The subjects covered in this blog include Slavoj Žižek, IQ tests, Chomsky, Tony Blair, Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Islam, Islamism, Marx, Foucault, National/International Socialism, economics, the Frankfurt School, philosophy, anti-racism, etc... I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here

This blog used to be called EDL Extra. I was a supporter (neither a member nor a leader) of the EDL until 2012. This blog has retained the old web address.


Wednesday, 6 February 2013

“Divorce cases could be settled by Sharia after landmark ruling”

"Now, as a leader of millions of Christians, what's the best things I can do to destroy Christianity and our Christian nation? Proselytise on behalf of sharia law? Pontificate about Interfaith - or Islamic dawah as it's also called?"

It has just been agreed, around a week ago, that divorce cases could be settled by Sharia courts after a High Court ruling on the issue.

This has been said to be the first time that an English family judge has sent a divorce dispute to a religious court. Mr Justice Baker even quoted the former Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams, who said in 2008 that 

citizenship in a secular society should not necessitate the abandoning of religious discipline’.

Muslims are all too keen to tell us that sharia law in the UK only covers "domestic cases" (such as divorce). Apart from that being a vague way of putting it, and not even true, that's only because Islamisation – or shariaisation - has to be done one step at a time within any non-Muslim state or society. It is counter-productive to call for full – or even partial - sharia law in one go. (Unless you are a Muslim Official Extremist, like Anjem Choudary.) It won't happen and Muslims know that. So Muslims attempt to implement sharia law bit by bit. This judgement will give Muslims the hope that further shariaisation is even more likely to be successful in the future.

Only in the last ten years Muslims have made massive progress. Think of halal meat (it often even being enforced on non-Muslims in schools, fast-food outlets, etc.), women-only swimming baths, more mosques, “prayer rooms” in all public institutions, more and more “faith schools”, the encouragement of Muslim self-ghettoisation, etc.

 Imagine what it will be like in the UK in twenty - or even ten - years!

A British court doing itself out of a job - at least in the long term.
The thing is that Muslims cannot - and must not - pick and choose with sharia law. Sharia law is a total package-deal which encompasses every aspect of life. It also deals with how Muslims must deal with the kuffar - you and I! And that dealing, e.g., kuffar dhimmihood, Muslim grooming, jihad-rape, forced conversion, etc., is often not very healthy for the non-Muslim. 

The more we give in to sharia law in the UK the worse it will be for all non-Muslims both today and in the future. There may not, in the end, be that many steps from sharia “domestic cases” to full dhimmi-status for all non-Muslims. Therefore we should nip sharia law in the bud by outlawing it for all cases. We can’t have a Muslim situation of self-ghettoisation and self-apartheid. This is but a prelude to future conflict and very likely to future civil war. How do I know that? Because it has happened in hundreds of similar situations before – situations in which Muslims have lived in non-Muslim societies. The more power Muslims gain power, the more sharia laws they impose, the more Muslims there are, the more there has been conflict and war with the non-Muslims who surround them. Look around the world today and see. Look at history and see.

No comments:

Post a Comment