This week in Islam

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Goddess said:

And what happens if/when the Justice Minister of a country is Muslim?  Muslim politicians in many countries of Europe are eroding freedoms - freedom of speech being the big one right now.  Some are not (some are like Hirsi Ali and stand firm for Western freedoms) but even many non-Muslim politicians are caving to Sharia law when it comes to freedom of the press and jurisprudence.

Bloodshed, I suppose.  It's pretty much inevitable now anyway.

[dialamah]

10 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Are you really unaware that Islam has been setting up and demanding Sharia courts in countries all over the world - even here in Canada?  Are you really unaware of what Sharia law entails?  Sincerely, educate yourself.

Last I heard, the request for Sharia tribunals in Ontario was refused, and similar tribunals for Catholic and Jewish law were scrapped to keep things fair.  Kind of a win-win, imo - no religion gets to 'impose' state-sanctioned religious laws.

The first example Scribblet gave involved British Courts recognizing Sharia marriages so they could give the same rights to divorcing Muslim women as other women for property division and child custody.  In that sense, recognizing Sharia law in the UK court system is to these women's benefit.

I suspect that regardless of whether the State 'allows' religious courts or tribunals, they'll still happen, mores the pity.  Governments should not, imo, support any kind of quasi-legal religious system.

Bruce Bawer.  He also said nasty things about American protestant fundamentalists.  I agree with him that Islamic and Christian fundamentalists are a scourge on Western civilization.  

[Goddess]

28 minutes ago, dialamah said:

The first example Scribblet gave involved British Courts recognizing Sharia marriages so they could give the same rights to divorcing Muslim women as other women for property division and child custody.  In that sense, recognizing Sharia law in the UK court system is to these women's benefit.

 

The potential for women to be abused and their rights to be trampled on is much greater with Sharia councils.  

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-37838496

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/01/inside-britains-sharia-councils-hardline-and-anti-women-or-a-dignified-way-to-divorce

Quote

 

 Sharia councils – often mislabelled as sharia courts – have a sinister reputation in the UK......The reality of the councils is much less bloodthirsty but there are still reasons to worry.

 

Khan fears councils are becoming increasingly misogynistic and inefficient. “Sadly they have become a victim of their own success – they are overworked. The Salafi [ultra-conservative] influence on religion has brought in a real misogyny. They have become more hardline and anti-female.”

This can be seen in the most frightening complaint against sharia councils – that with divorce permissible but discouraged by Islam, women are pressured into mediation with violent partners – or even reconciliation. Savin Bapir-Tarvey, a psychologist with the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), sees around 15 clients a week, many of whom are extremely vulnerable. She says cultural concepts such as honour are used to manipulate women. “They have experienced severe abuse and their children have witnessed it,” she says, but they are told that “to leave would bring shame on the family”.

Even marital rape can be ignored. “Women who have been through FGM might not make that clear [to their new husbands], but they might say they don’t want to have sex. One woman was told it was her duty – and she should pray while her husband has sex with her – basically while he raped her.”

Southall Black Sisters, however, is firm in its opposition. Religion and family law are too dangerous a mix to allow sharia councils to continue to operate. “Religion inherently discriminates against women,” stresses director Pragna Patel. “You cannot access justice if the people who are violating your rights are dispensing it.”

Along with other secular women’s groups, it has boycotted the government inquiry, pointing out that it is headed by a theologian rather than a judge, and has Islamic scholars in place of human rights experts. Sharia council supporters point out that women choose to have Islamic divorces of their own free will yet Patel says this ignores the fact that they do so to avoid being “treated as outcasts” by conservative communities, who view divorce as shameful.

Bano agrees that state law, however imperfect, “is the only system that Muslim and vulnerable women have for protection” and “in family law matters or in issues of vulnerability and marginalisation we should never have a delegation into the community”.

 

 

Edited September 3, 2019 by Goddess

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

1. Are you really unaware that Islam has been setting up and demanding Sharia courts in countries all over the world - even here in Canada?  

I'm surprised at your specific claim that Euro courts are now making more decisions based on Sharia.

That's my request.  Cite that.  Please don't start generating fog by asking me if I know Sharia.

You don't have to write long posts talking about books you read or things we discussed already.  Keep it brief.

 

[Goddess]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I'm surprised at your specific claim that Euro courts are now making more decisions based on Sharia.

That's my request.  Cite that.  Please don't start generating fog by asking me if I know Sharia.

You don't have to write long posts talking about books you read or things we discussed already.  Keep it brief.

 

**sigh**  You've totally missed the point - that every time Muslims push for Sharia law or push for governments to take Sharia action on situations like silencing media, the arts, authors, etc - that is the West capitulating our freedoms in deference to Islam and Sharia.

Here is a case from Greece that went all the way to the European Human Rights court:

https://www.asil.org/ILIB/european-court-human-rights-rules-against-use-sharia-law-inheritance-dispute-december-19-2018

 

Quote

In Austria, the government is imposing Sharia law even on its non-Muslim citizens, including Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, convicted in 2011 for making this factual statement: "We all know that Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 years old and consummated the marriage when she was 9. Now, what do we call this behavior if not pedophilia."

Here's an article of instances where Sharia law has been  applied in Canada:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/life-under-sharia-in-canada/article743980/

https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2018/10/europe-wades-further-into-sharia-law/

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/free-speech-sharia-european-court-of-human-rights-ruling/

I'm sure this won't satisfy you because you will not reflect on what these things mean in a global sense and I'm not going to re-write Bawer's book and copy all his research just for your amusement.  I've provided the cite - if you choose not to read it or educate yourself, that's your choice.  His cites are all listed in the back of his book for each chapter.  

This is a common tactic for apologists of Islam - demand that each case in the world be cited so that you can discount and excuse them one by one, thereby deliberately missing what is going on WORLD WIDE - which is Muslims and their apologists are petitioning courts and bringing court cases to every country demanding that Sharia laws - regarding treatment of women, treatment of gays, treatment of apostates, silencing of any criticism of Islam in the media or arts - are adhered to.  There is a lot of people risking their lives to keep Sharia out of Western democratic countries and a lot of people have died trying to keep democracy free of Islamic religious influence.  Why not read what happened to people like Theo Van Gogh, Pim Portuyn, the Charlie Hebdo massacre, etc.   read about the riots after the mohammed cartoons in Denmark and the court cases it spawned afterwards.  Read about the bizarre steps European governments are taking to avoid riling up their Muslim populations and how this is affecting the every day life of Westerners.  Read about the governmental agencies that have clamped down on the media by disallowing certain words and phrases to be used to avoid Muslim backlash. (1984 - very Orwellian - there's a reason why Muslims are to be called "Asians" now and "jihadists" and "Islamic extremism" are no longer phrases that should be used......)

I've done all the research and to demand that it be boiled down into a few cites of court cases here and there, will not change your opinion.

There's a LOT going on in the world  - democracy is in peril, freedom of speech is in peril - and your choice is be deliberately oblivious to it all, in favour of feel-good articles that stroke your multicultural ego.

 Edit to add this article which I have already posted here once:

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1811460,00.html

 

 

Edited September 3, 2019 by Goddess

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

 This is a common tactic for apologists of Islam - demand that each case in the world be cited so that you can discount and excuse them one by one,  

I don't apologize for Islam - fundamental religions are at odds with western institutions and must be accommodated only to pragmatic ends. But I didn't ask 'each case' to be validated, just your claim.  I specifically asked you to not give a long post which you did.

So your posts waste my time, and are either bullshit or long tracts of unasked-for articles because you can't back up your bullshit.  I usually put time wasters on ignore, because I have such short precious time on here that I need to discourage people who take little bits of my life away one bullshitty post at a time.

I don't think you're a bad person.  I just think you wrote a bad post.  Then two more.

[Goddess]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

  I specifically asked you to not give a long post which you did.

 

And I specifically stated to you that the issue is far more involved and covers too many countries and too many avenues - media, arts, authors, theater, banking and financial industries - for you to get a clear picture of what's going on in the brief cites you demand.

Remain deliberately oblivious.  You're a big proponent of censorship, that much is obvious.

[scribblet]

It's not just Sharia courts operating and judges using a form of Sharia, but it's judges excusing Muslims or giving lesser sentences because of 'cultural differences'.  It's also the cover up of rape gangs in the U.K.  and the ongoing accommodations for Muslim traditions and culture.  This is why we need to ask why so many people are concerned,  because as the demographics change so will the number of Muslim lawmakers who could, in the future, hold a majority thus making more accommodations (at the very least).   Not to mention people who ahem, seem to think it's okay to refuse service to a disabled person because of the guide dog.

Opposition is increasing against the accommodation of Islam (in the West) which more often than not is seen as a 'prejudice' against Muslims rather than a rejection  and aversion of an ideology/religion  that generally treats women as second class citizens (among other things).   Something the West has fought hard against for years, why would we accept this as normal now.

Here, the council of Europe expresses concern https://eclj.org/religious-freedom/pace/le-conseil-de-leurope-sinquite-grandement-de-lapplication-de-la-charia-en-europe

This resolution also reveals the weakness of Europe in the face of this politico-religious phenomenon.

Sharia is already applied in Europe…

First of all, the Assembly of the Council of Europe “is also greatly concerned about the fact that Sharia law – including provisions which are in clear contradiction with the Convention – is applied, either officially or unofficially, in several Council of Europe member States, or parts thereof”. Namely mainly Greece, Chechnya and the United Kingdom.

The Assembly declares it is “also concerned about the “judicial” activities of “Sharia councils” in the United Kingdom”. These private and informal bodies provide advice and deliver judgments in matters of divorce (including child custody and financial matters), as well as inheritance and commercial law.

It is also about the stifling of free speech such as motion 103 in Canada, also a form of Sharia (blasphemy) as any questioning of Islam is now considered 'hate speech'

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/free-speech-sharia-european-court-of-human-rights-ruling/

and, not the first instance of a swimming pool assault in Canada, something which is fairly frequent in Europe. 

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/man-sought-after-girl-sexually-assaulted-at-pool-cops

 

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

Here is a case from Greece that went all the way to the European Human Rights court:

The Rest of the Story: 

"Lawmakers in Greece have voted in favour of allowing Muslims in the country to opt into the secular court system to resolve family disputes instead of relying on Islamic Sharia law, ending a century-old obligation."

"Members of Greece’s Muslim minority have hailed new legislation that will enable citizens to sidestep sharia law in family disputes, but says the measure fails to go far enough in Europe’s only country where Islamic jurists still hold sway."

Apparently, Muslims being subject to Sharia law in Greece has been in place since the Ottoman Empire collapsed.  Greece appears to be going in a direction opposite to what you're claiming, with the support of Muslims - again contradicting the claim that Muslims demand Sharia.

[scribblet]

Opt in- sure if women are allowed to...

Here's one instance of a Muslim rapists acquitted due to cultural norms

https://onenewsnow.com/legal-courts/2018/11/27/court-cites-cultural-norms-in-acquitting-muslim-rapist

 

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

In Austria, the government is imposing Sharia law even on its non-Muslim citizens, including Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff,

The Rest of the Story.

Austria has a blasphemy law, predating the fear of creeping Sharia.  This law has resulted in a conviction against a cartoonist for his portrayal of Jesus (though overturned on appeal) and he was sued again on same grounds by Catholics offended by cartoons.  

The European Human Rights Court didn't support Sharia, it simply said that States with blasphemy laws can keep them.

So again, this is not Sharia taking over, but rather laws already in place and completely separate from Sharia.

Edited September 4, 2019 by dialamah

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

Here's an article of instances where Sharia law has been  applied in Canada:

Yes, the article is from 2004.  Here's the Rest of the Story, from the Guardian in 2008:  

"Such was the political feeling that the province's premier, Dalton McGuinty, eventually dismissed Boyd's recommendations. He was also forced to ban other religions which had been using faith-based tribunals."

Which I'd already pointed out.

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, scribblet said:

It is also about the stifling of free speech such as motion 103 in Canada, also a form of Sharia (blasphemy) as any questioning of Islam is now considered 'hate speech'

Yet you, DoP, Goddess, Argus and others are still here posting your "criticisms" of Islam and Muslims.  

.

[scribblet]

23 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Yet you, DoP, Goddess, Argus and others are still here posting your "criticisms" of Islam and Muslims.  .

For now, but on FB and Twitter not so much and in U.K. not at all  In fact,  on twitter, you can be suspended for swimply tweeting a statistic about rape-gangs.

https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2019/08/islam-like-any-other-religion-must-be-fair-game-for-criticism/

 

Edited September 4, 2019 by scribblet

[dialamah]

Here's the full ruling against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. 

The court distinguished between child marriage and pedophilia, noting that the defendant had failed to provide "evidence that his primary sexual interest in Aisha had been her not yet having reached puberty. Moreover, there were no reliable sources for that allegation, as no documentary evidence existed to suggest that his other wives or concubines had been similarly young."

"The court stated that child marriages were not the same as paedophilia, and were not only a phenomenon of Islam but also used to be widespread among the European ruling dynasties."

"Even though criticising child marriages was justifiable, she had accused a subject of religious worship of having a primary sexual interest in children’s bodies,"

"the Supreme Court held that she had not aimed to contribute to a serious debate about Islam or the phenomenon of child marriage, but merely to defame Muhammad by accusing him of a specific sexual preference,"

"The Regional Court further stated that anyone who wished to exercise their rights under Article 10 (freedom of expression)  of the Convention was subject to duties and responsibilities, such as refraining from making statements which hurt others without reason and therefore did not contribute to a debate of public interest"

______________

Austria's law re: disparagement of religious doctrine:

"Whoever, in circumstances where his or her behaviour is likely to arouse justified indignation, publicly disparages or insults a person who, or an object which, is an object of veneration of a church or religious community established within the country, or a dogma, a lawful custom or a lawful institution of such a church or religious community, shall be liable to up to six months’ imprisonment or a day-fine for a period of up to 360 days.”

[dialamah]

@Goddess.  Your claim that Europe is being overtaken by Sharia Law has been debunked.  I accept your surrender.

[Guest]

I think the question that needs to be asked is, is there anyone in a western democracy currently subject to sharia law who would rather not be?

I think we can all agree that there's no doubt at all that there is.

After that, it's just a matter of how many is too many for people.  I know how many is too many for me, but everyone's different.

 

Edited September 4, 2019 by bcsapper
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it when nobody will tell on them - Not Blaise Pascal

[kactus]

9 hours ago, scribblet said:

It's not just Sharia courts operating and judges using a form of Sharia, but it's judges excusing Muslims or giving lesser sentences because of 'cultural differences'.  It's also the cover up of rape gangs in the U.K.  and the ongoing accommodations for Muslim traditions and culture. 

Like these 12 Israeli boys who raped this british woman???

We fear 'creepy' Israelis, say UK women in Cyprus hotel at center of rape case

https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-5554606,00.html

https://www.haaretz.com/amp/israel-news/12-israelis-arrested-in-cyprus-on-suspicion-of-gang-raping-tourist-1.7535169

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9653280/ayia-napa-gang-rape-student-confession-forced/amp

It’s interesting there are british ex-pats on this forum with head stuck in the sand and only favour muslim bashing at any cost to draw a conclusionon someone’s religion....

It is about sick individual mentality that that drove these people to act “gang rape”

Edited September 4, 2019 by kactus

[scribblet]

Didn't happen, they where cleared and she is charged.  Selfies and DNA cleared them.

https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/israeli-teen-accused-of-rape-cleared-by-girlfriends-selfie/

 

Edited September 4, 2019 by scribblet

[scribblet]

10 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I think the question that needs to be asked is, is there anyone in a western democracy currently subject to sharia law who would rather not be?

I think we can all agree that there's no doubt at all that there is.

After that, it's just a matter of how many is too many for people.  I know how many is too many for me, but everyone's different.

 

Well, it hasn't been debunked either.  Obviously the situation is enough to cause the European courts to look into it and the U.K. released report  reveals the systemic discrimination against women in Islamic courts. The fact that we are even talking about the rape gangs in the U.K. and especially how they are handled is in itself enough to cause concern. 

various links on this page   https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/01/rape-murder-and-misogyny-the-real-victims-of-the-migrant-crisis-are-europes-women/

[dialamah]

53 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Didn't happen, they where cleared and she is charged.  Selfies and DNA cleared them.

https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/israeli-teen-accused-of-rape-cleared-by-girlfriends-selfie/

"Some' have been released, others still face charges.   From your link:  Nine of the teens have admitted to being in the room when the alleged rape occurred and three refused to answer police questions, according to Channel 2, the Times of Israel reported.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Well, it hasn't been debunked either.  Obviously the situation is enough to cause the European courts to look into it and the U.K. released report  reveals the systemic discrimination against women in Islamic courts. The fact that we are even talking about the rape gangs in the U.K. and especially how they are handled is in itself enough to cause concern. 

various links on this page   https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/01/rape-murder-and-misogyny-the-real-victims-of-the-migrant-crisis-are-europes-women/

No, it certainly hasn't been debunked.  Of course, as a British ex-pat, I am forced to wonder whether or not I have any right at all to comment on egregious religious excesses. 

Oh what the hell, I'll carry on doing it!

 

Edited September 4, 2019 by bcsapper

[scribblet]

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

"Some' have been released, others still face charges.   From your link:  Nine of the teens have admitted to being in the room when the alleged rape occurred and three refused to answer police questions, according to Channel 2, the Times of Israel reported.

You seem pretty desperate to tar and feather Israelis as if that clears Muslims of rape charges.    and now they are going to sue  https://news.yahoo.com/israelis-cleared-rape-sue-british-accuser-cyprus-174748922.html 

[dialamah]

11 minutes ago, scribblet said:

You seem pretty desperate to tar and feather Israelis as if that clears Muslims of rape charges.    and now they are going to sue  https://news.yahoo.com/israelis-cleared-rape-sue-british-accuser-cyprus-174748922.html 

1.  Nothing to do with tar and feathering one group vs. another; that's your purview.

2.  I like accuracy, and your claim that all the boys were free was absolutely wrong, according to the link you initially posted.

3. This new link from Yahoo says differently, so good on you, finding a credible link that supports your claim. 

[scribblet]

2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

1.  Nothing to do with tar and feathering one group vs. another; that's your purview.

2.  I like accuracy, and your claim that all the boys were free was absolutely wrong, according to the link you initially posted.

3. This new link from Yahoo says differently, so good on you, finding a credible link that supports your claim. 

Oh sure, if you want to parse words and draw your own conclusions you are free to do that.