Sharia Law

cyfrifia wrote: ---------------- It's difficult to oppose something which is a religious belief and a way of life, exactly where the limits of Sharia law should be is the question. The worst and most divisive option is to have geographical limits, with Sharia law, it's dress and behavioral rules operating in some places and not in others.

The monolithic categorisation promoted by many Western ‘observers’ has led to a gross misunderstanding of Islam that can be attributed to their limited knowledge of the religion.


While it may be true that a secular bias has contributed to the failure of many non-Muslim scholars to understand Islam, the major pitfall has been in their ignorance of Islam as a religion that could be and is interpreted in many ways.


Although Islam may appear to be monolithic, its form and expressions vary from one Muslim to another, and from group to group, etcetera


How is Islam, and especially sharia, to be understood? There are a several factors that can influence a Muslim’s understanding of Sharia: ---- Sociological, cultural (not simply religious) and intellectual factors — the “aesthetics of reception” — are significant in determining the forms and style of interpretation.

Aesthetic reception means “how a discourse, oral or written, is received by listeners or readers”.
In the case of Islam, this refers to the reception of the Koran. ------ It refers to an individual’s perception of each level of culture that corresponds to a social grouping, at every phase of historical development. ---- Sharia developed in response to historic challenges.


People are influenced by the different (new) social, political, and scientific environments in which they live.
It is for this reason that there are various schools of jurisprudence, which differ from one another on very many questions and rulings.

Various Koranic prescriptions even relate to the practices of pre-Islamic society and responded to some social circumstances of the era. These practices evidently no longer have the same social implications.

While people dismiss the idea of Sharia law in the UK, it slowly becomes more established. Bit like the poppy crop in Afghanistan, despite all the talk it keeps on growing.

cyfrifia wrote:While people dismiss the idea of Sharia law in the UK, it slowly becomes more established. Bit like the poppy crop in Afghanistan, despite all the talk it keeps on growing.

Afghanistan is thought by many to be a country well on its way to becoming the world’s first true narco-state. The poppies, which provide huge profits in one of the world’s poorest countries, also play a large part in the corruption that plagues Afghan life at every level, from district to national government.


The subject of bumper opium harvests ‘talk’ bears no comparison with or reasonable link to understanding the ideas or the construction of Sharia law in the UK.

Perhaps we don't want to understand "the ideas or the construction of Sharia law in the UK." The wider comparison is, that effort and talking is misplaced if it doesn't properly address or solve the problem.

cyfrifia wrote:Perhaps we don't want to understand "the ideas or the construction of Sharia law in the UK." The wider comparison is, that effort and talking is misplaced if it doesn't properly address or solve the problem.

Indeed, which is a good reason to avoid "uninformed" speculation, hypothesis and pontificating about Sharia law / courts in the UK. ----------- Concerns about the varied sharia interpretations in Muslim countries are often profound, with reasons running across the ' many shades of grey ' found in different communities and sectors.

A failure to recognise the massive diversity within Muslim communities compounds many a debate.

Your 'wider' comparison reply applies to universal problems ... per se.

Yes there is great diversity within Sharia law as applied in different countries, ranging from evil atrocity to prohibitions on education. There is nothing good within that range. Is there?

Watching the news earlier today and a 5 year old little girl has been the victim of a gang rape in India she is alive but poorly in hospital, the women were out in force just so sad !

Jeanie wrote:Watching the news earlier today and a 5 year old little girl has been the victim of a gang rape in India she is alive but poorly in hospital, the women were out in force just so sad !

A hideous crime; thought to be two offenders who left the young child for dead.


NOT Sharia: -------- In India, the legal system is based on English common law (except Goa, Daman and Diu, which follow a Civil Law based on Portuguese Civil Law)


Last month India passed a new bill containing harsher punishments, including the death penalty, for rapists.

Charly wrote:Panorama BBC1 at 8.30 Monday "Secrets of Britains Sharia Councils" has an undercover reporter investigating what really happens in the Sharia Councils.

It seems to be too inconvenient for government to find out about Sharia councils. The main complaint of the women featured in the program was that they want better organised Sharia councils.

cyfrifia wrote: It seems to be too inconvenient for government to find out about Sharia councils. The main complaint of the women featured in the program was that they want better organised Sharia councils.

What did you expect from a brief half-hour programme! There has been better previous coverage and relevant programmes on Channel4.


In reality, many of those dealt with by Sharia courts are from the most marginalised segments of society, with little or sometimes even no knowledge of their rights under British law. --- Many, particularly women, are pressured into going to these courts and abiding by their decisions.

Importantly, those who fail to make use of Sharia law, or seek to opt out, can be made to feel guilty and treated as apostates and outcasts.


The discriminatory nature of the courts is thought by many to be sufficient reason to bring an end to their use and implementation. ---------------Many of the laws that Sharia courts and religious tribunals aim to avoid have been hard fought for over centuries, in order to improve the rights of those most in need of protection in society.


In a civilised, fair society, shouldn't we believe that our people must have full rights and equality here in Britain under the law; ‘ One law for all ? ’

MJH posted:

‘ One law for all ? ’

Exactly!

If people of any religion wish to consult the leaders of their religion on any matter, they are free to do so, but any advice or 'judgements' from such counsel should not have any leverage whatsoever on UK law.

As I understood it. These Sharia Council people are encouraging the 'breaking' of British Law by asking the 'litigants' to appear together in front of them?? That in itself is illegal and could be construed as 'conspiracy' in a crime or 'a contempt' of the British Courts. If so? Why is no action being taken against them to put a stop to such abuses?? Is this yet another lamentable, no backbone, cringing establishment failure - for which we will all pay for in the long run? Ridiculous situation - if not pathetic in the extreme.

What was most disturbing it seemed that the abuse of female partners seem to be acceptable, and that the female partner was asked to find out if they had somehow contributed.

This to me has put the lives of some of them in danger but also for the very future of women in this country if Shiria was to be forced upon us and became enshrined with the British law. This is not acceptable.

Words come easy.

It may be LESSONS WILL BE LEARNED before the next time it happens again in Rochdale????????

There does seem to be an expectation amongst Muslims that Islam and Sharia will rule the world before too long, a bit like the 'The end is nigh' sort of religious beliefs.

Consequently they may have little motivation for giving up such practices as child marriage and wearing the Hijab.

cyfrifia wrote:

Consequently they may have little motivation for giving up such practices as child marriage and wearing the Hijab.

Neither practice is mandatory for observance of Islam and is also not part of Sharia.

You are being mischievous.

The conversation has already established that neither beards nor hijabs are mandatory, although some may assume they are. Like the rest of the cultural practices embedded in Islamic societies, such customs are not going to disappear just because they are not mandatory. Is it mischievous to say that Islam expects to dominate? The question is, why should Islamic peoples adopt western values and practices, when they hope and anticipate that the west, it's culture and systems will be displaced by Islam?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10716844/Islamic-law-is-adopted-by-British-legal-chiefs.html