RE: Sharia "Law"

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Sharia "Law"

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Sharia "Law"

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 5 [6]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Sharia "Law" - 7/30/2006 9:14:35 PM

abytchgoddess4u

Posts: 268
Joined: 10/17/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
"Goat Herder?"
Ahhhhhhh, they actually *DO* herd goats in the Middle East!
I've seen them do it because I was there in the U.S. Navy.
Ever been there?

Guess what? Goats are herded all over the world!

So, no acknowledgement or apology for accusing me of being a namecaller?

No explanation as to why you are trying to get me drawn into an argument? That was the second time I asked...politely, I may add.

Can't own your shit, or what?

_____________________________

"Everything in the Universe Is within you.
Ask all from yourself." Rumi

"The world will know and understand me someday. But if that day does not arrive, it does not greatly matter. I shall have opened the way for other women."
George Sand

(in reply to popeye1250)

Profile

Post #: 101

RE: Sharia "Law" - 7/31/2006 3:25:16 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

popeye,

I take your point about corporations and exploiting immigration but human migration is a natural state of life and we were hearing the same old tired arguments in the 1800s that we are hearing today. It's simply a means of Government diverting attention from what they are doing elsewhere - i.e. making a big issue of this when there are much bigger issues.

Regards

(in reply to popeye1250)

Profile

Post #: 102

RE: Sharia "Law" - 7/31/2006 3:26:50 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

agirl,

Spot on. There are many things in life that are blatantly wrong. My post was merely stating that we should be focusing our efforts in our own countries as we can do something about them through the ballot box.

Regards

(in reply to popeye1250)

Profile

Post #: 103

RE: Sharia "Law" - 7/31/2006 5:30:54 PM

popeye1250

Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline

Gent, it's not "the govt." in the U.S. that is against immigration, it is now the People!
And we're starting to get just a little pissed-off at "the govt." for not controlling it!

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Profile

Post #: 104

RE: Sharia "Law" - 7/31/2006 9:43:03 PM

MasterKalif

Posts: 648
Joined: 5/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear

Strange what some customs are. In one country it is illegal for a woman to marry whilst a virgin (I'm applying for the job if Virgin taker there) In a couple of South American Coutries, a man can legally execute his wife foe adultery and yet is free to bonk any woman he chooses.. Since the laws and incident that the OP quoted happened within their laws, the only comment I can offer is that when in Rome etc and thus if you feel that you may be in breach of local laws just don't go there...

which south american country? Ive never heard of anything like that....

(in reply to IronBear)

Profile

Post #: 105

RE: Sharia "Law" - 7/31/2006 9:49:53 PM

MasterKalif

Posts: 648
Joined: 5/24/2004
Status: offline

sorry if this topic and tha nature of the discussion changed, but reading the first post only reconfirms my strong belief that Iran is a complete "toilet" (I beg the pardon of any Iranians on here) and has long gone downhill since the forgotten enlightened days of the Shah, when Iran was a pro-western, strong regional power, and a beacon of modernity (until 1979).

Needless to say under the Shah the middle class grew (or came about actually), women could drive, the government was strongly against religious schools and women were actually required not to cover themselves....if you dont believe me, look up pictures of that country from that period, astonishing indeed.

Sharia law is a savagery that no self-respecting muslim nation should have to endure in any form....unfortunately the central governments of those nations are weak and have little power, or out of fear of mass uprising, allow these barbaric traditions to be kept, as is the case of Pakistan. I think the civil courts of state are the only valid law of the land, and no religious law should be kept other than to embrace its general moral example.

However dont think all muslim nations do that, Turkey is a great example of a modern muslim nation thanks to Attaturk and his forced modernization of that country. Egypt is also allright and does not practice that.

And why should women be stoned? That in itself is ugly as sin

no to sharia law! yes to civility.

(in reply to MasterKalif)

Profile

Post #: 106

RE: Sharia "Law" - 7/31/2006 10:01:16 PM

MasterKalif

Posts: 648
Joined: 5/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lashra

If these women don't get educated and stand up for themselves they will never stop suffering and it will continue forever.

Of course thats why their religion doesn't want them educated, because they would realise that they are more then just breeding fodder. They would actually want to be treated like human beings with rights. Keep them ignorant and you can keep them under control. Kind of like another religion that I know that isn't so far off in belief as Islam.

In this context, the men are as much in need of education as the women. If you use the religious context, the men are as ignorant as the women and are controlled in the same way. The men do what they do for the same reasons that the women suffer what they do.

agirl

lack of education is a factor not only on the part of women but also ont he part of men....but rather than simplistically blame it on religion, I would say its a tradition factor, or clan-tribal factor which is the issue at heart.

(in reply to agirl)

Profile

Post #: 107

RE: Sharia "Law" - 8/1/2006 5:02:45 AM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

popeye,

Fair enough but the Government are making an issue out of it with the border controls (or lack of). Their actions have put this issue firmly in the public eye. The result is that, bizarrely, people seem to have much stronger feelings about a group of people simply trying to earn a living than they do about their own Government, which they elect and who represents them, either directly slaughtering people or sending the equipment with the same result.. It's a strange state of affairs and I imagine the US Government have a collective smile on their faces as they are left free to go about their business in various parts of the world as a significant proportion of the population are lost in the immigration issue (which, ultimately, is simply people trying to earn a living and pales into insignificance by comparison).

Regards

(in reply to MasterKalif)

Profile

Post #: 108

RE: Sharia "Law" - 8/1/2006 8:19:47 AM

agirl

Posts: 4530
Joined: 6/14/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterKalif

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lashra

If these women don't get educated and stand up for themselves they will never stop suffering and it will continue forever.

Of course thats why their religion doesn't want them educated, because they would realise that they are more then just breeding fodder. They would actually want to be treated like human beings with rights. Keep them ignorant and you can keep them under control. Kind of like another religion that I know that isn't so far off in belief as Islam.

In this context, the men are as much in need of education as the women. If you use the religious context, the men are as ignorant as the women and are controlled in the same way. The men do what they do for the same reasons that the women suffer what they do.

agirl

lack of education is a factor not only on the part of women but also ont he part of men....but rather than simplistically blame it on religion, I would say its a tradition factor, or clan-tribal factor which is the issue at heart.

Yes MasterKalif,

I was commenting on the *context* of the previous statement that I quoted and qualified that with an *if*. In terms of * things we may find unpalatable*, it could encompass culture and tradition also.

agirl

< Message edited by agirl -- 8/1/2006 8:22:39 AM >

(in reply to MasterKalif)

Profile

Post #: 109

RE: Sharia "Law" - 8/1/2006 3:09:02 PM

LTRsubNW

Posts: 1604
Joined: 5/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Alumbrado,

There is a pattern developing here. I post and you appear with criticism. As luck would have it I am advertising for a stalker at the moment. I will send you an application form and a starter pack.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha (nicely done lol)

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Profile

Post #: 110

RE: Sharia "Law" - 8/1/2006 3:14:23 PM

LTRsubNW

Posts: 1604
Joined: 5/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterKalif

And why should women be stoned? That in itself is ugly as sin

I can't argue that in general, but I firmly believe some exceptions should be made (say, such as my ex wife)

(in reply to MasterKalif)

Profile

Post #: 111

RE: Sharia "Law" - 8/2/2006 6:44:30 AM

LadyEllen

Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline

Hi All

How did we get onto immigration? (been away, sorry!). I have no problem with anyone coming to my country to work and contribute as long as there is need for them and sufficient resources (housing, water etc) for them - and as long as they respect and obey the laws of the land. This might imply that I should respect others' wishes to respect and obey sharia in their land - however there is a big difference between our law and that systematic code of barbarity; central to our laws are the rights founded in Magna Carta and since developed to protect us from unlawful use of the law, as well as our capacity to influence and change the law via our votes, and the incorporation of human rights legislation as an overarching principle. Sharia meanwhile is subject to none of these factors - it is used to victimise the weak, has no requirement for habeas corpus, is enshrined as the unchangeable will of god and has no concept of human rights. No one can possibly support such a system, unless he is wielding it as a means of control over others that is fascist rather than religious in nature. Those subject to it dont want it, but are forced to submit and show enthusiasm lest they are punished under it - the same as in any system of totalitarian rule. As such, it is a problem for the whole world since the nuts who control it also seek to expand it, just as any fascist nut does with his flavour of fascism. Albeit on a small scale, we in the UK frequently see the results of this expansionist tendency amongst Islamic emigres to our shores, with abuses of the weak by the strong in their communities - westernised Muslim girls killed for wanting a boyfriend for instance. This is not about cultural diversity - it is about criminal acts, pure and simple, wherever they occur. This is not about religion either - it is about fascist control of the people, pure and simple. Human rights are universal - unless we wish to propose that some are less than human and so dont deserve the same considerations.

As for diversity - I'm all for that too. Its one of the best protections for our personal lifestyle choices that we have. Who here thinks that if we didnt have cultures from all over the world here, that we would be able to live our lives as we do? Without their coming and the necessary social and legal changes they brought about, we'd all still be liiving in the starch-shirt 1950s, in church every Sunday and referring to one another as sir and madam (in normal life I meant!). That society had to evolve to incorporate peoples of other cultures provided the impetus and foundation for the toleration/acceptance of our native diversity - swinging, homosexuality, transgenderism, bdsm et al, as well as for us to take to any religion or none as we see fit, to wear pretty much what we like and live pretty much as we want - the freedom not to conform to some model of how we should be.

To my mind then, this is not about anti-Islam or anti-immigrant - it is about respect for human rights under a lawful system of law, for all people wherever they are.

Lastly, to anyone who would like to see all immigrants sent back to their own countries; where shall we start? In England there is a very high percentage of Welsh, Scots and Irish - shall we send them home? No. This is a ridiculous argument at best, unless the intention is to clear all racial and cultural diversity from our lands, but people are afraid to say it in those terms? In any case, diversity is important to us for our sakes too as above. Personally I would rather export the work shy and the criminal from our shores (in which number the native population is well represented) than repatriate immigrants who are here to work and contribute. For those immigrants unable to accept our laws though, they really have only one suitable course of action open to them - though they should bear in mind that our ways are far closer to what their god wishes for the world and that eventually our ways must therefore triumph by way of the power of their god if not by way of our efforts.
E

(in reply to LTRsubNW)

Profile

Post #: 112

RE: Sharia "Law" - 8/2/2006 7:10:27 AM

SirKenin

Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline

Well. Here we go with the slams again. It seems to be a common theme on this board. You do not get your own way so you resort to name calling. Brilliant. How about next time trying to bring some contradicting facts to the table instead of trying to demoralize and discredit? To be truthful, the name callers are the ones that look like the retards and the uneducated. Not the victims.

With that said, getting on topic. For better or for worse it is their culture. They are entitled to it. Exactly who the hell are you to tell them how they can live their lives? If they keep it to themselves and do not try to force it down other people's throats, leave them the hell alone. Now, that is different if they decide to immigrate to the West. Then they have to abide by the Law of the West, and if that means no head scarfs and hanging then tough shit. Deal with it or go home.

If there are mass atrocities or crimes against humanity, that of course is different, for example what was happening in Iraq (and of course Somalia, to name another of many). Then it is the duty of the UN to step up to their aid and defend them.

No doubt you are aware that people do not approve of the western culture. Many Arab nations look at the West with complete and utter disdain. Does that mean they have the right to stomp in and terrorize us into conforming to their standards? No, of course not. So what exactly do you feel it is that gives you the right?

To go one step further. Many, many people in the West look upon WIITWD with complete disgust. They believe it to be abhorrent. Mayhaps it is, mayhaps it ain't. But that is not the point. Would you like it if they stomped in, shut us all down and made you go to church on Sunday? Think about it.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to popeye1250)

Profile

Post #: 113

RE: Sharia "Law" - 8/2/2006 7:56:51 AM

LadyEllen

Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline

I maintain my point - this is not about a right to cultural diversity, it is about breaches of human rights plain and simple. If we are willing to step in through the UN over mass breaches, then why not in recurrent isolated breaches?

Are we to say that the nazis should have been left alone should they have gassed only the odd Jew here and there? After all, that was their culture and their law and we would have no right to comment or intervene as such. And if Phol Pot had only exterminated a few intellectuals every now and then, that would be off limits too?

Of course we in the west are not perfect - there are many aspects of life which the Muslims are right to criticise and condemn. However the fact remains that whilst we in the west uphold human rights through law, countries employing the sharia do the exact opposite.

Wrong cannot be made right, purely because one person says it is so or makes a law for that to be the case. In that case then it must follow that Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, Phol Pot et al behaved in a morally acceptable manner within their cultures and were thus off limits to any form of action. The trial of Saddam is therefore also ridiculous since he made the laws under which he behaved so barbarically, so he cannot have broken any law other than the moral law which is now being imposed upon him. Neither is this the first such instance - Nuremberg would fall into the same category.

Given then that there is a precedent that we ourselves have set, that universal human rights and morality apply wherever a crime is committed, regardless of any justification which the perpetrators set in place to legalise it, it is certainly and without question a necessity for us to criticise and condemn sharia, and eventually to bring those responsible for injustices and abuses perpetrated through it, to justice, in the same way we have done with the nazis and are doing now with Saddam.

E

(in reply to SirKenin)

Profile

Post #: 114