Whose Islam?

[logicalview]

What role can be played by Sharia Law in contemporary Britain?

The ‘vigilantes’ of east London may have been Pythonesque, but the issue is deadly serious

By Fr Alexander Lucie-Smith on Monday, 9 December 2013

Things are not going well in the world of vigilantism. A story from the Guardian tells us:

The court had been told that Horner and the 23-year-old man drove alongside Joshua Bilton and Anna Reddiford in Bethnal Green and yelled at them through a megaphone. Horner shouted: “Let go of each other’s hands. This is a Muslim area!” The couple initially believed it was a joke but the group repeated the warning until they let go of each other’s hands. When they started holding hands again a few minutes later the car re-appeared and blocked their path until they let go.

England remains a country where it is perfectly legal and acceptable to hold hands with whoever you like in public, and thank goodness for that. Muslim vigilantes who try to stop couples holding hands in public are simply foolish, and it is not suprising that the couple they shouted at through the megaphone thought they were joking. Indeed, the british sense of humour being what it is, the behaviour of the vigilantes in this case is positively Pythonesque.

Moreover, in Britain there are no “Muslim areas”, nor can there be. There is only one law, and that is the law of the land. There is only one legal system. And there can only ever be one legal system. There are no “franchises”, as they were called in the Middle Ages, enclaves where another law is valid.

Though the behaviour of the vigilantes is comic, there was also a serious side to it, and they have been deservedly found guilty of harassment and assault. As the Guardian report continues:

Two weeks later, on 6 January this year, Horner and MacFarlane attacked a group of men drinking in the streets of Shoreditch. They said that they were there to “enforce Sharia law” in “Allah’s land”, and shouted: “Kill the non-believers”. Horner then punched two of the group, hitting James Forward in the jaw and knocking out Patrick Kavanagh with a punch to the head. A week later, Horner and the 23-year-old confronted another couple, Clare Coyle and Robert Gray, walking in the street in Stepney. The 23-year-old accused Coyle of dressing inappropriately in a Muslim area and that she would be punished in “hellfire”. Horner filmed the incident on his mobile phone and called Clare Coyle a “slag”. She told him: “This is Great Britain. I can dress how I wish.”

All this leads to a serious question: what role can be played by Sharia Law, or any other law of this type, in contemporary Britain? This is of course a question Catholics can answer and should answer as well, as we have the example of Canon Law.

The force of Canon Law is in the will of the participants in any canonical process. The Church may have the power to promulgate canons, but it has no power to coerce anyone to keep them. Hence, it is always misleading to imply that anyone is ‘silenced’ by the Church. A theologian may, after a canonical process, lose the right to call him or herself a Catholic theologian, and thus the right to work in a pontifical faculty of theology, but he or she can carry on teaching wherever anyone else gives them a job.

Sharia Law presumably acts on the same basis. People might approach a Sharia court and ask it to arbitrate on some matter, and they might then agree to abide by the decision handed down to them. But this process would depend on the consent of the parties. No Sharia court in the UK has any power over non-Muslims.

But here is the rub. In some countries non-Muslims are coerced to adhere to specifically Muslim customs; in other words, they are subjected to Sharia law. True, one does not have to visit those countries; you do not have to go to Saudi Arabia, but if you do, then it may well be reasonable to adopt the customs of the place. However, if you were born in the south of Sudan, and were a Christian, why on earth should you submit to Sharia Law, a law to which you have never consented?

Canon Law does not make universal claims. No canonical court claims jurisdiction over non-Catholics. No Jewish court ever legislates for Gentiles. So – why are Muslim vigilantes trying to enforces Muslim practices on non-Muslims? Is there any justification for this in Islam?

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/comment ... y-britain/

[maryjane48]

you post a link from catholic newspaper expecting anything but this? lol

[A_Britishcolumbian]

interesting discussion you have going here.

just dropped in to point out a glaring piece of misinformation in the catholic herald article.

There is only one law, and that is the law of the land. There is only one legal system. And there can only ever be one legal system. There are no “franchises”, as they were called in the Middle Ages, enclaves where another law is valid.

if the author is unaware of the Duchy of Cornwall i would not be surprised. that would be certainly the largest example if not also the most well known of a jurisdiction that does not fit within the author's belief.

[Atomoa]

Only to the extent we can guarantee the continued separation of church and state, religion and political process.

Lets start by not standing behind a country with a unlicensed nuclear arsenal which they routinely threaten their neighbors with, which also happens to be a religious government and State.

Israel!

It's like we gave the Pope nukes and Card Blanche...

[logicalview]

Lets start by not standing behind a country with a unlicensed nuclear arsenal which they routinely threaten their neighbors with, which also happens to be a religious government and State.

Israel!

...

You are right. Standing behind these guys makes way more sense....

[Atomoa]

You are right. Standing behind these guys makes way more sense....

Both equally as bad, but of course "our" side is the right one. LOL.

"Don't let Iran have nukes...they will blow us up...just like we promise to do to them every week!"

[logicalview]

Rate Of Hangings Accelerates Under Iran’s ‘Moderate’ New President Hassan Rouhani

Hundreds gather for a public execution. So far in 2013, Iran has executed at least 402 individuals, 53 of them in public.

125 People Executed Since Rouhani Took Officeby International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran

(October 8, 2013) – The Iranian authorities should impose an immediate moratorium on executions in Iran given the alarming rise in the use of the death penalty in recent weeks, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran and the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center said today.

As World Day Against the Death Penalty approaches on October 10, the Judiciary should review the sentencing guidelines that allow for the use of capital punishment, and revise them in accordance with international standards, the human rights organizations added.



TMI: Hassan Rouhani the moderate according to the EU and the U.S. His own son may disagree. He committed suicide leaving a note to his father that his extremism, harshness and Islam pushed him to it.

In the two weeks between September 11 and September 25, Iranian officials hanged a record 50 individuals, primarily for drug-related offenses.

“While Rouhani was promoting a softer image of Iran internationally during his visit to New York two weeks ago, it was business as usual on the domestic front with scores of prisoners put to death following unfair trials,” said Hadi Ghaemi, executive director of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. “Since Rouhani’s inauguration, the increasing number of prisoners being sent to the gallows is indefensible,” he added.

The increase in execution numbers comes at a time when the release of several well-known political prisoners has raised hopes for substantive human rights reform in Iran. Iranian president Hassan Rouhani’s visit to the UN General Assembly in New York and his diplomatic overtures aimed at ending tensions related to Iran’s nuclear dossier have been widely seen as a new, more conciliatory phase in relations between Iran and the international community. Yet while Rouhani was elected on promises of change and human rights reforms, there have been at least 125 executions since his inauguration on August 4, with dozens of other prisoners sentenced to death or facing imminent execution.

Iran carries out more executions per capita annually than any other country in the world. So far in 2013, Iran has executed at least 402 individuals. It also carries out many of these executions in public, with 53 such public executions in 2013.

UN experts and other governments have repeatedly voiced concern over Iran’s use of the death penalty in drug-related convictions. Under international law, the use of the death penalty is restricted to only the “most serious” crimes, and the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has explicitly held that drug-related crimes do not meet this criterion. Yet drug offenders are routinely sentenced to death and executed in Iran. In the past month alone, 25 out of the total 55 individuals executed were convicted of drug-related offenses. United Nations experts have called on Iranian authorities to impose a moratorium on the death penalty.

There are also serious concerns about the legal rights afforded to defendants in death penalty cases. Many defendants are denied due process and do not have adequate access to legal counsel. Additionally, evidentiary standards in these trials, especially in cases deemed “security crimes” by the Iranian Judiciary, fall well below international norms.

While the executive branch does not have direct control over executions or the prison system, recent developments—including the release of a few prominent political prisoners in advance of Rouhani’s visit to the UN—suggest that Iran’s Judiciary supports the new president’s diplomatic endeavors, at least in part. Yet the accelerating pace of executions over the past month indicates that Iran’s Judiciary has not initiated any broad review of domestic policy since Rouhani’s election.

In addition to the high numbers of individuals put to death for drug-related offenses, there is an on-going concern that the death penalty continues to be used as a tool to stifle political dissent, especially against ethnic minorities, such as in the case of six Kurdish Sunni activists and four Arab-Iranian men whose death sentences were recently upheld by Iran’s Supreme Court and who currently face imminent execution.

On September 19, 2013, Mowlana Abdulhamid, the Sunni Friday prayer leader, wrote a letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, calling for a halt to the execution of another 26 Sunni Kurdish-Iranian young men on death row at Karaj’s Rajaee Shahr prison.

“The rapid pace of executions over the past month shows that while talk of human rights reforms has intensified with the release of high-profile political prisoners and promises for more pardons, there is still a long way to go in pushing change on the margins of society,” said Gissou Nia, executive director of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. “The seeming trend for reform has yet to extend to Iran’s liberal application of the death penalty, which disproportionately affects ethnic minorities and the poor.”

http://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/201 ... n-rouhani/

[Atomoa]

...and how many Palestinian children die from bombings?

...how many people to they execute in christian-god-fearing Texas?

Oh yes, WE are the good guys.

[logicalview]

"Don't let Iran have nukes...they will blow us up...just like we promise to do to them every week!"

Who is "we" in this scenario? I don't recall promising to do that.

[Atomoa]

Who is "we" in this scenario? I don't recall promising to do that.

The we is Israel.

That we also has broken numerous international laws by attacking other countries without provocation (what Japan did to the US @ Pearl Harbor - but when we do it it's ok), and also was most recently behind the terrorist bombing deaths of many civilians and their contractor counterparts in Iran's nuclear energy program.

Car bombs in Tehran, with children around.

But, we are the good guys. Warm blanket.

[logicalview]

...and how many Palestinian children die from bombings?

Why don't you start a thread about that? This one is about Islam, not yet another radical leftist rant about Israel.

...how many people to they execute in christian-god-fearing Texas?

There have been 61 people executed in Texas in the past 3 years, all for murder. There have been over 600 people executed in Iran in 2013 so far, for the horrible crime of being a heretic (which of course is punishable by death) and the even worse crime of being gay. So yes, Texas is definitely totally the same as Iran. I don't agree with the death penalty anywhere, but this is just ridiculous to try and compare the two "states".

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/12/09 ... s-at-home/

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iran

Oh yes, WE are the good guys.

Well, I don't include any apologists for radical Islam in the West or radical leftists in the "Good guys" camp. They are the worst of the worst. In fact, it would be fantastic if you could go and walk a mile in the shoes of all of the people currently being persecuted world-wide by this religion that you so rabidly defend, despite supposedly being so anti-religion (according to other posts of yours).

[Atomoa]

Both sides are wrong.

... and i'm not standing with any guilty party.

Who says you have to pick the perceived lesser evil?

Executed for being gay...yet we turn women (even children now for profit) into prostitutes. Take your pick.

We are evil, and they are evil. I subscribe to a different magazine.

[logicalview]

Both sides are wrong.

Great. So that means we just stand idly by while women are stoned to death and gays are executed for the crime of being gay? You hide behind jargon and "ISRAEL IS BAD TOO" yet the platform you stand on is useless. All this thread is doing is serving to show how fundamentalist Islam is growing world-wide, and where ever that happens, people suffer. Especially women.

Who says you have to pick the perceived lesser evil?

Who says you have to tolerate evil? Why do it - just because your political ideology dictates it? Why not try free-thinking?

We are evil, and they are evil. I subscribe to a different magazine.

Which is what?

[logicalview]

Weekly Jihad Report
Nov 30 - Dec 06

Jihad Attacks: 50
Suicide Attacks*: 10
Dead Bodies: 253
Critically Injured: 556

[Atomoa]

All this thread is doing is serving to show how fundamentalist Islam is growing world-wide, and where ever that happens, people suffer. Especially women.

I can say the exact same thing about our society. Especially women.

If you did agree that we are as evil as they are you wouldn't have started a finger pointing thread, pointing xenophobiacally across the globe.

When you become agitated and upset at my "leftist rants" about what we do and the people that we support and actually say

yet the platform you stand on is useless.

I must ask. If my platform is useless, what makes yours useful? It is infact - the exact same platform.

I am merely suggesting that walking around pointing fingers at others while feeling justified and infallible is a dangerous thing for person to do as a individual...let alone a whole society and country.

The magazine I subscribe to is not be evil. I don't pretend we are the good guys. Pointing fingers instead of looking in a mirror is not a good start and my contribution to the thread is just that. Holding up a mirror. You can't change others, only yourself.

You want to save women? Watch reality TV and marketing-for-profit from North American TV feeds.