Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Should practicing Muslims be allowed to conduct their Sharia courts here in the US on civil matters? In the UK, they're allowed. What about the here in the US?
Those we already have are often imperfect, and although it is not always the case, we should all live under the same laws.
But we all aren't subjected to the same laws. We all don't live in the same jurisdictions. People in Colorado can carry marijuana without the fear of being arrested. You and I can't(Assuming you don't live in Colorado).
Should practicing Muslims be allowed to conduct their Sharia courts here in the US on civil matters? In the UK, they're allowed. What about the here in the US?
Just one clarification on laws in The United Kingdom concerning civil Sharia courts: all parties involved must first agree to participate in the process. In 1996, The UK passed an arbitration act which allows virtually anyone to be the arbiter of a civil dispute, as long as all of those involved are willing. Civil disputes can be heard by Christian or Jewish tribunals, a group of co-workers, or any other permanent or ad hoc groups that can be agreed upon by the litigants.
The important thing to bear in mind is that criminal cases cannot be tried by such groups, nor can anyone be forced to participate in such civil proceedings.
It is already common in The United States for parties to settle disputes among themselves by use of various means of mediation or arbitration which fall short of the actual filing of civil torts. I don't see any reason why people of a given religious belief who agree to such terms should be prohibited from engaging in the process.
But we all aren't subjected to the same laws. We all don't live in the same jurisdictions. People in Colorado can carry marijuana without the fear of being arrested. You and I can't(Assuming you don't live in Colorado).
As I wrote in another thread, we all live and are under the laws of our residential hierarchy. Everybody in your immediate community is subject to the same laws. If you change state, you will still be subject to the same laws as everyone else in your state.
I don't see any reason why people of a given religious belief who agree to such terms should be prohibited from engaging in the process.
Because women are a second class citizen in the Muslim world in most places where it is the dominant religion (aka middle east) they will feel intimidated by the Sharia courts and not get their full rights of the land they live in. They usually will be coerced into agreeing to such tribunals.
Sharia or any other religious "courts" should not be allowed. We need to ensure the secular and rational nature of our legal system. What is happening in the UK is unfortunate. It needs to be understood that these courts and other religious specific provisions are attempts by conservative community leaders and imams to create and maintain cultural separation. The intent is to prevent westernization and integration. That we in the west no longer live by such backward thinking is in fact the reason that we are advanced and wealthy and (ironically) the reason these immigrants from the 3rd world are relocating for better opportunities than what exist in their nations of origin. This latter fact is what many in the muslim world are in denial of and of course prefer attribute the wests current success and power to anything other than actual liberalism and secularism.
It is better to make an unambiguous secular legal standard now and never allow the wishful thinking of foolish imams bent on cultural self segregation and controlling the minds of their flock to take hold.
A Sharia court in the good old USA? surely you jest. You can see how well that works out for them in their own bum hole countries. They abide by OUR laws or they can simply hit the road Jack to where ever it is they came from. Our country has it's own laws to be followed by everyone regardless of their religion, WE'RE NOT PERFECT, but we don't need to follow anyone else, too many hands in the soup, last thing we need is the same problems that are happening in Euro, the nonsense of no police zones in the neighborhoods is exactly why they have problems now, moving forward, I have 3000 or more reasons to say no. Appeasement is nonsense.
I'm gonna go with no. Sharia Law is backwards. It's no different than the laws in Leviticus. I wouldn't want those laws.
With that said, let's say there was a town here in the US that literally only had Muslim citizens. IF they wanted to practice Sharia Law, I'd be ok with it, so long as it's voluntary. As in, if a citizens of the town wants to be tried by Sharia standards, they should have that right to do so. If they DON'T want to be tried by those laws, then they should NEVER be forced to.
In short, if someone wants to be punished according to Sharia Law, then they can be. But if you WANT to punish someone ELSE, you can't decide that for them.
What I think the real problem is: the growing emphasis on "diversity." It's causing nothing but problems.
I'm certainly not against people immigrating to the U.S., or even people having pride in their cultures, I'm just saying it would be much better if the goal was to become and be Americans.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
