Philosophy Now Forum

Sharia. The only legal system where equality to women and gays under the law is denied.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:Sharia. The only legal system where equality to women and gays under the law is denied.

Regards
DL

Wrong.

Thanks for the useful correction.

Chastisement without correction shows the evil in your heart.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:

ForCruxSake wrote:

Greatest I am wrote: I see that you have not watched much in the way of news about Muslims coming out of the U.K..

Shall I link you to information on how Muslims are protesting to be able to use Sharia law and how they are creating no-go zones all over the U.K..

Regards
DL

And shall I link you to the majority of law abiding British Muslims, who are NOT protesting to use Sharia law and just going about their business being good citizens? Just because a minority of hardliners want Sharia law, they do not speak for the majority who are just going about their daily routine of being decent and happy British citizens. Seems to me the only Muslims you seem to know are those you detect ONLINE. Do you actually know any real Muslims? I don't care how many links you show me, I can testify to KNOWING many more Muslims, IN MY REAL LIFE, than your links can direct me to, who are just average citizens, with little to shout about other than the racism of constantly being told who they are, and how they think, or should think, by both misguided white people and fanatical Muslims.

As to "no go zones", in the British press, which we know is part of the problem for creating mass hysteria and escalation of all things "Muslim" or "terrorism" related, the mention of "no go zones" refers to the fact the police are not being called into communities with regard to crime. The communities are policing themselves. It's not that they are areas where people need to be afraid to go. It's more indicative of the fact that Muslims can be so law abiding they police themselves. It's no surprise. Our police force is not what it once was. Constant cuts and a decline in the quality of recruits is affecting it's performance.

If the self-policing oversteps the line, the police would soon step in. So far, they choose to remain aside as they claim they "can't get involved if no-one calls them for assistance". In current times, who can blame Muslims for not trusting the institutions and wanting to be left alone.

Your 'common or garden' Muslim is not someone to whom you would see links online.

Governments have police. Islam does not need it's own, and if Sharia is what Muslims are using as a guide, it is an inferior system as they do not believe in equality and always give Muslim women slaves the short end of the stick.

Equality before the law is the cornerstone of all good law and Islam and Sharia do not believe in equality.

Regards
DL

You seem to have ignored everything I said just to repeat your original point. That doesn't even count as a discussion let alone argument.

If you are suggesting that Sharia law is being used to self-police in the situation I have described above, you are just making that up. Nowhere has that been stated, not by me, nor any reputable British press.

You need to cite tenets from actual Sharia law to me to prove its inequality to me, but I have a feeling you are parroting trite generalities. If you are going to talk about the inequalities within Islam or Sharia at least do it from a place of experience or academic study, if you want to be taken seriously.

If you are right about enshrined Western values of equality before the law, how is it in the Westerm world women still receive lower wages then men, in equivalent jobs, and the law has not redressed this balance? Things aren't as equal as you think in the West. Some people are 'more equal' than others here and it's quite clear that the more money they have the 'more equal' they can be!

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

ForCruxSake wrote:

It wasn't tolerance. It was the blind self-interest of the separate powers that ruled a provincial country, some of whose loyalties lay with other European concerns present in India. When the East India Co. arrived in India, in the 1600's, it was simply to trade. In order to protect its interests, it brought over British soldiers, that grew into the East India Co.'s own private army. Some provincial rulers found the British militia to be highly efficient and effective and would pay for the use of British militia to protect their own interests from neighbouring rulers. Over the course of a couple of hundred years, the Indians pretty much benefited from the British presence and, as they were a divided nation subject to several provincial rulers, many of whom had good relationships with the British, they just didn't see British rule creeping in to take over until it was too late to resist. The militia, first brought into protect the interests of the East India Company, quickly developed beyond their initial remit to protect, to become a private corporate armed force, used as an instrument of geo-political power and expansion. It became the most powerful military force in the Indian sub-continent. To some extent, Indians brought it upon themselves. To a greater extent, the East India Co. was the first evil corporation to dominate a huge part of the world.

Those in power aren't the population and as a rule don't give a shit about anyone but themselves.

Agreed... but I'm uncertain as to how that impacts on what I have said?

ForCruxSake wrote:

IN MY REAL LIFE, than your links can direct me to, who are just average citizens, with little to shout about other than the racism of constantly being told who they are, and how they think, or should think, by both misguided white people and fanatical Muslims.

Why, if Muslims are just average citizens , do practically no parents other than Muslims want to send their child to a Muslim faith school? The unpopularity of Muslim faith schools among other sections of the population doesn't compare with RC faith schools and C of E faith schools.

Why, if Muslims are just average citizens do Muslims so often not speak English in the home and playground as compared with other faith groups?
I put it to you that the fault is not with Muslims who as you say are good citizens, but with Islam and its idolatry of Muhammad who in this day and age, in England, would be a criminal. It is remarkable that Muslims are good citizens, which in general they are, when Islam is so intransigent.

Can we hope that Islam can modernise itself from within the world of Islam?

ForCruxSake wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

ForCruxSake wrote:
And shall I link you to the majority of law abiding British Muslims, who are NOT protesting to use Sharia law and just going about their business being good citizens? Just because a minority of hardliners want Sharia law, they do not speak for the majority who are just going about their daily routine of being decent and happy British citizens. Seems to me the only Muslims you seem to know are those you detect ONLINE. Do you actually know any real Muslims? I don't care how many links you show me, I can testify to KNOWING many more Muslims, IN MY REAL LIFE, than your links can direct me to, who are just average citizens, with little to shout about other than the racism of constantly being told who they are, and how they think, or should think, by both misguided white people and fanatical Muslims.

As to "no go zones", in the British press, which we know is part of the problem for creating mass hysteria and escalation of all things "Muslim" or "terrorism" related, the mention of "no go zones" refers to the fact the police are not being called into communities with regard to crime. The communities are policing themselves. It's not that they are areas where people need to be afraid to go. It's more indicative of the fact that Muslims can be so law abiding they police themselves. It's no surprise. Our police force is not what it once was. Constant cuts and a decline in the quality of recruits is affecting it's performance.

If the self-policing oversteps the line, the police would soon step in. So far, they choose to remain aside as they claim they "can't get involved if no-one calls them for assistance". In current times, who can blame Muslims for not trusting the institutions and wanting to be left alone.

Your 'common or garden' Muslim is not someone to whom you would see links online.

Governments have police. Islam does not need it's own, and if Sharia is what Muslims are using as a guide, it is an inferior system as they do not believe in equality and always give Muslim women slaves the short end of the stick.

Equality before the law is the cornerstone of all good law and Islam and Sharia do not believe in equality.

Regards
DL

You seem to have ignored everything I said just to repeat your original point. That doesn't even count as a discussion let alone argument.

If you are suggesting that Sharia law is being used to self-police in the situation I have described above, you are just making that up. Nowhere has that been stated, not by me, nor any reputable British press.

You need to cite tenets from actual Sharia law to me to prove its inequality to me, but I have a feeling you are parroting trite generalities. If you are going to talk about the inequalities within Islam or Sharia at least do it from a place of experience or academic study, if you want to be taken seriously.

If you are right about enshrined Western values of equality before the law, how is it in the Westerm world women still receive lower wages then men, in equivalent jobs, and the law has not redressed this balance? Things aren't as equal as you think in the West. Some people are 'more equal' than others here and it's quite clear that the more money they have the 'more equal' they can be!

Nice red herring.

Better to be paid less than to be a slave. You do know that Muslim girls are sold to old men for wives. Right? You do know that is slavery. Right?

If you want to see the inequality od Sharia, just read the wiki page as it shows all the facts to prove my point.

Here are a few examples of Muslim policy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9bEkGd1AVo

Regards
DL

Belinda wrote:ForCruxSake wrote:

IN MY REAL LIFE, than your links can direct me to, who are just average citizens, with little to shout about other than the racism of constantly being told who they are, and how they think, or should think, by both misguided white people and fanatical Muslims.

Why, if Muslims are just average citizens , do practically no parents other than Muslims want to send their child to a Muslim faith school?The unpopularity of Muslim faith schools among other sections of the population doesn't compare with RC faith schools and C of E faith schools.

Are you challenging what I said? Because whatever you are asking has no bearing on what I said. It doesn't even make sense to me. Why should the 'averageness' of ordinary Muslims even reflect on the choices other people make? Or even on schools set up by people of the same faith, they may have little to do with???

The 'averageness' of the Muslim citizen reflects in the fact the most of them send their children to mainstream educational schools. They didn't ask for the Muslim schools. Many of the faith schools set up in the South of England, have been set up by a Saudi Arabian concern who are trying to impose their flavour of Wahaabi-ism on British Muslims, who are predominantly of Indo-Pakistani origins. Consequently, many Muslim parents don't want their children going to them either, preferring to teach the religion at home or a culturally specific mosque that caters to their needs.

That no-one else wants to go to a Muslim school reflects on their 'averageness', too, I suppose. (Desperately scratching to respond to how silly your question seems to me.Why, oh why did I even try to dignify your question with this response???)

Belinda wrote:Why, if Muslims are just average citizens do Muslims so often not speak English in the home and playground as compared with other faith groups?

Why does the average Brit child not speak in RP but British dialects that pertain to their part of the country? I find it particularly hard to understand Geordies.

I'm not sure which country you are in but you are talking about newly arrived immigrant children? No British-born Muslim I know only speaks their parental' tongue. Quite a few I know speak ONLY English, to their parents dismay.

If you are talking about up-North, Leeds, Bradford etc, then again, if the playground is predominantly full of kids speaking a language they speak at home, then of course they will play in that language. Once in class, it's back to English, where it matters educationally, You could make the same complaint about the French schools in London, where the kids speak English in the playground but are forced to speak French in class. That's life, I'm afraid, but those children will acclimatise if they want to get ahead in life. Their immigrant parents will strive to have them do better.

In this year's London school rankings, two of the top ranking state schools were in Newham, a borough with a largely poor Asian and African immigrant population. Other well-performing schools in London, who usually do better, are trying to understand how their teaching methods have fared so well, or if it's down to qualities the immigrant children possess. (Did you see what I did there? I backed up what I said with a fact instead of expressing an unsupported opinion.)

It's also a well known fact that children who speak another language, benefit from it, educationally, if only to have the chance to pick up another qualification at GCSE.

Belinda wrote:I put it to you that the fault is not with Muslims who as you say are good citizens, but with Islam and its idolatry of Muhammad who in this day and age, in England, would be a criminal. It is remarkable that Muslims are good citizens, which in general they are, when Islam is so intransigent.

Opening your statement, like a lawyer, doesn't help your argument any here. It lends no weight whatsoever to what you are saying but appears slightly ridiculous. I feel like I'm being very negative, so I'll try to be nice: it did make me laugh, so I thank you for that.

Back to the point... I'll think you find Jesus was a criminal in his day, and might be seen to be a lefty, hippy, communist to be treated with suspicion in the present day, particularly in the U.S. Anyone who challenges the cultural hegemony and its rules could be found to be criminal.

You talk of idolatry, which in Islam is forbidden. There are supposed to be no images or statues of Muhammed, and it is quite clearly stated he is 'a man', a special man, yes, because he was chosen to be a prophet. The prophet Muhammed should not be deified. Now let's take the sane criteria and apply it to Christ: pinned to a cross, which can be bought in stores across the world, is not just the son of God but has been stated to be so special he is his own father, too. Now that's idolatory! The fact that the prophet Muhammad still has the same kind of 'respect' and fascination as a rock or Hollywood movie star, is to be expected. He was someone special, after all.

Islam is no more intransigent than any other culture, or society that imposes rules on its citizens. It's transparent, unlike the culture of the Western world which appears be transparent, and safeguarding freedoms, but isn't and doesn't.

Muslims are allowed to disagree. In the 1990s a community in Hamburg appointed a woman imam, who was automatically disowned by the international community of Islam. "How can a woman be an imam when she can't even set foot in a mosque for one week every month?!!" they cried. A delegation of progressive Muslims went from Britain to show their support. I know this because I covered the story. There was no big press about it here in the U.K. There was no press at all. It simply wasn't relevant to the mainstream press. The community stood its ground. No fatwahs were issued. No one died. Of course, you won't know this story because what you seem to reflect, in some of your views of Islam, is the hate mongering, 'cultured' points of view touted by the likes of The Daily Mail and other less valued press. (Just to be clear, as you seem to misinterpret what I am actually saying, when I use the word 'cultured' I mean it in the same way bacteria is grown in a petri dish!)

Belinda wrote:Can we hope that Islam can modernise itself from within the world of Islam?

As much as we can hope that people like yourself actually get out into the world to understand the true experience of the 'average' Muslim, within their world of Islam, and try not to impose your thoughts on them, as to who they are and how they should be.

I've already given you an example of what happened in the 1990's but the truth is your 'average' British Muslim is practising the faith he was born into. If he's Pakistani, Iranian, Somalian, Sunni or Shia, that's his particular flavour of worship. No fatwah delivered by a cleric in Iran, may matter to a Pakistani Muslim. It can be heard and ignored. They tend to get on with their own thing.

When the fatwah was issued against Salman Rushdie, given the number of Muslins in Britain, several attempts could have been made on his life, rather successfully. A lot of cab drivers at the time were Asian Muslims and I had one jokingly tell me,"I could do him over on the way to the airport. A quick snuff job and body in the boot, nobody'd be any the wiser..." but nobody gave a tinker's cuss about it amongst your 'average' British Muslims, bar the odd derisory snort, despite what the papers would have you believe. The press hysteria actually 'stoked up' some Muslims to support the fatwah, initially, but that soon died down once the press circus moved on to other stories. Nobody really cared about it that much. The mainly white middle class folk did. I knew one Muslim academic, who defiantly ignored the fatwah, only to say, "I'm disappointed. It's not that good a read." (Look at that... I did it again! I tried to support my opinion with some sort of throwback to a historically relevant Islamically related event! It all helps to get a point across and if nothing else shows a first hand connection to something I am talking about. You should try it some time.)

You seem to lump all Muslims together, as frantically observing an Islam, which is incapable of being interpreted in any but one way. Just as Islam developed several different schools of thought, and countries followed suit to develop their own cultural 'flavours' of Islam, so do practitioners of the faith develop the way they practise Islam in their personal lives. Rules do die away, or are not applied, only to be magically resurrected when it suits a culture to do so, and people may follow suit or ignore if it doesn't seem to be relevant to them or their particular 'flavour' of Islam.

Technically, all Muslims MUST observe the Five Pillars of Islam, other than that they're sort of in the driving seat, with only their consciences to wrestle with, when they break faith. It's a religion that has particular ways of doing things but no one is going to tell on you for, say, doing a silent fart during your prayers. (Technically, that makes you unclean and the prayer redundant, you have to go ritually cleanse yourself and start the prayer again. The steadfast will do it, many will cheat!). At my son's primary school, where there's a large percentage of Muslim children, parents were given a chance to cast a vote on whether the school meals should use only halal meat. The school found a supplier who could provide cost effective halal meat and were willing to switch, if it made the parents happy. Many of the Muslims voted, no, because they thought quality might be compromised. It never went through. I doubt that fits in with your model of British Muslims and how they follow Islam.


The personal choices Muslims make are separate issues from being subject to Shaira Law, in a country whose laws don't follow suit. Islam can be, and is, a more personal experience for many 'average' Muslims, certainly in the bit of Britain, where I live. They may not be the best Muslims in the world, they're just very 'average'.

Greatest I am wrote:Thanks for the useful correction.

DL

Church law.
marriage law in most western countries.

Greatest I am wrote:

ForCruxSake wrote: You seem to have ignored everything I said just to repeat your original point. That doesn't even count as a discussion let alone argument.

If you are suggesting that Sharia law is being used to self-police in the situation I have described above, you are just making that up. Nowhere has that been stated, not by me, nor any reputable British press.

You need to cite tenets from actual Sharia law to me to prove its inequality to me, but I have a feeling you are parroting trite generalities. If you are going to talk about the inequalities within Islam or Sharia at least do it from a place of experience or academic study, if you want to be taken seriously.

If you are right about enshrined Western values of equality before the law, how is it in the Westerm world women still receive lower wages then men, in equivalent jobs, and the law has not redressed this balance? Things aren't as equal as you think in the West. Some people are 'more equal' than others here and it's quite clear that the more money they have the 'more equal' they can be!

Nice red herring.

Red herring??!

I'm not defending the right of Sharia Law to replace British jurisprudence. In fact I stated your average Muslim is NOT protesting to replace British law with Sharia Law, and challenging the fact you seem to think equality is enshrined in the West's way of living.

If you are going to reply to, or challenge, a post I write, at least have the sense to read it and understand what I am saying before you reply. Is there not a six year old in your home that can help you?

Greatest I am wrote:Better to be paid less than to be a slave. You do know that Muslim girls are sold to old men for wives. Right? You do know that is slavery. Right?

Not in my part of England. Sometimes marriage brokers might charge a fee, though, but that applies as equally to the man as a woman, who might be searching to find a spouse.

Greatest I am wrote:If you want to see the inequality od Sharia, just read the wiki page as it shows all the facts to prove my point.

Here are a few examples of Muslim policy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9bEkGd1AVo

Regards
DL

I don't need to, as I was neither arguing to support Sharia nor discussing it's iniquities. You hijacked my post and made it about that as that seems to be *your* agenda. More fool me for asking you to cite Sharia Law to prove what you were saying, because I knew you would be incapable of that.

I have to point out that citing a wiki page, that could have been contributed to by anyone, and run the risk of poor citations and editing, isn't actually what I count as citing Sharia Law. Maybe I should cite what my Muslim academic friend from London's SOAS has to say, and write, about Sharia Law, from the point of view of academic study... No wait!... Clever, you almost drew me in, again!

ForCruxSake challenged my opinion about everything I said regarding Muslims, and Islam.

I doubt if ForCruxSake would be happy to send his grandchildren or children to a local authority school where 70% of the children spoke no English at home. A native English speaking child would feel left out, and the teacher would have to spend an inordinate amount of time teaching Urdu speakers to think, socialise, and work in English. English is the global lingua franca, as Crux will be aware.

I dislike the presence of faith schools altogether. RC schools, for instance, how can a teacher teach critical thinking against RC doctrine? Not possible. Same goes for Muslim faith schools. Do you see secular parents moving deliberately to the catchment area of a Muslim faith school? No . I thought not.

I am a little surprised at your defiant tone, Crux. I am supposing that your politically correct attitude makes it hard to be challenged.I don't have to defend my Muslim acquaintance and observations or lack thereof, but I can assure Crux that my Muslim neighbours are friendly good neighbours, and the neighbourhood mosque is as welcoming as it can be especially as I myself am an infidel.

Politically correct people like yourself, Crux, are blind to the difficulties of integrating Muslims who quite possibly for reasons of Islamic doctrine don't want to be integrated . These matters need to be discussed openly without political correctness.

ForCruxSake, I refer to your latest post addressed to me. Regarding idolatry,this has little to do with statuettes or other images. It has to do with making a human and their ideas into a figure of perfection. Only God is perfect. Muhammad is not Allah, yet Muslims regard Muhammad as perfect.

True, Muhammad was a great innovator. politician, and reformer the spirit of whose ethics is relevant today. Muhammad however is not an aspect of God as is Jesus Christ, but is God's messenger. As messenger Muhammad should not be regarded as perfect.

Jesus of history was not an ordinary criminal as you said but was possibly an insurgent against a cruel and stupid Roman regime of occupation in Palestine. It was more likely that J was a wandering holy man with a charismatic way of preaching Judaism.

ForCruxSake wrote:[ They may not be the best Muslims in the world, they're just very 'average'.

Does this accurately represent the average Muslim?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9bEkGd1AVo

Before you answer, look at the stats.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... SPvnFDDQHk

Regards
DL

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:Thanks for the useful correction.

DL

Church law.
marriage law in most western countries.

You are one confused guy.

Check your meds and try sentences. Those are what adults use to communicate.

Regards
DL

Belinda wrote:ForCruxSake challenged my opinion about everything I said regarding Muslims, and Islam.

I doubt if ForCruxSake would be happy to send his grandchildren or children to a local authority school where 70% of the children spoke no English at home. A native English speaking child would feel left out, and the teacher would have to spend an inordinate amount of time teaching Urdu speakers to think, socialise, and work in English. English is the global lingua franca, as Crux will be aware.

I dislike the presence of faith schools altogether. RC schools, for instance, how can a teacher teach critical thinking against RC doctrine? Not possible. Same goes for Muslim faith schools. Do you see secular parents moving deliberately to the catchment area of a Muslim faith school? No . I thought not.

I am a little surprised at your defiant tone, Crux. I am supposing that your politically correct attitude makes it hard to be challenged.I don't have to defend my Muslim acquaintance and observations or lack thereof, but I can assure Crux that my Muslim neighbours are friendly good neighbours, and the neighbourhood mosque is as welcoming as it can be especially as I myself am an infidel.

Politically correct people like yourself, Crux, are blind to the difficulties of integrating Muslims who quite possibly for reasons of Islamic doctrine don't want to be integrated . These matters need to be discussed openly without political correctness.

Ouch! Again you assume too much... this time about my background. You don't ask questions but prefer to state what my experience must be.

My son's primary school is as diverse and culturally mixed as you can get in central London. The predominant ethnic mix was made up of Arab and Asian kids, Somalians, French and Italians, who flock to its trendiness possibly because it is the borough that houses many foreign embassies. It's mainly the French kids who struggled, language wise. We just got on with it. My son learned a slew of different international words which he took to be one language. I'm proud to say it's the diversity I grew up in that makes me respect cultures and jump to their defence. You may have some Muslim neighbour's, but if you threw a stick where I am, it would hit at least six Muslims. I know them. I grew up with them.

My tone may be defiant, in defending the 'average' Muslim, but you do your "friendly good" Muslim neighbours a disservice by patronising them as you decry their religion. Maybe I should inform the mosque you have been allowed to attend exactly what you think of Islam? Chances are they'd probably make you feel even more welcome than you deserve.