Log in

View Full Version : Sharia law in the UK...



uber-liberal
29th November 2006, 11:49
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...9/nsharia29.xml (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=Y3UZA1RZGTHK5QFIQMFSFGGAVCBQ 0IV0?xml=/news/2006/11/29/nsharia29.xml)

Sorry it's so long. If you can find a shorter URL for it, let me know.

Thoughts, comments?

Raisa
2nd December 2006, 08:02
Well, the Somali man said he didnt handle his shit according to Sharia law...it was his cultural laws they used.

I think it is not a bad idea.

The imperialists only use the law to ghettoize people, I dont think their law is any more superior to anyone elses and it is kind of inspiring to see people collectively over riding their "laws"

Jazzratt
2nd December 2006, 18:40
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 08:02 am
The imperialists only use the law to ghettoize people, I dont think their law is any more superior to anyone elses and it is kind of inspiring to see people collectively over riding their "laws"
Interesting you should mention 'ghettoisation' in the same, metaphorical, breath as championing a small ethnic group splitting from society into their own comunities, isolated from others and in this case impoverished whilst living under highly reactionary laws. Reeks of the ghetto to me.

Forward Union
2nd December 2006, 18:54
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 08:02 am
I think it is not a bad idea.

Maybe I have misunderstood. But are you saying that Sharia law is "not a bad idea"??

How can you say the amputation of hands or feet for stealing is justified? Stoning married men and women who commit adultery? The trafficking of women as sex slaves, and the execution of homosexuals?

If you honestly think that Sharia law making any form of progress is anything other than grotesque, then you should frankly be banned. And reconsider your allegiances. It's not a sign that people are rejecting the authority of the imperialists, it's a sign that some people want to see a tougher, more fascist society, with greater authorotarianism, and prejudice, of course, it's prejudice in your religions favour. Fuck you if you support that bullshit :angry:

Then again maybe I have misunderstood. I only had 2 hours sleep and lots of drugs :unsure:

Cryotank Screams
2nd December 2006, 19:13
Originally posted by Raisa+December 02, 2006 04:02 am--> (Raisa @ December 02, 2006 04:02 am) I think it is not a bad idea.

[/b]

Originally posted by wiki+--> (wiki)In accordance with the Qur'an and several hadith, theft is punished by imprisonment or amputation of hands or feet, depending on the number of times it was committed and depending on the item of theft and the situation.[/b]


Originally posted by wiki
In accordance with hadith, stoning to death is the penalty for married men and women who commit adultery. For unmarried men and women, the punishment prescribed in the Qur'an and hadith is 100 lashes.


Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, you can chastise them but not severely. Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner.

Archaic, barbaric, sexist, reactionary, and most of all complete bullshit!


dietary laws according to the sharia [email protected]
the prohibition of swine, blood, meat of dead animals and animals slaughtered in the name of someone other than Allah. slaughtering in the prescribed manner of tadhkiyah (cleansing) by taking Allah’s name. prohibition of intoxicants

I like my ham, and my booze, <_< .


homosexuality and the sharia law
Homosexuality, moreover, is an abomination and a grave sin. In Hadith, Muhammad clarifies the gravity of this abomination by saying: "Allah curses the one who does the actions (homosexual practices) of the people of Lut," repeating it three times; saying in another Hadith: "If a man comes upon a man then they are both adulterers." Here, he considered homosexuality tantamount to adultery in relation to the Shari’ah punishments because it is an abomination on the one hand, and the definition of adultery applies to it on the other hand.....As for lesbians, Muhammad said about them: "If a woman comes upon a woman, they are both adulteresses." The homosexual receives the same punishment as an adulterer. This means, that if the homosexual is married, he/she is stoned to death, while if single, he/she is whipped 100 times.

So I should recieve 100 lashes daily, that&#39;s not a bad idea to you?

Maybe you should read more on this law?

Redmau5
2nd December 2006, 19:34
Way too often, leftists defend Islamic reactionaries because they believe they&#39;re "anti-imperialist". I remember I was called an Islamophobe by an SWP member because I said Iran wasn&#39;t a democracy.

Fuck Islamic fundamentalism.

Fuck any kind of religious fundamentalism.

Keyser
3rd December 2006, 06:28
I remember I was called an Islamophobe by an SWP member because I said Iran wasn&#39;t a democracy.

Fuck, I know the British SWP more or less make excuses for Islamism and support Hizbullah in Lebanon and label any criticism of Islamic traditions or religious practice &#39;Islamaphobic&#39;. But I end up feeling a bit shocked that a SWPer labels you an &#39;Islamaphobe&#39; becuase you correctly describe Iran as a dictatorship and a oppressive Islamist hellhole.

I am not a SWP member, but I do know a few SWP members from the West London area on a personal basis and all of them, from the conversations I have had with them, are sick to death of the SWP&#39;s sucking the cock of Islamist fundamentalism. Many of them are now thinking of leaving and good for them, they will make the right decision if they do. The SWP has a lot of decent and genuine low level members, but the SWP leadership (John Rees, Alex Callinicos, Mike Gonzales, Chris Nieman etc...) have turned out to be reformist, reactionary supporting and authoritarian wankers.

bloody_capitalist_sham
3rd December 2006, 17:34
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 09:02 am
Well, the Somali man said he didnt handle his shit according to Sharia law...it was his cultural laws they used.

I think it is not a bad idea.

The imperialists only use the law to ghettoize people, I dont think their law is any more superior to anyone elses and it is kind of inspiring to see people collectively over riding their "laws"
Its a very bad idea, sharia law is fucking reactionary and patriachical.

How are you a leftist again?

Severian
3rd December 2006, 17:58
Originally posted by Love Underground+December 02, 2006 12:54 pm--> (Love Underground @ December 02, 2006 12:54 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2006 08:02 am
I think it is not a bad idea.

Maybe I have misunderstood. But are you saying that Sharia law is "not a bad idea"??

How can you say the amputation of hands or feet for stealing is justified? Stoning married men and women who commit adultery? The trafficking of women as sex slaves, and the execution of homosexuals? [/b]
Did you read the article? It doesn&#39;t mention any of those things happening in Britain.

Of course, that&#39;s because these courts don&#39;t have any official legal status or power to impose that kind of penalty. It&#39;s more like a system of voluntary arbitration.

Any proposal to give official status to Sharia law would of course be deeply reactionary: it&#39;s important to have one civil law code for everyone.

There may be all kinds of problems with these unofficial courts not mentioned in the article. And all kinds of good reasons to oppose them.

But that&#39;d have to be on the basis of what they actually do and how they actually function, not on the basis of a panic campaign about amputation, stoning, etc.

The Bitter Hippy
3rd December 2006, 22:18
it also mentions that "it is not sharia, its not religious" in the article.

It is also not imposed by the state. Somebody tell me the difference between this form of civil justice and how we propose to deal with violent/deviant people after the revolution?

This is a community of people coming together, agreeing their standards and keeping to them. These courts can&#39;t force the defendants to be there, they can&#39;t force the defendants to abide by their punishments. This is community action actually working.

The fact that the people engaged in it are not of a western/european background and value system is irrelevant: the principle and the way it is being carried out is.

I am just as critical of islam, religion and shari&#39;ah as the next commie, but i can see the framework as a useful idea.

Raisa
4th December 2006, 07:50
Originally posted by bloody_capitalist_sham+December 03, 2006 05:34 pm--> (bloody_capitalist_sham @ December 03, 2006 05:34 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2006 09:02 am
Well, the Somali man said he didnt handle his shit according to Sharia law...it was his cultural laws they used.

I think it is not a bad idea.

The imperialists only use the law to ghettoize people, I dont think their law is any more superior to anyone elses and it is kind of inspiring to see people collectively over riding their "laws"
Its a very bad idea, sharia law is fucking reactionary and patriachical.

How are you a leftist again? [/b]
I am against Shariah law, but it think it is interesting for our observance of how people can just disregauard a law of an established country and take it into their own hands....

Outside the box now...

bloody_capitalist_sham
4th December 2006, 16:13
oh okay, sorry :P

STI
6th December 2006, 05:52
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 08:02 am
I am against Shariah law, but it think it is interesting for our observance of how people can just disregauard a law of an established country and take it into their own hands....

Outside the box now...
Disregarding the law of an established country? Isn&#39;t that exactly what we, as revolutionaries, are pretty much required to do?

In response to your pretentious little statement at the end there, I think you should cut back on the fasting. Seriously, Mama Bear, as a friend I suggest you re-evaluate exactly where your head has gotten.

Comrade Wolfie's Very Nearly Banned Adventures
6th December 2006, 21:40
religion=baddd&#33;

fundemental religion = even worse&#33;

ATG
11th December 2006, 17:04
i don&#39;t get in Russia 15 percent of the population of muslims more then in the UK i think but in Russia things like Sharia law aren&#39;t even mentioned

Severian
11th December 2006, 17:54
Originally posted by STI+December 05, 2006 11:52 pm--> (STI @ December 05, 2006 11:52 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2006 08:02 am
I am against Shariah law, but it think it is interesting for our observance of how people can just disregauard a law of an established country and take it into their own hands....

Outside the box now...
Disregarding the law of an established country? Isn&#39;t that exactly what we, as revolutionaries, are pretty much required to do? [/b]
Yes, she&#39;s suggesting it&#39;s positive for that reason.

Now, does that make it automatically good? No. You gotta consider whether the new law is a step forward or backward compared to the old.

Johnny Anarcho
4th January 2007, 16:59
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 07:34 pm
Fuck Islamic fundamentalism.

Fuck any kind of religious fundamentalism.
What are you, spokesman for the National Front. Fundamentalism means practicing a religions fundamentals, its not the same thing as extremism.

Johnny Anarcho
4th January 2007, 17:01
Originally posted by bloody_capitalist_sham+December 03, 2006 05:34 pm--> (bloody_capitalist_sham @ December 03, 2006 05:34 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2006 09:02 am
Well, the Somali man said he didnt handle his shit according to Sharia law...it was his cultural laws they used.

I think it is not a bad idea.

The imperialists only use the law to ghettoize people, I dont think their law is any more superior to anyone elses and it is kind of inspiring to see people collectively over riding their "laws"
Its a very bad idea, sharia law is fucking reactionary and patriachical.

How are you a leftist again? [/b]
Not true, you dont have to follow it. Iran makes a new Sharia every day and you think it means we all follow them, bollocks.

Jazzratt
4th January 2007, 17:25
Originally posted by Johnny Anarcho+January 04, 2007 04:59 pm--> (Johnny Anarcho @ January 04, 2007 04:59 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2006 07:34 pm
Fuck Islamic fundamentalism.

Fuck any kind of religious fundamentalism.
What are you, spokesman for the National Front. Fundamentalism means practicing a religions fundamentals, its not the same thing as extremism. [/b]
:huh: YOu don&#39;t even know what fucking fundamentalism is do you? It&#39;s the following of a religion&#39;s "holy book" to the letter. So fuck it, because it advocates stoning me and my friends to death. Fuck all religious fundamentalism, it&#39;s not going to help us.

The fundamentals of most religions are also bad anyway, to whit: Don&#39;t let anyone else even think of straying from the path of "true" belief, Restrict all kinds of behaviour that don&#39;t need restricting, restrict the kind of behaviour that most people don&#39;t induldge in anyway.

THe only problem with this guy&#39;s post is that it didn&#39;t go far enough. Religion is the biggest shackle that we have put on our minds, often its morality holds back our science, especially in genetics. Who was it after all that came up with the &#39;playing god&#39; argument? The atheists? No. It is religion that holds us back, every attempt to better humanity is, for the most part, opposed by religion. It is true that you get progressive elements in religions, but they are not holding true to their own deluded system, they compromise on the very thing that keeps them believing yet they still insit on believing in a higher power, a fairy in the sky that sends lightning bolts.

The religious want ignorance, it helps them feed their disorder - it confirms their illogical belief system. Their god lives in our ignorance, everything unexplained becomes god&#39;s doing. When we discovered the reasons for lightning it no longer became god&#39;s righteous anger but a simple physical occurance. When we know of plate techtonics earthquakes no longer represent god&#39;s anger with the infidels. Every archeological discovery that confirms the theory of evolution is another nail in the coffin of the &#39;cosmic watchmaker&#39; argument&#39;s coffin. The start of the universe is still disputed so that is one of god&#39;s last refuges, but even that is becoming encroached on by the light of reason.

Johnny Anarcho
5th January 2007, 15:24
Originally posted by Jazzratt+January 04, 2007 05:25 pm--> (Jazzratt &#064; January 04, 2007 05:25 pm)
Originally posted by Johnny [email protected] 04, 2007 04:59 pm

[email protected] 02, 2006 07:34 pm
Fuck Islamic fundamentalism.

Fuck any kind of religious fundamentalism.
What are you, spokesman for the National Front. Fundamentalism means practicing a religions fundamentals, its not the same thing as extremism.
:huh: YOu don&#39;t even know what fucking fundamentalism is do you? It&#39;s the following of a religion&#39;s "holy book" to the letter. So fuck it, because it advocates stoning me and my friends to death. Fuck all religious fundamentalism, it&#39;s not going to help us.

The fundamentals of most religions are also bad anyway, to whit: Don&#39;t let anyone else even think of straying from the path of "true" belief, Restrict all kinds of behaviour that don&#39;t need restricting, restrict the kind of behaviour that most people don&#39;t induldge in anyway.

THe only problem with this guy&#39;s post is that it didn&#39;t go far enough. Religion is the biggest shackle that we have put on our minds, often its morality holds back our science, especially in genetics. Who was it after all that came up with the &#39;playing god&#39; argument? The atheists? No. It is religion that holds us back, every attempt to better humanity is, for the most part, opposed by religion. It is true that you get progressive elements in religions, but they are not holding true to their own deluded system, they compromise on the very thing that keeps them believing yet they still insit on believing in a higher power, a fairy in the sky that sends lightning bolts.

The religious want ignorance, it helps them feed their disorder - it confirms their illogical belief system. Their god lives in our ignorance, everything unexplained becomes god&#39;s doing. When we discovered the reasons for lightning it no longer became god&#39;s righteous anger but a simple physical occurance. When we know of plate techtonics earthquakes no longer represent god&#39;s anger with the infidels. Every archeological discovery that confirms the theory of evolution is another nail in the coffin of the &#39;cosmic watchmaker&#39; argument&#39;s coffin. The start of the universe is still disputed so that is one of god&#39;s last refuges, but even that is becoming encroached on by the light of reason. [/b]

Religion doesnt hold us down, Capitalism does. If anything religion is progressive. What got the Hebrews out of slavery in Egypt? Judaism. What helped to smash the Roman Empire? Christianity. What gave Arabian women their rights? Islam.

As a religious person, I can say that your view of religion is stereotyped and biased. Yes there have been terrible things done in the name of religion but that doesnt mean religion is to blame but that the person is to blame. The KKK for example, though they claim to be Christian, have greatly twisted Christianity. The same goes for the JDL with Judaism and al-Qaeda with Islam.

True that many religious conservatives have opposed change but they dont represent everyone. I&#39;m not here to preach but if these people want to live by a Sharia then that is their right to live as they choose, everyone should have the freedom to live as they please and who is anyone to prevent that from entering the Muslim community.

Jazzratt
5th January 2007, 18:06
Originally posted by Johnny Anarcho+January 05, 2007 03:24 pm--> (Johnny Anarcho @ January 05, 2007 03:24 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 05:25 pm

Originally posted by Johnny [email protected] 04, 2007 04:59 pm

[email protected] 02, 2006 07:34 pm
Fuck Islamic fundamentalism.

Fuck any kind of religious fundamentalism.
What are you, spokesman for the National Front. Fundamentalism means practicing a religions fundamentals, its not the same thing as extremism.
:huh: YOu don&#39;t even know what fucking fundamentalism is do you? It&#39;s the following of a religion&#39;s "holy book" to the letter. So fuck it, because it advocates stoning me and my friends to death. Fuck all religious fundamentalism, it&#39;s not going to help us.

The fundamentals of most religions are also bad anyway, to whit: Don&#39;t let anyone else even think of straying from the path of "true" belief, Restrict all kinds of behaviour that don&#39;t need restricting, restrict the kind of behaviour that most people don&#39;t induldge in anyway.

THe only problem with this guy&#39;s post is that it didn&#39;t go far enough. Religion is the biggest shackle that we have put on our minds, often its morality holds back our science, especially in genetics. Who was it after all that came up with the &#39;playing god&#39; argument? The atheists? No. It is religion that holds us back, every attempt to better humanity is, for the most part, opposed by religion. It is true that you get progressive elements in religions, but they are not holding true to their own deluded system, they compromise on the very thing that keeps them believing yet they still insit on believing in a higher power, a fairy in the sky that sends lightning bolts.

The religious want ignorance, it helps them feed their disorder - it confirms their illogical belief system. Their god lives in our ignorance, everything unexplained becomes god&#39;s doing. When we discovered the reasons for lightning it no longer became god&#39;s righteous anger but a simple physical occurance. When we know of plate techtonics earthquakes no longer represent god&#39;s anger with the infidels. Every archeological discovery that confirms the theory of evolution is another nail in the coffin of the &#39;cosmic watchmaker&#39; argument&#39;s coffin. The start of the universe is still disputed so that is one of god&#39;s last refuges, but even that is becoming encroached on by the light of reason.

Religion doesnt hold us down, Capitalism does. If anything religion is progressive. What got the Hebrews out of slavery in Egypt? Judaism. What helped to smash the Roman Empire? Christianity. What gave Arabian women their rights? Islam. [/b]
I can&#39;t comment on the slaves in Egypt but I&#39;ve got some questions about the others:
1) Why was the fall of the Roman Empire, the event that hailed western civilisation&#39;s decent into an age of ignorance which took decades, maybe centuries, to escape from?

2)Are you joking about Islam bringing women&#39;s rights to the Arab world? If not, may I ask precisly what you&#39;re smoking and where I can get some?

3) WHo is more likley to rise up gianst oppression - someone who believes that if they do what their god says they will end up in heaven or whatever happy afterlife they believe in or one that believes their life on earth is the best thing that&#39;s ever going to happen to them?


As a religious person, I can say that your view of religion is stereotyped and biased. Yes there have been terrible things done in the name of religion but that doesnt mean religion is to blame but that the person is to blame. The KKK for example, though they claim to be Christian, have greatly twisted Christianity. The same goes for the JDL with Judaism and al-Qaeda with Islam. It&#39;s not just these things which oppose progress though, terrible though they are. It&#39;s people&#39;s determination to live in ignorance because each new discovery, each new enlightenment brings a small death to the god they bow down to. Religion is also a very good dogmatic tool, a bunch of ready to use lies which people like al-qaeda and so on can use however they want.


True that many religious conservatives have opposed change but they dont represent everyone. That&#39;s irrelevant to my argument.
I&#39;m not here to preach but if these people want to live by a Sharia then that is their right to live as they choose, everyone should have the freedom to live as they please and who is anyone to prevent that from entering the Muslim community. No. Fuck their law. If we went by that stupid relativist approach we&#39;d have to leave everyone alone because they&#39;re living, ostensibly, how they want to. Sharia is a reactionary law which we as leftists need to oppose.

Andy Bowden
5th January 2007, 20:53
Any proposal to give official status to Sharia law would of course be deeply reactionary: it&#39;s important to have one civil law code for everyone.

There may be all kinds of problems with these unofficial courts not mentioned in the article. And all kinds of good reasons to oppose them.

But that&#39;d have to be on the basis of what they actually do and how they actually function, not on the basis of a panic campaign about amputation, stoning, etc.[/quote]
Yeah, it&#39;s been a quite common practice in the UK where once every couple of months a poll is done showing a huge amount of Muslims backing Sharia, and that this is a sign that British values are under attack etc.

And of course it&#39;s disturbing that anyone would want any kind of religious interference in laws.

But what&#39;s ignored is that the Sharia thats talked about being introduced applies to civil cases - such as divorce, etc. While it would undoubtedly be an extremely reactionary move to introduce Sharia on any basis, what should be recognised is that sexism and reactionary ideas are present among all religions.

The polls done regarding Islam are done to present Islam as being especially bad and especially dangerous for a variety of reasons - but secularism is not one of them.

As for revolutionaries challenging the laws of capitalist stastes, obviously theres no point in doing that if the laws your replacing them with are arguably worse than those under a bourgeois democracy.