Sharia in the West

[Flatlander]

I read an article today in the Globe and Mail that pleased me. To begin with, I was disturbed by this:

Although (Canadian Islamic Congress President) Mr. Elmasry cited Canada's recently expanded military role in Afghanistan as a major strike against the federal Liberals, Ontario's recent decision not to allow the use of Shariah was especially galling, he said.

but further down was pleased to see:

“It's quite a ridiculous position to take,” said Tarek Fatah of the Muslim Canadian Congress.

“Muslims come from all political parties, ranging from the Bloc and the NDP (to) the Liberal party. They make up their minds based on what is good for Canada, not necessarily is good for the Canadian Islamic Congress.”

I certainly hope that Mr. Fatah is correct.

Part of my concern stemmed from the fear that, were Sharia to gain a foothold here through family law arbitration, it might open the door for a further establishment of Islamic Law for Muslim people. I feel that faith based law is in conflict with our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which I believe ought to apply to all Canadians irrespective of their religeous affiliation. What was particularly disturbing for me regarding Sharia arbitration was my fear that Muslim women would end up being forced or coerced into participating in the Sharia system. To the best of my knowledge, Sharia does not treat women equally. So, hooray for no Sharia here!

 

[Bob Hubbard]

What's "Sharia"?

 

[Tgace]

Muslim religious law.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Ah. Thanks.

As long as the men have to wear burkas it would fit with Canadian law.

 

[arnisador]

As long as the men have to wear burkas it would fit with Canadian law.

I can get behind this.

Yes, it's nice to hear a comment that puts the nation first!

 

[BlackCatBonz]

i couldnt believe that they actually approached the government about it.
a lot of them already treat their women as second class citizens and they would essentially be taking away their rights to have things decided in the canadian judicial system.
i heard on the radio that it would be upto the families to have their case heard by lawyers or by people that interpret their law.
if that were the case, im sure it would be easy for the men to coerce women into seeing things their way.
Dalton McGuinty, the premier of Ontario recently made his decision against allowing sharia law in ontario, much to the chagrin of the muslim community.

 

[mantis]

Ah. Thanks.

As long as the men have to wear burkas it would fit with Canadian law.

stereotypes!
you would be surprised how 'sharia' does have solutions to different aspects of life, including the western life varying from social, political, and economic integrated systems

 

[Tgace]

Religious Law is a genie in the bottle you dont want to let out. Religious belief will always have in influence on law creation, as people and their beliefs are what make laws in the first place. BUT to pass and enforce laws based on religion (this person is subject to a different set of laws based on their religion, or you are subjuct to MY religions law) is a big No No IMO.

 

[mantis]

Religious Law is a genie in the bottle you dont want to let out. Religious belief will always have in influence on law creation, as people and their beliefs are what make laws in the first place. BUT to pass and enforce laws based on religion (this person is subject to a different set of laws based on their religion, or you are subjuct to MY religions law) is a big No No IMO.

true..
but you're a little bit generalizing. im not talking about passing laws based on a religion.. i am talking about a whole system that came with a religion.. this might sound the same.. but sharia is not laws based on Islam, it's a system that came with Islam which also has lots of laws regarding people of other religions (dont forget that Islam started where all religions where present at some point)
i've actually read a lot about the economic aspect of sharia as a part of my school work and made a lot of sense to me..
I was actually involved in researching how economic sharia offers a solution to the western monetery and economic systems...

 

[Tgace]

How about a Catholic Law, or Jewish Law? You cannot deny that Sharia has blatant religious overtones. While you are correct that Sharia isnt exactly "religious law"..

http://i-cias.com/e.o/sharia.htm

Also, calling the Sharia 'law' can be misleading, as Sharia extends beyond law. Sharia is the totality of religious, political, social, domestic and private life. Sharia is primarily meant for all Muslims, but applies to a certain extent also for people living inside a Muslim society. Muslims are not totally bound by the Sharia when they live or travel outside the Muslim world.
Dogmatically, Sharia is not something the intelligence of man can prove wrong, it is only to be accepted by humans, since it is based on the will of God. This is clear from what we read in the Koran:

Not something I see as compatible with US/Canadian law or legislation. Look at the problems we are having with "christian" conservatives flexing their political muscle here. Could you imagine if we instituted a codified "Christian" system comparable to Sharia?

 

[mantis]

How about a Catholic Law, or Jewish Law? You cannot seny that Sharia has blatant religious overtones. While you are correct that Sharia isnt exactly "religious law"..

http://i-cias.com/e.o/sharia.htm



Not something I see as compatible with US/Canadian law or legislation. Look at the problems we are having with "christian" conservatives flexing their political muscle here. Could you imagine if we instituted a codified "Christian" system comparable to Sharia?

haha.. true sir/ma'am
isnt this country running on a system like that nowadays tho?

 

[Tgace]

No..people of a religious denomination are having a say, but within the current structure. As it always has been. When a large chunck of a population in a democratic system share a common trait its only natural that that trait influences government. Look at the 50's and the red scare, the 60's and its change. The legislative system hasnt been changed to a "Christira" system. The beliefs of the generation in charge have always had an impact on the direction of legislation, but the system allows for that trend/error/change and provides the ability to adapt. A system that says its infallible and unchangeable because its Gods word is Armageddon waiting to happen.

 

[mantis]

No..people of a religious denomination are having a say, but within the current structure. As it always has been. When a large chunck of a population in a democratic system share a common trait its only natural that that trait influences government. Look at the 50's and the red scare, the 60's and its change. The legislative system hasnt been changed to a "Christira" system. The beliefs of the generation in charge have always had an impact on the direction of legislation, but the system allows for that trend/error/change and provides the ability to adapt. A system that says its infallible and unchangeable because its Gods word is Armageddon waiting to happen.

hmm.. actually church is ruling around the world.. all wars are initiated in church, and for church-related purposes. and as far as there is no "christian" structure, we go back to the same argument, what defines "christian"

 

[Tgace]

I mean within the US legal system...besides the Catholic Church telling me that they do not approve of abortion, gay marriage etc. there is no "judicial system" where I will be brought before the Catholic court and tried/punished.....

 

[Tgace]

"All Wars"???

Im wondering if I have to start making a foil hat now.....

 

[mantis]

"All Wars"???

Im wondering if I have to start making a foil hat now.....

haha
maybe i should stop arguing..
it looks like i have no more points to bring up, right?
thanks Tgace for replying!

 

[Tgace]

Not at all. Post your opinion and hash it out, thats what this place is about.

 

[sgtmac_46]

true..
but you're a little bit generalizing. im not talking about passing laws based on a religion.. i am talking about a whole system that came with a religion.. this might sound the same.. but sharia is not laws based on Islam, it's a system that came with Islam which also has lots of laws regarding people of other religions (dont forget that Islam started where all religions where present at some point)
i've actually read a lot about the economic aspect of sharia as a part of my school work and made a lot of sense to me..
I was actually involved in researching how economic sharia offers a solution to the western monetery and economic systems...

Well, yes of course. As I pointed out on another post, Sharia isn't just applied to Muslims. The idea is that all people should be under Sharia, Muslim or not. That people aren't all living under Sharia is what galls many of those who are making war with the west. Islam has never been about forcing conversion to Islam, Islam has always been tolerant of other "Children of the Book" and many have lived good lives under Islamic rule. Islamic teachings just say that all people should live under Islamic rule. A subtle, but important distinction.

hmm.. actually church is ruling around the world.. all wars are initiated in church, and for church-related purposes. and as far as there is no "christian" structure, we go back to the same argument, what defines "christian"

That's a vast simplification and distortion of reality. In actuality, few wars are started on basic religious grounds as such. Where religion is used, it is used as support for war, not as the reason. That isn't to say that some religions don't provide built in justification, or don't act as incitement for the creation of empires, it's just that religion itself is not usually the source.

The true source of warfare is two fold....Conflict over resources AND the basic sectarian nature of man himself. Religion just provides one more way of people to seperate themselves from others.

Even without religion, we'd find ways to define ourselves as different/superior to others. Just look at America today. Religion isn't the key defining trait, it's politics. Conservatives and Liberals both view each other as being wrong/evil/bad. It's just part of the human condition, and not likely to change in the near future. The irony is, that even while trying to change it...We just create another sect.