Archbishop of Canterbury calls for Sharia law to operate in Britain

Originally posted by Chaoticar

This raised the prospect of Islamic courts in Britain with full legal powers to [...] prevent finance firms from charging interest.

If we have a choice over which legal system we can have a Civil Court case heard under, then this raises an interesting idea in my mind of the question of avoiding bad credit debts or bankrupcy...

We need to distinguish the difference between Civil and Crown law

I'm pretty certain that Sharia would only be allowed to apply to civil-legal matters such as marriage, financial, or other legal-contractual cases.

Any crown-legal case (crimes against the person or state etc) will be still under the jurisdiction of British law and tried under such

[edit on 8-2-2008 by citizen smith]

If we allow Muslims to be judged by Sharia Law then must we in turn then allow Hindu's to use Hindu Law, Catholics Catholic Law etc etc.

As a result we would see British society breaking up into segmented pockets of races and creeds and the break up of Britain as a whole.

Any changes to British Law should be a natural process which reflect the changes in British society and not the enforcement of a set of rules and values that the vast majority of British people have no desire for.

Originally posted by Freeborn
Any changes to British Law should be a natural process which reflect the changes in British society and not the enforcement of a set of rules and values that the vast majority of British people have no desire for.

Technically you can have a civil-case heard under any set of laws...I could request that a building contract dispute be heard under French, Indian, US or Sharia law and state that in the contract between myself and my client if I wished, even though the case will be heard in a British court.

The laws that govern society, the criminal offence kind, are enforced by the Crown...there is a big difference between the two. No other legal system can overrule Crown law, not even Sharia



[edit on 8-2-2008 by citizen smith]

I'm sure even muslims don't want this law, I don't anyway!!!! Especially if it end ups like Saudi Arabia.

I think people forget about the actual muslims, does the majority even want this? We can't just assume it like most actually want this.

[edit on 8-2-2008 by _Phoenix_]

Originally posted by citizen smith
Technically you can have a civil-case heard under any set of laws...I could request that a building contract dispute be heard under French, Indian, US or Sharia law and state that in the contract between myself and my client if I wished, even though the case will be heard in a British court.

The laws that govern society, the criminal offence kind, are enforced by the Crown...there is a big difference between the two. No other legal system can overrule Crown law, not even Sharia



[edit on 8-2-2008 by citizen smith]

The Archbishop is calling for some Official/ Legalised status to be given to these types of court, which present operate INFORMALLY- the leap in doing so is a grave one, and one which I doubt most muslims would support.........

[edit on 8-2-2008 by blueorder]

reply to post by blueorder


40% do, according to Government polls qouted on the BBC today:

BBC

reply to post by stumason


You keep repeating they are immigrants but they have been here for the past 40-50 years and their 2-3 generations have been bought up here in UK.So i dont think we can really label them as 'immigrants' anymore and we should take them as natural British citizens.

Otherwise we will have to put the blacks in the same mix aswel.

oh for the love of god let me explain.

the number one method of control is distraction,whenever the government wants ti supress something they use an emotive subject such as this to distract you from the real news they dont want you to hear.

the arcbishop is a crony for the government and he is simply following thier orders to stir up a bit of contraversy and thus eat up valuable news space and distract us from the failings of the government he is working for.

the chruch of england isnt a religion,it was created by the state for the state and any sincere religious person would give it no respect whatsoever.

Originally posted by Attari
You keep repeating they are immigrants but they have been here for the past 40-50 years and their 2-3 generations have been bought up here in UK.

To delude yourself into believing they have been here for that long is erroneous. Many are not immigrants, granted, but many are. Alot have come over very recently from Africa and Asia.

Besides, I was referring generally to immigrants as that is a major integration issue as well, what with the blatant open doors policy this Labour Government has and fits nicely into the general discussion about social cohesion.

Originally posted by Attari
So i dont think we can really label them as 'immigrants' anymore and we should take them as natural British citizens.

Otherwise we will have to put the blacks in the same mix aswel.

"The blacks?". How ironic that you have a go at me for apparently generalising, but do the same yourself.

Specify, what do you mean by "the blacks"?

Are we talking the flood of African immigrants heading into Europe and the UK now?

Or the already resident West Indian blacks that came here in the 50's and 60's?

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by blueorder

 

40% do, according to Government polls qouted on the BBC today:

BBC

fair point, the supposed tiny "minority".............

reply to post by Chaoticar



This whole Issue makes me laugh
we have tabloids and people jumping on the band wagon making it look like the whole Sharia law should be imposed and muslims want to impose all Sharia law.

yet no one seems to read the only things that the unofficial Sharia courts deal with are devorse and other small matters which arent considerd legal bindings by the British Legal system.

and the even more funny thing is this wasnt brought up for debate again by a Muslim but by a leader of Church.

for me i dont care either way, since the sharia law that is suggested is trival and deals with personal issues.

and second i am quite happy with the legal system (maybe not the 30+ days detention and so on.

some Views from Muslims in the UK

www.bbc.co.uk...

reply to post by stumason


From the BBC source you posted:

Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Ramadhan Foundation, welcomed Dr Williams's comments, saying they "further underline the attempts by both our great faiths to build respect and tolerance".

He added: "I believe that Muslims would take huge comfort from the government allowing civil matters being resolved according to their faith"

Ibrahim Mogra, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "We're looking at a very small aspect of Sharia for Muslim families when they choose to be governed with regards to their marriage, divorce, inheritance, custody of children and so forth.

I've underlined to indicate that what is being proposed is Sharia for Civil-Law matters, NOT criminal Crown-Law sentencing such as stoning or be-handing

reply to post by bodrul


So Bod, should Catholics also be allowed to cherry pick which British Laws they have to adhere to and be allowed to put their belief in papal infalability above British sovereignty.
What happens if or when there is a subsequent conflict of interests.

reply to post by Freeborn



and yet you seem to miss the Part
i dont Care either way,

also did you even read what parts they wanted?

posted by citizen smith from the bbc

government allowing civil matters being resolved according to their faith"

Ibrahim Mogra, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "We're looking at a very small aspect of Sharia for Muslim families when they choose to be governed with regards to their marriage, divorce, inheritance, custody of children and so forth.

if catholics want something like that Good on them not like its going to effect me on how they sort out their devorse or Inheritance and so on.

reply to post by ANOK


If you emigrate, you assimilate or keep your opinions to yourself. Why should a sovereign nation pander to the whims of an immigrant. You know what you're getting into before moving somewhere, and you don't expect them to change their culture to cater to your sensibilities.

[edit on 8-2-2008 by BlueRaja]

Originally posted by jon1
but you can't have one set of rules for one and one for another.
It riles me that Muslims can now claim benefits for more than one wife when it is against the law in this country to have more than one wife.

First thing that came to mind is this. I don't mean to quote you specifically jon1 but it goes along with what I'm about to say.

If I was in the UK now, I'd declare myself Rastafarian, and demand that I can legally smoke marijuana.

Maybe they'd start to think about how dumb an idea it is to have different sets of laws for different sets of people?

reply to post by bodrul


Bodrul, I've read and re-read it several times.

The thin end of the wedge springs to mind.

It also further alienates and isolates Muslims from the rest of British society.
Not a good thing from both perpectives.
If Muslims and Non-Muslims are to successfully co-exist then we need to have closer ties and relationships, not the opposite.

This is in no-ones best interests, apart fro m those who are seeking to further other agenda's.

Originally posted by Griff
If I was in the UK now, I'd declare myself Rastafarian, and demand that I can legally smoke marijuana.

Thats a valid point and one that is actually close to this issue. Could one claim religious discrimination because of this? Could one expect exemption from the law based on religious grounds?

Isn't this being discussed here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by jerico65


Yeah, but this is an ATS News article, whereas the other one is current events. Two articles can exist side by side in that format.