« McCain Campaign At War With Old Media New York Times And New Media The Politico
Obama and McCain: The Incredible Shrinking Candidates’ – O Globo of Brazil »
Disturbing Developments In Britain and France
Sep 23rd, 2008 | 10 responses
While we have been focused on things here in the US, there have been a couple of somewhat-disturbing developments in Europe with regard to their laws and Islam.
In England it was decided that Islamic Court Rulings are enforceable by the force of the government.
In France a divorce was granted to a Muslim man because his wife lied about being a virgin.
I considered writing a commentary on these decisions but decided I’d rather hear what you all have to think.
I would just offer one thought for you to ponder. Try taking the words Islamic Court and Muslim man and replacing them with ‘Fundamentalist Christian Court’ or ‘Jewish Man’. Would your reaction be different ?
Just food for thought
Cross posted to The Square Deal
opinions powered by SendLove.to
10 Responses to “Disturbing Developments In Britain and France”
This scares me more than any economic crisis ever could. Are we not heading towards competing worldwide theocracies?
i've been following the “debate” over allowing sharia law for civil cases in the UK. are they really just arbitration cases?
either way, both french and british cases set, as you suggest, set disturbing precedents. it is cases like these, and others involving attacks on free speech in the name of “sensitivity” (in the EU and canada), that make me glad i still live in this country, despite its problems.
The homosexual activist in the U.S. have shown the muslims the road ahead. All the muslims need now is one judge anywhere in the U.S. (say Dearborn, MI) and then the CAIR types can scream full faith and credit just like the homosexual marriage activist can.
Of course, the real question is what will happen with Muslim Activist and homosexual activist end up on the opposite sides of an issue such as a will or contract dispute.
On a side note, I noticed that during a financial planning class at work that most Muslims in the crowd admitted that they did not have wills. I guess the Arab/Middle Eastern world is not big on wills and thus they do not come from a culture of having wills (or financial investments). Several of the muslims in the class talked like they expected their estate to be handled in the Muslim way indepdent of U.S. Laws.
I have not read or followed either the British or French cases. But it seems that the British have codified Islamic law which is disturbing… if the British want to do it, then fine. But I can't help but wonder what would happen if the husband and wife are of different religions… let's say the wife is Jewish and the husband is Islamic and they have a dispute over say the religion of their offspring. Would the British courts apply Islamic law, Jewish law or British law (I would be surprised if British law even addressed the issue of the religion of offspring).
As far as the French case, the divorce granted to the husband because the wife lied about her virginity….. I actually support that court's decision because the wife entered into the marriage under false pretenses… and it takes a court to sever the marriage…. And Catholics, under very strict circumstances could have their marriages annulled, and that would also require court intervention…. It just makes a stronger case for having religious ceremonies to “get married” and then having the state confer the civil benefits to people (who may or may not be married within a religion and if that couple should decide to break-up then the state can cancel their civil benefits when requested, without the need of going before a judge to do so). Now back to the original situation… the wife claiming to be a virgin…. while I agree that the court should take action, I would die laughing at anyone who wanted me to be a virgin before I married them…. and I can't help help but wonder about the husband's grip on modern realities and expectations. I also can't help but wonder at the woman feeling she needed to lie…. Not a situation I would want to be in…. But you know, it's their religion and their beliefs and if they need to divorce, then they should have that right. I may not understand their religion, but then again I don't have to…. If this case were in the US I would expect a court to rule similarly and respect their religion (and I'm only making this statement with relation to getting a divorce, I'm not suggesting that religion should trump civil law in other matters… that's a different discussion).
These developments are truly odd. What we're seeing here is the development and seeming acceptance in two jurisdictions of somthing akin to competing or should I say seperatist legal systems within the same national jurisdiction. I used to practice law and can't quite get my mind around the problem because it implies that the “subject” or person is allowed to choose which set of laws they will abide by and then seek redress in the courts of choice. Then of course we will have to wonder for example if an agrieved party gets to choose a legal system for resolution of disputes with an opposite party not Muslim? So, for example, if the typical U.S. citizen has an auto accident with a Muslim, does the Muslim get to chose which legal system resolves the issue of damages? This could get really weird!
The British case is an example of what happens when you don't have a government and constitution which include, embrace and defend an absolute separation of church and state. The door gets opened to all manner of mischief. The French case was, I believe, arbitration, not a finding of a full trial. No matter which, it was idiotic. People enter into pretty much every marriage with at least *some* degree of perfidy, since nobody likes admitting to each and every one of their faults to their perspective mate. It also opens the door to a Get Out of Marriage Free Card for men, since they can all now say that the wife wasn't actually a virgin. Once you've slept with her, she definitely not one anymore, so who's to say she wasn't before hand except the two of you?
Stupidity is far more frightening than creeping theocracies.
Hasidem are not that far removed from their Islamic counterparts. They share the same mysoginistic, parochial attitudes and reactionary thinking. They adhere to a highly Orthodox dogma. They're just more accepted here because they are insular and keep to themselves. They are forbidden to look at other women other than their wives and family members, and yet have very high rates of STDs as the men go out a'whoring ( and not using condoms!)- which they pass on to their women.
Pfft, religion is the deathknell of the spirit.
Jazz : “Stupidity is far more frightening than creeping theocracies.”
Agreed… as we see here in the US. There can also be much overlap between the two. I'm sorry to see these developments in France and England, as I see it as caving.
From what I've read so far I don't see this as necessarily bad. The people involved are still voluntarily agreeing to follow Sharia law – they're not being forced to follow it. The issue I guess is – should the courts enforce the agreement? If I agree to something stupid and there's no evidence that I was mislead or that I didn't understand what I was entering into then the agreement is legally enforceable, whether it's Sharia law or a stupid land deal. The only fix to that situation is a bigger nanny state to protect us from our own ignorance.
When I bought my house I was forced into a terrible legal contract that forced me to be married to a corporation known as my HOA. Any disputes I have regarding my property have to be settled through arbitration, no matter where I live, as long as I claim ownership rights to the property. My HOA board has been populated by lots of nutcases and religious extremists. When the existence of this HOA was sprung on me at signing, I could have walked away. Of course I had a significant outlay of cash to lose and a family living in a motel, but nonetheless people would say that I wasn't “forced”.