U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-30-2011, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Sinking in the Great Salt Lake
13,143 posts, read 19,186,968 times
Reputation: 14007

Advertisements

Sharia law is a legitimate cultural philosophy that works reasonably well in it's own culture.

The problem is (as is usually the case with religion) that some people figure if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for the world...and it's their job to "give" it to the world.

Sharia Lawyers don't wanna just knock on your door or yell about it on street corner though, they fully intent to spread it by force, Spanish Inquisition style. THAT is bad...

Last edited by Chango; 10-30-2011 at 10:33 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-30-2011, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Maryland
3,540 posts, read 6,079,527 times
Reputation: 981
All of Abraham's children have developed a set of "laws"
The fundamentalists within each faith are what scare me.
Be they islamic, christian, or jew.

It's my prayer that our common "Father" will quide us well in interpreting His law of Love.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 11:49 AM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,274,304 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
Sharia law is a legitimate cultural philosophy that works reasonably well in it's own culture.

The problem is (as is usually the case with religion) that some people figure if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for the world...and it's their job to "give" it to the world.

Sharia Lawyers don't wanna just knock on your door or yell about it on street corner though, they fully intent to spread it by force, Spanish Inquisition style. THAT is bad...
.

Sharia can not be fully implemented except under a true God(swt) ordained Caliphate which we will not have until the Return of Jesus(as) and the coming of the Mehdi.

That does not mean there can not be the implementation of sharia based civil laws or even criminal laws. But, it must be recognized that the criminal code under sharia is not enforceable as the criteria for establishing guilt is so strict, a legal conviction is impossible to obtain.

It must be remembered that sharia while based upon the Qur'an, Sunnah and Ahadith is man written and as such is subject to error and misinterpretation. Proper implementation requires an infallible leader which we will not have until the final caliphate.

For practical application of sharia based law, the codes can and should be followed. However, the criteria for proof and the implementation of punishment must be applicable for the times and culture. This does have a precedent as seen by the 4 madhabs all Sunni accept as legitimate.

The purpose and wisdom of shariah is that it should deter the people from violating the laws. If we do not have a reduction of crime, it is time to study how Shariah is used.

Since most of us do not know of the solution, and most Muslims now live in mixed nations. The only sharia laws applicable for most of us are the civil laws. Nearly every country already has the Hadd (Hadud) crimes as being illegal. There is no reason we can not accept their criteria for guilt and punishment. If we feel the laws are too strict or too lenient, we can petition for a change through legal channels in most Nations.

We can always look forward to a fully united Ummah and a time when all people live in Peace, but until that time happens, we must make concessions in terms of enforcement, criteria of proof and fairness of punishments.

However, we must make it known that we do want Shariah civil laws to be recognized and be enforceable for Muslims in all Nations. For this we must reassure people that Shariah civil laws can only apply to Muslims and only in cases in which all involved are Muslim and all agree to let the issue be settled by a mutually accepted arbitrator.

We do need to be aware that when non-Muslims hear the word Shariah, they are thinking of those who wrongly use the name Shariah and call their cultural laws Shariah.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 12:29 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,274,304 times
Reputation: 7407
As I was looking for an easy to read synopsis of shariah Sex crime laws I came across this article. A little off topic, but quite interesting as it is written by an Atheist, Israeli Journalist.

Quote:
Why Israel imposes Sharia law

Most Americans would be shocked to hear Israel imposes Sharia. But it does, for some 60 years.

On Andrew Sullivan’s blog, a reader wondered about the contradiction of conservatives supporting, at the same time, two contradictory opinions: on the one hand, they blindly support Israel and its army, and on the other, they strongly oppose the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, even as the IDF has permitted openly gay soldiers to serve some two decades ago.

Well, actually, there seems to be a better question for neocons: how can you be so hysterical about the (non-existent) threat of Sharia in the US, to the point of supporting Oklahoma’s boneheaded amendment, and yet, at the same time, loudly support – in the case of Sarah Palin, even wear the flag of – one of the very few non-Muslim countries to impose Sharia? And yes, I am speaking of Israel.

SOURCE
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 12:51 PM
 
Location: Golden, CO
2,108 posts, read 2,497,518 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
However, we must make it known that we do want Shariah civil laws to be recognized and be enforceable for Muslims in all Nations.
I wholeheartedly oppose any religion having its own justice system separate from the government, even if it is restricted to civil matters.

I would have no problem with state sanctioned mediators who only work with parties from a particular religion. Mediators can help the parties negotiate a settlement and payment arrangement without ever having to go to court. However, mediators have no power to enforce a mediated agreement. They cannot physically deprive one party of its property and give it to another.

If this Shariah law for civil matters that you talk about is nothing more than a mediator under a different name, then I am fine with that. However, if this Shariah "court" has the power to enforce an agreement between the parties when one party fails to follow through on what they agreed to through penalties, sanctions, ostracization from the community, confiscation, etc. I have a huge problem with that.

One, where is the accountability in that situation? In America, we can get rid of corrupt judges by voting them out either through a retention vote or by popular election, depending on local laws. We also have an appeals system, in which we can appeal a lower court's decision to a higher court. To whom can a Muslim appeal to under Sharia law. They may have chosen an arbiter thinking they would be fair, but it might turn out that they were not fair.

Two, I just have a problem with allowing one person or group to have power over the property of others, other than the government.

Three, what are the opportunities of abuses? If everyone in one Muslim community sides with one party, because he is rich and powerful, etc, how can the other party get a fair hearing when there is no Muslim in that community he could say would make a fair arbiter. What recourse does one have if it is discovered the arbiter is taken bribes from one side, or the less tangible (I'll scratch your back, if you scratch mine)?

Four, it could make a religious imams too powerful over the individuals of that Muslim community. Because you know imams will be selected more often than others to be the arbiters. There are conflicts of interest created by dual roles. Hard feelings can be fostered toward imams if people feel like they did not get a fair deal. And those hard feelings can destroy a religious community. One could feel guilt or feel compelled to accept someone as an arbiter because it might offend them if you reject them. People should not be in that position.

We can't have separate justice systems and be one country. If you like that justice system best, then get a bunch of Muslims together, found your own country and adopt that as your justice system. But, don't try to set up a separate justice system in a country that has another for all the people.

In America, our ideal is to not mix government and religion, and the justice system is part of the government. Religion can do its own thing with rituals and the like, but when it comes to a person's life, liberty, and property, religion should have no power to deprive a citizen of any of those things regardless of whether they are part of that religion or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 01:09 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,737,886 times
Reputation: 1328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
[...]
Truly, Woodrow, people such as yourself a full of righteous thought and contemplation. It is refreshing to find the people of their religions who can express their thoughts so well and have such ready and contemplated answers to many bothersome questions. Though you didn't convince me of the superiority of Sharia over secular law, I can see that you have dutifully contemplated upon the tenets of your beliefs and those of your brothers and sisters. Many people don't bother to work as hard as others, and that leads to many mistakes and wrong-doings.

Truly though, these Sharia Imams are only in it for their greed. If being a Sharia Lawyer made them hungry, they would not do it. And these are the corrupt Muslims yelling at the British that they will Impose sharia in England.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
3,381 posts, read 3,489,596 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
I wholeheartedly oppose any religion having its own justice system separate from the government, even if it is restricted to civil matters.

In America, our ideal is to not mix government and religion, and the justice system is part of the government. Religion can do its own thing with rituals and the like, but when it comes to a person's life, liberty, and property, religion should have no power to deprive a citizen of any of those things regardless of whether they are part of that religion or not.

And, I wholeheartedly agree with your opposition. Humanity doesn't need a lengthy set of laws written by men to over-ride what conscience tells us to do. Isn't that what happened in the OT? The religious leaders heaped burdens upon men that nobody could bear. Our political and economic leaders could use a conscience. There is no law that can force a conscience into man. Tyranny and oppression result when we have people who try to do such things.

This is the law; love. The law and the prophets hang on this command.

The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." Galations 5:14
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 02:39 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,274,304 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
Truly, Woodrow, people such as yourself a full of righteous thought and contemplation. It is refreshing to find the people of their religions who can express their thoughts so well and have such ready and contemplated answers to many bothersome questions. Though you didn't convince me of the superiority of Sharia over secular law, I can see that you have dutifully contemplated upon the tenets of your beliefs and those of your brothers and sisters. Many people don't bother to work as hard as others, and that leads to many mistakes and wrong-doings.

Truly though, these Sharia Imams are only in it for their greed. If being a Sharia Lawyer made them hungry, they would not do it. And these are the corrupt Muslims yelling at the British that they will Impose sharia in England.
Typicallyan Imam is not paid and is the person who has built a Mosque and has taken on the responsibility to pay for it's upkeep. We have no ordained clergy. Every Muslim can be the Imam at a local Mosque. Normally the Imam will be the oldest person present or the person accepted as having the most knowledge. Paid Imams are a fairly recent development that seems to have originated in the USA Mosques here are often started by local groups of Muslims who in turn hire a full time Imam.

Islamic titles are easily misunderstood. I have the title of Sheikh, but it is based simply on my being considered to be elderly. Other people who have the title of Sheikh are recognized community leaders, people with high level of education usually at the Ph.D level etc. A Mufti is a person well educated in at least one field of Islamic studies such as Qur'anic Studies, The Science of Ahadith or Islamic Jurisprudence, and who also functions as an Imam.

Islamic Lawyers are those with a doctorate in Islamic Jurisprudence. They do pass the state Bar exams in the nations they happen to live in and do carry full licensing for the state they are in.

The UK is somewhat unique there is much animosity between the Pakistani population and the "Native" UK residents. You have to remember that the Pakistani were British citizens, as Pakistan was a commonwealth. Legally the Pakistanis are not immigrants but came into the country as full citizens, some, perhaps many even held perpetual, inheritable knighthoods that were granted to their families by Queen Victoria. Think Bengal Lancers these were people that eventually became Pakistani. Pakistan is a new nation having been a State of India until 1947 and the end of British colonialism. The Pakistanis were kicked out of India and sent to Pakistan as they were the former Military arm of the UK in India. Some came to the UK with promises of being rewarded for serving the crown, and ended up penniless in the slum districts. Lots of bad feelings besides religious differences taking place there.

Last edited by Woodrow LI; 10-30-2011 at 03:30 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 04:17 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,274,304 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
I wholeheartedly oppose any religion having its own justice system separate from the government, even if it is restricted to civil matters.
I will agree you have a valid concern there. also a very understandable one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
I would have no problem with state sanctioned mediators who only work with parties from a particular religion. Mediators can help the parties negotiate a settlement and payment arrangement without ever having to go to court. However, mediators have no power to enforce a mediated agreement. They cannot physically deprive one party of its property and give it to another.
In any Islamic civil matters all participants will know each other and often will be related. A large degree of Islamic contracts do require considerable trust of each other. The problems arise if for some reason either party can not fulfill the agreed upon conditions. In the event of the unexpected, an arbitrator is needed to help facilitate an amicable settlement. Person A agrees to buy a house from person B the agreed upon amount is $1000 per month for 5 years. after 4 years and 10 months person A looses his job and can not make the last two payments. How can this be handled legally and fairly. typically in a shariah contract the seller would have the right to resale the house and from the sale pay back to buyer A the full amount he has paid in. However, in this case person A will be faced with a hardship if having to move, he offers to pay 3 more payments instead of the 2 owed if allowed to stay in the house until he can return to work. Neither likes the others offer. So to settle such a matter person A will select a person from person B's family to serve as an arbitrator and person B will select one from Person A's family. After discussion it is hoped an agreeable solution will be found. If that does not happen all involved will negotiate accepting a disinterested outside party and agree to abide by his decision. this is were it gets sticky and a need for the shariah contract to be found to be legal, in the event either party refuses to accept the decision of the 3rd party.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
If this Shariah law for civil matters that you talk about is nothing more than a mediator under a different name, then I am fine with that. However, if this Shariah "court" has the power to enforce an agreement between the parties when one party fails to follow through on what they agreed to through penalties, sanctions, ostracization from the community, confiscation, etc. I have a huge problem with that.
In most case possibly not all, but generally speaking and except for the rare occasion somebody refuses the suggestion of the mediator, that is what it entails. the Mediator/arbitrator is never paid and is usually a close friend or relative of all parties involved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
One, where is the accountability in that situation? In America, we can get rid of corrupt judges by voting them out either through a retention vote or by popular election, depending on local laws. We also have an appeals system, in which we can appeal a lower court's decision to a higher court. To whom can a Muslim appeal to under Sharia law. They may have chosen an arbiter thinking they would be fair, but it might turn out that they were not fair.
there is option for appeal, if either person can produce witnesses that the arbitrator acted unfairly. In which case the parties involved would seek out another arbitrator who all parties believe will be fair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
Two, I just have a problem with allowing one person or group to have power over the property of others, other than the government.
In Islam we have no concept of property ownership. we see each person as simply having the burden of being the caretaker of the property. In Islam property ownership can become expensive as a Muslim is to give 2.75 % of the value of all property in his care to Charity. each and every year he has possession of the property.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
Three, what are the opportunities of abuses? If everyone in one Muslim community sides with one party, because he is rich and powerful, etc, how can the other party get a fair hearing when there is no Muslim in that community he could say would make a fair arbiter. What recourse does one have if it is discovered the arbiter is taken bribes from one side, or the less tangible (I'll scratch your back, if you scratch mine)?
As the mediator is not paid and is selected by the ones involved. It seems abuse is quite difficult.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
Four, it could make a religious imams too powerful over the individuals of that Muslim community. Because you know imams will be selected more often than others to be the arbiters. There are conflicts of interest created by dual roles. Hard feelings can be fostered toward imams if people feel like they did not get a fair deal. And those hard feelings can destroy a religious community. One could feel guilt or feel compelled to accept someone as an arbiter because it might offend them if you reject them. People should not be in that position.
Here in the US that could be a problem, but for most communities each and every male will eventually be the Imam of the local Mosque.

(Females can be Imams. However a male is forbidden to pray behind a female. It is felt the site of a female bending in prostration could be very distracting to some males. So a female will be an Imam only in an all female mosque. This does happen on occasion and actually quite often is a few Moroccan cities were the male population habitually does not attend Mosque but choose to pray at home.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
We can't have separate justice systems and be one country. If you like that justice system best, then get a bunch of Muslims together, found your own country and adopt that as your justice system. But, don't try to set up a separate justice system in a country that has another for all the people.
But, the very same right is already granted to the Jews. In every state Jews are permitted to have civil cases heard by a Rabbi instead of a court appointed Judge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
In America, our ideal is to not mix government and religion, and the justice system is part of the government. Religion can do its own thing with rituals and the like, but when it comes to a person's life, liberty, and property, religion should have no power to deprive a citizen of any of those things regardless of whether they are part of that religion or not.
I do agree fully with regards to life and liberty. But disagree in terms of property. As under state laws a creditor does have the right to seize property, and or wages in the event of non payment. would it not be fair for a Muslim creditor to have the same right with Muslim debtors?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2011, 08:30 PM
 
330 posts, read 497,507 times
Reputation: 397
A Woman in indonesia to be EXECUTED for drinking a beer... a Man in Afghanistan to be EXECUTED for changing religions... Sure "sharia" is a wonderfull system of laws... Woodrow claims "The intent of sharia seems to be that of fair treatment of all people and the elimination of the need for earthly punishment" Sorry Woodrow, stop apologizing for this SAVAGE and HATE FILLED system. This is not justice, this is facsim, and it needs to be completly eliminated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top