Canada Weighs Using Muslim Law

Chanman

:-?PipeSmokin'
Forum Member
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,131715,00.html

Wake up, McGuinty
By PETER WORTHINGTON

Political correctness aside, it's incredible and outrageous that Premier Dalton McGuinty is apparently willing to have Sharia law resolve domestic disputes in Ontario's Muslim community.

Attorney-General Michael Bryant is already "looking into options" (to be up and running this year) and former NDP A-G Marion Boyd has been appointed to review procedures that the Islamic Institute for Civil Justice will apply if the province approves.

Premier McGuinty's wishy-washy "I want to make sure we are getting this right," compounds the outrage. He is getting it wrong -- woefully wrong, because Sharia is alien to everything Canada stands for: Our Constitution, Charter of Rights, Common law, Canadian values.

For what it's worth, the Canadian Council of Muslim Women has it right when it "sees no compelling reason to live under any other form of law in Canada, as we want the same laws to apply to us as to other Canadian women."

Amen to that. Liberals constantly agonize that every citizen should be treated equally and the same, whatever their physical or mental handicaps, whatever their colour or creed.

Mr. McGuinty should be reminded that Sharia is totally unfair and discriminates against women and has no place in Canadian culture, and certainly not in law. In short, it's an abomination that mitigates against women in favour of men.

Premier McGuinty (and others) may be dazzled and confused by the 1991 Arbitration Act that allows some religious groups to mediate or resolve family disputes. Fine, but discrimination is unacceptable.

Sharia is a combination religion and law. Muslims dispute whether these laws are divine or man-made, based on the Koran.

The risk to women if Sharia laws are applied in domestic disputes can't be exaggerated. Muslim women are vulnerable to intimation, coercion, being bullied into accepting Sharia intervention.

Immigrants from Muslim countries may be pressured into arranged marriages and not treated equally in disputes with male family members.

Regardless, Sharia violates our values. It would seem that Sharia law violates what the Koran espouses as the "inherent dignity and equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family."

Men are still more equal than women. For example, Sharia law requires circumcision of males and females. But, there is a world of difference between snip, snip of a foreskin, and grotesque mutilation of women's sexual organs.

A Muslim man may marry "People of the Book" (Jews or Christians), but Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman from marrying anyone but a Muslim. In sexual offenses and adultery, usually the woman is blamed for tempting the man.

In places like Nigeria, women can be stoned to death. Under Islam, husbands have the right, on occasion, to beat disobedient wives; Allah made men to excel and be "maintainers of women."

Under Sharia law no part of a woman's body should be exposed. Often, women are punished for not covering head to foot. The essence of Islam is that it is immutable and rigid.

It atrophied 1,400 years ago and cannot evolve or be re-interpreted like other religions.

None of this is to suggest that Muslims should not practice their religion or have full rights as citizens. It is to say that Canada shouldn't consider adopting any part of Sharia law. It contravenes what we should stand for, especially regarding the sexes.

It's not too late. Premier McGuinty, who seems to stumble from gaffe to pitfall, should show leadership in Canadian values and reject Sharia law being applied to domestic disputes. For the sake of the province, for Muslim women, for Canada, and for his own conscience, McGuinty should listen to Muslim women who insist Canadian law, not Sharia law be applied to domestic issues.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,451
132
63
Bowling Green Ky
The Muslim movement is quite interesting.With terrorism running rampant everywhere the only way a country could escape it is by allowing NO musilims to enter. While I always read the Muslims in general are peaceful I never see the peaceful ones condem the fanatics or why they allow them refuge in their peaceful place of worship.
You can look at it any way you wish but there is one unequivical axiom.
While all muslims may not be terrorist--99% of terrorist are Muslims.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,573
226
63
"the bunker"
so canada....a country apparently firmly entrenched in the 21st century,wants to allow "part" of it`s citizenry to digress socially based on specific religions,faith groups and ethical systems?....

even if it means diminishing the rights of women?......

how about the hindi`s....judaism?.....christians?...

can all of the great monotheistic religions, eastern religions; nopagan religions; a wide range of other faith groups, spiritual paths, and ethical systems; and beliefs about the existence of gods and goddesses be included?....

if not,is that fair?.....

the fundamentalists appear to be winning the battle of hearts and minds....through fear and intimidation....murder...hostage taking...

canada?.......that`s hard to believe....

beyond scary...i can`t believe our canadian brethren will stand for this garbage...
 

GM

PleasureGlutton
Forum Member
Jan 21, 2000
2,962
5
0
123
Toronto, ON, Canada
gardenweasel said:
so canada....a country apparently firmly entrenched in the 21st century,wants to allow "part" of it`s citizenry to digress socially based on specific religions,faith groups and ethical systems?....
Not CANADA - Dalton McGuinty and a few of the PROVINCIAL Liberals from ONE of Canada's provinces. Reread the article if you felt that was ALL OF CANADA'S view. Clearly it isn't. No need to hate the whole country because of the misguided ideas of a few.

(What IS your fascination with all the negative Canada remarks anyways GW? I don't read much from you, but it seems most of the time when I do you are bashing my country. I don't hate your country. I don't agree with the views of every person in your nation, but I don't hate you for them. And I certainly don't think one person's or one party's view is the stance of the entire nation).
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,573
226
63
"the bunker"
gm....my comments weren`t meant as a slam on canada or canadians....maybe i should have been more specific in my comments and who they were aimed at...

i was just incredulous that such a proposal would even be broached by our neighbors to the north.....in any province.,,,,



"beyond scary...i can`t believe our canadian brethren will stand for this garbage"...i don`t think that was negative...it was affirmation on my part that i couldn`t believe that such a proposal would ever grow legs up north..

other than some comments on chretien and the booing of american children playing hockey in canada,i don`t recall being overly negative regarding you guys...

i really had no use for chretien..he hated us...many americans hated him.....other than that,i think canada is fine......ditto canandians...

sorry if i was to general..and i`m sorry that that`s impression that i left in this forum....not my intention......my bad....
 
Last edited:

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,573
226
63
"the bunker"
this garbage is why i was so amazed that any right thinking westerner........ultra liberal,canadian,martian,whatever.....could even consider allowing any portion of their citizenry to exist in their country under such laws....this is medieval stuff.....

mcguinty must be an idiot...
 
Last edited:
Bet on MyBookie
Top