Donald I, emperor of the world.

[AuroraSaab]

As I understand it, These 'courts' are merely mechanisms for mediation/arbitration, requiring the consent or agreement of the 2 parties involved, before an amicable solution is reached.
That's it.
Exactly like Beth Din, the Judaism equivalent.
Hardly 'muslamic ray guns' is it? 🤦🏻‍♂️

There can be a large element of coercion or social/family pressure applied to accept adjuducation through the shariah or Beth Din courts though. Their rulings in matrimonial matters and child custody often favour males.
It's not consent when the alternative is domestic abuse, ostracisation, financial insecurity.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58334745.amp
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ng-wife-caroline-get-jewish-religious-divorce
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/one-woman-s-brush-with-sharia-courts-in-uk/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21791...ying-to-obtain-divorce-through-sharia-courts/

 

[icowden]

There can be a large element of coercion or social/family pressure applied to accept adjuducation through the shariah or Beth Din courts though. Their rulings in matrimonial matters and child custody often favour males.
It's not consent when the alternative is domestic abuse, ostracisation, financial insecurity.

All true. The point is that it is not an alternative to the rule of law. If you want to set up your own cult with weird rules, you are free to do so as long as those rules do not conflict with the rule of law. If the people in your cult don't like your rules, they can leave the cult. If they are not able to leave the cult then your cult may be committing a criminal offence.

 

[Pinno718]

There can be a large element of coercion or social/family pressure applied to accept adjuducation through the shariah or Beth Din courts though. Their rulings in matrimonial matters and child custody often favour males.
It's not consent when the alternative is domestic abuse, ostracisation, financial insecurity.

Yebbut: a) Sadiq Khan has never mentioned brining in Sharia law b) there's been no mention in the London Evening standard of anyone wanting Sharia law C) no-one would endorse Sharia law over and above our judicial system d) Fagash is a c*nt using misinformation, stirring up nationalism, legitimising xenophobia, prejudice and racism and getting paid by the Musks of the world because hate and fear is far more lucrative and popular (amongst certain groups).
He's another tw@t selling snake oil whilst lining his pockets. He's part of an internationally funded network of ultra right wing purveyors of extremism.
Your point is?

 

[Ian H]

All true. The point is that it is not an alternative to the rule of law. If you want to set up your own cult with weird rules, you are free to do so as long as those rules do not conflict with the rule of law. If the people in your cult don't like your rules, they can leave the cult. If they are not able to leave the cult then your cult may be committing a criminal offence.

There's always some coercion to accept any given religion's rules, and protection of those in authority when they break those rules.

 

[AuroraSaab]

If the people in your cult don't like your rules, they can leave the cult. If they are not able to leave the cult then your cult may be committing a criminal offence.

Have you any idea how hard it is for women - and men too, though less so - to leave your marriage, your family, your community when everything is faith based? When you have no support outside it and little financial support?
Reporting their behaviour as criminal also leads to ostracisation from family and community, often the only support they have, so it's really not as easy as just leaving the religion.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33424644.amp

 

[All uphill]

I get how difficult it is to break with family, cultural or religious rules, and the huge cost that imposes on both men and women.

I volunteer with people, some of whom are refugees here because their lives were at risk in their place of origin.

As others have said, in this country national law overrides religious rules. Note that the only people suggesting otherwise are on the far right - and I don't think it's because they care about islamic people, do you?

 

[Evil_Breakfast]

There can be a large element of coercion or social/family pressure applied to accept adjuducation through the shariah or Beth Din courts though. Their rulings in matrimonial matters and child custody often favour males.
It's not consent when the alternative is domestic abuse, ostracisation, financial insecurity.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58334745.amp
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ng-wife-caroline-get-jewish-religious-divorce
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/one-woman-s-brush-with-sharia-courts-in-uk/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21791...ying-to-obtain-divorce-through-sharia-courts/

I will not dispute any of the, valid, points raised by @AuroraSaab.
I do recall Channel 4 airing a 'fly-on-the-wall' documentary series regarding Sharia Courts; with unprecedented access, including -pixelated- filmed sessions.
Late 90's?
Religions, of any denomination, require mechanisms to resolve grievances/complaints etc.
Which is completely fine.
What Reform are doing, however, is a deliberate attempt to galvanise their base, through demonstrably false smearing and mis-information; knowing that it won't be questioned.
It's disgraceful that UK media are not robustly challenging this narrative.

 

[C R]

Yebbut: a) Sadiq Khan has never mentioned brining in Sharia law b) there's been no mention in the London Evening standard of anyone wanting Sharia law C) no-one would endorse Sharia law over and above our judicial system d) Fagash is a c*nt using misinformation, stirring up nationalism, legitimising xenophobia, prejudice and racism and getting paid by the Musks of the world because hate and fear is far more lucrative and popular (amongst certain groups).
He's another tw@t selling snake oil whilst lining his pockets. He's part of an internationally funded network of ultra right wing purveyors of extremism.
Your point is?

Both things can be true.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Your point is?

That shariah law courts, their orthodox Jewish equivalent - and in fact any religious or political organisation that expects its members to defer to internal arbitration on moral matters - are not benign, often disadvantage women and children, and are not easily rejected by those in the communities they serve.

I've made no comment on Farage's views but it's daft to pretend it isn't an issue just because he's now latched on to it.

It's a mistake to give any power or status to these courts at all and much more needs to be done to make sure the most vulnerable in these communities are able to access the British justice system.

 

[Rusty Nails]

First they demand Sharia law and the next thing you know they want swans on the Sunday lunch menu down the pub.

 

[Evil_Breakfast]

That shariah law courts, their orthodox Jewish equivalent - and in fact any religious or political organisation that expects its members to defer to internal arbitration on moral matters - are not benign, often disadvantage women and children, and are not easily rejected by those in the communities they serve.

I've made no comment on Farage's views but it's daft to pretend it isn't an issue just because he's now latched on to it.

It's a mistake to give any power or status to these courts at all and much more needs to be done to make sure the most vulnerable in these communities are able to access the British justice system.

Women, who find themselves in an intolerable situation, should be able to have -unfettered- access to the British justice system, for resolution.
The 'inverse' of this (for wont of a better word) is what is, currently, being belched out; and accepted, by ignorant racists with no empathy.
Or critical thinking skills.

 

[BoldonLad]

All true. The point is that it is not an alternative to the rule of law. If you want to set up your own cult with weird rules, you are free to do so as long as those rules do not conflict with the rule of law. If the people in your cult don't like your rules, they can leave the cult. If they are not able to leave the cult then your cult may be committing a criminal offence.

It is not about Sharia Law (or, any other set of religious crap) being above or an alternative to the rule of law.

As a totally non-religious individual, I find it quite amazing that the the grip of Christianity (in its various sects) in the UK, has diminished significantly in my lifetime, but, we have people supporting the growth of alternative forms of Religious (or cultish) oppression and coercion.

 

[Evil_Breakfast]

It is not about Sharia Law (or, any other set of religious crap) being above or an alternative to the rule of law.

As a totally non-religious individual, I find it quite amazing that the the grip of Christianity (in its various sects) in the UK, has diminished significantly in my lifetime, but, we have people supporting the growth of alternative forms of Religious (or cultish) oppression and coercion.

Through fear, via mis-information.

[Orwell] Football, beer, and above all, gambling, filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult [/Orwell]

 

[Pinno718]

Joe Rogan entertains... dun dun da!!! Bernie Sanders !?!?


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYVzme2fybU

 

[cookiemonster]

The democrats under Biden and Obama have been going after Trump for years.

If you want to call it - Payback

With good reason. He's a criminal. The only reason he stood for a second term is because he would've been jailed for Jan 6th among other issues.