The Mid-Atlantic Blog has an update on the Sunday Telegraph Muslim poll which showed 40% of British Muslims in favour of the introduction of some sort of Sharia Law into the UK. It seems that rather unbelievably more Muslim women that men are in favour. Here's an extract...40% of the total sample were in favour [of Sharia Law being introduced into Britain], with an equal number against. Look at it on the segmental basis, though, and things change. Women, for example, turn out to be net in support of the introduction of Sharia law in certain circumstances (a net of 3% in favour) while men are mildly opposed (a net of -6%). Those under 35 are in favour (+5%), while those 35 and over are opposed (-9%). ABC1s are strongly opposed (-12%), while C2DEs are quite strongly in favour (10%). Voting intentions are interesting too, with Tories (-33%) and LibDems (-21%) very strongly opposed, but with Labour supporters actually neutral on the issue (a net of 0%, believe it or not). There is quite strong support in the Midlands (+8%), with opposition in the South (-7%).
To read more click HERE.
There aren't that many moderate Muslims by Western standards - despite what others (the BBC for example) claim.
ReplyDeleteWorrying, isn't it, that there are over 300,000 in this country, running around, happily endorsing suicide bombings.
You say it's surprising that more women than men are in favour, but the Tories and conservatism in general have always had a greater proportion of women supporters than men...
ReplyDeleteThey just take a (wrong) conservative approach.
I'm not clear what they were being "offered" in the poll. If they were to propose something similar to the Church of England ecclesiastical courts in which civil actions could be pursued according to Sharia does that seem unreasonable? Didn't Canada do something similar? And, whilst I do not support personally the CofE's prvileged position, would it be wrong to allow another faith to have a similar "parallel" type system?
ReplyDeleteMind you, if they're talking about the whole law, and things like Sharia penalties for things that are legal here, such as gay sex, then it's quite scary!
But perhaps no scarier than a government able to make and amend whatever laws it wants without parliament...:)
If it was introduced as a replacement for secular civil law, where both parties consent, as a form of binding arbitration it wouldn't really be all that different from the use of Jewish law to settle civil disputes (see the London Beth Din Judicial Division).
ReplyDeleteExactly the same arguments about letting consenting adults regulate their own affairs, or the possibility of communal coercion into using the courts would surely apply to all religious communities.
Jock, What country is this? This is a country with an established church and it ain't Islam. What you are suggesting is that a separate judicial system is set up for a religious group - so where does it end? Your kind of leftie pandering makes me quite ill. Yes, different religions, such as Judaism have ecclesiastical 'courts. They are more of a moral arbiter. Even so, the State has intervened as in the case of Andrew Dismore MP for Hendon, who fought for Orthodox Jewish women in obtaining a 'get'. Previously, orthodox Jewish law made it very difficult for women to obtain a divorce within the religion, although. Still, if a Jewish couple divorced they would have to do it under civil law. There is no Judaic law which can grant a divorce which would be recognised in civil courts.
ReplyDelete