Sharia already in Britain

[Skybird]

hm. We need to wait and see. Different to what usually is said, employers love high unemployment. It gives them more power over employees and helps to reduce the wages as long as the state does not intervene and makes them paying compensation in form of changed tax patterns.

[UnderseaLcpl]

W........T........F..........??????

What the hell are the Brits thinking!? Is there no seperation of church and state!? Why not have Christian courts and Buddhist courts and Scientologist courts!? Why have a court system at all!!!? Where is STEED and why isn't he ranting about this right now!?

I swear to all that I hold dear, if they ever do something like this in the states I'm going to revolt.

[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

W........T........F..........??????

What the hell are the Brits thinking!? Is there no seperation of church and state!? Why not have Christian courts and Buddhist courts and Scientologist courts!? Why have a court system at all!!!? Where is STEED and why isn't he ranting about this right now!?

I swear to all that I hold dear, if they ever do something like this in the states I'm going to revolt.

Technically the UK only has a partial seperation of church and state. The Queen is not only the head of state but also the head of the Church of England. There is also only partial seperation of the judiciary and the government through the office of lord chancellor, although this has been modified in the last few years somewhat, not too sure what the situation is though. State run schools also have Church of England prayer and religeous assembly, but this is not rigidly enforced and in most schools its merely a formality (in my secondary school it happened once in a blue moon) Children can opt out if their parents object; this is somewhat different from a church run school or Catholic school.

In practice though, a speration of sorts works by convention, though, as with many things in the British state the potenial remains, its never taken advantage of.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by mrbeast

Technically the UK only has a partial seperation of church and state. The Queen is not only the head of state but also the head of the Church of England. There is also only partial seperation of the judiciary and the government through the office of lord chancellor, although this has been modified in the last few years somewhat, not too sure what the situation is though. State run schools also have Church of England prayer and religeous assembly, but this is not rigidly enforced and in most schools its merely a formality (in my secondary school it happened once in a blue moon) Children can opt out if their parents object; this is somewhat different from a church run school or Catholic school.

In practice though, a speration of sorts works by convention, though, as with many things in the British state the potenial remains, its never taken advantage of.

Thank you for the explanation.

Still, I'm concerned. What if someone does take advantage of the potential to get church into the state? I'd prefer to eliminate the possibility altogether and strictly prohibit the state from endorsing or prosecuting any religion.

The U.S. is not immune to religion seeping into state affairs, but I think it is a lot less susceptible because of American ideologies. Thank God for the nutjobs that endlessly debate whether or not prayer in school should be allowed, and the ones that condemn the Pledge of Allegiance because the word "God" is in it. No system is perfect (not even mine, I slipped a "Thank God" in there) but simply allowing the church to have anything to do with the state invites complications upon a state, and in the worst case, theocracy.

[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

Thank you for the explanation.

Still, I'm concerned. What if someone does take advantage of the potential to get church into the state? I'd prefer to eliminate the possibility altogether and strictly prohibit the state from endorsing or prosecuting any religion.

The U.S. is not immune to religion seeping into state affairs, but I think it is a lot less susceptible because of American ideologies. Thank God for the nutjobs that endlessly debate whether or not prayer in school should be allowed, and the ones that condemn the Pledge of Allegiance because the word "God" is in it. No system is perfect (not even mine, I slipped a "Thank God" in there) but simply allowing the church to have anything to do with the state invites complications upon a state, and in the worst case, theocracy.

It's an anomally in a modern democracy and I think we are moving slowly towards a separation, but like so many things in the British state, its very very complex; a result of several hundred years of slow evolution. Its one of those things that on paper shoudn't work but in practice, somehow manages to. Take prayer in state schools for example, you would think it might have the effect of indoctrinating children to be christians; yet the UK has one of the most secular societies in the western world!

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

W........T........F..........??????

What the hell are the Brits thinking!? Is there no seperation of church and state!? Why not have Christian courts and Buddhist courts and Scientologist courts!? Why have a court system at all!!!? Where is STEED and why isn't he ranting about this right now!?

I swear to all that I hold dear, if they ever do something like this in the states I'm going to revolt.

Islam knows no secularism, and does not accept it - something that many Westerners stubbornly ignore. In principle, Islam is totally intolerant to everything that is not itself - this is where it'S brute force and energetic drive to expand at all costs, by all means, derives from. It simply does not accept that principle for itself, nor recognizes it in others - it just abuses it for its own purposes if it meets it in others, and kills it once it is on full control. Secularism and democracy are only trains it temporarily boiards to gain legitimation that cannot be attacked by democracies, and winning in power - and then it leaves that train behind at burns it, turning into the totalitarian monoculture that the Quran as a whole demands.

This is what makes our constitutions so very vulnerable to Islam, because they base on the separation of church and state, and grant - basing on that principle - the freedom to practice religion freely. Islam claims exactly that right for religious freedom - and in fact pushes it's political agenda of Islamisation against the constitution allowing it that freedom, because it does not separate between religion and freedom. That way policies get protected by the guarantee of free religion, and thus are almost forbidden to be questioned, critizised or attacked that way. Afterwards only that freedom is accepted anymore that does not question the overruling superiority of Islamic definition of freedom (and that is the absence of anything non- or anti-islamic). You can't just feed only your finger or just your hand or just your arm - in all three cases it ends with your whole body being eaten. the mistake of yours already begins when you raise a hand to make a friendly wavering gesture.

As a criticil Benedictinian monk here in Germany just had said:

"The Christian says to the Muslim: 'We allow you to build mosques in the West, and then you allow us to build as many chruches in your countries' Replies the Muslim: 'No, we build mosques in your countries, and you are not allowed to build any churches in our country.' That is our religion."

That is the law and rule of Islam: no multiculturalism that is no discrimination in reality. No peaceful coexistence that is no preparation for later subjugation. No cease-fire that is no preparation for latter continuation of conquest. No peace as long as there is something left that is not Islamic. that is no crazy idea by some fundamental terrorists - that is Islam's core and essence, based in the Quran itself. and the Quranic Islam is the only there is that qualifies for that label. Evertyhing else is just western intellectual inventions and self-induced fantasies. Like islam does not recognize the concept of secularism, most westerners do not understand the originally fundamentalistic nature of islam. Non-fundamentalism in islam is not the rule, but is the departure from the Quran.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

I swear to all that I hold dear, if they ever do something like this in the states I'm going to revolt.

Well you better start revolting as the United States has recognized arbiration courts since 1925.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Arbitration_Act

This really is nothing to get your undies in a twist about. Arbitration is a valid way of handling disagreements.

No conspiracy. In the case of the original poster a voluntary arbitration tribunal has been formed to arbitrate according to religious teachings. This is hardly a unique organization.

Here is a christian arbitration group

http://www.bluestratus.net/servlets/...%20Clauses.pdf

This organization advises people on how to put religious conditions on contracts. Don't hear anyone screaming about this one though.

P'SHARA Jewish Dispute Resolution, Inc. is a jewish arbitration organization. Anyone complaining about that one? Did not think so.

But at the mention of Islam, people get suddenly so concerned. I wonder why?

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by Platapus

But at the mention of Islam, people get suddenly so concerned. I wonder why?

I dont, its not like the threat to our culture is imaginary.

[joegrundman]

Although I'm British, I haven't actually lived in the UK since 2003, so when I stumbled on this article i was surprised.

In a rare event, a subsim GT discussion has provided illumination and a sense of perspective

thanks very much

joe

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

I dont, its not like the threat to our culture is imaginary.

But the threat is not by Muslims though. The threat to our society are criminals who happen to be Muslim.

You might want to check your logic there.

Even if the case can be made that terrorists are Muslims, that does not mean that Muslims are terrorists.

There are significantly more Muslims who mean us no harm than there are Muslims intending to do us harm.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by DanD

Dear Americans friends,
I don't know how to tell you this but American courts enforce Sharia law as well, Texan courts even:

„Sharia already in Texas“, so to speak
http://www.2ndcoa.courts.state.tx.us...pinionID=14601
The parties entered into a contract that provided for Sharia arbitration; the court considered challenges to the arbitral process, and upheld the awards.
via
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2...tml#1202454061
with comment:
„And of course the application of Sharia law was indeed a perfectly normal matter. American courts are governed by American law, but American law has long provided that parties to contracts can provide for alternative dispute resolution mechanisms (such as arbitration). American law has likewise long provided that some contractual disputes would be resolved with reference to foreign law, especially when the law is expressly provided for by the contract. It doesn't matter whether the arbitration or the foreign law is secular or religious -- secular and religious rules are treated basically equally, on the principle that the parties' contractual choices should be honored unless some extraordinary circumstance makes it unfair to do so.“ http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2...tml#1202454061

Despite the tensions between Islamic rules and Western convictions, Islamic law is generally applicable on certain levels in all Western countries and enforced by all Western courts. The rules of International Private Law may lead to the result that the foreign law of an Islamic country is applicable. The freedom of contract as a basic principle of private law allows you to agree upon the application of Islamic law within the limits of the public order.

Originally Posted by Platapus

Well you better start revolting as the United States has recognized arbiration courts since 1925.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Arbitration_Act

This really is nothing to get your undies in a twist about. Arbitration is a valid way of handling disagreements.

No conspiracy. In the case of the original poster a voluntary arbitration tribunal has been formed to arbitrate according to religious teachings. This is hardly a unique organization.

Here is a christian arbitration group

http://www.bluestratus.net/servlets/...%20Clauses.pdf

This organization advises people on how to put religious conditions on contracts. Don't hear anyone screaming about this one though.

P'SHARA Jewish Dispute Resolution, Inc. is a jewish arbitration organization. Anyone complaining about that one? Did not think so.

But at the mention of Islam, people get suddenly so concerned. I wonder why?

I have been pwned


I may still revolt anyway. just for fun

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

I may still revolt anyway. just for fun

Spoken like a true Jeffersonian.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

I dont, its not like the threat to our culture is imaginary.

Threat to culture?

The biggest threat to traditional English culture is the lack of morris dancers and
the preference the young have for coffee and hamburgers over tea and scones.