Should we adopt Sharia Law?

[amsterdammer]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith /article3328024.ece
Do you agree with the Archbishops sentiments that this country adopts certain aspects of Sharia Law?

[MatydaLover]

There are already different laws for different groups.

The law requiring the wearing of a crash-helmet while riding a motor-cycle does not apply to Sikhs wearing a turban.

Halal meat can be prepared without the need for the animal to be stunned.

Scotland has a variety of laws that differ from those in England.

The precedent is all around us.

[Lonnie]

I've said before, New Labour is trying, and succeeding, to destroy this country, for their own agenda.

I tend to get laughed off of this site for expounding my views, but its happening, and gathering pace.

The Arch Bishop is a close ally of new Labour.

I've said on another thread, that my understanding of his comments, is that if it happens, the subscribers of Sharia Law will be answerable only to Sharia Law, and not the law of the land.

If it does happen like that,
I leave you to use your imaginations.

[jno]

Lonnie, I don't there's any suggestion at all that Islamic laws would involve criminal matters - only civil law, which basically deals with disputes between citizens. If two people agree to have a dispute arbitrated by someone they trust, I doubt it makes any difference to the overall law of the land.

There's some discussion of the present position here:

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/society/ law_order/factcheck+is+sharia+law+a+recipe+for +chaos/1515147

[Lonnie]

jno,
I appreciate that link, but I never mentioned anything about criminal matters, to my way of thinking, and I know various relgions hold there own 'courts' for certain matters, none of which is criminal, and all are answerable to the law of the land, the suggestion, and thats all it is at the moment, is that Sharia Law would run alongside British Law, not obediant to it.

Maybe i'm paranoid, but i've watched this great country going downhill over the last decade, and this is escalating.

I know the goverment has distanced itself from the remarks the Archbishop has made, but I still reckon he was enticed, asked or told to say them.

[jno]

I think you're wrong, Lonnie. As far as I can see (and the archbishop is not known for crystal clarity), all that happens is that if two Muslims are in some dispute over a contract - that might include marriage contracts, but I am not sure how those work - they can ask a mullah of some sort, rather than a law court, to arbitrate. This doesn't make them answerable only to Sharia. If they kill someone they are answerable in the usual British criminal courts, just like anyone else. (So Abu Hamza wouldn't be able to avoid British justice.) Moreover, if they argue over a different contract, they can take that one to an ordinary court too - they haven't committed themselves forever to Sharia jurisdiction.

The province of Ontario tried something similar a while ago, partly to unclog the regular courts. The rules were that they could use an Islamic court if they wanted - and this was only for civil cases - and if unsatisfied could still go to a regular Canadian court. (This didn't apply only to Muslim courts, though.) People eventually panicked - much as people are doing here - and repealed the measure. Now the courts are clogged up again.

[tufty7]

No No No , Its time we took back our country and got rid of the minority of people who are causing trouble for the majority whatever ther colour or religion,
If this minority ever got into a position to dictate to the majority would the last one to leave please turn the gas taps on and set it on fire ..... I am absolutely fed up to the back teeth with this country pampering to everyones civil libertys, If you don't like this country and the way it runs feel free to leave ,..................

[naomi24]

There has to be one law for all. Implementation of this suggestion will cause more division than we have already, and I seriously fear for the future of this country.

[Theland]

He is also a Druid!

[naomi24]

Steve, Lonnie doesn't get laughed off this site. Where did you get that from?

Mr Brown & Co may have binned the idea in the wake of the controversy it's caused, but can they be trusted not to back-pedal at sometime in the future? They're good at making the right noises to suit the occasion - and the gullible continue to fall for it. Perhaps it those people who have their heads up their backsides.

[naomi24]

Steve, my apologies. I've just realised that Lonnie said he tends to get laughed off this site, not you.

The rest of what I said still stands though.

[Whoever]

A man of his supposed intelligence in the public domain should have thought very carefully before pronouncing such a statement. he should have known what a storm his words would have caused in a country that is now facing a major cultural and religious divide. He should do the decent thing and resign. The end effect will probably be to cause even more resentment against Islam and stir even moderate people to take sides in such an argument. You cannot have two different types of law operating in a county and people picking and choosing which one they will be tried by.

[Theland]

R.W. has a reputation for being intelligent, yet he can't speak in ordinary plain language, but uses the convoluted language of the diplomatic corps reminiscent of "Yes Minister," so that by the time he has finished yapping his gob off, we are hardly any the wiser!
Why does he do this?
Simple! As soon as he gets criticised, he can interpret his original saying to give an altogether different meaning.
Oh what the hell! His slary is still going in every month so what does he care?

[IggyB]

full text of his speech here is anyone want to read what the fuss is about http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith /article3333953.ece
Personally i think this is just more of peoples knee jerk reaction and the medias spin on anything muslim... if we replaced the word muslim with jewish for instance there would be no problem or in fact no news as jewish courts have operated in the country for hundreds of years.

All this one land one law declaration is missing the point - these jewish or sharia courts would still be within the english legal system, at the moment the UK actively encourages third party arbitration in civil disputes re contacts etc in these cases the two sides can choose the arbitrator to be a religious person or group within their community - i see nothing wrong with this at all.

is you'd like to see a news story about jewish courts you could read this
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7233040.stm

[THECORBYLOON]

If folk think there is such a thing as British or UK law, is it any wonder they are confused about what the Archbishop meant?

[Lindylou]

From what I've heard on the news this morning the Archbishop is now denying what he said... He should resign.

[wired]

He's a good advertiser for the Catholic church,ask the ex prime minister, perhaps Henry II was right.

[sp1814]

IggyB

I absolutely applaud you.

[Phantaxus]

I must admit that I dont know much about Sharia law and my immediate impression of it would be a negative one, but this is coming from what I have read in our western focused media.
Where is the Muslim council of Britain? why are they not explaining to us what the positive elements of Sharia law are? This would be a good opportunity for them to comment.