Britains first islamic state ?

[tangentlama]

Please provide ANY example of ANY part of the UK which has ANY independent legal or social system which is not consistent with the rest of the UK, on the basis of ANY characteristic. (And no, Scotland / Wales / Northern Ireland do not count as they have been nations in their own right prior to becoming part of the UK and, in any event, the differences are with the consent of (or even at the behest of, in some cases) the UK government).

It ain't going to happen unless the UK as a whole changes so much that there is no recognisable link with what we have now.

This thread is fucking stupid. The question posed in the original post is absolute bollocks, sub-Daily Mail at it's worst.

Absolutely. This is a very stupid thread, but the person who began it isn't stupid, just could do with being informed.

So Pawn, some information for you. Muslim's Sharia Law is almost identical to Jewish Halachic Law, and Sharia Courts are like Beth Din Courts.

In 2004, Canadian Muslims were successful in winning a long campaign to be allowed to practice Sharia Law. Canadian Jewish leaders spoke up for this right. Read a little about it here.

Muslim promoters of sharia arbitration said no cases have yet been decided but the process is set. Islamic leaders created an Islamic Court of Civil Justice last fall and it has chosen arbitrators who have undergone training in sharia and Canadian civil law.

"People can agree to resolve disputes any way acceptable," said Brendan Crawley, a spokesman for the Ontario Attorney General's office said in an interview. He said the arbitration act has a number of safeguards, including the requirement that parties enter into arbitration only on a voluntary basis, and any decisions by arbitrators are subject to court ratification.

Jewish courts, using similar methods, have long been operating in Ontario. Such a court, called a Beit Din, deals with monetary, business and family disputes, but no criminal matters.

"Jewish courts have been operating in Toronto for as long as Jews have been here, hundreds of years," said Rabbi Reuven Tradburks, secretary of the Beit Din of Toronto. He said he had not heard of cases decided by arbitrators in Jewish courts that had been overturned.

We already have Beth Din Courts in the UK for observant Jews, and so it's ok for observant Muslims to have their courts, since these will operate within the law.

These Religious Courts deal with Birth, Marriage, Divorce, Death and other rites of passage and what are called 'religious observances', in a religious-social way that wouldn't impinge on any non-Muslim or non-Jew.

The fact that you're not aware that another religious group already is allowed to have their own religious courts,n shows that in reality, religious laws work just fine alongside the Law of the 'Crown', because it's voluntary.

Just imagine if you're part of a community that had all agreed to the same rules or laws. In this community, there would be a moral duty to recognise these religious laws, and the courts which uphold them.

I feel I must say this again, because it's entirely voluntary whether a religious person chooses to use these courts, but for those with religious committments, it's part of their religious expression, and doesn't harm or affect anyone outside that religion, because only those in the religious community follow those laws.

Does this info help any?

 

[TeeJay]

Please provide ANY example of ANY part of the UK which has ANY independent legal or social system which is not consistent with the rest of the UK, on the basis of ANY characteristic.

Lambeth?

(I can't think of any other way of explaining half the shit that goes on there)

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Lambeth?

(I can't think of any other way of explaining half the shit that goes on there)

Newham - At the Court of Brave Sir Robin Wales who knows what lies buried in the corrrupt murk there.

 

[TeeJay]

tangentlama, I think it is a bit of a stretch calling them "laws" - my local golf club has its own set of rules and ways of settling disputes between members. This doesn't mean they are operating their own "laws" in parallel or alongside UK law. It is a private and voluntary matter which governs their own membership and agreements between private individuals. To me this isn't the same as a "law". Arbitration isn't "law" or a "legal system" - it is a voluntary system for settling disputes in private and doesn't overrule any legal recourse or provision, unlkess people sign legally binding contracts (which would only be binding in as far as they comply with UK law).

 

[The Pious Pawn]

i asked a simple question about something that was said to me in conversation , because i was intrested in what people thought but as usual i got some sensible answers an some from bigger bigots than they claim to hate so much .

 

[circlesquare]

I don't think it is likely, but it could happen. More likely I think is that over the generations Asians will come to consider themselves no more than nominally 'Muslim' just as most white British people consider themselves nominally 'christian'.

I admit I am being optimistic here.

 

[TeeJay]

Bit of a lazy use of the term "asian" there surely?

 

[zoltan]

All this discussion of law and shit......someobody correct me, but aint European law pretty much able to overrule any regional shite in most cases ? so if ( however unlikely ) someone does decide to set up a Muslim state & enact whatver version of Muslim law they want,, it would alos have to opt out of the EU to avoid having its petty religious rules overturned by disgruntled citizens ?

I may be wrong here .

 

[zoltan]

for once, i agree.

BTW Keele University once declared itself its own self-governing state with its own currency etc.
The army were sent out because they thought it was a serious attempt at independence from the state.

Just to remind you how free we are.

I know keele well - I am not surprised the revolution was stamped on - lazy fuckers

 

[likesfish]

don't think anyone really cares how muslims settle business and religous affairs amgonst them selves as long as it does'nt break Uk or EU law.
big problem if someone thinks stoning to death a woman for adultery or flying kites is going to be allowed

 

[zoltan]

don't think anyone really cares how muslims settle business and religous affairs amgonst them selves as long as it does'nt break Uk or EU law.
big problem if someone thinks stoning to death a woman for adultery or flying kites is going to be allowed

Flying Kites? - how dare they ...... FUCKERS!!!!!

 

[circlesquare]

Bit of a lazy use of the term "asian" there surely?

A fair criticism.

 

[likesfish]

taliban had a problem with people flying kites apprantly
plus people with too short a beard (although in my jedi republic of brighton goatees and other weird semi beards would get it. simply because I think that makes you a vain tosser

 

[circlesquare]

taliban had a problem with people flying kites apprantly

Best hope they don't go to Hampstead Heath on a Saturday morning then

 

[detective-boy]

All this discussion of law and shit......someobody correct me, but aint European law pretty much able to overrule any regional shite in most cases ? so if ( however unlikely ) someone does decide to set up a Muslim state & enact whatver version of Muslim law they want,, it would alos have to opt out of the EU to avoid having its petty religious rules overturned by disgruntled citizens ?

Depends what you mean by European Law really. "Ordinary" European law only has effect in acordance with EU treaty agreements. It mostly impacts on trade and commercial law rather than what we would see as criminal law.

But ECHR Human Rights law does have an overriding effect in that whilst a member of the EU traety obligations give effect to the Convention Rights. They have now been specifically incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act but even before that it was possible for a citizen to take a case against the UK to the European Court of Human Rights at Strasbourg.

Whether or not any European law had effect would depend on whether or not this imaginary territory remained part of the EU.

 

[detective-boy]

Best hope they don't go to Hampstead Heath on a Saturday morning then

Don't suppose they'd be over impressed with Hampstead Heath on a Saturday night either ...

 

[zoltan]

Whether or not any European law had effect would depend on whether or not this imaginary territory remained part of the EU.

Like the heinous Channel islands ?

 

[Gmart]

The Uk as an Islamic State has already been written about by none other than Anthony Burgess of Clockwork Orange fame. He wrote an alternative to Orwell's 1984 called originally enough 1985, which was a depiction of the UK in just such a state. Great book, i'd recommend it

 

[audiotech]

The Uk as an Islamic State has already been written about by none other than Anthony Burgess of Clockwork Orange fame. He wrote an alternative to Orwell's 1984 called originally enough 1985, which was a depiction of the UK in just such a state. Great book, i'd recommend it

1985 has been and gone. Then we had that fundamentalist Thatcher in power with her very own shister law.

 

[Cadmus]

I don't think it will happen in the near future but i don't see how could one oppose it.

A clear minority self-determination precedent is being set up with Kosovo, which has major support of all western powers including the UK arguing that the will of the people should be enforced, regardless of the fact that that particular nation already has a nation state. the same rules should then apply across the globe, including the muslim minority in the UK.

Once they effectively take control of a particular territory and express their will to secede, they should be allowed to do so as any other action would be inconsistent with current policies.

 

[mutley]

Ain't gonna happen. There's a fluid process of - not exactly 'integration' cos its more of a synthesis, between younger muslims and wider UK society. Even if big chunks of some cities are overwhelmingly Muslim, you won't get anything like a consensus about secession. The jewish community in the East End took, what, 60 - 70 years to become 'invisible' but it happens eventually.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Ain't gonna happen. There's a fluid process of - not exactly 'integration' cos its more of a synthesis, between younger muslims and wider UK society. Even if big chunks of some cities are overwhelmingly Muslim, you won't get anything like a consensus about secession. The jewish community in the East End took, what, 60 - 70 years to become 'invisible' but it happens eventually.

Good point. There is a difference between first and subsequent generations of immigrants. For example I've noticed on my way home from work that there is a rise in young muslim couples smooching together on the train. I can't think that this would have happened a generation ago. You also have the rise of the progressive muslim movement who are questioning the provanances of the hadith (abeit under much threat from the nutjob fundies ) and also the rise in the confidence of LBGT muslims etc.

Up to a point I agree with you about the comparison with the Jewish community 80 years ago parts of the east end were like a separate jewish world with people not hving to learn english as they could live there life all in areas where they didn't need to. However, the main difference between the Jews and Muslims is the basis of each groups faith. Judaism is not an evangelical religion. Islam is an evangelical religion. IMO it is this agressive evangelical strand present in Islam which will cause problems.

Any attempt by a muslim group to suceed in the UK would be rightfully resisted on two fronts with liberal muslims saying fuck you and moving out but also more violently by indigenous brits of all faiths who would feel pissed off by this. An attempt by muslim fundie nutjobs would have severe adverse affects on all muslims in the UK as they would find themselves targetted for revenge or hate attacks becuase of the actions of the fundie nutjobs who they don't support just because they share the same religion.

 

[winterinmoscow]

Hey - I've just read this whole thread and think Pawn has got a well hostile approach for asking something and I can't see what's so wrong about asking questions. If people want to call it a stupid question - why bother answering it at all? That would seem to be a big waste of time. I can't see the need to be so hostile.

FWIW, I don't think it's likely to happen, and a lot of the people who have thought about the question and not replied with "what a bollocks question" have made it pretty clear why.

 

[Aldebaran]

You also have the rise of the progressive muslim movement who are questioning the provanances of the hadith (abeit under much threat from the nutjob fundies ) and also the rise in the confidence of LBGT muslims etc.

I am still very much involved in researching all matters concerning Islam and its history and I am no victim of any "threat". Maybe the Muslims in the UK are less "free" then I am?

Islam is an evangelical religion.

You couldn't be more wrong. Where do you come to this idea?

IMO it is this agressive evangelical strand present in Islam which will cause problems.

In my view it is the agressiveness of people who have no clue about Islam yet act as if they do (= vilifying, with scaremongering goals) who already cause many problems and instigate to causing problems in the future.

By the way: there is no such thing as "fundamentalism" in Islam. That is a US Christian concept.
The people you refer to should be called Radicals (at best).

To answer the question of the thread starter:

1. Do you make threads like this about everything you hear 2 or 3 strangers say "somewhere"?
2. Don't you get ANY education in UK law in your school system? (= How on earth do you see the possibility you propose to become possible in practice within that system?)
3. If your 3 strangers want to establish the Caliphate in the UK, please be so kind to remind them on my behalf that the Caliph is meant to be the chosen leader of all Muslims = representing Islam and its dogmas and laws. So please ask them on my behalf where they see a place for this within the UK law system and tell them too that if they violate the law of the country in which they are citizens or in which they live, they violate the commands of Islam.

salaam.

 

[detective-boy]

There is a difference between first and subsequent generations of immigrants.

A fact which is not unrelated to much of the crime and disorder we have seen - with subsequent generations being torn between their original culture and the general culture of the UK, not fitting fully into either. Their parents try and use their natural approach to controlling them, but find the host country does not support that (and sometimes, such as with corporal punishment, ruling the traditional means illegal) and so things enter a phase during which the subsequent generations struggle to establish a cultural identity they can call their own.

Over the last few years Asian youths have become involved in crime and unrest far more than previously. I suspect it is not a coincidence that it is a generation or two from the large-scale Asian immigration of the 70s and 80s. Give it a few years and, unless something else intervenes, it'll settle down as the next couple of generations grow up.

 

[detective-boy]

If people want to call it a stupid question - why bother answering it at all?

Because it's scaremongering. And it plays into the hands of the likes of the BNP and (at the other end of the scale) the Daily Mail, who love to raise fears based on race.

By all means raise and discuss issues which have, or at least could, arise. But inventing impossible scenarios is either (a) stupid or (b) malicious.

 

[winterinmoscow]

Perhaps you're right DB, I can't say I read it as scare-mongering myself and thought the reaction was pretty bad but I take your point.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

I am still very much involved in researching all matters concerning Islam and its history and I am no victim of any "threat". Maybe the Muslims in the UK are less "free" then I am?

This just my observations of mixing and meeting with progressive muslims and the fact that they cannot advertise thier meetings etc freely because of fears of reprisals and harrassment from co - religionists who disagree with them.

You couldn't be more wrong. Where do you come to this idea?

Maybe a bit of background would help here - I had a lot of contact when was younger with evangelical christians and because of my personal experience with them I notice strong similarities in attitude between some muslims and evangelical christians.

In my view it is the agressiveness of people who have no clue about Islam yet act as if they do (= vilifying, with scaremongering goals) who already cause many problems and instigate to causing problems in the future.

Interesting point. I'm always willing to have my POV chalenged on stuff. Are you saying that because people are frightened of Islam (which may be because of historical stuff) this is pushing some muslims into being more isolated and separatist?

By the way: there is no such thing as "fundamentalism" in Islam. That is a US Christian concept.
The people you refer to should be called Radicals (at best).

OK I accept your point there. Having thought about it I can see why you prefer the term Radicals as opposed to fundamentalism.

To answer the question of the thread starter:

1. Do you make threads like this about everything you hear 2 or 3 strangers say "somewhere"?
2. Don't you get ANY education in UK law in your school system? (= How on earth do you see the possibility you propose to become possible in practice within that system?)
3. If your 3 strangers want to establish the Caliphate in the UK, please be so kind to remind them on my behalf that the Caliph is meant to be the chosen leader of all Muslims = representing Islam and its dogmas and laws. So please ask them on my behalf where they see a place for this within the UK law system and tell them too that if they violate the law of the country in which they are citizens or in which they live, they violate the commands of Islam.

salaam.

Aldabaran, to go back to the subject of evangalism in Islam did Islam spread thoughout North Africa / Middle East in the 7th to 12th Centuries CE by conquest or as in Al Andalus was it chosen because it was seen as more fair minded than the Catholic Church. I know from recent reading that Catharism was popularily chosen in France, Spain and Northern Italy because it was not as oppressive as Catholicism?

 

[KeyboardJockey]

A fact which is not unrelated to much of the crime and disorder we have seen - with subsequent generations being torn between their original culture and the general culture of the UK, not fitting fully into either. Their parents try and use their natural approach to controlling them, but find the host country does not support that (and sometimes, such as with corporal punishment, ruling the traditional means illegal) and so things enter a phase during which the subsequent generations struggle to establish a cultural identity they can call their own.


Over the last few years Asian youths have become involved in crime and unrest far more than previously. I suspect it is not a coincidence that it is a generation or two from the large-scale Asian immigration of the 70s and 80s. Give it a few years and, unless something else intervenes, it'll settle down as the next couple of generations grow up.

Good points there. I'm old enough to recall my schooldays when the people least likely to cause shit and stuff were the asian kids.

When I went into teaching for a while 20 odd years later the sitation was reversed and the asian kids were acting the arseholes whilst the other groups who had been here for more generations just gottheir head down and got on with their work.

 

[Fong]

By the way: there is no such thing as "fundamentalism" in Islam. That is a US Christian concept.

Rubbish.

There are moderates right?

Those who have a more progressive view of Islam and don't adhere to the more extreme ends of Islamic law? Because if they exist, then so do Fundamentalists, you may not like the term, but that isn't really the issue, they may not like the term, but that also isn't the issue.

The issue is whether the term fits, and those that want to stick to the more extreme and 'fundamental' parts of Islam, those parts that were written several centuries ago and are considered out of date by the more moderate Muslims, are Fundamentalists, because they want to stick to the fundamental laws and writings of Islam.

Like the term or not, is irrelevent, you can't just dismiss it and say that there is no such thing, it is possibly a corrupted latin term, but it is a term used in English to describe a certain type of religous person. Whether they are muslim or christian.

If the shoe fits.