Sharia Law in Britain: A Threat to One Law for All and Equal Rights

Sharia Law in Britain – A Threat to One Law for All and Equal Rights

17 June 2010

New Report by One Law for All

“Sharia Law in Britain: A Threat to One Law for All and Equal Rights”

A report by One Law for All has found Sharia Councils and Muslim Arbitration Tribunals to be in violation of UK law, public policy and human rights (see report here).

The report is being launched to coincide with a 20 June 2010 rally on the issue of Sharia law.

Based on an 8 March 2010 Seminar on Sharia Law, research, interviews, and One Law for All case files, the report has identified a number of problem areas:

– Sharia law’s civil code is arbitrary and discriminatory against women and children in particular. With the rise in the acceptance of Sharia courts, discrimination is being further institutionalised with some UK law firms additionally offering clients advice on Sharia law and the use of collaborative law.

– Sharia law is practiced in Britain primarily by Sharia Councils and Muslims Arbitration Tribunals. Both operate on religious principles and are harmful to women although Muslim Arbitration Tribunals are wrongly regarded as being of more concern because they operate as tribunals under the Arbitration Act 1996, making their rulings binding in law.

– Sharia Councils, on the other hand, claim to mediate on family issues but in practice often this differs little from arbitration: they frequently ask those appearing before them to sign an agreement to abide by their decisions; they call themselves courts, and the presiding imams, judges. Their decisions are then imposed and regarded as having the weight of legal judgements.

– There is neither control over the appointment of “judges” in Sharia Councils or Tribunals nor an independent mechanism for monitoring them. Clients often do not have access to legal advice and representation. The proceedings are not recorded, nor are there any searchable legal judgements, nor any real right of appeal.

– Sharia law cannot be compared to secular legal systems because it is considered sacred law that cannot be challenged. There is no scope to look at the interests of the individuals involved, as required by UK family law.

– These legal processes ignore both common law and due process, far less Human Rights, and provide little protection and safety for women in violent situations.

– There is a general assumption that those who attend Sharia courts do so voluntarily and that unfair decisions can be challenged in a British court. Many of the principles of Sharia law are contrary to British law and public policy, and would in theory therefore be unlikely to be upheld in a British court. In reality, however, women are often pressured by their families into going to these courts and adhering to unfair decisions, and may lack knowledge of English and their rights under British law. Moreover, refusal to settle a dispute in a Sharia court can give rise to threats and intimidation, or at best being ostracised.

According to Maryam Namazie, spokesperson of the One Law for All Campaign and an author of the report, “The existence of a parallel legal system that is denying a large section of the British population their fundamental human rights is scandalous. Our findings show that it is essential to abolish all religious courts in the UK. Their very existence and legitimisation puts pressure on vulnerable women not to assert their civil rights in a British court. As long as Sharia Councils and Tribunals are allowed to continue to make rulings on issues of family law, women will be pressured into accepting decisions which are prejudicial to them and their children.”

The report recommends that Sharia courts be closed on the grounds that they work against rather than for equality, and are incompatible with human rights. Recommendations include:

  1. initiating a Human Rights challenge to Muslim Arbitration Tribunals and/or Sharia Councils
  2. amending the Arbitration Act under which the Muslim Arbitration Tribunals operate in a similar way to which the Canadian equivalent of the Arbitration Act was amended in 2005 to exclude religious arbitration
  3. launching a major and nationwide helpline and information campaign to inform people of their rights under British law
  4. proposing legislation under the EU Citizens Rights Initiative to address the issue EU-wide, and
  5. strengthening secularism and the separation of religion from the state, the judicial system and education, in order to more fully protect citizenship rights.

The full report can be downloaded here.

Notes:

1. The report can be downloaded free of charge or a paperback copy purchased from One Law for All for £5.00 plus £2.00 Shipping and Handling. To purchase the book or donate to the work of One Law for All, please either send a cheque to our address below or pay via Paypal by visiting: Donate Page.

2. The One Law for All Campaign was launched on 10 December 2008, International Human Rights Day, to call on the UK Government to recognise that Sharia and religious courts are arbitrary and discriminatory against women and children in particular and that citizenship and human rights are non-negotiable.

3. For further information contact:

Maryam Namazie
Spokesperson
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 7719166731
onelawforall@gmail.com

www.onelawforall.org.uk

Download report here

new report sharia law



By | 2015-06-23T13:41:04+00:00 June 17th, 2010|Press Releases|45 Comments

About the Author:

45 Comments

  1. Civilus Defendus June 18, 2010 at 1:47 am

    Excellent. Send this to every elected representative and candidate for office. Discuss with law enforcement, local government and all national representatives. We can no longer tolerate islamic sharia law. Sharia condemns liberty, forbids equality and rejects national sovereignty.

  2. robin June 18, 2010 at 9:35 am

    I commend this report and associated campaign. I’d just say that I think this supposed religion of peace should be challenged in its entirety. You only have to question –well, try to question!– a few “expert” Muslims to see how outstandingly intellectually shallow this ideology is. They are bursting with enthusiasm to tell you all about it as long as you are “willing to learn”, i.e. willing not to exercise any critical faculties in the process. If on the other hand you indicate any scepticism or ask any of the wrong questions, well, then they are suddenly far, far too busy to discuss this so, so, pre-eminent thing in their lives!

    • MaryamNamazie June 18, 2010 at 11:44 am

      Islam is the banner of Islamism so it is obviously open for criticism but it is a mistake to think this is an ideological battle – it is first and foremost a political one. Read more about this here: http://maryamnamazie.blogspot.com/2008/06/islam-matters-because-of-political.html. The Bible wasn’t banned in order to get rid of the Christian inquisition. People have a right to religion or belief whether you like it or not. If one is able to push back political Islam as was done by the Enlightenment with Christianity – people can then begin to go back to belief as a private matter.

      • Denis MacEoin June 19, 2010 at 11:36 am

        Maryam, surely the problem is that Islam has never been a mainly private affair. It differs from all others in this respect. Removing political Islam from the scene won’t change the structure of a shari’a-based system. Islamism isn’t a distortion of Islam, it’s an authentic expression of how things were at the time of Muhammad and after, and a rejection of Western-inspired attempts to secularize the Muslim state. Ataturk and Reza Shah took this a long way, but the pendulum has swung the other way with a vengeance. Jews who observe halakha generally make that a private matter, but the body of hadith and the later rulings of jurists cover a much broader range of topics. I think there is room for Islam to be criticized like any other ideology, but at the moment Western states have given in to cries of ‘offence’ and have made Islam an exception to all the rules. Here again, Muslim have to be subject to the same rules as the rest of us, and be open to criticism of all kinds. That will surely make your task easier. I look forward to reading your report.

      • Capt'n John June 22, 2010 at 8:31 pm

        People may have the right to whatever religious belief that they like, but they do not have the right be tried by a religious court. They do have the right to be judged under a secular court made of their peers, not necessarily those of the same religious beliefs as either the complainant or the defender. The laws of a country are made, with the permission of the people governed, by the elected representatives of the people of that country. There is no direction from any religious authority that has any secular value.

  3. Stuart June 18, 2010 at 9:44 am

    I hope this report gets tons of coverage.

  4. Diana June 18, 2010 at 9:45 pm

    It would be an excellent beginning for the new government to abolish sharia unconditionally. Here are only some of the reasons.

    1. There should only ever be one law for one people. Anything else militates against social cohesion and causes confusion.

    2. Sharia is intrinsically unjust. A system where one man equals two women and one Muslim equals fifteen Hindus is completely unacceptable in Britain. The sharia punishments of death, mutilation and flogging violate human rights. The acceptance of slavery and polygamy and the punishment of apostasy and homosexuality are un-British.

    3. Sharia courts were permitted on the condition that they would try only civil cases, but they have already tried recognisably criminal offences such as knife crime. They have therefore outlawed themselves on the grounds that they have broken the original condition for their establishment.

    4. There is no evidence that attendance at sharia courts is voluntary. Women are usually forced into them. Children cannot be represented at all.

    There are other reasons to abolish sharia courts, but are not the above sufficient in themselves?

    BTW, I advertised One Law For All from my Facebook page. The first person who accepted my challenge to sign the anti-sharia petition was a male Muslim. It is worth asking: how many British Muslims REALLY want sharia?

  5. Stuart Parsons June 18, 2010 at 9:58 pm

    No woman will receive justice under Shari’ah Law in spite of the latest taqiyya and kitman campaign ‘Inspired by Muhammad.’ Just imagine it, if a woman was raped and she was able to provide three witnesses who actually saw the rape take place…… she would still be stoned to death….. because she is unable to provide sufficient witnesses. And presumably this would apply even if there was DNA evidence…… or have I missed something and by one of the so-called miracles of the Qur’an it has been revealed that Muhammad knew all about DNA.

    • Irfan June 20, 2010 at 4:23 am

      The system commonly understood to be the authentic system of governance under Islam is a HUGE misunderstanding by both Muslims and non-Muslims. There is no such word as “Shari’ah” in the Qur’an except in a sense that is totally unrelated to what we are told about this word (). Same is the case with the Hadith which is totally unQur’anic. The Qur’anic word closest to the word “Shari’ah” is “Shari’ah” (5:48) but then that—and many people would find it strange here—relates to “everyone’s ways of devotion” are actually “ordained” by God. This is just a tip of the iceberg in a whole ocean of misunderstood concepts of the authentic “God’s system of governing and human conduct” as perfectly preserved in the Holy Book for mankind, the Glorious Qur’an. Muslims don’t read it—they only RECITE it in Arabic to earn some presumed “heavenly rewards”.
      So, in sum, yes, the Shari’ah as touted day in and day out in the word MUST be condemned unquestionably, but to say that the Islam is evil and unjust to women or children or anyone else is indicative of the same ignorance and bigotry that most of the people of the world are in today—including the so-called “Muslims”.
      Show me ONE instance of injustice to any human—to women or children or ANYONE—in the Qur’an. Show me the punishment by death to stoning in the Qur’an; show me the death punishment for apostasy in the Qur’an; show me “one man equal to two women”, or “One Muslim equal to 15 Hindus” in the Qur’an —yes I am asking you to show me all that in the God-authored QUR’AN—not in some man-made “Shari’ah” and I will get back to you with the response!!!
      The Qur’an is YET to be discovered, folks. This is a book of Light and Guidance. The so-called “Muslims” don’t understand it, how can others?

      • Bo Diddley June 22, 2010 at 1:42 pm

        The Qur’an was man-made.

      • Diana June 22, 2010 at 11:32 pm

        Irfan, we are not compaigning here for the banning of the Qur’an. I have read it, and I didn’t like it, but I don’t believe it should be banned. On the contrary, I believe EVERYONE should read it, so that everyone knows what Islam is about.

        Your personal belief that Shariah courts are not “real” Islam reflects well on you, and you are welcome to be a “Muslim without Shariah” in modern Britain. However, this is irrelevant to the problem with which we are dealing here. The reality of Britain today is that Shariah courts exist. The purpose of this campaign is to stop them.

        In practical terms, 90% of the British Shariah dealings concern women who are seeking a divorce. Therefore it is worth noting that Qur’an 4:34 advises beating a disobedient wife. In Britain we do not recognise that a wife has a duty of obedience to her husband and we do not accept the beating of any household member. Qur’an 2:226ff gives extensive instructions for how a man is to divorce his wife, but nothing for how a woman may divorce her husband. Did I miss something? Or is the Shariah ruling that makes divorce easy for a man and difficult for a woman rooted right there in the Qur’an? Qur’an 60:10 indicates that a Muslima is automatically considered divorced from a non-Muslim husband, even if she doesn’t want to be. That sounds unjust to BOTH spouses. British law gives equal status to all religions, and if a couple wishes to continue with a mixed-faith marriage, that is a private matter with which British law does not interfere. The fourth sura specifically permits polygyny but not polyandry, which is definitely unequal.

        I believe that Shariah injustice is inspired by injustice in the Qur’an itself. But, of course, the Shariah is far worse than the Qur’an alone, and the Shariah, not the Qur’an, is the target of this campaign.

  6. jimbo1lee June 19, 2010 at 8:40 pm

    THIS COUNTRY IS ENGLANDwhen you come to MY country leave your rules & laws at home, as I have to do when I go to ANY other country in the world.—ie, WTF did Emily pankhurst campaign for?. NO WAY should we allow sharia, law,– IT IS TOTALLY BARBARIC.

  7. Randy Barish June 19, 2010 at 9:45 pm

    Down with Sharia Law! It’s an unfair, cruel system created to oppress and control people. Thus, it has no place in any modern democratic society. I pray it will banned in England as soon as possible and let those deranged fanatics who believe there is a need for this, leave the country if they don’t like it. Goodbye, Sharia Law!!!!!

    • MaryamNamazie June 23, 2010 at 3:45 pm

      Many of the Islamists are British born – and the British government has had a hand in imposing Sharia law. recently a Kenyan court banned Sharia courts there and said it was a remnant from colonial days when Britain established different courts for different people – the old concept of divide and rule. Right now the British army is helping to set up informal Sharia courts in Afghanistan and Iraq is more Islamic after the US led militarism. Islamism is a global phenomenon. Plus there is a racism behind the idea that that which is ‘foreign’ can be deported even if most of the Islamists are British born thanks to multiculturalism and the appeasment of Islamism. How come there is never a call to deport Dr Shipman for murdering his patients or for Stephen Griffiths who recently murdered three women to be sent off somewhere?

  8. Peter Forsythe June 20, 2010 at 4:02 am

    The video “Divorce Iranian style” referred to in the Report at footnote 37 no longer works. This seems to be a growing pattern: videos critical of Islam suddenly disappear. Note the disappearance of “They Con us All” video…
    Should we not make sure they are kept by downloading them, eg OneLawforAll download that video to its site?
    The video is supposed to be here; it’s blank on my computer:
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7607777740102230188#

  9. Russ Walsh June 20, 2010 at 4:28 am

    No country can operate on the basis of two radically different legal systems. To think it can is madness. To insitute two separate legal systems in England was madness. For the voters of England to elect a government that would insitute impose two separate legal systems was madness. I left England decades ago and it seems the place has gone to the dogs since my departure. Were I still there I would: 1) Deterine which political party or parties sold the notion of Sharia law. 2) Identify and name the leaders of those parties, together with their members. 3) Insitute legal proceedings against them for having acted in a manner destructive to the public good. 4) Demand a national referendum entitled One Country One Legal System. 5) If the government of the day refused to hold a national referendum, a) hold one anyway, run by the public b) demand the implementation of the Initiative, Referenda, and Recall System, making as much fuss as would be required to get British politicians to understand the simple concept that Britain belongs to the British, and NOT to its politicians! To cut to the heart of the matter, though, MP Enoch Powell was villified for warning England about the perils of allowing in immigrants with radically different belief systems. He was vilified for his efforts, of course, but as with all things, the truth eventually comes out. So here we are, decades later. England has two legal systems, one of which, Sharia, contradicts everything embedded in English Common Law over the past thousand years. Serious civil strife, and worse, are caused by this sort of nonsense by out of control governments.

    • MaryamNamazie June 23, 2010 at 3:40 pm

      Again someone who blames immigrants – I am an immigrant – not sure what you would do against Sharia without me and the many who are at the forefront of the struggle against Islamism and Sharia law, for women’s rights, against honour killings and in defence of secularism. Stop blaming immigrants – stop scapegoating immigrants – and focus on Islamism. our campaign is for those who want to oppose sharia law from a human rights perspective.

  10. Art4artsache June 20, 2010 at 7:55 pm

    It is obvious; the expansion of Islamic conformity is part of a global irrationalality: Human Rights are denied from Beijing to Guantanamo, from Chechnia to East Timor & all points between. Was there not once, after 1945, a world-wide aspiration toward a higher state of social convention? The UN, UNESCO, UNICEF & the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, this last, now quibbled over, even by our democratic, British government. After WWII we hoped for Justice to replace the atrocities of Nazi & Soviet oppression? Humane dealing, even with enemies, to wipe away Japanese cruelties? Democracy with Decency to oust the corrupt practices of many regimes? Increasing Economic interdependence with cooperation to modernise ancient inefficiencies?
    Globally, ‘Progress’ has turned back from gradual integration of nations (at political & economic levels)& from mutual appreciation of cultural enrichment, back into self-centred nationalism and wide-spread appeasement toward aggressive bully-boys’ promoting their intolerant, narrow agendas via every aspect of exclusivity. “Let us establish in this land … Sharia Law or White Supremacy or Exploitative Trading Practices” etc. The Powerful consolidate their self-interest, casting aside principles that are recognisably more civilised, in favour of coercing or bribing people into fearful or apathetic surrender of their rightful expectation for a sustainable, healthy, happier lifestyle.
    It is not in the nature of most human beings to confront these subtle attackers, yet it is in the nature of the few, ambitious for influence, to manipulate the psyche of the masses & that is happening all the time. A comparatively benign level of this practice is Advertising. Not acceptable is this messing with Humanity’s trek towards the ultimate goal of ‘Maximum Possible Freedom, albeit with Responsibility’ & the elimination (as far as possible) of unfair imposition by any upon others. “2 Steps Forward: 1 Step back” is a process that Human Nature seems to prefer. Unfortunately, it is sometimes 1 forward & 2 back & Sharia Law appears to be an instance of this unwanted reversal. Will the British Government throw off the chains of financial subservience to these usurpers & reassert the fairer and protective nationhood that first attracted other nationals to our country & by so doing, rebuff the ambitious opportunists seeking social and/or political domination.

  11. An Dean June 22, 2010 at 8:24 am

    NO SHARIA LAW!!! Understand Islam and Sharia Law, Islam is a fascist ideology, that wants to have world domination and control every facet of your life. Islam does not get on with no other religion and does not recognize any other law, but Shaira. Well stay in your country then!!! Fit in or ship out! Only solution~
    What the West needs to know:
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781&ei=QxTBSdvHF6aKrQKw2sDmCw&q=full+movie&hl=en&dur=3#

    • MaryamNamazie June 23, 2010 at 3:36 pm

      Not even five minutes before I have to repeat myself – anyway let’s start again. Islam is a religion – much like many other religions. Its adverse effects are more widely felt because of Islamism. It is the difference between living in Britain today and during the inquisition and crusades. Finally many of the Islamists are British born – deal with them – stop shipping them out to some other country which has its own Islamists to deal with. Also shipping people out is not a solution – do you ship out your serial killers and far Righters?

  12. Keith Hampson June 22, 2010 at 11:01 am

    Excellent news and reports and not before time. Who on earth do these Muslims really think they are, attempting to enforce Sharia Law in a Christian country ! We all know that this law is for the extremists within this grotesque, every swarming group, which is against their own children and woman !! They are just filth, pure and simple, who under no circumstance should be allowed to reside in the UK.
    Don’t call me racist, just Black British, and proud of it…..even though we have a crap football team.

    • MaryamNamazie June 23, 2010 at 3:33 pm

      Let me repeat for the umpteenth time – Sharia law is the demand of Islamists not Muslims. Muslims or those who are labelled as such are the first victims of Islamism and Sharia law. Also this is not a Christian country – if it was we would be still be living under the inquisition. The fact that religion is a somewhat – though not wholly – private matter is thanks to the Enlightenment. Finally if something is wrong it should be wrong anywhere – which is why our campaign links the issue of Sharia law here in Britain with it in other countries. Now let me do something for five minutes before I have to repeat this again. And I will – until people begin to understand who the real enemy is – Islamism – not Muslims. Get it?

      • Ruth Orpen June 23, 2010 at 7:14 pm

        No you get one thing staight..as an aethiest there are no gods, no Islamic rules, Moslem rules but just common sense. Where in all your rights and justices are the rights of the barbarically, mutilated Moslems who just because they are born female have to go through and endure for the rest of their lives female circumcistion

  13. Jean Clark June 24, 2010 at 7:57 am

    Maryam

    Sharia is Islamic law based on the Qu’ran and Sunna. It is applicable to all Muslims, not just “Islamists”.

    Islam is not just a religion, it is a political ideology, which is encompassed by and directed by Sharia law. Just like you can not disentangle english common law from Judeo-christian principles, you can’t erase sharia law without forcing muslims to abandon much of their religion.

    This is an ideological problem you face – how is it possible to prevent Sharia law without implicitly debasing the religion?

    I note you are prominent in the Council of Ex-Muslims in Britain. It appears you are coming from this from your personal angle without necessarily noticing the implications of what you are trying to do

  14. Arthur June 24, 2010 at 8:58 pm

    Maryam, The culture of this country is based on 2000 years of Christianity and the church is connected to the state via the Queen and some Bishops in the House of Lords and I think you will find that the majority of people in the country are content with this and so am I, altho I’m an atheist I see the church of England as benign and certainly no threat to anyone.

  15. Rafiq Mahmood June 25, 2010 at 5:02 am

    Jean Clark, first I think you are wrong to say you cannot disentangle English common law from Judeo-Christian principles, whatever they might be. The past three hundred years at least has seen an incredible disentangling of the most barbarous laws based on Trinitarian Christian principles. We have stopped burning people at the stake for heresy and hanging them for blasphemy. The United States’ system is based on the same English common law but they have managed to separate church and state constitutionally – although since the McCarthy era it has admittedly been creeping back.

    We are people. People do not work within strict rules. As long as no one is preventing Muslims from saying their prayers and fulfilling their other main religious obligations most people will be happy. We fudge. We get along. We perform mental gymnastics where we have to. And Muslims can get along without the sharia quasi courts and having to put up with only one judicial system.

    I do agree with Maryam. It is the Islamists who want to exploit people’s religious sentiments for political power who are the real and immediate danger together with the actual practical implementation of these tribunals which is unjust and creates second-class citizens.

    There are issues about the influence of religion, and Islam in particular, on people’s minds, on education and freedom in the arts. There is another battle going on for a global enlightenment: but the battle against sharia implementation in the UK is not predicated on winning that longer term battle.

    Sahria is a danger primarily for Muslims: those who are under family, religious and social pressure to conform to their unjust deliberations and decisions. Muslims are part of our society. It is arrogant and unjust for us to expect them to give up all they still hold dear and alienate themselves from their families just because, rightly or wrongly, we maintain that Islam and sharia are inextricably intertwined.

  16. Jonn Mero June 26, 2010 at 5:57 pm

    The sad part about this is that no lawmaker has the guts to suggest practising sharia law as UNLAWFUL, with hefty penalties for these self-appointed judges.
    That sharia law is cruel, unjust, and medieval should also qualify it to be banned totally. Tell those who want to practise sharia that their citizenship will be terminated with immediate effect, and they will be deported to a country where there is sharia law.
    That might stop many of the troglodytes in their tracks!

  17. Charles USA June 26, 2010 at 11:07 pm

    The document “Sharia Law in Britain: A Threat to One Law for All and Equal Rights” is not able to be accessed, currently, from the website onelawforall.org.uk. Does anyone know where else it might be found so I can download to print? Thanks.

  18. busy do Niemiec June 29, 2010 at 10:01 am

    I stumbled across your site and think it’s fantastic, keep us posting

  19. Kim Patel July 3, 2010 at 7:35 pm

    The law of this country is currently not being upheld. We don’t need a different law, we just need the judges to actually rule by the law instead of ignoring it.

    Please support this very important petition.

    Judges are making too many wrong decisions which are seriously affecting innocent people. They are ignoring the law and not basing their decisions on point of law, often preferring to base their decisions on race, colour or bias, or simply because they are corrupt. Judges should be forced to make their decisions on point of law.

    Please join the petition at: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/justice_not_injustice/

    This is a very important petition to bring back everyones rights to justice in court, please therefore sign it as soon as you can and ask as many of your friends, family, associates and members as you can to sign this.

    We are aiming to get as many signatures as possible as quickly as possible to force the government into urgent action because the state of our judicial system is a disgrace, too many innocent people are suffering and will continue to suffer until we can force the government to sit up and take notice.

  20. Jean Clark July 9, 2010 at 4:40 pm

    Rafiq

    You have jumped on one statement and made strange judgments but omitted to address the actual problem of how to extricate Islam (the “peaceful”
    religion element) and Sharia (the political and legal ideology that forces the religion to be unpeaceful). These are the complexities of Islam versus Islamism, but I am still confused as to how they can be separated.

    On your initial statement about Judeo-Christian principles and UK common law, we have undergone an “enlightenment” and removed many excesses of religious law, which were generated by humans as a form of power, rather than based on the biblical texts. Most of our common law and values have a basis in religious morals (marriage, monogamy, human rights, peace not war, family values, stealing, burglary, love thine enemy etc) and they have been amended and changed to more peaceful and acceptance values for the diversity of the population when seen that they are working against a particular group. But they are still based on those original Judeo-Christian principles. By the way, I am non-religious and secular, but I open my eyes to the reality of my country’s history and where it has come from. This is no diferent to the US Constitution and law – it again is based on those same principles, albeit stating that there is no State religion.

    On the real question of Islam and Sharia. The Qur’an, seen by Muslims as the book of Allah/God, written by him directly and thus cannot be improved or changed one iota, contains much of the “law” that is Sharia. Such as women having to have 4 witnesses to a rape (was Allah unaware of DNA in the 7th Century?), such as women only having the right to one half of divorce payments, such as women being unable to ask for divorce except under specific conditions while men can just divorce willy-nilly, such as the taking and rape of women slaves after you have killed their men in battle, such as killing Jews and infidels wherever ye may find them?

    These things are in the Qur’an, and are part and parcel of the religion.
    If you cannot change one letter or grammatical point in the Qur’an, how can you define that certain elements of it are Ismalist while other elements are peaceful Islam? They are all part of the one same as far as I can tell.

    Removing those elements, thus eliminating Sharia, means that Muslims are no longer Muslims.

    I am not trying to have an argument, I am trying to understand how one side of that argument can be defended and the other attacked without causing great harm to the general population of Muslims, who see it as a right-wing extremist attack against their religion whichever way you try to paint it.

    My view is that One Law for All is asking for an Enlightenment of Islam, a rewriting of the Qur’an, effectively stating that it must have been written by humans and can therefore be changed to fit in with our times and our man-made laws, and our sensibilities. I don’t believe that is possible from the outset.

    As such, I actually can see no difference between One Law for All, the SIOE or SIOA or the EDL in their ideological leanings. Each want to stop the Islamization of their countries and Sharia Law. The sole difference is that the other organisations have clearly been infiltrated by some extreme right wing hotheads, fanatics and racists, (amongst a much wider cross-section of society and beliefs) while extreme left-wing hotheads, fanatics and racists occupy One Law for All (and the right-wing side just keep their mouths shut and hide among them).

Comments are closed.