Yeah, I guess I just found it funny cause I always pictured America as more intolerant than Europe and Canada, but with regards to these faith-based arbitration courts, America seems to be ahead of the curve…go figure!

In part most people believe they don’t need it, others don’t understand it, but above all its seen as “Islamicising” the UK. Which of course sends people into a fit of fury.

I’m really confused over this uproar. What’s the big deal?

Funny thing is that shariah-based arbitration currently exists in America (and has for quite some time). Its practiced in the same form as the Jewish courts (as summarized in your first quote in the post):

“Two individuals agree to have their dispute handled by the Beth Din rather than the ordinary courts. The judges, or dayanim, who preside are rabbis. If a dispute is over a contract under English law or another country’s civil law, the court can “incorporate” some of the rules of the civil law into Jewish law. In reality, the proceedings are a form of arbitration.”

I know of one Muslim judge who has presided over many divorce cases and his ruling is legally binding in a US court of law.

I was equally bemused a few years back, when a proposal to introduce shariah-based arbitration (which was maliciously misnamed as Shariah Law) in Canada resulted in similar uproar.

Mutually consented arbitration is not the same as Shariah Law (ala Nigeria or Saudi)…we need to make that distinction clear to those willing to listen…

By the way, dear Sister, you are TAGGED for a book meme. Check out my blog for details

Ya Haqq!

Letting murderers’, peodo’s and rapists back on the streets for behaving in prison?

Or as of late giving a girl only 2.5yr detention for causing the death of a man because she was drunk?!