Should secular societies allow Sharia Law?

[LuisDantas]

Is there ever, in any society, some sort of legal / dispute resolution system that does not demand a lot of work?

If so, please tell me where I can find it. Pretty please

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

Seems to me that while it may have risks, the dangers of Sharia law are highly overrated. Besides, if one religion should be allowed to influence government, all religions should.

 

[LittleSidhe]

Seems to me that while it may have risks, the dangers of Sharia law are highly overrated. Besides, if one religion should be allowed to influence government, all religions should.

He has a good point..why should one religion be treated better than any other?

 

[gnostic]

If i understand you correctly, and what you're saying is that sharia needs a lot of work to be fit to be applied, i completely agree. But that is when talking about a full appliance. There is a lot of work that needs to be done to make sharia law fit to run today.

Even in Australia, a rather young country have enacted countless number of laws (I am no expert in law, so I don't know how many laws there are, because there are not just the constitution, criminal law, family law, civil law, military, road & transport, etc, but also laws with jurisdictions at federal level, state level and local level), don't have full appliance, because some enacted laws are never used...until the occasions arise.

The problem with Sharia law don't come from full appliance, badran. It comes from the fact that it is over 1000 years old, and Muslim officials tried to put outdated laws that need serious updating. The framework of the Sharia law is seriously behind the time. Either throw out each outdated law (that needs replacing) and replace it with something more for the current environment or update each law with amendment. I think both needs to be done.

You have pointed out the corruption of officials. That may well be true, but the Sharia has no mechanism to counter these corruptions, simply point out one of the flaws of the Sharia principle.

However, I don't think it is that simple just to blame the officials. The law itself needs fixing.

 

[LuisDantas]

But Gnostic, as long as Sharia is implemented as a first attempt at solving things out of common accord, is it really any different or worse from any other tradition?

As far as either party can choose to go through regular courts instead, I don't see any problem - and there can be quite a few benefits, even.

 

[gnostic]

But Gnostic, as long as Sharia is implemented as a first attempt at solving things out of common accord, is it really any different or worse from any other tradition?

As far as either party can choose to go through regular courts instead, I don't see any problem - and there can be quite a few benefits, even.

They did go through courts in Australia. Both sides (husband and wife) got legal representations with regards to the custody of children. Apparently none of them (husbands' side) were satisfied with the court ruling, taking matter in their own hands, took children out of the country into another, and had the sharia court give different rulings on the divorce case, without wives' side being present.

Each of the case did go before a family court in Australia.

I know of 4 cases that involved Lebanese nationals-Australian men that took the children out of Australia, into Lebanon, when the wives custody of the children. One as recent 2006, during the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict.

The so-called Sharia courts had each time awarded the custody to the husband, overruling the Australian court ruling, without the wife's legal representation in the matter.

These Sharia rulings are not only unfair, these judges were both sexist and racist. None of these judges waited for the mothers to come to the country with legal representations; they each gave their ruling without the other side (ex-wives/mothers). They say the children should have Islamic upbringing. It didn't matter to the judges that the children were taken out of the country without the mother's consent, who did have custody of the children, thereby the ex-husbands/fathers had broken Australian laws.

This one of the reasons why I don't think Muslim men should be allowed to marry non-Muslim women, if you have unfair religious courts dealing with divorces. Quite frankly, I don't think Lebanese Muslims should be allowed in Australia, the way they show total disregards to our law.

 

[Badran]

Even in Australia, a rather young country have enacted countless number of laws (I am no expert in law, so I don't know how many laws there are, because there are not just the constitution, criminal law, family law, civil law, military, road & transport, etc, but also laws with jurisdictions at federal level, state level and local level), don't have full appliance, because some enacted laws are never used...until the occasions arise.

The problem with Sharia law don't come from full appliance, badran. It comes from the fact that it is over 1000 years old, and Muslim officials tried to put outdated laws that need serious updating. The framework of the Sharia law is seriously behind the time. Either throw out each outdated law (that needs replacing) and replace it with something more for the current environment or update each law with amendment. I think both needs to be done.

You have pointed out the corruption of officials. That may well be true, but the Sharia has no mechanism to counter these corruptions, simply point out one of the flaws of the Sharia principle.

However, I don't think it is that simple just to blame the officials. The law itself needs fixing.

No law is perfect, every law system is an ongoing process. And sharia obviously has some problems.

However, non of these problems are at all concerned once again with what is proposed here. The basics of sharia or in other words the things dealing with divorce, inheritance, business dealings do not contain such problems, and if so like i said which ever problem can be easily dealt with, and if muslims don't want to deal with it for now, or like it as it is, thats their own business since it will not apply to anybody who doesn't want it to. And one more time under the supervision of the country's law.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

*mod post: Thread moved into the general debates from the islam dir*

given the comments of some muslims on rf, that islam is not compatible with secularism, should secular societies allow sharia law to be enacted within secular societies?

Link to not4me's thread: secularism vs islam

after making your selection in the poll, please comment on your vote, if you feel so inclined.

If yes, why so?
If not, why not?
If you are unsure, why are you unsure?

Do share your thoughts.

hell no

 

[gnostic]

No law is perfect, every law system is an ongoing process.

No, they are not. And they will never be. Society changes too much, so the law has to change with the society, otherwise the law will stagnate and will fail the society it meant to protect.

And if know me long enough, then you will find out that I don't believe in "perfection". Nothing is ever "perfect".

Imperfection doesn't mean ugliness or bad. From from it. Great beauty come from the uniqueness and imperfection. If everything looked the same, then it become bland and boring.

 

[Yerda]

Besides, if one religion should be allowed to influence government, all religions should.

Why so?