Sharia law can be defined as a set of relilgious principles based on the Koran by which Muslims are required to live. Modern-day Iran, Lebanon, and Nigeria are some of the modern nations that use these laws ( Afghanistan had Sharia law under the Taliban.) Interestingly, a Chief Justice in Great Britain recently proposed the use of Sharia law in Britains' Muslim communities as a way to settle civil and domestic disputes. As we conclude our unit on Iran and prepare for upcoming units on Nigeria, England and Afghanistan the following articles pose interesting questions for comparative social science.
Directions:
1. Actively read the following articles:
A) "Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain, says UK's top judge"By Steve Doughty Daily Mail Blogsite. July 4, 2008:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1031611/Sharia-law-SHOULD-used-Britain-says-UKs-judge.html
B) "Sharia law incompatible with human rights legislation, Lords say" by Afua Hirsch. UK Guardian, October 23, 2008:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/23/religion-islam2)
2. Watch the Frontline clip linked below (it is only two minutes) on Sharia law in Nigeria and one Nigerian's views on the system:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/muslims/portraits/nigeria.html
3. Summarize the main ideas of all three sources. Evaluate the arguments for and against Sharia legal systems as presented in the articles. Then, consider all you have learned from this assignment and our current unit in Iran to present your own opinion on Sharia law in the modern world.
Your post should be at least 250 words and include a response to at least one other classmate, on this or another block's blog.
Work due Wednesday, November 5 (same day as test on US and Iran)
Please remind your loved ones to vote!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Loretta Au
November 2, 2008
Block C
*I didn't watch the video because I don't have realplayer on my computer, and also you have to pay for it,
Sharia law is a set of religious principles based on the Koran by which Muslims are required to live. The Koran is a sacred text of Islam, Believed y Muslims to record the revelations of God to Muhammad. In recent months, United Kingdom’s top judge, Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips, says that sharia law should be used in Britain. He believes that Sharia law ill resolve disputes among Muslims. Although his proposal seems fair, it has caused a lot of controversy. Lawyers warn that family and marriage settled by sharia law could affect women. As shown in the film and novel “Persepolis,” women lost many of their rights when the Shah was defeated in the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Islamic fundamentalists ruled Iran and enforced strict laws. Although Lord Phillips is supporting the use of the sharia, he opposes any sort of severe physical punishment. He understands the laws of the Koran, and believes those who believe in it through freedom of religion, but should abide should follow them to Britain’s laws to some extent. On the contrary to Lord Phillips, the House of Lords called the Islamic legal code “wholly incompatible” wit human rights legislation. The lords based their opinion of sharia law through a women’s experience. The women would be forced to hand over custody of her son to a man who severely abused her if she returned to Lebanon. She would be obliged under sharia law to do so. The women sought help in the UK. Thus, there has been much debate between the courts over the legal system. Some places in the UK have already begun enforcing the sharia law. There has been domestic violence and divorce. The house of court argues “sharia law was created by and for men in a male-dominated society” in his position to keep the women from Lebanon. The court ruled 5-1 that the women and her son should have permission to remain in the UK and it is anticipated that this case was significant in benefit of future cases. I do not think that sharia law would be fair or effective in today’s society. Although women have fewer rights, women have more opinions. There are women who protest and fight for their rights. Sharia law can no longer keep women or the vulnerable suffocated in the unfair laws of the Koran.
Loretta - you were wise to do the work with use of the sources you could use, so no penalty. I'd point out that the laws of the Koran might not be unfair on their own, it is the way they have been interpreted by modern fundamentalist regimes that has resulted in harsh violations of human and women's rights.
Melissa Coughlin
After looking at all of the resources provided and reviewing what we have discussed in class, I am not exactly sure how I feel about Sharia law. Sharia law is a set of religious rules that are based on the Koran. In many Muslim countries, Sharia law is followed. In the first article, the Lord Chief Justice of England approved that Muslims in England should follow Sharia law. I am against his opinion for the reason in the second article. If Sharia law is put into effect in England, this woman would have to give up her child to the man that she fled to England to get away from. He beat her and tried to kill her multiple times. Surely a man like that should not be able to take care of a child! But then again, the source of the article could be biased. I am sure that not every single person who follows Sharia law beats their wife and children. I am sure that every single person who follows Sharia law is a bad person who wants to get rid of women's rights. It is a way of life for people on that side of the world, just because we live differently here in the United States, doesn't mean that what they do in other countries is wrong. Yet, I do believe that England should not enforce Sharia law because if the Muslims living there want to live under Sharia law, they could just go to the part of the world where it is naturally enforced, like Nigeria where the 3rd resource had come from. That family seemed very happy. They felt safe under that law, and that is fine for them. But just incase there are people who need to seek refuge, they can go to places like the U.S. or the U.K. In reponse to Loretta, I am glad to see that you talked about the movie "Persepolis" because it does relate to these articles and the video. And indeed it is very sad that women lost their rights.
Justin Lefkowitz
C Block
"Sharia Law SHOULD Be Used in Britain, Says UK's Top Judge" by Steve Doughty and "Sharia Law Incompatible With Human Rights Legislation, Lords Say" by Afua Hirsch are two articles that sum up whether Sharia law should or should not be used in Muslim communities in Britain. According to Ms. Francis, Sharia law can be defined as a set of religious principles based on the Koran by which Muslims are required to live.
Some of the countries that follow Sharia law are Nigeria, Lebanon, and Iran. Afghanistan used to be ruled under Sharia law when the Taliban was in power. The two articles argue whether or not Sharia law should be used in Britain Muslim communities as a way to settle domestic and civil disputes.
According to the article "Sharia Law SHOULD Be Used in Britain, Says UK's Top Judge" by Steve Doughty, Sharia law is made up of four parts by which Muslims are required to live. These four parts are worship, commerce, crime and punishment, and marriage and divorce. According to Sharia law, if Muslims drink, do drugs, or commit adultery, they should be punished through a stoning or lashings. Sharia law permits behavior banned by English law, for example, polygamy. Mosques often operate the Sharia courts, but the rulings that are made have no legal status.
Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips said, “Islamic legal principles could be employed to deal with family and marital arguments and to regulate finance.”
If Sharia law were to be used in Britain, many new problems would arise. I believe that both law systems would start to smash into one another. For example, English law believes in monogamy and Sharia law believes in polygamy. If both law systems have different beliefs, why wouldn’t there be any problems? Since the law systems do not see eye to eye on every subject, I feel that it would be impossible for Sharia law to become a part of English law.
I also had the same problem as Loretta stated in her blog. Real Player was not working for me, and I do not have a subscription for it either.
kimberly gangemi
shalom!,
The first article, by Steve Doughty, discusses the senior judge in England, Chief Justice Lord Phillips, who believes that introducing Islamic lawful concepts into the lives of English Muslims is a righteous way to resolve their disputes. These disputes include martial and financial situations. Lord Phillips added that the resolutions of he sharia must abide to the laws of England. His proposal was criticized, may believing that women and the weak would not get fair settlements. This is because the principles of Islam degrade women. However, hat was brought into consideration, and equality between men and women would remain in the outcomes. Other protesters believe there should be one law system. Furthermore, Lord Phillips doesn't see a big deal in binding the two law systems together, given the disputers can chose who meditation or a judge. Lord Phillips didn't forget to add that no punishment will result in violence, and the English law will be accounted for. A solution is for people to govern their own lives based on their own religions, and still obey the basis of the British law. In accordance to Doughty's article, I disagree with introducing the sharia into the British law. Lord Phillips said himself that it's not a radical difference; therefore, I don't see the point in shaking up the people's lives with more written rules. I just think it's simply unnecessary.
The second article seems to oppose the incorporation of the sharia law into the UK law, it gave light on the issue of women. Thus, the House of Lords realized the basic human rights, including equality, and the sharia law will not go hand in hand, given the sharia gives more power to the men. In addition, the sharia law is considered a discrimination against women, and the Lords saw that. The Lords were given a case of an Islamic women who'd come to the UK to escape the power of men and to be equal. They were dealing with controversial subjects of child custody, and divorce. However, the case dealt with the custody of a child with a loving mother, and a abusing father. In the sharia law it would be obvious that the child would go to the man, but the Lords saw that has harmful and unjust. The Lords gave custody to the mother. Due to the sharia law in Islam, many women live dreadful lives just to stay with their children. However, free of the sharia, women are able to live happy and fulfilling lives.
If you haven't noticed already I totally oppose the sharia law in the modern world. Women have come to far, and fought too hard to have to suffer under such a tyrannical law in which men are able to prevail without question. Furthermore, people, especially women, escape the Islamic law by going to other countries to live freely. However, if the sharia laws are incorporated to other countries laws, then they'll ever be given a chance to live .
& the realplayer isn't working. silly macs.
I'm agreeable with Justin, that it'd be impossible for each system to rule peacefully. I think people would protest and perhaps cause some demonstrations.
Also, I would just like to point out how far Islamic people have come. Because currently there is a advertisements on the side of my screen for "Single Muslims", that includes a photo of a Muslim women. Back in the day it was outrageous for some women to even step out of the house. Women had to wear those black veils and dresses that would make them appear and blobs, and mere objects for men.
xoxo
kg
Christopher Morawed
After reading the first article pertaining to the new Sharia law in Britain, I was shocked that a way of life affected the Judge of the United Kingdom. The judge believed that this Sharia law would help resolve disputes conflicting within Muslims. He also believed that this new suggestion at life would help regulate money and resolve family arguments. With this new idea given by the Judge, came oppositions. Lawyers announced that with this will come problems such as women and children having a disadvantage. The lord Chief Justice believed that these Sharia views were not radical but in a way misunderstood and could do well if given the chance. In conclusion of this article it was stated that they should follow religious law if it doesn’t compromise equality between all the people.
The second law is a very good example of why Sharia law will not work. In one occasion a woman ran away from Lebanon. If she returned to Lebanon, she would have to give up her twelve year old son to his father who attempted to strangle the woman, threw her off a balcony and beat her. The Shaira law gave power to the man and custody of the children if they are over seven years old. This law is controversial as to the aim of being made for the comfort of men or not. It is argued that because of the circumstances, these laws were made for male dominance.
I also believe Justins argument that both laws of the U.K. and the Sharia laws do not agree on every single topic so problems are bound to arise. One area will arise where conflicts will rise making many agree with one side and others agree with another. Ultamitely, it will segregate the government as a whole only causing more problems instead of production.
gerald lara
november 4,2008
block c
Shara law are followed by muslims are the basic relisgious principles from the koran. these set rules have recently be considered in great britain by Lord Chief justice Lord Philips. He believes the Sharia can solve any confliction in english laws. Though his idea does spread an idealism of peaceful solution of peaceful intergration of other cultures, the idea of Sharia has been critized as it would deprive women of rights especially in divorce cases. the term "wholly incompatible" to human legislation from the second article seems to be a bit extreme, but correct with it statement about the Sharia.
Countires that except the Sharia has oppressed women since it has begun. women follows more restricted laws than men in the law of Sharia, but even as they are oppressed another feeling is shown, Fear. In these countries women have tried to revolt, but were crushed during the revolution. Now women are not only forced to follow the rules, but also afraid of what could happen to them if they don't. Sharia should only be used if the entire nation has excepted each law as ones they would follow. If women are ok with having less freedom than men, then they should be permitted to use Sharia. The modern world should be using law that makes everything equal for everyone, not reversing the progress we have already achieved.
Anthony Fontana
Block C
Sharia Law says how people should live their every day lives and how government should be run based on the Qu’ran. According to the article "Sharia Law SHOULD Be Used in Britain, Says UK's Top Judge" by Steve Doughty, is about how Lord Chief Justice Philip and other leaders say that Sharia Law could help people live more moral lives, and keep people in check. Lord Philip says that Sharia Law could deal with marital disputes, finance, and etcetera. He also stated that the basic principals of the law would be followed; however the extreme punishments of breaking this code would not be enforced. Lord Phillips said that, “Those who are in dispute are free to subject it to mediation or to agree that it shall be resolved by a chosen arbitrator. There is no reason why principles of sharia law or any other religious code should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of dispute resolution.”
The second article, “Sharia law incompatible with human rights legislation, Lords say,” talks about how the British Parliament shot down the idea of having Sharia courts. This article points out how Sharia Law is a very fundamentalist way to live and how women would loose power in society. Fore example, the father automatically gets custody. The Qu’ran endorses polygamy but British law banns it.
Sharia Law should definitely not be incorporated into legislature. Sharia Law takes power out of many hands, especially women. The law tells people how to live their lives step by step, and that is very undemocratic and theocratic way of running a country.
Melissa - E: I think you're picking up on some key points - the issue of self-determination for women and ALL people is central to what seems fair and right.
Justin: Sorry about the tech problem. As reading your post I was thinking about how when dignitaries form different religious institutions are implicated in breaking laws and scandals in the US that their trials and punishments are often placed in the hands of the Church/ Synagouge involved. Would you also argue that this is a violation of modernity and anti-democratic?
Kimi- Insightful, spirited post. Keep in mind that choosing modesty ( a reason many Muslim women wear hijabs and other traditional dress) is a CHOICE many women voluntarily make for themselves. To me, making one's own choices is the true definition of freedom. What if women WANT sharia law?
Post a Comment