kumble_rocks Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 according to the Archbishop of Canterbury. Jesus, what next , will Hindu personal law be honored in Britain. But wait , Hindus don't demand that. Then it is beyond me why in the world some of the Muslims want this draconian sharia law. If they want it , then can always immigrate to Saudi.http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2266522,00.html Sharia law 'unavoidable' in UK 07/02/2008 22:26 - (SA) London - The introduction of Islamic Sharia law in Britain is "unavoidable" to promote social cohesion and enable Muslims to choose between legal systems, the Archbishop of Canterbury said on Thursday. The remarks are likely to inflame the debate about the aims and limitations of efforts to integrate Britain's 1.7-million-strong Muslim community. Archbishop Rowan Williams, who is also the head of the worldwide Anglican Church with more than 70 million members, said in a BBC interview on Thursday that there needed to be a debate on whether the existing legal system could fulfil the demands of a "multi-faith society". Britain had to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens did not relate to the British legal system, said Williams. Muslims should not be forced to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty". Williams proposed that Muslims should be able to choose whether to have issues like marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in Sharia-compliant proceedings or the existing legal system. He said that a better understanding of Sharia law was required in Britain, where the issue was currently "clouded by sensational reporting". However, the Archbishop stressed that "nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that's sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states."
CC1981 Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 This is rubbish! This is one of the major criticisms i have of Islam- that ultimately, at the end of the day, they refuse to leave religion/respect religious beleifs of others in their daily workings.
Desi Cartman Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 This is rubbish! This is one of the major criticisms i have of Islam- that ultimately, at the end of the day, they refuse to leave religion/respect religious beleifs of others in their daily workings. I agree with you but in the above report I dont see any muslim asking for it.
Grim Reaper Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 I would just love to see another Crusade lauched against them! :D
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 according to the Archbishop of Canterbury. Jesus' date=' what next , will Hindu personal law be honored in Britain. But wait , Hindus don't demand that. Then it is beyond me why in the world [b']some of the Muslims want this draconian sharia law. If they want it , then can always immigrate to Saudi.:D http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_2266522,00.html Sharia law 'unavoidable' in UK 07/02/2008 22:26 - (SA) London - The introduction of Islamic Sharia law in Britain is "unavoidable" to promote social cohesion and enable Muslims to choose between legal systems, the Archbishop of Canterbury said on Thursday. The remarks are likely to inflame the debate about the aims and limitations of efforts to integrate Britain's 1.7-million-strong Muslim community. Archbishop Rowan Williams, who is also the head of the worldwide Anglican Church with more than 70 million members, said in a BBC interview on Thursday that there needed to be a debate on whether the existing legal system could fulfil the demands of a "multi-faith society". Britain had to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens did not relate to the British legal system, said Williams. Muslims should not be forced to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty". Williams proposed that Muslims should be able to choose whether to have issues like marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in Sharia-compliant proceedings or the existing legal system. He said that a better understanding of Sharia law was required in Britain, where the issue was currently "clouded by sensational reporting". However, the Archbishop stressed that "nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that's sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states." All of them do some openly soem subliminally soe provide moral support it's detailed network..and same theme plays.. and my theory of the momnet they achieve critical mass such demand is unavoidable once again is vindicated
Lurker Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 London - The introduction of Islamic Sharia law in Britain is "unavoidable" to promote social cohesion and enable Muslims to choose between legal systems, the Archbishop of Canterbury said on Thursday. The remarks are likely to inflame the debate about the aims and limitations of efforts to integrate Britain's 1.7-million-strong Muslim community. Isnt it amazing how a statement from a Christian head-honcho results in slamming of Muslims? No I am not talking of you KR, I know you long enough to realize you are not that kind but overall. What i find amazing is that although few Muslims in Britain have brought shame to their community, how easily the rest of them are chastised! I mean look at the numbers here, 1.7 million in total, out of 60 million plus. A grand %age of less than 3! If you looked at the statement it is like the Archbishop think its not 3 but 30%! On a different note, all these Muslim bashing has resulted in Christians going scott-free. The other day I was having a discussion at work as to the sheer number of Mexican immigrants in Arizona(about 30% plus at unofficial number). A Democrat senior gave a rather interesting explanation. The Mexicans are allowed in not because they do the low end work or that their work ethics is great. No. They are allowed in because they are Christians. It did make me think. All things being equal if Mexico was say Hindu would US still allow the kind of migration that it does? And heaven forbid if Mexico was Muslim. xxx
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Question is why muslim are viewed with that kind of susspicion.. Answer is obvious even with a cursroy glance around the world map and their acitivities.. heck even Thailand of all places is facing separatism. In face of this obviously people will be suspicious of their presence. Yes if Mexico was muslim by now Arizona dn californaia wud have been seeing separatism movement . There is no reason to believe otherwise given their track record without even single exception around the world.
Lurker Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Question is why muslim are viewed with that kind of susspicion.. Answer is rather simple. Saawan ke andhe ko har taraf hariyaali dikhti hai. Muslims are viewed with suspicion by YOU, not me. So stop insinuating as if you speak for everyone here. I am sure you do realized over the years that more people here, just as an example, are at odds with your Muslim-suspicion than those in support of it. xxx
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Answer is rather simple. Saawan ke andhe ko har taraf hariyaali dikhti hai. Muslims are viewed with suspicion by YOU, not me. So stop insinuating as if you speak for everyone here. I am sure you do realized over the years that more people here, just as an example, are at odds with your Muslim-suspicion than those in support of it. xxx You are in minority, actually that sawana ke andhe ko phrase suits u better given ur little too personal interaction with those samples u have lost objectivity. most of the people are in agreement even here ask them the question whether muslim minoroity are likeley to start the spearatist movemtn or chrstiam or some other minority u will get the picture, despite this site not being a represenatative ensemble. Are u ready for sanity check of the experience natives faced from muslim minority after that critical mass phase world over. Go tell those Thais that it's just an insinificant minority which demands separate state. Most probably they mgiht slap you given they see everyday what they are facing.. Freaking having problmes with buddhist of all people takes the cake
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Let me remind those who peddle only minority ask for it.. Even canada has already seen one attempt towards import of shariah.. Canadian government will have none of it. Fact is only minorty of them were opposed to it > When this happened day in day oout one after another muslim leader cam in support of this law except one Tariq fatah.. so much for only minority want it:giggle:
Lurker Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 You are in minority' date= actually that sawana ke andhe ko phrase suits u better given ur little too personal interaction with those samples u have lost objectivity. most of the people are in agreement even here ask them the question whether muslim minoroity are likeley to start the spearatist movemtn or chrstiam or some other minority u will get the picture, despite this site not being a represenatative ensemble. Really? So why is it that the triad of you, Sandtest and BB has to resort in every post how you are "honest" and not "politically correct"? :hysterical::hysterical: Right from issue like SRK to Muslims in Army yada yada your ar$e has been handed out to you by many, even if I take the core critics like myself, KR, CC, Shwetabh, away. So quit living in this la la land of how you are in majority. Bhai khushfahmi ki bi hadh hoti hai, tumhari to koi hadh hi nahin hai! :hysterical:
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Politically correct doesn't mean unpopular in larger world.. U seeTaslima Nasreen espousal is not political correct but take a poll on any site she is resoundingly popular.. Politically correct only means unpopular among psec crowd.. I don't know anyone else except few even post on those issues.. Don't muddle the issue by throwing up scores of issue thus derail the topic.. Ask thsi question Which minority is more likeley to start the separatism.. ( although even the cursory glance wud say who has done it over the past) btu it seems u are not in consonance wiht facts and love to have face-savign poll but let me assure u even those polls u will find u are hallucinating minority who has lost sense of objectvity due to some personal expereince.... Extrapolation 101.. if they screwed in pat and are screwing in present chances are they will screw in future.... Khuishfahmi world over one after another leader keeps winning on rigid stance against islamist be it bush or sarkozi or Harper and people like u revel in popularity contest among select coterie of few :hysterical:
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Another burnign example of politically correct but popular sentiment statement can be traced to Soharabuddin episode.. psec crowd cried foul but we all know through election results how Gujrati people viewed those sentiments.. At worst they didn't care because that was not the sole issue and at best they endorsed it.. Politically correctsentiment doesn't have to be unpopular among larger population..
Lurker Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Politically correct doesn't mean unpopular in larger world.. Of course it doesnt mean that. In other words people who say politically correct words are also popular in larger world(your words) and so it should effectively tell you all you need to know about politically correct people being in minority :haha: Which minority is more likeley to start the separatism.. Ummm lets see. In the modern India a 3% minority population, Sikhs, have asked for a seperate land. So I suppose you were hinting at Sikh religion then
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Chalo u got the drift pretty fast.. u have bene getitng prgasmic how politcally incorrect means minority voice.. My conviction comes from the fact (1) See u are cryign how muslims are being attacked left right and centre in USA chrstians ain;t .. so obviouslsy majority see my point else u won;t have ben complaining (2) then there is little matter of electipon results world over showing strong anti islamic-nonesense voice winning the vote of confidence of rank and file from russia to canada.. This one nails whatever hallucination u might have about ur khushfahmi being popular.... Sikhs never wanted it it was few pakistani adminsistered clowns had sikh wanted they wud have gotten their sheer number in armed forces was enough for that... IN modern India mullahs orchestrated one diviion and and as we speak are fightitng for another in kashmir.. In thailand these gits are fightitn for separate land In rusisa they are fighting for separate land. Have started the first phase of separarims by asking Shariah in canada and britain.. Already are creating toubles in France Germany etc
Lurker Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Chalo u got the drift pretty fast.. u have bene getitng prgasmic how politcally incorrect means minority voice.. Bhaiya I have to beg/plead you to read your post before you post man. Itna jaldi mein kyun rahte ho? In the last post you wrote - Politically correct doesn't mean unpopular in larger world, and now you write - politcally incorrect means minority voice. So make up your mind if you are defending being politically correct or incorrect. Mujhe to kuch samajh nahin aata bhai :((
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 Really? So why is it that the triad of you' date= Sandtest and BB has to resort in every post how you are "honest" and not "politically correct"? :hysterical::hysterical: Right from issue like SRK to Muslims in Army yada yada your ar has been handed out to you by many, even if I take the core critics like myself, KR, CC, Shwetabh, away. So quit living in this la la land of how you are in majority. Bhai khushfahmi ki bi hadh hoti hai, tumhari to koi hadh hi nahin hai! :hysterical: I guess debating beyodn couple fo posts either is not ur cuo of tea or u cnveneinetly forget what u have written.. See here was u insisnuating somehow politicalling incorrect means not popular.. mind u this post was in response to me saying u are the minority voice.. Suddenly when i show u how ignorant u are for thinking politically incorrect to be equal to unpopular.. Suddenly I am not sure about my stand.. I show u mirror and suddenly my stand is under scrutiny sahi hai lage raho :hysterical: One thing si right though U are not sure about anythign where debate goes beyond single page.. u lose sense of topic sense of example basically sense over-all
TheBoyPlunger Posted February 9, 2008 Posted February 9, 2008 I just don't understand why some of the Muslims want Sharia and why other people support these stupid claims. If you want to have Sharia, there are many Islamic republics around that they can move their shop to.
Guest dada_rocks Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 wud u call this one religious debate gambo?.. I rest my case.. it's politics
Gambit Posted February 13, 2008 Posted February 13, 2008 Yeh thread meri nazar ke kaise bach gaya. IMO it's largely religious(judging by posts as well).
Recommended Posts