Posted on 03/17/2008 1:10:47 PM PDT by reaganaut1
...
In some sense, the outrage about according a degree of official status to Shariah in a Western country should come as no surprise. No legal system has ever had worse press. To many, the word “Shariah” conjures horrors of hands cut off, adulterers stoned and women oppressed. By contrast, who today remembers that the much-loved English common law called for execution as punishment for hundreds of crimes, including theft of any object worth five shillings or more? How many know that until the 18th century, the laws of most European countries authorized torture as an official component of the criminal-justice system? As for sexism, the common law long denied married women any property rights or indeed legal personality apart from their husbands. [...]
In fact, for most of its history, Islamic law offered the most liberal and humane legal principles available anywhere in the world. Today, when we invoke the harsh punishments prescribed by Shariah for a handful of offenses, we rarely acknowledge the high standards of proof necessary for their implementation. Before an adultery conviction can typically be obtained, for example, the accused must confess four times or four adult male witnesses of good character must testify that they directly observed the sex act. The extremes of our own legal system — like life sentences for relatively minor drug crimes, in some cases — are routinely ignored. We neglect to mention the recent vintage of our tentative improvements in family law. It sometimes seems as if we need Shariah as Westerners have long needed Islam: as a canvas on which to project our ideas of the horrible, and as a foil to make us look good.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
No non-muslim can testify against a muslim.
Non-muslims must pay a confiscatory “jizyah” tax.
Non-muslims must live in subjugation.
No other religions may be practiced openly.
Non-muslims must wear identifying clothing.
on and on.
Yeah, what’s wrong with Shariah?
Yeah, well....lop'n off heads tends to have that effect.
Perhaps during the Dark Ages.
They and the NYT should all go ...
To an Islamic country with out a passport.
If Shariah law is coming to the west, I’m putting all my money in prosthetic device companies.
Bass-ackwards-stone-age-evil-cult and law system.
And, the author is a Jew? Sheesh
An apologia for Sharia?
Spare me.
(Although I’m certain they wouldn’t)
Oh ,yeah, it is a cult.
Islam is still stuck in the stone age!
If it wasn't for oil revenues, most muslims would still be nomadic in search of dung beetles.
“Before an adultery conviction can typically be obtained, for example, the accused must confess four times or four adult male witnesses of good character must testify that they directly observed the sex act”
Do they know how stupid that sounds????
The result of this law means only women are ever found guilty of adultery.
I worked with a Pakistani man that was very prominent in Pakistan: he would laugh at sharia law saying even though adultery is a crime that one can be killed over that only women needed to be scared of the law, because cheating men never got in trouble, unless they did something really stupid to make the adultery too public to overlook.
I’m sure Nick Berg was impressed by it.
There was a time when I thought everyone had a purpose. Noah's scribblings have convinced me this is not so.
Some countries had bad laws hundreds of years ago, this guy thinks some of our present laws are bad, so we should allow really bad, fanatical religious laws to supplant our legal systems. Oy. This reasoning could just as easily be used to say: "We are so quick to denounce Hitler for exterminating millions, but we shouldn't because we allowed slavery until 1864." Make sense? Next time, welcome the Nazis.
So, this guy is comparing English Law from 300-800 years ago to Muslim Law today to “prove” how great it will be to live under “Sharia”, and how backwards we are if we don’t welcome it?
Leave it to the NYT to publish such tripe.
More self-loathing Jews, Noah will see the headsman’s block if Sharia ever finds its way here—fool!
Shariah’s not so bad! Come on, they ask the accused 4 whole times before they execute her! /s
Forget the sexist angle, how about the insanity of executing people for adultery in the first place?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.