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.
If you are happy with it, then follow the common law, if the laws don't suit you, then move to a nation where the laws are more along the lines of your ideas. One nation, ONE set of laws
Here in the USA I can use sharia law for civil matters. Although it is by mutual agreement only and involves no State support. Although my wife and myself were Married under Sharia law, it is recognized by the Federal Government, The Tribal councils of the Lakota, the Department of Veteran's Affairs and all but 18 states.
BTW Judaic law which is virtually identical to sharia civil law is legal and recognized by the UK. the only difference is the contracts are conducted under the supervision of a Rabbi and Sharia Civil law would be under the jurisdiction of a Mosque.
I have no legal training, but here is my guess how civil law works.
Suppose I sell you a house and you pay me $100K today and agree to pay me $100K next week. If you don't pay me next week, I go to a judge, show him our contract, and he orders you to pay me.
Suppose the contract also says that if you don't pay me $100K next week, I can have one of your fingers. I go to the judge, show him the contract, and ask him to have one of your fingers cut off. I think he would rule that the contract is not enforceable.
If we had Sharia law in the U.S., I suspect Muslims would write a contract with terms that are not enforceable under our normal laws, but would be appropriate under Sharia. Then, if there was a dispute, one of the Muslims would go to court and ask a judge to enforce the Sharia contract.
We don't want that in the U.S. Our laws are fine, and do not need to be made more complicated.
I have no legal training, but here is my guess how civil law works.
Suppose I sell you a house and you pay me $100K today and agree to pay me $100K next week. If you don't pay me next week, I go to a judge, show him our contract, and he orders you to pay me.
Suppose the contract also says that if you don't pay me $100K next week, I can have one of your fingers. I go to the judge, show him the contract, and ask him to have one of your fingers cut off. I think he would rule that the contract is not enforceable.
If we had Sharia law in the U.S., I suspect Muslims would write a contract with terms that are not enforceable under our normal laws, but would be appropriate under Sharia. Then, if there was a dispute, one of the Muslims would go to court and ask a judge to enforce the Sharia contract.
We don't want that in the U.S. Our laws are fine, and do not need to be made more complicated.
Woodrow can correct me if I am wrong, but I think the first part of your post is exactly what is currently allowed. If somneone tried to write an unenforceable contract it is invalid, Sharia or no.
Judaism uses a combination of contract law in the manner you mentioned above, with Beth Din, a religious court that is in essence binding arbitration. I think this is a fine way to conduct religious affairs, rather than trying to redefine civil (or criminal) law to fit a particular religion. This makes the religious law only binding on those who agree to it.
An example of it done poorly is Louisiana's covenant marriage. The state has defined a second type of marriage with specific restrictions on divorces, based on Christian doctrine, and codified it into state law. This is a perfect example of something that should have been handled through contract law and binding arbitration, and instead has been written into state law.
As long as Sharia is implemented through contract law, is only binding on those that agree to it, and is not allowed to override local, state, and federal law, I don't have any more of a problem with it than I do Jewish law, and less of a problem than I do with the Covenant marriage stuff.
In fact I think contract law is a good solution to a lot of issues. Removing marriage from federal and state law entirely and making it contract based would allow religious groups to define what a <insert sect> marriage is and refuse to recognize any others, while governmental status is determined solely by the contract. Believers, in whatever faith, could make all the regulations they want, and they are only binding on the faithful who subject themselves to these rules. The rest of us get left alone!
I have no legal training, but here is my guess how civil law works.
Suppose I sell you a house and you pay me $100K today and agree to pay me $100K next week. If you don't pay me next week, I go to a judge, show him our contract, and he orders you to pay me.
Suppose the contract also says that if you don't pay me $100K next week, I can have one of your fingers. I go to the judge, show him the contract, and ask him to have one of your fingers cut off. I think he would rule that the contract is not enforceable.
If we had Sharia law in the U.S., I suspect Muslims would write a contract with terms that are not enforceable under our normal laws, but would be appropriate under Sharia. Then, if there was a dispute, one of the Muslims would go to court and ask a judge to enforce the Sharia contract.
We don't want that in the U.S. Our laws are fine, and do not need to be made more complicated.
Sharia Civil law has no physical punishments attached. The civil contracts are very similar to what are already used. the differences are mostly in terms of loans, buying, selling, marriage and divorce.
In Islam it is forbidden to pay or collect interest. On a house note you find a house. Go to the bank and make an offer to buy the house and name your price you will pay and the terms you want to pay it in. The bank negotiates with the seller and if they can get it at a price that will make them a profit, they buy it and resell it to you under the price and terms you offered. In the event you default. the bank resells the house, You get what you have paid returned as equity. Nothing lost on your part. Every penny of the note goes to the principal and is considered equity. That is a simple explanation.
In terms of marriage, some terms of the Nikkah are not legal under most State civil law, such as the husband alone being the one with full responsibility for all household expenses, with the wife often being the sole owner of the house with no joint ownership. Divorce is another issue as except if the wife is guilty of adultery, the husband has to pay all of her expenses until the time she remarries, no matter what the reason is for the divorce. Also the conditions both parties agree to in the Nikkah may not be enforceable under state law.
There are no physical punishments for civil laws under sharia. All of the madhabs are very much in agreement with the civil laws. It is the Criminal laws in which you get extremem differences between what Madhab of sharia is used. But, most Muslims just want the Civil laws recognized. Most Muslims in the Western world are sunni and follow the Hanafi Madhab of sharia, which very often is much more lenient than the state criminal laws. the penalties may be harsh, but it is virtually impossible to find sufficient proof for a conviction.
Too many people see Wahhabiism as being sharia. Sharia to be sharia has to follow one of the recognized Madhabs, which is not Wahhabi.
No offense Woodrow LI but I think you are ignoring reality and attempting to impose idealism..what should happen vs what happens..very Liberal mentality.
Islam, muslims, sharia = bad idea for everyone. Case in point: look at the state of muslims today. look at what is happening when all these muslims come to the West and practise their religion. Not compatible, no matter how you argue it. There's a reason muslims can practise their religion freely in the West but muslim nations refuse to give half the rights to nonmuslim counterparts.
The use of sharia courts violates freedom-loving nations that respect human rights, and opens the door to eventual domination, given the nature of Islam and the West's current socio-economic and cultural problems. When I say this to muslims and their pathetic Lib defenders they counter it with: "well the West is already corrupt and they bomb muslim nations so you shouldn't talk about what we do here". Nice...so muslims are using everyone's problems as justification to implement their own intolerance, and using the military-govt's actions to inflict sharia on entire nonmuslim populations. When any crime against muslims, even an incident of trivial misunderstanding involving their dress code, occurs the press is all up in arms and no excuses are made. But apparently it's okay for them to commit crimes against nonmuslims...understandable because of what the West is doing to their nations, despite many of these muslims being born and raised in Western nations.
I suggest you educate yourself on what DOES happen when muslims use, exploit current events to gain followers and public pity, what islam has done to just about any population, vs what you think SHOULD happen.
Multiculturalism does not work, especially with an aggressive force such as Islam.
Here in the USA I can use sharia law for civil matters. Although it is by mutual agreement only and involves no State support. Although my wife and myself were Married under Sharia law, it is recognized by the Federal Government, The Tribal councils of the Lakota, the Department of Veteran's Affairs and all but 18 states.
BTW Judaic law which is virtually identical to sharia civil law is legal and recognized by the UK. the only difference is the contracts are conducted under the supervision of a Rabbi and Sharia Civil law would be under the jurisdiction of a Mosque.
OK pardon me I just saw this post & looked at your profile so now I see why you're a sharia apologist. I guess ignoring reality is your typical stance just like many muslims.
GUess you're blind to all the troubles muslims are causing and their future threats. I suppose since you think Islam and muslims are immune from criticism because their nations are being exploited and their people slaughtered. Things aren't that black and white, but your posts suggest a sneaky demeanour typical of muslims trying to portray a benign image of their religion and hide the true nasty reality.
OK pardon me I just saw this post & looked at your profile so now I see why you're a sharia apologist. I guess ignoring reality is your typical stance just like many muslims.
GUess you're blind to all the troubles muslims are causing and their future threats. I suppose since you think Islam and muslims are immune from criticism because their nations are being exploited and their people slaughtered. Things aren't that black and white, but your posts suggest a sneaky demeanour typical of muslims trying to portray a benign image of their religion and hide the true nasty reality.
I'm still a bit new at being a Muslim. I accepted Islam 7 years ago.
I accepted Islam because I found it to be much more peaceful than what I lived in 45 years as a Christian and then 20 years as an atheist.
Very little things in life are Black and white. Sharia is a very difficult concept even for Muslims. It takes almost a lifetime to complete an education in the 4 Madhabs of Sharia. Only 2 or 3 colleges world wide offer a Ph.D in Islamic Jusrisprudence.
I have very little background in sharia law outside the Courses on Islamic Jurisprudence I took at UT in Austin. I only personally know one person with a Ph.D in sharia law and he lives in Malaysia and is a practicing defense attorney.
Currently no nation is under true Sharia, especially none of the Mideastern Nations. I do not think there is even one self proclaimed Sharia Judge that has a degree in Islamic Jurisprudence.
Much of what the Western world sees as Sharia is Wahabbiism as practiced in Pakistan, Egypt and to some extent Saudi. Or the Jafa'ari law of Iran that the Shi'a call Sharia.
Most of us Muslims in the USA only want the Sharia civil laws recognized for contracts involving only consenting Muslims. I can live without the Sharia Civil Laws being recognized, it is still legal for me to use Sharia in all private contracts. To me it is a matter of principal, the Jews are permitted to use Judaic law as civil law in every State. Islamic Sharia is partially recognized in 32 States and completely outlawed in 2 or 3 states.
I'm still a bit new at being a Muslim. I accepted Islam 7 years ago.
I accepted Islam because I found it to be much more peaceful than what I lived in 45 years as a Christian and then 20 years as an atheist.
Very little things in life are Black and white. Sharia is a very difficult concept even for Muslims. It takes almost a lifetime to complete an education in the 4 Madhabs of Sharia. Only 2 or 3 colleges world wide offer a Ph.D in Islamic Jusrisprudence.
I have very little background in sharia law outside the Courses on Islamic Jurisprudence I took at UT in Austin. I only personally know one person with a Ph.D in sharia law and he lives in Malaysia and is a practicing defense attorney.
Currently no nation is under true Sharia, especially none of the Mideastern Nations. I do not think there is even one self proclaimed Sharia Judge that has a degree in Islamic Jurisprudence.
Much of what the Western world sees as Sharia is Wahabbiism as practiced in Pakistan, Egypt and to some extent Saudi. Or the Jafa'ari law of Iran that the Shi'a call Sharia.
Most of us Muslims in the USA only want the Sharia civil laws recognized for contracts involving only consenting Muslims. I can live without the Sharia Civil Laws being recognized, it is still legal for me to use Sharia in all private contracts. To me it is a matter of principal, the Jews are permitted to use Judaic law as civil law in every State. Islamic Sharia is partially recognized in 32 States and completely outlawed in 2 or 3 states.
So you're ignorant, foolish, stupid and naive. Fine, but there are too many like you who will destroy the world with your dangerous mentality. I suggest you educate yourself and stop demanding sharia when history has proven it DOES NOT WORK. Also know that Christians are currently the most persecuted group NOT muslims, as the latter are free (too free IMO) to practise their religion in nonmuslim nations whilst muslims do their best to force nonmuslims to bow to them or chase them from their lands. All abrahamic religions are violent.
So you're ignorant, foolish, stupid and naive. Fine, but there are too many like you who will destroy the world with your dangerous mentality. I suggest you educate yourself and stop demanding sharia when history has proven it DOES NOT WORK. Also know that Christians are currently the most persecuted group NOT muslims, as the latter are free (too free IMO) to practise their religion in nonmuslim nations whilst muslims do their best to force nonmuslims to bow to them or chase them from their lands. All abrahamic religions are violent.
One can only be personally certain of that which they them self have experienced.
I have never been mistreated by a Muslim. Not even while living in Muslim predominate countries as a very out spoken Christian evangelist.
I have never personally seen any of the atrocities that are frequently in the news. Not even in Pakistan, Saudi or Iran. But I have not been out of the USA since 1995
I am aware of the many problems there have been with Pakistanis in the UK. I am also aware as to why there are so many Pakistanis in the UK. This began in India dating back to the days of the Bengal lancers when the British recruited the Muslims in India to serve Queen Victoria and protect the British settlers from the Hindus. These Muslims were the people that eventually were moved to Pakistan. However, many had full British Citizenship and full inherited British Knighthoods. The UK seemed like the better choice as there was a labor shortage and considerable recruitment from London Businesses fro Pakistani labor. they came with expectation of Jobs, Homes, good salaries and even the benefits of knighthoods. Surprise. many ended up unemployed, living in squalid conditions and treated as immigrants instead of UK citizens.
Then about in the 1960s the infamous "Teddy Boy" gangs formed and the sport of the day was "Paki Bashing" in which gangs would drive into Pakistani neighborhoods and randomly beat up pakistanis.
Well the Pakistan population grew and now there is a backlash from them. What you have is not a Muslim uprising but rather discouraged, frustrated and fed up Pakistani's.
One can only be personally certain of that which they them self have experienced.
I have never been mistreated by a Muslim. Not even while living in Muslim predominate countries as a very out spoken Christian evangelist.
I have never personally seen any of the atrocities that are frequently in the news. Not even in Pakistan, Saudi or Iran. But I have not been out of the USA since 1995
I am aware of the many problems there have been with Pakistanis in the UK. I am also aware as to why there are so many Pakistanis in the UK. This began in India dating back to the days of the Bengal lancers when the British recruited the Muslims in India to serve Queen Victoria and protect the British settlers from the Hindus. These Muslims were the people that eventually were moved to Pakistan. However, many had full British Citizenship and full inherited British Knighthoods. The UK seemed like the better choice as there was a labor shortage and considerable recruitment from London Businesses fro Pakistani labor. they came with expectation of Jobs, Homes, good salaries and even the benefits of knighthoods. Surprise. many ended up unemployed, living in squalid conditions and treated as immigrants instead of UK citizens.
Then about in the 1960s the infamous "Teddy Boy" gangs formed and the sport of the day was "Paki Bashing" in which gangs would drive into Pakistani neighborhoods and randomly beat up pakistanis.
Well the Pakistan population grew and now there is a backlash from them. What you have is not a Muslim uprising but rather discouraged, frustrated and fed up Pakistani's.
Britain does have a long cultural link with Pakistan, and the UK does have a sizable Pakistani community. I don't think they were any more disenfranchised than any other immigrant group. Lately there have been many distressing cases the worse is where young vunerable white girls have been targeted and groomed for sex. The Pakistani men responsible have or are in the process of court proceedings and hopefully they will spend a long time in prison. What was clear 'twas the fact they regarded these young girls as worthless. Then we have parents who murdered their daughter because she being born here was considered to westernised and refused the marraige they had arranged for her in Pakistan.
For the most part Pakistanis run successful businesses and integrate into the community, but there is a section who regard themselves as above the law of the land they have chosen to make their home and insist on holding fast to their cultural traditions, which they believe is part and parcel of their religion. We allow the building of mosques despite the fact that some teach hatred and intolerance against the British people. A minority for sure, but with most minorities they tend to make their presence felt to the detriment of peace.
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.
