The Sharia court can say whatever it wants regarding abortion but it can’t prosecute anyone for having an abortion if the state court says otherwise.
TIL the source of the 80 Sharia courts factoid is none other than that widely respected scholar of Islam, Nigel Farage.
How nice, the naked religious hatred.
Please observe fair use guidelines about copy/paste from other sources. I also recommend you link to your sources.
[/moderating]
I’m going to request a cite for this fearmongering panic before I believe it to be true. Can you point me to an actual government policy concerning this? Thanks, I understand it may take a while, a long time, like even really long, I get it. Let me know.
OK, I wasn’t completely serious about the mayor. But the rest of my post was completely serious, as you by implication agree.
As for Sharia Law, why single her out? There’s lots of pop acts I don’t like. There’s Christian Fundie, and Joseph and the Mormen.
For taking quotes out of context this might be up there with “you didn’t build that,” “what difference, at this point, does it make?” and “I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”
Please provide a cite for your paragraph starting with “Several European…”
Regarding the subject of this thread, I work in NYC and please believe me when I say that being prepared for a terrorist attack is part and parcel of living in a big city. There are occasional armed policemen at subway entrances, signs everywhere that say, “If you see something, say something” and give you a number to call or text. There is heightened police presence after any sort of incident. The marathons and bike races are heavily patrolled – I recently did a large bike tour in the city and backpacks were banned. Every building makes you sign in and provide photo ID. The airports have all kinds of security theater. Backpacks are checked or banned at concerts. I could go on.
So, I’m not sure what your point is. The mayor of London, A MUSLIM, CAN YOU BELIEVE IT!!!, is simply stating the truth – people who live in big cities should be prepared for terrorist attacks.
Fight my ignorance: what did he do?
There’s an actual video in my link, in case you want to actually listen to that. Khan did construct his sentence in a less clear manner, but your interpretation only makes sense if you stop listening halfway through.
And again, he said this back in the days of yore 2016. It’s okay if you’re starting an OP now, I’m just curious why. The current internet outrageosphere is mad about his other quote.
No, She-Ra court. Disgustingly making use adhere to the Power of Greyskull, whether we like it or not.
The MSM cover up what is actually going on in Europe. There are not going to be any cites. Take it from someone whose been there. Even mentioning the 100% imposition of sharia will get you thrown into prison and all the womenfolk in your family stapled into their hijab.
I have little use for Khan, but what’s he supposed to say?
It’s impossible to prevent all terrorism in London (or Paris or New York or Toronto or…). Even so, the chances of dying in a terror attack in any of those cities is mighty low. If Khan’s basic message is, “London is still quite safe, but security will never be 100%,” well, he’s right.
I’m not sure what to call that bit of naked sophistry (is that an oxymoron?)
I don’t want to speak for the Baron, but I think he means that the mayor of Manchester also had a terrorist attack in his city recently, but no one seems to be all up in his business since he’s not Muslim.
So, his statement “I just can’t figure it out…” is likely a rhetorical flourish…
“The bait?” What bait? Your baiting of this board?
This is Great Debates. Do you expect to get by without a single cite for a claim as egregious as this?
I’m trying to debate whether to give you the benefit of the doubt that you mean that what the mayor said is indefensible. Anything can be defended, that’s one of the things that free speech is about.
This is a particularly loathsome discussion tactic, and fully deserves to be ignored.
And there it is, your real thesis among all the tripe in this thread. The “main problem” is that Muslims are allowed to freely exist in European countries. You poor fear-ridden sweat-soaked, shaking-in-your-boots child.
Well, I think the OP and his point re Sharia should be treated very seriously. We shouldn’t mock.
Do not personalize your arguments in this fashion. If you feel you must, the BBQ Pit is right around the corner.
[/moderating]
Absolutely. We should also remember that terrorism was invented by Muslims and definitely wouldn’t exist if they had never immigrated.
Who should pass a law? The U.K. Parliament? What is 'talk of terrorism?" Would this thread qualify?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Absolutely. I’m going to the UK later this year. You’ll notice none of my posts in this thread use the T word.
Plenty.
Basically the legal system in the UK allows for two parties to agree to have disputes be resolved by a mutually-trusted arbitrator. That arbitration has limited scope, and can always be overruled by the actual courts. That’s all the sharia councils are in the UK.
There are similar arbitration councils for some other religions such as Judaism (indeed they are more numerous IIRC).
Not only does the US legal system have a similar provision, it’s actually utilized for court TV shows like Judge Judy. She’s acting as a trusted arbitrator, not a judge.
Wait a minute <checks Wikipedia…>
Judy Hussein Sheindlin
Oh my god…