Londonstan.

[DaveDodo007]

Well done feminists, SJWS and lefty/libtards. Enjoy your Caliphate.

[NineBerry]

I guess 0,16 % blood alcohol

[pErvinalia]

I don't think DD has had a blood alcohol level that low since his mum let him have his first drink at age 26!

[Forty Two]

Acid doesn't burn and maim people; people burn and main people.

Sharia courts for marriages make a lot of sense, because, of course, there is no patriarchy in the Muslim community which disfavors and marginalizes women resulting in them being pressured to "voluntarily" agree to Sharia courts for their divorces, and when they are forced back into abusive homes under Sharia law it is purely of their own accord. In general British culture, there is a patriarchy which disfavors women, and oppresses them, so forcing women to resort to the official courts in the UK would be an oppression, of which they are freed by the concept and use of Sharia courts.

[Svartalf]

religious law can't be the law of the land, and religious courts can't supersede lawful courts or go counter to the law of the land.

[NineBerry]

there is no patriarchy in the Muslim community which disfavors and marginalizes women

There's lots of patriarchal structures in Muslim communities.

[Forty Two]

religious law can't be the law of the land, and religious courts can't supersede lawful courts or go counter to the law of the land.

What they do in Britain is allow people to voluntarily agree to submit disputes to private arbitration panels, and Sharia courts is like that. So, the concept is that private individuals are free to voluntarily submit to different sets of rules to resolve private disputes between them. I find it funny that feminists in Britain don't seem to be worried much about Sha'ria courts, and that must be because the patriarchy doesn't oppress women systemically in the Muslim communities, resulting their marginalization and elimination of their free choice when it comes to agreeing to Sha'ria courts. They denounce the patriarchy of the British culture generally, but are generally silent when it comes to Sha'ria courts.

[Forty Two]

there is no patriarchy in the Muslim community which disfavors and marginalizes women

There's lots of patriarchal structures in Muslim communities.

One would think that if one accepts that premise, then Sha'ria courts can't really be allowed, because those patriarchal structures render the "choice" of a woman to "agree" to a Sha'ria court to resolve any future divorce to be a tad less than free.

[NineBerry]

religious law can't be the law of the land, and religious courts can't supersede lawful courts or go counter to the law of the land.

What they do in Britain is allow people to voluntarily agree to submit disputes to private arbitration panels, and Sharia courts is like that. So, the concept is that private individuals are free to voluntarily submit to different sets of rules to resolve private disputes between them. I find it funny that feminists in Britain don't seem to be worried much about Sha'ria courts, and that must be because the patriarchy doesn't oppress women systemically in the Muslim communities, resulting their marginalization and elimination of their free choice when it comes to agreeing to Sha'ria courts. They denounce the patriarchy of the British culture generally, but are generally silent when it comes to Sha'ria courts.

Feminists in Britain are very worried about female oppression via religious courts.

[NineBerry]

there is no patriarchy in the Muslim community which disfavors and marginalizes women

There's lots of patriarchal structures in Muslim communities.

One would think that if one accepts that premise, then Sha'ria courts can't really be allowed, because those patriarchal structures render the "choice" of a woman to "agree" to a Sha'ria court to resolve any future divorce to be a tad less than free.

Go back to Logic 101.

[Forty Two]

LOL, well, if women in the UK have the true freedom of choice to agree or not agree to Sha'ria law, and they are not impacted in that decision by the systemic oppression and patriarchal capitalism, then on what basis would it be claimed that women are otherwise systemically oppressed in the UK?

[NineBerry]

You are basically asking: When it often rains in London, why have they cars and not only boats to roam the city?

[JimC]

This thread is getting weird.

Even weirder than usual, I should have said...

[Collector1337]

images(10).jpg (11.64 KiB) Viewed 1339 times

[DaveDodo007]

religious law can't be the law of the land, and religious courts can't supersede lawful courts or go counter to the law of the land.

What they do in Britain is allow people to voluntarily agree to submit disputes to private arbitration panels, and Sharia courts is like that. So, the concept is that private individuals are free to voluntarily submit to different sets of rules to resolve private disputes between them. I find it funny that feminists in Britain don't seem to be worried much about Sha'ria courts, and that must be because the patriarchy doesn't oppress women systemically in the Muslim communities, resulting their marginalization and elimination of their free choice when it comes to agreeing to Sha'ria courts. They denounce the patriarchy of the British culture generally, but are generally silent when it comes to Sha'ria courts.

Feminists in Britain are very worried about female oppression via religious courts.

Christ, I wish that was true. Please don't disappoint me again with your assertion you pulled out of your arse and have evidence to back up your claim.