Not scaremongering and what-ifing, mind you, a reality. a fact. timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u … 749183.ece
excerpt:
There are concerns that women who agree to go to tribunal courts are getting worse deals because Islamic law favours men.
Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons.
The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts.
In the six cases of domestic violence, Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment.
In each case, the women subsequently withdrew the complaints they had lodged with the police and the police stopped their investigations.
Siddiqi said that in the domestic violence cases, the advantage was that marriages were saved and couples given a second chance.
I understand that there is a significant Muslim population in the UK and I believe in cultural relativity and all that, but…THE WOMEN. The poor women. Do we really want to give legitimacy to a system that treats women as less than human?
If there were a court that treated non-white humans the way Sharia courts treat female humans, I feel that more people would be speaking out about it than are speaking out about this.
And I am sad. I have not been to the UK in years, but I feel the need to post this and make people aware of it.
WHY? Nothing seems to make sense. I want someone to explain to me what is going on.
I understand that women are strong and can speak for themselves, but by God, if men do not speak up as well when they are being treated this way, then we are part of the problem.
What in the hell is happening? I cannot hold my head up in this world as a man when things like this are allowed to happen.
:fume: :fume: :fume: :fume: :fume:
Words fail me but men are lesser human beings as long as we stand by and do nothing in the face of this.
Three daughters and two sons. How strange. I wonder why the women didn’t simply refuse to allow the sharia court to rule on the claim? You can be very very sure that their lawyer or social workers would have made it clear what they were getting themselves into.
If they decided to go the sharia route – which they were in NO WAY obliged to do – they must have known what would happen. :loco:
Sharia is only used in Britain if BOTH parties agree, and only for civil cases. In the absence of such agreement, English or Scots law is used as the basis for any rulings.
If sharia is used, its with the full consent of both sides.
[quote=“sandman”]Three daughters and two sons. How strange. I wonder why the women didn’t simply refuse to allow the sharia court to rule on the claim? You can be very very sure that their lawyer or soical workers would have made it clear what they were getting themselves into.
If they decided to go the sharia route – which they were in NO WAY obliged to do – they must have know what would happen. :loco:[/quote]
I have never claimed to be an expert on UK politics, far from it. I posted this story because I wanted to hear from people more knowledgeable than myself.
Can the women really refuse? Without repercussions?
Why does Britain feel the need to provide Sharia courts anyway?
I truly do not understand. From where I am standing, it seems nothing good can come of this. Please tell me what I’m missing? What good will come of this? What is the motivation for which it was allowed to happen?
What are the Jewish courts for and why are they necessary?
I’m pretty ignorant about Judaism as well but my observation has been that Jewish women seem pretty happy and free to do as they please. I’ve never heard a Jewish woman complain that she has fewer rights than non-Jewish women.
Can the women refuse? Sure. So can the men. Without repercussions? That depends, I suppose, on whether the men are thugs or not (hint: not all Muslim men are thugs). Certainly there are no LEGAL repercussions.
There are huge Muslim communities in the UK. They want to follow their own religion and culture, which includes sharia, and the British government has agreed to this, as long as all parties concerned are happy with it.
If those women agreed to sharia, it was with their full consent. Whether they can be coerced by their men I have no idea, but you need to remember that most Muslim women are happy to be Muslim and don’t feel that Islam makes them prisoners in any way.
There are female adherents and former adherents to Islam who are regular long-time posters on these very boards, by the way. Maybe they’ll chime in on this.
What are the Jewish courts for and why are they necessary?
I’m pretty ignorant about Judaism as well but my observation has been that Jewish women seem pretty happy and free to do as they please. I’ve never heard a Jewish woman complain that she has fewer rights than non-Jewish women.[/quote]
Don’t know much about it, sorry. I just read an article, discussing the issue.
The site in the OP says “Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.” Makes sense, you can’t decide to go to another court if you don’t like the result the first one gave you. They decided to go to a Sharia court, no one to blame but themselves.
If they felt pressured to go to these tribunals because of family/tradition then they are bad.
They’ve had Sharia mortgages available for years too.
[quote=“sandman”]Can the women refuse? Sure. So can the men. Without repercussions? That depends, I suppose, on whether the men are thugs or not (hint: not all Muslim men are thugs). Certainly there are no LEGAL repercussions.
There are huge Muslim communities in the UK. They want to follow their own religion and culture, which includes sharia, and the British government has agreed to this, as long as all parties concerned are happy with it.
If those women agreed to sharia, it was with their full consent. Whether they can be coerced by their men I have no idea, but you need to remember that most Muslim women are happy to be Muslim and don’t feel that Islam makes them prisoners in any way.
There are female adherents and former adherents to Islam who are regular long-time posters on these very boards, by the way. Maybe they’ll chime in on this.[/quote]
I do not believe it. There are too many stories of women in the Middle East risking their lives in the name of not being second class citizens.
I have known cool, happy, well-adjusted Muslim women. All of them did not wear veils, drove cars, held down jobs, and did not abide by the rules of Sharia Law. They dated, they loved, they laughed, they spoke their minds, they attended university, they were free. Islam for them was something they found beauty in on their own terms. There are different degrees of Islam just as there are different degrees of every other religion. Giving up their rights to a court that considers them inferior, NO. Not one of them would have ever made the statement “my brain is inferior to a man’s brain.” This was not part of their belief system.
I’m curious for the Muslim women on this board to chime in. I am dying to know. It’s like Frederick Douglas once said, “there is not a man alive who would state that slavery is right FOR HIM”.
No woman would want this. No human would want this.
I have never met a free human who would like to live the life of a woman under Sharia rule. I would not myself like to live under the tenets of Sharia rule. Why does anyone think others would?
Do YOU want to have the lack of rights that a woman is subjected to under Sharia Law applied to YOU?
[quote]Do YOU want to have the lack of rights that a woman is subjected to under Sharia Law applied to YOU?
[/quote]
What the fuck does what I think have to do with it? You asked a question, which I answered to the best of my ability. Now you want my opinion, too? Sorry, dude. That costs extra.
Those women were NOT “subjected” to sharia – they CHOSE to accept the ruling of a sharia court. Maybe that’s strange to you. Maybe its not strange to them.
[quote=“trebuchet”]I do not believe it. There are too many stories of women in the Middle East risking their lives in the name of not being second class citizens.
[…]
No woman would want this. No human would want this.
I have never met a free human who would like to live the life of a woman under Sharia rule. I would not myself like to live under the tenets of Sharia rule. Why does anyone think others would?
Do YOU want to have the lack of rights that a woman is subjected to under Sharia Law applied to YOU?[/quote]What makes you think your range of acceptable options is exhaustive of what others will freely accept? People freely choose to pursue and profess all kinds of crazy shit. So long as they’re well-informed free agents and do no harm to others, what’s it to you? The UK’s got a very long history of sensible, evolving law; I’m sure they’ve built in a number of safeguards you’ve overlooked.
Also, this is the UK we’re talking about – where kids have been banned from playing with conkers, for chrissakes! in case they hurt each other, and the game of “tag” has been likewise banned due to the extreme danger of children running in a school playground.
You seriously think there aren’t fucking ARMIES of earnest social workers wearing ethnic Chilean woolly hats and Birkenstocks making sure these Muslim womyn aren’t being coerced – or at least if they ARE being coerced, that the coercion is being done only by lentil-eating Guardian readers?
Agreed. People do not lose the protection of British law, but can agree to go through religious arbitration. In the case of marriage disputes, that’s far more preferable to people who see marriage as a religious affair. It’s nothing new in Britain, as there are already Christian and Jewish arbitration systems.
Cases of criminal coercion can still be prosecuted. It’s neither adding to nor taking away from existing controls and safeguards.
I’m against any religious meddling in the judicial system.
Note that in the Jewish courts, which up till recently have been essentially Orthodox-run, the system discriminates against women.
A man is granted a divorce if he insists, a woman cannot obtain one unless the man agrees.
I think the social pressure against women may be too great, and a lot of that social pressure may come from people who are assumed to be on her side. Most of the honour killings are committed by the woman’s relatives who feel her action brings shame on her family, and I think in many cases it would be the same with these courts.
“Why are you dragging this into the public courts where outsiders will use it to mock our traditions? Settle it in the community, or we will be shamed.”
Arbitration is too easily used as a weapon against the powerless. Look at the women filing suits against KBR after they were sexually assaulted in Iraq; the claim was that they had no right to do so because they had agreed to arbitration as a condition of employment- and that’s just the tip of the ice-berg. Too many cases these days require people to give up their day in court, and the arbitration system is too often tilted to bolster the ones who already have the power.
I think people have the right to arbitrate their civil disputes in whatever fashion they please. As for criminal cases, it’s better this way than having crimes (like domestic abuse) go unreported by the victims – which is what would otherwise happen, and long has been happening.
If you want to fix the problems with Sharia law, it has to be done at the source, by changing the attitudes of the culture and community behind it.
I take this whole thing as a positive sign that we’ve actually learned something from Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, Iraq, and countless other places we’ve tried (and failed, at great cost) to force people to believe what we believe. It’s progress for all involved.
What I want to know is this folks. What’s the need for a muslim man to go to this court for a divorce when, under sharia law, a man can instantly do so by saying the Arabic word for divorce to his wife three times?
Because that’s not recognised under civil law in Britain.[/quote]
It would be if the sharia court says men have such a right. What part of the rulings of these “arbitration tribunals” being binding into law and are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system don’t you not understand?
I’m not sure that’s not a myth. Can Muslim men REALLY do this without recourse to any kind of administrative process? DO Muslim women REALLY get left with absolutely nothing?
