Many immigrant groups coming to the United States run afoul of cultural traditions that are contrary to US law. They get prosecuted, they try the “but this is our tradition” argument and it doesn’t work. Eventually it stops.
We had a similar problem when the Hmong came over. Their tradition was to marry 12-14 year old girls to 35+ year old men. They argued that it was their culture and tradition. They lost. Now it isn’t something you hear of very often - and we still prosecute it.
FGM will be prosecuted, they’ll argue it is their culture, they’ll lose. Doctors who do it will lose their licenses. And word will get around and it will (largely) come to an end.
“Those” people are a minuscule portion of the total Muslim population. How about the next abortion doctor who gets killed, we call you an extremist Christian. Accuse you of harboring terrorists at your local church.
And don’t forget, Christians like Pence, Cruz and Huckabee have no problem establishing [del]Sharia[/del] Christian law in this country.
That’s the entire point of the book. There are a lot of recent converts to Islam looking to better themselves. Change their lives. People like Morton with violent pasts. These young converts are easy prey for the extremist teachings. They don’t know the Koran that well. It doesn’t excuse any bad things they may do, but it’s easier to understand how it happens.
The book is a slow read. There’s a lot of detail to get through. Seeing the journey this guy took was quite interesting.
It is very nice, the Coptic Egyptian christians and the Ethiopian Orthodox christians will be very happy to know you consider them not Christian but Muslim, all 35-40 million of them.
Of course the FGM is unknown in the majority of the Islamic world and even in the Muslim North Africa we do not practice it at all - it is an Egyptian practice.
But so nice to see the smear repeated.
so you brought it up out of the sheer prejudice.
So you jump from making an assertion not supported by your own citation to making another assertion that has no support based purely on your badly informed prejudices that you lack the shame to stop repeating as if you had some factual knowledge.
What “religious laws” exist in the Code Civil of 1956?
What “religious police” and what “religioius laws” are involved here in the Gulf - United Arab Emirates - incident?
There is the secular law
By ignorantly repeating the half truths and the falsehoods you have absorbed it seems.
Of course by your standards I can now say that some States in the United States have had the Christian Sharia Law! The Florida only recently repealed its law indistinguishable from the UAE, in the 2011.
Christians killing women for adultery? All you have to do is look up “honor killing” or “crimes of passion”.
From Wikipedia: for France - The Napoleonic Code did not allow women to murder unfaithful husbands, while it permitted the murder of unfaithful women by their husbands.[63] The Napoleonic Code Article 324 which was passed in 1810 permitted the murders of an unfaithful wife and her lover at the hand of her husband.[64] It was abolished only in 1975. And just to make clear, the original French code was adopted secularly by many countries in the middle east.
For Italy - Similar to other Southern/Mediterranean European areas, “honor” was traditionally important in Italy. Indeed, until 1981, the Criminal Code provided for mitigating circumstances for such killings; until 1981 the law read: Art. 587: He who causes the death of a spouse, daughter, or sister upon discovering her in illegitimate carnal relations and in the heat of passion caused by the offence to his honour or that of his family will be sentenced to three to seven years. The same sentence shall apply to whom, in the above circumstances, causes the death of the person involved in illegitimate carnal relations with his spouse, daughter, or sister.
For Brazil - *Throughout the 20th century, husbands have used the “legitimate defense of their honor” (legítima defesa da honra) as justification for adultery-related killings in court cases . Although this defense was not explicitly stipulated in the 20th century Criminal Code, it has been successfully pleaded by lawyers throughout the 20th century, in particular in the interior of the country, though less so in the coastal big cities. *
And India has a whole paragraph to itself. The abuse/killing of women for adultery is a cultural thing. A worldwide cultural thing that to this day is not limited to Muslims or “sharia law”.
Small data point. I’m not an Islamic scholar. Tried to read the Koran once; lost interest (same story with the Bible). Heard all the stuff about cutting off hands in Sharia, etc.
So no real knowledge to speak of.
I spent some time in Malaysia about 10 years ago. Malaysia is an Islamic country with a mostly British legal heritage. But they do use Sharia for matrimonial stuff.
One day I was in a law library and decided to poke about. I found the matrimonial reports, which looked pretty much like any recognisable set of Western law reports - a series of cases deciding individual disputes.
They seemed to follow recognisably legalistic reasoning. They had head notes and lists of authorities. A point of difference was that there seemed to be less reliance on previous case law, and more references to religious authority like the Koran and Hadith. The fact that they created the reports, of course, meant that there was value in case precedents nevertheless.
The case volumes looked like routine collections of sad stories you’d get anywhere - custody, maintenance, etc. The courts’ solutions were attempts to identify principle and apply it to facts that any Western lawyer would recognise. And the results, from the sample I read, were not wildly out of line with what would be Western expectations, even if the way of getting there was different. No brutality, no ideological craziness. Women were not routinely left destitute or routinely deprived of their kids, although I am in no position to reflect upon broad statistical trends beyond the few dozen cases I looked at.
A different way of thinking from mine at the level of detail, and a reliance on a source of authority that I couldn’t buy into, to be sure.
I realise this is only one country’s adaptation of Sharia, and in only one aspect of the law. I saw foreign, but I did not see cancer.