CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Stoning of arab gays coming to the UK
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Stoning of arab gays coming to the UK

post #1 of 18
2/7/08 at 3:47pm
Thread Starter 
Link

I wonder if this will ever make it across the pond?

Quote:
The Archbishop of Canterbury has today said that the adoption of Islamic Sharia law in the UK is "unavoidable" and that it would help maintain social cohesion.

Rowan Williams told BBC Radio 4's World At One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal syst
em.
Reply
post #2 of 18
2/7/08 at 3:50pm
"And when they came for me, I found there was no one left to speak up."
Reply
post #3 of 18
2/7/08 at 3:52pm
Well, I'd be up with the Sharia, only if they also bring back the Inquisition. Stoning the gays and then burning them is a combo worthy of any god.

Wow...
Reply
post #4 of 18
2/7/08 at 3:54pm
Um, are you guys reading the article he linked to? This isn't actually happening - it's just the contention of the Archbishop of Canterbury that it seems likely to happen. It's a highly debatable point - I really can't see a democracy like England permitting a second system of laws for a particular group of people.
Reply
post #5 of 18
2/7/08 at 3:56pm
Agreed. And it wouldn't even be Constitutional in the US, so I'm not overly concerned.
Reply
post #6 of 18
2/7/08 at 3:57pm
They won't. But it does make you notice when the Archbishop of Canterbury starts talking in such terms. At the very least, the notion is out there and can now be debated and discussed.

Hey, I want to live under CHUD rule! Can we make that happen?

Edit: the banner ad up top reads 'Singlemuslim.com'. I chuckled.
Reply
post #7 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissZooey View Post
It's a highly debatable point - I really can't see a democracy like England permitting a second system of laws for a particular group of people.
I know, yet here Ontario's local court had to reject this shit because Islamic fundamentalists wanted to put forth such a system.
Reply
post #8 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:01pm
"Good. Out of the door, line on the left, one stone each."

Seriously, all legal and humanitarian obstacles aside, I second the thought brought up here that this is actually a good (if only completely weird and virtually out of left field) starting point for debate. For both sides of the fence. To oversimplify the situation by leaning towards "them" and "us" but nonetheless.
Reply
post #9 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe LeFors View Post
Agreed. And it wouldn't even be Constitutional in the US, so I'm not overly concerned.
In theory, if one state has a Muslim majority, then its legislature can start changing state laws to be more like Sharia - different marriage and divorce laws, harsher punishments in general, and maybe even dietary or dress code stuff. Of course, they couldn't do anything unconstitutional, and they couldn't make a system where Muslims get one law and non-Muslims get another. But still, if I wanted to live under Muslim-style in a Western nation, I'd try to do it somewhere with a little more federalism than Britain.
Reply
post #10 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Kimbell View Post
But still, if I wanted to live under Muslim-style in a Western nation*, I'd try to do it somewhere with a little more federalism than Britain.

*: I really don't.
Huh? I am a little confused here. I reckon the Sharia would be mostly criminal law. And your post seems to indicate that criminal law seems to be a federal issue in the States. That would be weird from a European, or to be more precise German point of view. Just asking.
Reply
post #11 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:20pm
No, I mean the opposite. By 'federalism' I mean that there are separate states, which are united but have domain over a large portion of their own governance.

Even though 'federal' refers to the central government, the word 'federalism' implies more division and state sovereignty than, say, 'union' would.
Reply
post #12 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Kimbell View Post
No, I mean the opposite. By 'federalism' I mean that there are separate states, which are united but have domain over a large portion of their own governance.
That´s actually what I meant. Therefore my question was if, say California can legislate own criminal laws. Because here in the "Federal Republic of Germany" Criminal law is solely a matter of legislation for the state=Germany. Hence all criminal law related Sharia stuff would not be executable in federal states if not legislated by the German government. Hope I am not confusing you here.
Reply
post #13 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Kimbell View Post
In theory, if one state has a Muslim majority, then its legislature can start changing state laws to be more like Sharia - different marriage and divorce laws, harsher punishments in general, and maybe even dietary or dress code stuff. Of course, they couldn't do anything unconstitutional, and they couldn't make a system where Muslims get one law and non-Muslims get another. But still, if I wanted to live under Muslim-style in a Western nation, I'd try to do it somewhere with a little more federalism than Britain.
I hear what you're saying, but if you ever wanted to see the Conservatives rally behind the usefully amorphous Right to Privacy, this would be what does it.
Reply
post #14 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan Travolta View Post
That´s actually what I meant. Therefore my question was if, say California can legislate own criminal laws. Because here in the "Federal Republic of Germany" Criminal law is solely a matter of legislation for the state=Germany. Hence all criminal law related Sharia stuff would not be executable in federal states if not legislated by the German government. Hope I am not confusing you here.
Oh, ok. Some specific criminal law here is national, but most is done independently by each state. Punishment for drunk driving is wildly different in different states, for example.
Reply
post #15 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe LeFors View Post
Agreed. And it wouldn't even be Constitutional in the US, so I'm not overly concerned.
Neither is spying on citizens, removing Habeas Corpus from the constitution, torture, preemptive war, suspension of the bill of rights and on and on
Reply
post #16 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Kimbell View Post
Oh, ok. Some specific criminal law here is national, but most is done independently by each state. Punishment for drunk driving is wildly different in different states, for example.
Oh, thanks. Our legal systems seem to differ even more than I was aware of. But both are apparently not Sharia-compatible. But, going back full circle, this is still a good starting point for discussion.
Reply
post #17 of 18
2/7/08 at 4:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Savage View Post
I know, yet here Ontario's local court had to reject this shit because Islamic fundamentalists wanted to put forth such a system.
Yes, but the thing is, that was exaggerated by both sides. Of course it was rejected, and will always be rejected, just as it will always be rejected in Britain and anywhere else with a moderate democratic system of government. But anti-Islamites like to make it sound like a looming inevitability.
Reply
post #18 of 18
2/8/08 at 2:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Kimbell View Post
In theory, if one state has a Muslim majority, then its legislature can start changing state laws to be more like Sharia - different marriage and divorce laws, harsher punishments in general, and maybe even dietary or dress code stuff. Of course, they couldn't do anything unconstitutional, and they couldn't make a system where Muslims get one law and non-Muslims get another. But still, if I wanted to live under Muslim-style in a Western nation, I'd try to do it somewhere with a little more federalism than Britain.
The back door is via the European Union, and unelected interpretation of several European statutes, not least the Human Rights one. It may end up being a decision beyond Britain's control
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Stoning of arab gays coming to the UK