Have Muslim leaders been condemning the attacks?

[JumpandScore]

It just occurred to me reading another thread (sorry!)

I am very much in the don't tar them all with the same brush camp, but a number of people have said why aren't many Muslims speaking out? It's true I haven't seen any reports of prominent Muslims condemning them. Have I missed them? Are they not being reported? Or are they keeping quiet?

"The Catholic Church does not permit divorce for valid sacramental marriages."

so when a British couple has a valid divorce under British law, the Catholic church doesn't accept it?

Catholics in the UK have to have a registrar at the church whereas CofE the vicar is also the registrar.

Not always. Depends on the 'level' of the priest. I was married in the RC church and the priest also acted as Registrar - he was a Monsignor.

I knew a lay preacher at some minority church, who had qualified as a registrar. I think it can be independent of your religious standing, if any.

What I was thinking was that there are various religions, not just Islam, which already make their adherents follow rules which are different from British law. Refusing to consider a civil divorce as valid is an easy example.

www.islamic-sharia.org/talaq/

^ The Islamic version.

It seems rather loaded towards the married man in the way its written and

" if, after this waiting period, the husband fails to take his wife back, then the wife is completely divorced, and must leave the matrimonial home immediately"

I except this is extreme version of what happens in reality though?

www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jul/05/sharia-law-religious-courts

^ Good article on Sharia Law and some problems it poses, especially with women who perhaps are not fully aware of British Law and their actual rights.

Why?

Why should Muslims be seen to condemn? Muslims in Syria 200,000 of them have been killed by other Muslims.

OP did you condemn France for bombing innocent civilians since the attack? And I wouldn't expect you to.

Not just Muslim women, obviously

www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jun/25/religion.uk1

I've been to hundreds of Catholic weddings and there's never been a need for a registrar to be present.

Priests are registrars aren't they?

At Catholic weddings in the UK you have to are a registrar present. They are very discreet, they're just there for the signing, but the Parish Priest doesn't count as registrar.

I know someone who had no idea you needed a registrar, they got legally married after the honeymoon.

Theres no way in hell any british muslims would want stoning and no way it would even be suggested. Shariah courts are for arbitration and usually its used for divorce, disputes over wills that sort of thing. Never ever has it been used in relation to corporal punishments and wouldn't be because it goes against British law which is above all other laws in this country.

Talk about a storm in a teacup

Turkeys voting for Christmas?

www.secularism.org.uk/blog/2013/02/here-is-why-sharia-law-has-no-place-in-britain-or-elsewhere

...and just in case anyone can't or won't open the link, this is just for starters:

A woman's testimony is worthy half a man's in Islam. She gets half the inheritance of her male siblings; a woman's marriage contract is between her male guardian and her husband. A man can have four wives and divorce his wife by simple repudiation using the word "Talig", whereas a woman must give specific reasons, some of which are extremely difficult to prove. Child custody reverts to the father at a pre-set age, even if the father is abusive. Women who remarry lose custody of their children.

These are real issues of inequality and discrimination that Muslim women face every day.

fourmummy

Are you equally interested in Catholic and Jewish rules that don't accept a civil divorce? Or are you just an Islam-basher?

One woman and no male testimony suffices if the evidence is for a matter where a woman is an expert, for example a midwifes testimony is sufficient.

Brother's get twice the inheritance their sisters get if the parents die intestate. The brothers are financially responsible for their sisters, including those who are divorced an return home. Womens finances are their own, they are not required to financially support anyone.

A woman can indeed marry herself, I have done. A young woman chooses her male family members to act as her guardians and they put forward her marriage contract and conditions she wants in her marriage contract. Older women, divorced, widowed women can do it themselves as they wont be shy about and less likely to waive their rights.

Divorce in Islam is allowed, a husband can divorce his wife by saying he divorces her, in cases of divorce there is a three month cooling off period wherein the couple can reconcile, this is only allowed three times. A woman can ask for divorce, she doesn't need a reason, that she does not wish to be married is sufficient. I got a divorce it was a damn sight easier to get an Islamic divorce than a legal one.

Where both parents are equally able to care for their and neither is abusive custody of a child under the age of seven goes to the mother, after the age of seven the child's wishes are considered and the father gets custody if the child wants to live with the father and there is no abuse and the father is equally able to care for the child as the mother.
The father is always completely and utterly financially responsible for his children he must cover full financial responsibility of his child and the mother (being his ex-wife) and his child for the first two years of the child's life if the mother chooses to breast feed their child.
Custody means the child sleeps at his fathers house not that the mother is prevented from seeing the child. It's meant to safeguard the child from abuse and make it easier for the mother to re-marry, it also ensures the father does shoulder full financial responsibility for his child. I have full custody of my children and nobody is suggesting I hand my DC to ex who was abusive despite being re-married. I have a friend who has full custody of her two DC awarded her in courts in Pakistan.

It's funny how people are so helpful in picking out any rubbish that's Islam related.
Usually out of context and with no background or practical knowledge.
I'm sure they're the same kind of people who look out for everyone. Supporting their families, helping their neighbours, seeking out injustices in their local communities and fighting the wrongs in this world. Lovely people

Are you equally interested in Catholic and Jewish rules that don't accept a civil divorce? Or are you just an Islam-basher? Absolutely (or, 'absolutely not', depending on how you read that sentence). As a secularist, atheist, humanist, I want to see a secular, atheist and humanist nation (and world). The key to achieving this is argumentation. Criticism is vital. This is a thread about a Muslim response to the terrorist attacks. Why are you not criticising me for patriarchy-bashing? I am also vocally critical of that perspective (and it would ne nice to get a proper answer to this question).

The thread is "Have Muslim leaders been condemning the attacks"

To which the answer is "Yes"

If you can talk about different, off-topic things, why can't I?

There's nothing to fear from criticising Islam (a loaded statement, but you know what I mean). The more people, in the words of the great Loyd Grossman, 'deliberate, cogitate, digest', play around with ideas, terminology, words, feelings, consider and debate, the more chance there is of achieving atheism, humanism and secularism.

Never ever has (Sharia) been used in relation to corporal punishments and wouldn't be because it goes against British law which is above all other laws in this country

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/06/muslim-vigilantes-jailed-sharia-law-attacks-london

Yes Puzzled? I read that article as two men who aren't Muslim, and have no affiliation to the Sharia council decide they are patrolling an area and incorporating what they ignorantly think is Muslim ideals of decorum in an area of England and have been rightly arrested and charged for it.

I do not know a single practicing Muslim, who has studied Islam and Islamic jurisprudence would behave in this manner.

I'm absolutely positive the behaviour displayed in that article was neither condoned nor sanctioned by the Sharia council.

anyone can announce their Muslim, does not make them experts in Islam, does not make them representative of Islam and Muslims, does not even make them even vaguely knowledgeable of the basics in Islam.

I don't know about the Catholic church today but it was definitely a thing that divorcees could not remarry in church. It was extremely hard to get the necessary annulment - unless you were a well off aristo along the lines of Princess Caroline of Monaco - I recall the bitter comments!

Ah yes, Fuzzy - they're not real muslims, they don't understand correctly, their interpretation is wrong and "proper muslims" wouldn't support them; all the usual things we hear when anyone does something illegal claiming it's in the name of Islam, in fact

FWIW I don't necessarily disagree with the points you've made, but as I've said it's the message implicit in acceptance of a parallel set of laws which worries me - and yes, that applies whoever's alternative laws they are. Given that some will always twist bits to suit, it hardly seems sensible to import a judicial code which contains such utterly repugnant penalties, and I'm afraid claims that "oh, nobody would ever want to observe that bit" simply don't wash