[Kona_Silat]

This something that I seem to encounter quite often in the news and also hearing from Islamophobes about their "concern" about Muslim population in the West. My question is why would Muslims living in the Western world want to have Sharia Law implemented upon themselves? Isn't the law of the land enough and fair to Muslim concerns as it is? How would our way of life be hindered if we did not have Sharia law?

[Revert]

Originally Posted by Kona_Silat

This something that I seem to encounter quite often in the news and also hearing from Islamophobes about their "concern" about Muslim population in the West. My question is why would Muslims living in the Western world want to have Sharia Law implemented upon themselves? Isn't the law of the land enough and fair to Muslim concerns as it is? How would our way of life be hindered if we did not have Sharia law?

Your understanding of Sharia is limited to the judicial system. You don't realise that Sharia law is also applied ot EVRY aspect of our lives. SO if you pray 5 times daily, give Zakat, go on Hajj, say the Kalima, and fast ramadhan you are actually implementing the sharia.

[Kona_Silat]

Originally Posted by Revert

Your understanding of Sharia is limited to the judicial system. You don't realise that Sharia law is also applied ot EVRY aspect of our lives. SO if you pray 5 times daily, give Zakat, go on Hajj, say the Kalima, and fast ramadhan you are actually implementing the sharia.

That's true, but why is there a movement like in places in Canada or in the UK to have the judicial aspect.

[IbnMardhiyah]

Originally Posted by Kona_Silat

This something that I seem to encounter quite often in the news and also hearing from Islamophobes about their "concern" about Muslim population in the West. My question is why would Muslims living in the Western world want to have Sharia Law implemented upon themselves? Isn't the law of the land enough and fair to Muslim concerns as it is? How would our way of life be hindered if we did not have Sharia law?

Personally I'm neither for, nor against its implementation here in the West. If its going to be used, then only if done by mutual acceptance by both / all parties in a dispute.

And as for you asking "isn't the law of the land fair enough" - let's refine the question a bit and ask "Who's law is more just? God's law or man's?"

For example in the issue of inheritance, in Islam a man [generally] gets 2x what the female does. If you don't know any better, then you might think this is unfair and unjust until you see that in Islam, its incumbent upon the men only to provide for their families out of their own wealth, but its not incumbent upon the women to do the same. So the man likely stands to gain either the same or even less, in the distribution of inheritance, than a woman does.

There are many other examples.

[Kona_Silat]

Originally Posted by IbnMardhiyah

Personally I'm neither for, nor against its implementation here in the West. If its going to be used, then only if done by mutual acceptance by both / all parties in a dispute.

And as for you asking "isn't the law of the land fair enough" - let's refine the question a bit and ask "Who's law is more just? God's law or man's?"

For example in the issue of inheritance, in Islam a man [generally] gets 2x what the female does. If you don't know any better, then you might think this is unfair and unjust until you see that in Islam, its incumbent upon the men only to provide for their families out of their own wealth, but its not incumbent upon the women to do the same. So the man likely stands to gain either the same or even less, in the distribution of inheritance, than a woman does.

There are many other examples.

I understand.

I mean more or less the judicial system is fair and appropriate for Muslims in the West. There is not a law that I can think of that is unfair to Muslims. For inheritance, a man can write in his will that he will give 2x the share to the male over the female. We do not need to have Sharia law to make it so, for example.

[LEGALEAGLE]

Originally Posted by Kona_Silat

That's true, but why is there a movement like in places in Canada or in the UK to have the judicial aspect.

because people want justice and not just law.

oddly in the corporate law sphere business people have no problems with borrowing from other legal systems nor do media organisations froth at the mouth when contracts do take such matters into account.

[Kona_Silat]

Originally Posted by LEGALEAGLE

...

oddly in the corporate law sphere business people have no problems with borrowing from other legal systems nor do media organisations froth at the mouth when contracts do take such matters into account.

So where would Sharia law fit in for that example.

[IbnMardhiyah]

Originally Posted by Kona_Silat

I understand.

I mean more or less the judicial system is fair and appropriate for Muslims in the West. There is not a law that I can think of that is unfair to Muslims.

Generally, it is fair but that doesn't mean it takes the nuances of Islamic / Muslim life into consideration, simply because there are many things in the Islamic way of life that are illegal, but yet are not so in Western law. And I'm sure I don't have to list these for you.

The main problem with implementing shariah law in the West is that of enforcement in the event of non-compliance. The land would not recognize shariah law as legally binding, and established law would always have the right to overrule or veto. Shariah law can only be used by mutual agreement by both or all parties involved, and if one party doesn't agree or doesn't even want to deal with shariah law in the first place, then they'll simply resort to using established law to address their concerns.

As far as I understand it - and this is just my opinion - in the eyes of Western law, shariah is essentially the same as if two parties made a mutual agreement with each other with all sorts of custom clauses, rules, regulations and stipulations that all signatories agree to.

If there is a dispute, then Western law will allow enforcement of that agreement as per the penalties stated in the agreement itself, such penalties or enforcement methods that all parties have agreed to except if the penalties include taking life or limb, etc. in which case western, federal law would override such an agreement.

I mean, you and I could draw up some business deal with conditions, considerations, clauses, and penalties that no one has heard of before, but as long as we agree on the terms, we can mutually enforce it upon one another as well.

So, in the eyes of western law, shariah is just that - two or more parties consenting to abide by a set of rules drawn up between them.

Here in Ontario, we had Marion Boyd, a former top Attorney General, release a very detailed report on allowing the adoption of sharia law in Ontario and in the end, she recommended doing it.

And this is a white, non-Muslim chick who did her due diligence and didn't allow the hate-mongers to sway her critical thinking processes.

[Blue_Phoenix]

Isn't anyone giving any concern to how non-Muslims will live under sharia law?

[Jamroll]

Originally Posted by Blue_Phoenix

Isn't anyone giving any concern to how non-Muslims will live under sharia law?

Non-muslims will not live under sharia law; at least not in the countries that are being discussed such as the UK and Canada. The sharia law being campaigned for in the UK for example, is akin to a legally binding arbitration system.

[Macaca]

Originally Posted by Kona_Silat

I understand.

I mean more or less the judicial system is fair and appropriate for Muslims in the West. There is not a law that I can think of that is unfair to Muslims. For inheritance, a man can write in his will that he will give 2x the share to the male over the female. We do not need to have Sharia law to make it so, for example.

How about in a relationship where the father is muslim and wife is christian? She tells the judge the father is a "fundamentalist," or wants to take the kids to the mosque. The judge would treat him harsher than a child molester, in the West unfortunately.

We need Islamic law- I don't care that some nonmuslims are mad about it.

[Kona_Silat]

Originally Posted by Macaca

How about in a relationship where the father is muslim and wife is christian? She tells the judge the father is a "fundamentalist," or wants to take the kids to the mosque. The judge would treat him harsher than a child molester, in the West unfortunately.

We need Islamic law- I don't care that some nonmuslims are mad about it.

that kaffir meat is not halal?

[Variable]

Originally Posted by Macaca

How about in a relationship where the father is muslim and wife is christian? She tells the judge the father is a "fundamentalist," or wants to take the kids to the mosque. The judge would treat him harsher than a child molester, in the West unfortunately.

We need Islamic law- I don't care that some nonmuslims are mad about it.

And non-Muslims don't care that you don't care.

[m_ali_qazi]

its not necessary to have sharia law in the west, but it could help though

a lot of muslims abuse the sharia in matters of marriage and divorce and law of the land is unable to do anything about it, a sharia court in place can control that

[shadha]

Kona_Silat: Why Have Sharia Law In The West?

Because it's working oh so well in the East?


shadha-