosecution if they are allowed to do so. This business woman was lucky that her husband had high enough contacts, there are many that don't and can face long prision sentences, lashes or worse! There was another article I read that was about Basra, where Christian women who went to the university were threatened by men who wanted them to cover up or face punnishment! Women are being killed over religious observence! Therefore we do not want this law to take hold in a democratic society, these people want to come to the UK and the IOM, they therefore should follow the law of the country that they reside in and not try to impose their ways onto others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.