The Ontario situation is very similar, Judy (and anyone else who is interested).
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/islam/shariah-law.html On 11-09-08 3:09 PM, Judith Evans wrote:
In my view, Lawrence, your blog posts do not count as a reply to any of my points. Let me reply to *your* points, in your email, now. “The sharia courts operating in Britain, will hear and pass legally binding judgment on cases involving divorce, financial disputes, and even domestic violence <<<<<<<<< Let me quote from the very Daily Mail article you quote: ******************* In Britain, sharia courts are permitted to rule only in civil cases, such as divorce and financial disputes. ******************* And let me explain the divorce point. Sharia courts can deal only with divorce in an Islamic marriage, can only end -- or not -- a Muslim marriage. (They make this clear.) Muslim/Islamic marriages contracted in the US are not recognised by UK law, a civil marriage must be contracted if a couple wish to be regarded as legally married. If a couple married by civil and Muslim ceremony seek a divorce, the Sharia court can only grant (or not) a Muslim divorce. So, a couple would have to seek a civil divorce also. (The Beth Din is in a similar position.) Nonetheless, full prior agreement by both parties is required. "Legally binding" here is, then, an interesting concept. How, Lawrence, do parties to a Muslim marriage in the US get a divorce from the Muslim marriage?Financial disputes can indeed be decided by the sharia courts/tribunals. This seems so uncontentious to me as to be hardly worth discussing.You say (Daily Mail again) ************** “In one recent inheritance dispute in Nuneaton, a Muslim man's estate was spit was between three daughters and two sons with each son receiving twice as much as each daughter – in keeping with sharia law. ************** I can't find this case. What did the will say? and even domestic violenc <<<<<<<<<this is of course dodgy in the extreme. The sharia courts/tribunals have no, repeat, no, jurisdiction in criminal matters. They also can only hear cases and issue rulings with the consent of both parties.So, what's going on here? It seems that the tribunals are, in conjunction with the police, acting as mediators/arbitrators. Without a specific case or cases I can't really say any more except that the police may be at fault here, one point apart. Any ruling they make on this cannot be legally binding. Judy Evans, Cardiff, UK --- On Thu, 8/9/11, Lawrence Helm<lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: Lawrence Helm<lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Sharia Law and Britain's decline To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thursday, 8 September, 2011, 18:54 Judy, I hadn’t intended to specifically reply. I thought my notes were covering the issues adequately. The one “point” I see in your note had to do with my comment “not from what I read elsewhere” or something like that. I haven’t time to research everything I’ve read, but such an “elsewhere” was in the note of mine you referenced (by reference) when you ex cathedra declared me non responsive: “The sharia courts operating in Britain, will hear and pass legally binding judgment on cases involving divorce, financial disputes, and even domestic violence. But, it will not end there. According to the Daily Mail, sharia court officials have said, that they hope, “[…] to take over growing numbers of 'smaller' criminal cases in future,” and extremist clerics have already asserted their aims to establish sharia law for everyone in Britain. Only yesterday, the Sun newspaper showed a video of radical clerics announcing plans to take over Britain: “It may be by pure conversion that Britain will become an Islamic state. We may never need to conquer it from the outside. “This, among other similar pronouncements, was made at a rally billed as a debate on whether the West had ‘learned the lessons’ of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Apparently, we have not. “Sharia law regards women as inferior to men, and non-Muslims as inferior to Muslims, and it demands the execution of homosexuals. Sharia courts in Britain have already tried cases in domestic violence, and have issued no punishments beyond requiring the abuser get mentoring from Muslim elders and to attend anger management classes. In my opinion, this is an entirely unacceptable judgment for those who inflict violence on women. According to the Daily Mail, again: “In one recent inheritance dispute in Nuneaton, a Muslim man's estate was spit was between three daughters and two sons with each son receiving twice as much as each daughter – in keeping with sharia law. “The establishment of sharia law in Britain, even on a minor scale, not only undermines British law and culture of equality ‘under the law,’ with cases judged by a jury of one’s peers, but is implicitly menacing to people of all non-Muslim religions, atheists, conservatives, women, homosexuals, and people of all racial and ethnic backgrounds.” [http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3522] Lawrence From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Judith Evans Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 10:14 AM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Sharia Law and Britain's decline I made points, Lawrence. I invited a reply. Your post is not responsive. --- On Thu, 8/9/11, Lawrence Helm<lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: Lawrence Helm<lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [lit-ideas] Sharia Law and Britain's decline To: "Lit-Ideas "<Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Date: Thursday, 8 September, 2011, 17:02http://www.lawrencehelm.com/2011/09/sharia-law-britain-decline.html Lawrence------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
