Muslim leader wants elements of sharia in Australia - SMH 08MARCH2010 (1 Viewer)

[Essjaybee]

ELEMENTS of Islamic law - the sharia - should be legally recognised in Australia so that Muslims can live according their faith, a prominent Muslim leader says.
Addressing an open day at Lakemba Mosque on Saturday, the president of the Australian Islamic Mission, Zachariah Matthews, said parts of sharia could be recognised as a secondary legal system so that Muslims were not forced to act contrary to their beliefs. ''Sharia law could function as a parallel system in the same way that some traditional Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander law was recognised in the Northern Territory,'' Dr Matthews told the Herald after the session.
''I don't think we are so unsophisticated that we cannot consider a multilayered legal system as long as it doesn't conflict with the existing civil system.''
The comments shocked some attending the open day. They felt Dr Matthews was advocating the introduction of the penal system under which women have been stoned to death for adultery, and corporal punishment is meted out for some offences.
''It came as quite a shock to some non-Muslims in the crowd when sharia law and the idea of a parallel legal system was mentioned,'' one audience member, Jasmine Donnelly, said.
''One group of people just left straight after that.''
But Dr Matthews said he was referring only to certain elements of family law and inheritance law and was not advocating the sharia penal system.
''I wasn't talking about sharia law in its entirety - we are not calling for the introduction of the penal system which calls for cutting off hands,'' he said.
Dr Matthews said a clash occurred in some custody matters. ''Under sharia law, if a couple divorce and the mother remarries, her former husband has the right to decide whether the children will live with the new husband or not,'' Dr Matthews said.
''There is still a preference for the child to go with the mother, but the father has the ultimate decision.
''This does not exist in Australian law but I do not believe it clashes fundamentally with Australian values or the Australian legal system.''

I don't actually agree with this. I understand recognising Aboriginal customary law because this country is rightfully theirs, but why sharia law? If we incorporate that, why not chinese law and laws from every country in the world?

I see the point that the "new husband" may be abusive or something and it would be in the best interests of the child, but I think that would be rare when compared to an ex-husband with a grudge just trying to make his ex-wife miserable. There are ways under our law to approach abusive situations.

I still think there's a degree of sexism. Why does the father or the child get the ultimate say? If the situation was reversed, would the mother have the "ultimate decision" on the situation?

Sharia law incorporated into Australian law. Discuss.

 

[ilikebeeef]

I am against it. If they don't like our system, then they should either live with it, or go away.

 

[wixxy2348]

The argument has flaws, though.
If these people want to live under a system which adopts some Sharia principles (e.g. the divorce custody settlement specifically), then this should be settled outside of the legal system (privately, with hired solicitors, who come to an agreement incorporating this, keeping both parties happy.
Either way, non sharia legal resolution would still be open to either party.

 

[Omie Jay]

no sharia plz

 

[Fish Tank]

Two legal systems running at the same time... gives people a chance to hop over to the one that benefits them better.

Aren't all people equal in the eyes of the law? Why have seperate laws for one group, wouldn't that be favouring/disadvantaging that group compared to the rest?

 

[ilikebeeef]

fucking islamcs are srsly taking over this great nation that I love so much. I heard that queensland was going to be named saxonland....only if it was.

Rofl Saxonland?

 

[Essjaybee]

I am against it. If they don't like our system, then they should either live with it, or go away.

Im muslim, and i strongly agree with what you said.
He's just a tool, trying to take-over australia. He came over here, he should shut up and live in it.

Exactly - what's the point? It's like joining the greens to outlaw rainforests. You don't become part of something if you want to change its laws and policies or don't believe they should apply to you.

 

[Durga]

I don't actually agree with this. I understand recognising Aboriginal customary law because this country is rightfully theirs, but why sharia law? If we incorporate that, why not chinese law and laws from every country in the world?

I see the point that the "new husband" may be abusive or something and it would be in the best interests of the child, but I think that would be rare when compared to an ex-husband with a grudge just trying to make his ex-wife miserable. There are ways under our law to approach abusive situations.

I still think there's a degree of sexism. Why does the father or the child get the ultimate say? If the situation was reversed, would the mother have the "ultimate decision" on the situation?

Sharia law incorporated into Australian law. Discuss.

The other responders are quite right in saying that if he doesn't like our laws, he can get out. When an Australian travels to Saudi Arabia, or any country with Sharia Law, our women are not treated with our moral values, they are treated with theirs - effectively stripped of their liberty and safety.

While the proposition is a little more reasonable than the Sharia penal system, why would the husband get to make the decision? Does he not recognise that one of the core tenants of Western values are that men and women are equal? It's a ridiculous proposition, but I can imagine Tony Abbott wouldn't actually give much thought to the men/women equality part of it...

 

[Scorch]

We already have enough violent Bronze Age nonsense to get rid of without adding more 7th century violent nonsense to it as well.

 

[Bereie]

Exactly - what's the point? It's like joining the greens to outlaw rainforests. You don't become part of something if you want to change its laws and policies or don't believe they should apply to you.

Lol it's called democracy.

The other responders are quite right in saying that if he doesn't like our laws, he can get out. When an Australian travels to Saudi Arabia, or any country with Sharia Law, our women are not treated with our moral values, they are treated with theirs - effectively stripped of their liberty and safety.

That's why we try to never compare ourselves to Saudi Arabia or any other Islamic country. (As they are fucking terrible in almost every way). We are tolerant of all belief systems no matter how backward and we must implement Sharia law to make the Mozlerms feel welcome. We must be whipping women and stoning gays in the street, to fasten the pace of Muslim integration into Western society.

While the proposition is a little more reasonable than the Sharia penal system, why would the husband get to make the decision? Does he not recognise that one of the core tenants of Western values are that men and women are equal? It's a ridiculous proposition, but I can imagine Tony Abbott wouldn't actually give much thought to the men/women equality part of it...

Because in Islam women are inferior beings to be covered up and beaten.

 

[JohnMcGee]

fucking islamcs are srsly taking over this great nation that I love so much. I heard that queensland was going to be named saxonland....only if it was.

How are you? lol

Yeah silly idea. Stock standard (and completely reasonable) response is to say you live in our treehouse you abide by our treehouse rules. Only if the population, the entire population, agrees to adopt these laws should they become law.

And that will never happen because normal people realise that any Muslim who wants to introduce Sharia law is a fucked up moron who needs to fuck off back to Saudi Arabia where he can beat up his wife for not buttering his toast as much as he wants.

Doss cunt.

 

[Dream-Theater]

Lol it's called democracy.
Because in Islam women are inferior beings to be covered up and beaten.

During the 'Islamic Golden Age' (8th to 13th centuries A.D.) women were employed in a wide range of commercial activities and diverse occupations in the primary sector (as farmers for example), secondary sector (as construction workers, dyers, spinners, etc.) and tertiary sector (as investors, doctors, nurses, presidents of guilds, brokers, peddlers, lenders, scholars, etc.). Muslim women also had a monopoly over certain branches of the textile industry.
All of which is something that is relatively recent in the west.

But he said adopting aspects of Sharia marital and inheritance law - in a dual legal system - would be an advantage, particularly for women.

"At the moment it can disadvantage Muslims here, particularly women, because if a woman gets divorced through the normal civil process that divorce is not recognised in Muslim countries," Mr Trad said.

"So they would still be considered to be married elsewhere."

Equally, Australian governments don't recognise divorce documents made by imams, the mosque and community leaders, Mr Trad said.

"These are all considerations that Muslims living in Australia face all the time and a lot of them support introducing these parts of Sharia law here," he added.

Why should Muslim women have to get divorced twice?

 

[Scorch]

During the 'Islamic Golden Age' (8th to 13th centuries A.D.)

Yes ... and then the past 700 years happened.

 

[Dream-Theater]

Yeah this fucking thing about how Islamic history had some positives.

John Locke took those things and ran with them.

It's like Hitler screaming that he won the Olympics.

COME ON GUYS WE LIVE IN THE FUTURE NOW

So then why are assumptions being made that Muslim men beat their wives?

 

[Scorch]

So then why are assumptions being made that Muslim men beat their wives?

Because a number of Islamic countries are violent, persecutory theocracies that have not yet started making excuses for the fact that their Holy Book is violent and derogatory as we have in the West.

 

[Durga]

So then why are assumptions being made that Muslim men beat their wives?

Reality?

 

[Bereie]

Verse 4:34 of the Quran in numerous credible well known translations,

Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

Online Quran Project (OQP)

You might find 'beat' replaced with 'chastise' or something else in western friendly qurans written by people who don't want you to know the truth.

Crime statistics.

Maybe in Western countries.. but in Islamic countries wife beating isn't a crime and/or wouldn't get reported.


2009 Arab Human Development Report http://www.arab-hdr.org/ -

Many Arab women are still bound by patriarchal patterns of kinship, legalised discrimination, social subordination and ingrained male dominance. Because women find themselves in a lowly position in relation to decision-making within the family, their situation continuously exposes them to forms of family and institutionalised violence. Arab women like many of their peers in other regions sustain both direct and indirect violence In the first category, they suffer forms of physical assault, from beating to rape and murder. In the second, they are victim of cultural and social practices that cause material harm to women, such as female genital mutilation (FGM) and child marriage. Although some states have banned the practice of FGM, it continues to be widespread in many countries because traditional beliefs favour it. Inluential figures aligned with conservative political or social forces also speak out in its defence.

Among many other gems. And people think Israel is worse, haha.

 

[banco55]

Yes ... and then the past 700 years happened.

Shhhh you are not supposed to mention that muslims have achieved relatively little since the "golden age".

 

[Sadiah]

fucking islamcs are srsly taking over this great nation that I love so much. I heard that queensland was going to be named saxonland....only if it was.

But you really confuse me.

The comment that you left when you repped me makes me doubt your sanity. =)

Jks.

 

[Scorch]

Shhhh you are not supposed to mention that muslims have achieved relatively little since the "golden age".

That's also not true. Don't put words in my mouth.