Archbishop says Sharia law in this country is unavoidable

[spokette]

Really?

Well if it does happen (heaven help us if it does), guess who will lose out because it certainly won't be the men.

There are over 50 muslim countries in the world so if someone wants to observe sharia law, I'm sure one of them will accommodate their lifestyle choice.

My parents came from Jamaica in the 1960s and even though they retained their culture, they observed British law.

My personal opinion is that Sharia law is incompatible in a country where laws are in place to protect and uphold the rights of women because it is usually women who receive a raw deal.

There was a documentary shown a few years ago which followed a female lawyer in an African country (cannot remember which one - might have been Nigeria) who adjudicated over cases where women seeked redress in civil courts whilst their husbands went to the Sharia courts. It made me thankful to live in this country.

Also remember the case of the Muslim woman in Nigeria who was sentenced to death for having an affair with a married man which resulted in a child? He was given a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again.

I know that's been debated in that film with the Mona Lisa in it - can't remember which it was - but it was at the movies recently.

So that's why I'm saying maybe he didn't.

Don't want to offend people of faith about these things.

sorry pankhurst but what has that got to do with anything?

I am a Darwinain kutilputil - history gives us no such exuses sorry

and yes, you have heard of stockhiolm syndrome?

oh, sorry.

maybe nothing. it's just you were saying it was a different age and a different culture and so on.

so i just looked for another religious leader of about that time to see what the general common moral standard for marrying was.

do you have hiccups monkeytrooz?

stockhiolm???

must - go - to - bed -

see as with all life on earth each and every case is different and unique in its own right, you cannot compare such issues like marriage, between Jesus who died really young to Muhammed (pbuh)who died relatively old for that time...

and monkeytrousers...you did it again...that is the third insult in one night....why is it that any issue/opinion anyone else is passionate about is laughable to you and yours is so superior...why should we give credit to your jargon about darwin when my support of my religion and its origins is seen as insignificant to you? why do you think i have stockholm syndrome?just because i am willing to support something that is an exception to the rule?

I do agree with spokette. Does anyone think it seems as if he may be doing a Tony Blair; perhaps he will convert to Islam?

I don't actually have a problem as such with people from particular belief systems abiding by the laws of those belief systems AS LONG AS the upholders of those belief-based rules are not given free rein to impose them on the unwilling ie if a British citizen or any person living in Britain is sentenced by a religious 'court' operating in Britain to a severe physical punishment then that person should have the right to be protected against the imposition of a barbaric religious law by the full weight of British law. IE if you want to do your banking or indeed get mutually consensual marriage guidance according to a tribunal of your religious leaders then go ahead: if a religious court sentences you to death for being gay then you should be able to access protection and anyone who tries to carry out that 'sentence' should be prosecuted.

lol @ kutilputil justifying mohammed's paedophilia

"different cultures have different traditions and this exists to this day"
that's right, and many Islam traditions are abhorrent to British culture. utterly abhorrent. religious tolerance is one thing, and religious tolerance is what we have. accommodation with a system of law that is utterly incompatible with the laws and traditions and culture of this country is quite another and must not be allowed to happen. talking about "choice" is also pretty hard to stomach, when the position of women under Sharia law is so disempowered

whatever the prevailing culture. a "relationship" between a 9 yo and 56 yo could only be based on an abuse of power, and any comparisons with the behaviour of Jesus show a gross misunderstanding of the example of Jesus, who was actually pretty good at cutting through the inherent injustices of his own culture and showed immense respect for his women contemporaries and friends.

I think we need to dispel the Ayesha thing. State marriages between children and other children or old men were not unusual, in most areas of developed worlds up until the enlightenment in Europe (don't know about the rest of the world). Mohammed would not have slept with Ayesha until she had menstruated, there has been a taboo against sleeping with pre-pubescent children in pretty much every human culture (bar a few wierdie ones) in history. A child who had menstruated was no longer considered a child, so it's unlikely that he would have slept with Ayesha at the age of 9, unless of course she'd reached puberty by then (also unlikely).

So there's no need for any muslim to defend Mohammed's paedophila as it probably didn't exist. Or get outraged on his behalf and pretend it would have been OK if he did it because he was the prophet and tell everyone else they're offended because of everyone's distaste for the idea of a 54 year old man fucking a 9 year old. It didn't happen. I'm surprised that devout muslims are so ready to insult your prophet by accepting it did and trying to make unnecessary excuses for him.

I haven't read the whole thread but just wanted to express my frustration at monkeytrousers' apparent inability to learn.

How many times do you need to be told that Female Circumcision ('Infibulation') Is NOT A MUSLIM Thing? It Is An AFRICAN Thing.

Christian Africans do it. Muslims from elsewhere don't do it.

Do you understand?

Can I trust you to remember it this time?

Cote d'Azur, MT is well aware that infibulation is not a technically muslim thing.

But when muslims are doing it because they mistakenly believe it to be a "muslim thing", you cannot wash your hands of responsibility for the leaders of Islam in those countries pretending to everyone that it's a muslim thing.

Burning people at the stake is not currently a Christian thing. But 500 years ago, it most certainly was. It's no use Christians saying "it's not a christian thing, it's a misunderstanding of christianity." They did it. And they did it in the name of christianity. Just as many muslims are carrying out female castration in the name of their religion.

Obviously not. Otherwise, she would not bring it up every time she rants about Islam.

And Muslims don't "believe it's a muslim thing" - Who told you that? (Is it MT? )

"500 years ago it certainly was" is not a valid argument. Female circumcision has no place in the Quran nor the Hadith. No female member of Mohammad's family has been circumcised. It has no place in the religion whatsoever.

As I said, it is an AFRICAN TRADITION. It does NOT come from Islam.

Rebelling against the religion whose weirdos want to kill you is understandable. But going about it with disinformation is just stupid. Learn from your mistakes and change your argument for the better.

er. Jesus didn't die 'really young'. He was (?33). Plenty of time by those standards to get married to all sorts.

The Prophet (PBUH) was already married at 33 to Kadijha. According to all this googling

And then when she dies, he gets engaged to a six year old. who menstruates at 9.(he's 56 by then). So then he has sex with her.

It might have been common for old men to have sex with 'young women' in those days, but I'm interested why someone with superior information didn't think better of it.

(If this weren't going alongside his stoning to death of the other woman, and his 'women are half as intelligent as men', I might be inclined to be persuaded that it was cultural, but how is it NOT TRUE? LitleBella?

It looks as if there's lots of 'evidence'?
Is this googling lark wrong?

Some muslims do believe it is a muslim thing Coted'. Many Somalis will simply not be told that female castration has no part in Islam, they persist in saying that their (muslim) religion says they must do it. As do many sub-saharan African Muslims. (And many African Christians for that matter, who also insist it's a religious thing.)

Are you really unaware that religion is being used to justify this barbaric practice?

I'm not arguing with you that technically, it has no place in Islam. Educated people know that. But many uneducated muslims do not, and their religious leaders are not disabusing them.

oh I didn't know he'd actually had sex with her because she'd menstruated at 9 pankhurst, do we really know that, what's the source? I was assuming it was one of those marriages where the children are married from the age of dot and then it's not consummated until a few months after first menstruation (as was the standard practice). I just assume the Mohammed as paedophile thing is a red herring and pretty much an anti-islamic slur which distracts people from the real issues.

Er, no...or at least I think its worth YOU googling as PUSSINJIMMY suggests.

She's a muslim convert of four years, and I'm not sure she said she knew about this.

and now you're defending islam and you don't know about it.

so maybe i've got the completely wrong of the stick.

which is VERY possible.

but MTrooz is ususally fairly good with her comments?

I can't be arsed to google about it and anyway I've googled in the past. From what I remember there isn't quite enough proper evidence for any of us to know either way. One site will say he's a raging paedophile and another will say don't be silly of course he's not. Don't you have a link to your source?

I'm not defending islam, I have no reason to, I'm just discussing.

Oh sorry.

You said we should 'dispel the Ayesha thing'.

But now you're saying there's no proper evidence either way?

I'm confused - cos I'm googling as suggested by my favourite Muslim kitty - and it's not looking like a big DEBATE.

It's in Hadith. Which you mentioned as being a good source.

So the ones who are saying it;s not true are saying don't believe Hadith?

CONFUSED ICON (With head spinning)

Sorry to all if this Muhammed (PBUH) sleeping with a nine year old is a handbrake moment.

I have to go swimming in a moment so I'll let it go!

The New Generation Network Manifesto - prominent muslim thinkers and others calling for a new approach but largely unheard, probably for being too sensible and disappointingly unsensational. Also none have eyebrows like Rowan Williams

You got a link?

I'm quite happy to accept if there is good historical evidence for it. Up to now, I hadn't clocked that there was.

If he slept with her after she menstruated, then she wouldn't be considered a child. It's not nice, it's not what we would consider decent, but it would not be classed as paedophilia in that society (or indeed in European society up until modern times). And I just don't think it's very helpful to keep bringing up this peadophile thing, unless there's evidence that Mohammed had sexual relations with Ayesha before puberty. Which as far as I'm aware, he didn't. Are you saying that Hadith says he slept with Ayesha before she menstruated? I'm very surprised by that, but please by all means post your link I'm quite happy to stand corrected.