General Election Pre-Thread (6 of 6)

[Rugeley Villa]

Isn’t that pretty normal thinking?  Got no objections with mosques and celebrating Eid or Ramadan. No mosques in rugeley but if there came a time where it warranted a place for Muslims to pray then go ahead and build one in the area. 

[Davkaus]

1 minute ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Isn’t that pretty normal thinking?  Got no objections with mosques and celebrating Eid or Ramadan. No mosques in rugeley but if there came a time where it warranted a place for Muslims to pray then go ahead and build one in the area. 

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume you don't know a **** thing about what Sharia councils/"courts"/"law" actually are, because the alternative is you thinking that "two adults agreeing on a islamic mediation service within the uk should **** off home".

As I said on the last page, I have some reservations about them, but they do not override British law, and they're not courts in the sense of the word that you're probably assuming.

There is a lot of room for discussion of what safeguarding obligations, accreditation and oversight might be needed to make Sharia councils more consistent and safe, but your previous post comes across absolutely **** horrifically. 

[Davkaus]

I'd even actually be open to a discussion about "no amount of potential safeguards mitigate the risks of sharia councils/courts/law, and we should do everything possible to remove it and more fully integrate muslim communities with the rest of Britain", I think that's a perfectly legitimate argument, but I think a starting point to having that opinion is understanding what Sharia actually is, what it's used for, and what the drawbacks are other than "they're coming over here, ignoring British law and making Muslim courts".

[Rugeley Villa]

3 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume you don't know a **** thing about what Sharia councils/"courts"/"law" actually are, because the alternative is you thinking that "two adults agreeing on a islamic mediation service within the uk should **** off home".

As I said on the last page, I have some reservations about them, but they do not override British law, and they're not courts in the sense of the word that you're probably assuming.

There is a lot of room for discussion of what safeguarding obligations, accreditation and oversight might be needed to make Sharia councils more consistent and safe, but your previous post comes across absolutely **** horrifically. 

I know it’s not all about chopping off heads and hands. Not going to pretend I’m that clued up on it , but I’d rather it didn’t exist in the uk. Obviously it does and will do forevermore. It shouldn’t exist unless as you say it’s monitored better. I don’t think it’s horrific. I’m hardly being anti Islam. 

[sidcow]

30 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Because we already have our own laws and way of doing things. If people want to live by sharia then go and live in a country where they practise it. You don’t want to live by western values then leave . 

Wow. That's very authoritarian. You only volunteer to live by Sharia law willingly if you wish to. No one can be legacy bound by it in this country. Nothing can be enforced. People can walk away from it whenever they want.  

It's like saying that there is no room in this country for folk dancing clubs who have strange customs and rules they abide by. Completely bizarre point of view. 

[sidcow]

Those Masons should 100% be outlawed. They have some strange customs and rules. Kick them out. Think The Round Table are a bit suspect as well. 

Don't even start me on some of those London Private Members clubs was well.  Kick the lot out. 

[Davkaus]

15 minutes ago, sidcow said:

You only volunteer to live by Sharia law willingly if you wish to. No one can be legacy bound by it in this country. Nothing can be enforced. People can walk away from it whenever they want.  

I think this is pretty naïve to be honest.

If you're a muslim woman "married" under Sharia with no legal UK marriage (surprisingly common), how do you go about walking away? If all your friends and family are horrified you're ignoring the imam, and you'll be shunned by them for declining their guidance, how do you walk away?

The law is clear that sharia law is a form of mediation that cannot override UK law, and nobody can be bound from it. In practice, I don't think it's that simple.

This is a few years old, but I don't think much has substantively changed. 

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/01/inside-britains-sharia-councils-hardline-and-anti-women-or-a-dignified-way-to-divorce

This kind of thing is behind my concerns:

Quote

Yet because each council operates alone, with rulings based on its panel’s personal knowledge and interpretation of religious laws, their approach and decisions can vary wildly. Bano says some of the 25 women she interviewed for her book found sharia councils patriarchal and problematic. Often women got round this by “forum shopping” for a council that suited them. Yet when things go wrong, there is no accountability.

Amara, a 45-year-old lawyer from London, went to see a sharia council in her 20s. During her three-year marriage, she says her husband hit her, tried to push her down the stairs when she was pregnant, and kept her prisoner for three days. She took out an injunction against him, began civil divorce proceedings, and finally approached a sharia council.

Her voice shakes as she remembers how the three panel judges – all elderly men – reacted. “They asked things like: ‘What did you do to provoke him?’” Her husband had been restricted by the court to supervised contact with their children because of his violence, yet the judges insisted on talking about access. “All they cared about was his relationship with the children – not their safety, or my safety.”

Amara dropped the case, but later approached the Muslim College in Ealing. This, she says, “was a completely different experience”. Her case was dealt with in writing, professionally, and resolved within a few months.

 

Quote

This can be seen in the most frightening complaint against sharia councils – that with divorce permissible but discouraged by Islam, women are pressured into mediation with violent partners – or even reconciliation. Savin Bapir-Tarvey, a psychologist with the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO), sees around 15 clients a week, many of whom are extremely vulnerable. She says cultural concepts such as honour are used to manipulate women. “They have experienced severe abuse and their children have witnessed it,” she says, but they are told that “to leave would bring shame on the family”.

Even marital rape can be ignored. “Women who have been through FGM might not make that clear [to their new husbands], but they might say they don’t want to have sex. One woman was told it was her duty – and she should pray while her husband has sex with her – basically while he raped her.”

In all of these cases, the women could and should have binned off this sharia bollocks and went to the police. It's much easier said than done though, we have vulnerable women subject to "courts" that are run by men who view women as lesser than they are. 

I wouldn't necessarily ban them, but they need oversight. The article does mention that this is not a system unique to islam - we also have Catholic tribunals and Jewish Beth Din. All should be subject to the same scrutiny.

Edited June 29 by Davkaus

[mjmooney]

18 minutes ago, sidcow said:

That's very authoritarian. You only volunteer to live by Sharia law willingly if you wish to. No one can be legacy bound by it in this country. Nothing can be enforced. People can walk away from it whenever they want.  

Hmmm. Being devil's advocate for a moment here, I think the cultural pressure on - say - Muslim women up against their husbands/fathers/imams is rather different from members of folk dancing clubs, and I would want to ensure that they are given full protection by UK law - so nothing behind closed doors. (I admit that my strong antipathy to all religion probably influences my views). 

EDIT: @Davkaus expressed it better than me (above). 

Edited June 29 by mjmooney

[sidcow]

9 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I think this is pretty naïve to be honest.

If you're a muslim woman "married" under Sharia with no legal UK marriage (surprisingly common), how do you go about walking away? If all your friends and family are horrified you're ignoring the imam, and you'll be shunned by them for declining their guidance, how do you walk away?

The law is clear that sharia law is a form of mediation that cannot override UK law, and nobody can be bound from it. In practice, I don't think it's that simple.

This is a few years old, but I don't think much has substantively changed. 

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/01/inside-britains-sharia-councils-hardline-and-anti-women-or-a-dignified-way-to-divorce

This kind of thing is behind my concerns:

 

In all of these cases, the women could and should have binned off this sharia bollocks and went to the police. It's much easier said than done though, we have vulnerable women subject to "courts" that are run by men who view women as lesser than they are. 

I wouldn't necessarily ban them, but they need oversight. The article does mention that this is not a system unique to islam - we also have Catholic tribunals and Jewish Beth Din. All should be subject to the same scrutiny.

Well yes, people being coerced/forced into a way of life against their will is obviously a reprehensible thing. But that happens in all sorts of cultures, creeds, types of people. It's nothing to do with Sharia law, and there are agencies and UK laws to help people in that situation. But like an abused "white British" wife, they need to ask for help, which is difficult for them often. 

It's a human problem, not a Sharia law exclusive problem. 

It's basically the same as saying their culture is not compatible with the British way of life so they should go elsewhere which is a very BNP /Reform message. 

Edited June 29 by sidcow

[Rugeley Villa]

7 minutes ago, sidcow said:

 

It's basically the same as saying their culture is not compatible with the British way of life so they should go elsewhere which is a very BNP /Reform message. 

I’d vote for neither 

[Davkaus]

11 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Well yes, people being coerced/forced into a way of life against their will is obviously a reprehensible thing. But that happens in all sorts of cultures, creeds, types of people. It's nothing to do with Sharia law, and there are agencies and UK laws to help people in that situation. But like an abused "white British" wife, they need to ask for help, which is difficult for them often. 

It's a human problem, not a Sharia law exclusive problem. 

I think there's a key difference between a lone battered and oppressed housewife, and a housewife subject to Sharia law, which is the level of societal acceptance - It takes a big step to go and report your abusive partner. Imagine you do that once, and get told to shut up and it's your fault. I can barely imagine how hard it is to shrug that off and go over their head and report it outside "the tribe". You are 100% correct that we have a cultural problem more broadly, but this puts one extra layer to fight through.

I am on the fence about if we should tolerate them having a place - as I expressed previously I think banning them is near to impossible, but I would love to see any decision that is referred to them given as much scrutiny as any over accredited mediators. Is that possible though, is it any more achievable than just banning them? It probably isn't without broader societal change.

Either way, I am pretty sure that these aren't the considerations being made by that Reform throbber.

Quote

It's basically the same as saying their culture is not compatible with the British way of life so they should go elsewhere which is a very BNP /Reform message. 

I think this is a bit of a low blow in response to my post, tbh.

Edited June 29 by Davkaus

[bickster]

I think I’m ambivalent to these Sharia things because if you want to believe all this sky fairy nonsense it’s partially on you

Does the Catholic Church believe in divorce yet? That’s got no place in this society either I don’t see anyone complaining about it though. To get remarried in the Catholic Church, you have to get your first marriage annulled. In decisions made almost entirely by men again. So in order to get the marriage annulled all sorts of false accusations are let fly which causes all kinds of grief for those involved, false accusations that can really damage people

What’s the difference?

[sidcow]

12 minutes ago, bickster said:

I think I’m ambivalent to these Sharia things because if you want to believe all this sky fairy nonsense it’s partially on you

Does the Catholic Church believe in divorce yet? That’s got no place in this society either I don’t see anyone complaining about it though. To get remarried in the Catholic Church, you have to get your first marriage annulled. In decisions made almost entirely by men again. So in order to get the marriage annulled all sorts of false accusations are let fly which causes all kinds of grief for those involved, false accusations that can really damage people

What’s the difference?

Exactly, brings me back to the point that it's a culture thing more than anything, and there are plenty of cultures who make life difficult for those who don't tow the line. 

[chrisp65]

4 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said:

They have no place in this country

What about Jewish courts?

[Rugeley Villa]

13 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

What about Jewish courts?

Judaism runs a lot deeper in this country than Islam does, but to answer your question I don’t believe they should exist either or at least be regulated by an independent body. 

[bickster]

28 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Judaism runs a lot deeper in this country than Islam does, but to answer your question I don’t believe they should exist either or at least be regulated by an independent body. 

First mosque in the Uk was established in 1889, how deep do you want it to run?

The first Muslims started to come to these shores about 300 years ago

[bickster]

Anyhoo, going back to the average voters engagement with politricks

plenty more examples in the replies

 

[MessiWillSignForVilla]

20 minutes ago, bickster said:

First mosque in the Uk was established in 1889, how deep do you want it to run?

The first Muslims started to come to these shores about 300 years ago

I'd argue it would be far longer ago than that, the Iberian Peninsula was under Muslim control by the early 700s and Islam spread a lot through trade, so likely would've had some (extremely small) communities in trade hubs here not too long after. Although England was a bit of a backwater around that time, so may not have seen the point trading much with us, but certainly by the early part of the last millenium they probably would've been.

Edit - in fact my cursory glance at wikipedia to see if there was a commonly accepted date suggests the British Museum has a coin minted by Offa that has Arbic inscription on it which I find absolutely fascinating and now really want to go and see. This is massively off topic now but it's crazy just how intertwined cultures around the globe have been and for how long.

Edited June 29 by MessiWillSignForVilla

[markavfc40]

Time will tell if they'll deliver but f**k me it is refreshing to hear a message of hope and positivity rather that the politics of fear under the Tories.

 

[Rugeley Villa]

27 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

Time will tell if they'll deliver but f**k me it is refreshing to hear a message of hope and positivity rather that the politics of fear under the Tories.

 

He seems to have moved more towards the right which suits me but not so much the loony hard left. Wasn’t all that long ago he had opposite views to what he’s actually coming out with now so what’s changed?