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.
Sitting in one room, a young Muslim woman tells an elderly cleric about the parlous state of her marriage to a 50-year-old man.
‘He oppressed me to the maximum,’ she declares. ‘He is violent, physically, and treats me like a dog.’
It's time to start busting heads and making it very clear to the invaders that assimilation isn't optional if they want their free ****.
It's time to start busting heads and making it very clear to the invaders that assimilation isn't optional if they want their free ****.
Their country, their people their laws.
You gotta a problem with that? Revisit your thoughts and try to follow the "Live and let live" rule.
There are quite a few problems at home that you can use your time and energy to help with. Don't sweat too much of your blood in the business of others.
Do you have the same outrage for people who go to their priest for marriage counseling?
Do you get bent if the church won't provide an annulment without specific parameters being met? Laws of the crown still apply across the board.
I guess I'm confused. It's attached to the church, non state sanctioned, so people are free to choose not to use the church as the arbitrator. It's not the law of the land.
A lot of Catholics and other religious folks seek counsel and guidance from their clergy and church on marital affairs. Annulments being a great example. One can get a legal divorce recognized by the State and have the case adjucared to dispense assets, but only the Church can grant an annulment.
Similar in respects to Sharia, kind of. Obviously Sharia being a very rigid dogma and not one most western folks would care for.
In other words- if a Muslim chooses to adjucate at a church, is it anyone's business? Sharia has no legal binding in the secular sense- same as annulment. This article seems to illustrate these are not publicly sanctioned- they are religious.
Do you have the same outrage for people who go to their priest for marriage counseling?
Do you get bent if the church won't provide an annulment without specific parameters being met? Laws of the crown still apply across the board.
It's not exactly the same thing because these religious courts have an extremely lopsided scale when it comes to men's and women's rights, and there is huge pressure from the family for women to go to these courts for family disputes. Many people come from countries like Pakistan, where honor killing is common. They averaged three honor killings a day in Pakistan in 2015. How do women from such societies get a fair shake in the U.K. if they're forced to go to one of these courts?
I guess I'm confused. It's attached to the church, non state sanctioned, so people are free to choose not to use the church as the arbitrator. It's not the law of the land.
A lot of Catholics and other religious folks seek counsel and guidance from their clergy and church on marital affairs. Annulments being a great example. One can get a legal divorce recognized by the State and have the case adjucared to dispense assets, but only the Church can grant an annulment.
Similar in respects to Sharia, kind of. Obviously Sharia being a very rigid dogma and not one most western folks would care for.
In other words- if a Muslim chooses to adjucate at a church, is it anyone's business? Sharia has no legal binding in the secular sense- same as annulment. This article seems to illustrate these are not publicly sanctioned- they are religious.
Food for thought.
How many choose it though? Family pressure could be forcing many women to choose it when they would rather go to an English court.
Actually Catholics and Jews have similar courts. And the orthodox Jews are as hard on womem as the Muslims. Actually built into a lot of Judeo-Christians sects.
Actually Catholics and Jews have similar courts. And the orthodox Jews are as hard on womem as the Muslims. Actually built into a lot of Judeo-Christians sects.
Do they take over public school districts and dictate kosher food for all at public expense?
I guess I'm confused. It's attached to the church, non state sanctioned, so people are free to choose not to use the church as the arbitrator. It's not the law of the land.
A lot of Catholics and other religious folks seek counsel and guidance from their clergy and church on marital affairs. Annulments being a great example. One can get a legal divorce recognized by the State and have the case adjucared to dispense assets, but only the Church can grant an annulment.
Similar in respects to Sharia, kind of. Obviously Sharia being a very rigid dogma and not one most western folks would care for.
In other words- if a Muslim chooses to adjucate at a church, is it anyone's business? Sharia has no legal binding in the secular sense- same as annulment. This article seems to illustrate these are not publicly sanctioned- they are religious.
Food for thought.
How many choose it though? Family pressure could be forcing many women to choose it when they would rather go to an English court.
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.
