Radical/Muslim protests, Shop owners told they face 40 lashes if they continue selling 'evil' alcoho - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Chickens!;43210262]The Irish don't have time for religion there's barely even any catholics now.[/QUOTE] I got too many potatoes to harvest and pints to drink to worry about what God thinks!

Another thing they would want to ban is bread. I heard that they hate the smell of bread and that most western people seem to smell like that for them.

[QUOTE=OnDemand;43211066]Another thing they would want to ban is bread. I heard that they hate the smell of bread and that most western people seem to smell like that for them.[/QUOTE] Don't troll this thread will false statements. Islam has no issues with bread at all, no ethnic group in islam rejects eating bread. [quote]Bread in Islam refers to food in general. It is a gift of God from the Creator to creation; therefore it shall be taken care of, protected, nurtured and used appropriately. Wasting food, destroying places that produce food, including the oceans and farmland, is strictly prohibited in Islam. Food is sacred in Islam because it sustains life and protection of life is sacred. Destroying food resources is actually destroying life. Eating moderately is the principle of Islam. Eating excessively is unhealthy and discouraged in Islam. It is considered un-Islamic to fill the plate and then leave some food to be wasted. The Prophet (peace be upon him) himself ate very little and advised his followers to do so. The Muslim custom is if bread is dropped on the floor, eat it if clean or give it to the birds. But throwing food into the trash is unethical in Islam.[/quote] Note: [quote] In biblical times, bread (“lechem”) was such an important element of the diet that sometimes the word was synonymous with food in general.*[/quote]

[QUOTE=Jamie1992GSC;43210937]Islam. Not Muslim. Islam. You should probably read before you post.[/QUOTE] Fuck are you on about? [editline]17th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43211044]You are generalizing Muslims as one entity. These "60" are true followers of islam, we call them extremists but they are just following the word of Allah, what muhammad wrote in the Qu'ran and the Hadith by enacting sharia law.[/QUOTE] They are extremists because no where in the Qu'ran does it say people who sell alcohol should face lashes. A moderate follower of islam would try and persuade the sellers to see "what is right", give them "guidance" and all that shit.

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43210499] Although, these courts decide family, religious and business issues, no darker side of sharia law is currently present (sharia punishment like beheadings, lashes.) [B]Sharia law exists, is legal and is recognized by the uk government[/B], this is because of the The Arbitration Act.[/QUOTE] I think you're confused about what ADR is. Suggesting that Sharia Law is present in the UK, when the situation refers to "40 lashes for selling alcohol" is a misrepresentation of how Sharia Law actually may operate in the UK. One thing for sure is if there are any conflicts between Sharia Law and the Law of the UK, Sharia Law is completely meaningless.

[QUOTE=Harry3;43211185]Fuck are you on about? [editline]17th December 2013[/editline] They are extremists because no where in the Qu'ran does it say people who sell alcohol should face lashes. A moderate follower of islam would try and persuade the sellers to see "what is right", give them "guidance" and all that shit.[/QUOTE] You are very wrong, Mohummad openly speaks about Alcohol in the Qu'ran and it's offenses. Sharia Law takes his the quotes in the Qu'ran and uses them to enforce said laws which involve lashes as punishment. You are only right that there is no statement of Mohummad ordering the lashes of someone for the sale of alcohol. But under sharia law in islamic countries, this is a punishment that is dealt for doing so. [quote]There are out-right bans or severe restrictions put on the sale, purchase, and drinking of alcohol by adults in many Islamic majority countries, including: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia,[34] The Maldives, Morocco, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, and The United Arab Emirates.[35] Punishments vary according to country, but many are consistent with the Sunnah of Muhammad. They range from weeks to months of imprisonment, public flogging, and (in the case of Iran) the death penalty. This prohabition, in many cases, does not exclude the non-Muslim. For example; in June 2009, Catholic chef Sapon D Costa was jailed in Dhaka, Bangladesh, for possession of alcohol.[/quote] Please see the islam wiki for quotations on what Muhammad says in the koran about alcohol: [url]http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islamic_Law#Intoxicants_and_Recreational_Games[/url] [editline]17th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=DogGunn;43211234]I think you're confused about what ADR is. Suggesting that Sharia Law is present in the UK, when the situation refers to "40 lashes for selling alcohol" is a misrepresentation of how Sharia Law actually may operate in the UK. One thing for sure is if there are any conflicts between Sharia Law and the Law of the UK, Sharia Law is completely meaningless.[/QUOTE] You are the one who is confused, i was replying to someone who said the uk was not subject to sharia law. [QUOTE=Chickens!;43210229]UK is not subject to Sharia law, bloody extremists. Hero[/QUOTE] The UK is subject to sharia law as an alternative law system, but as i stated, it's only a "minor" form of Sharia law, no physical punishments are dealt like those that are a Islamic state and have sharia law. I say no physical, because there are other punishments (financial and religious punishments) that sharia courts can do. So i don't get mis-quoted again, Sharia courts are optional (There's no governmental enforcement of someone being judged in a sharia law), it's typically muslim to muslim conflicts.

OK fine. There are different forms of islam though right, youve got the extremists who take everything the prophet said literally, but those who choose to follow the earlier teachings. The Qu'ran starts off saying you shouldnt turn up to prayer drunk. And ends up saying it should be banned completely. But its not actually written in order. So it couldve been banned completely first, then changed to hold a more moderate view later? Just like all religions, people decide to pick and choose which parts of their holy book to follow. Really then there isnt a single definition for a "true" follower of Islam. Because to follow the entire book completely would mean contradicting yourself a fuck ton.

[QUOTE=Harry3;43211428]OK fine. There are different forms of islam though right, youve got the extremists who take everything the prophet said literally, but those who choose to follow the earlier teachings. The Qu'ran starts off saying you shouldnt turn up to prayer drunk. And ends up saying it should be banned completely. But its not actually written in order. So it couldve been banned completely first, then changed to hold a more moderate view later? Just like all religions, people decide to pick and choose which parts of their holy book to follow. Really then there isnt a "true" follower of Islam. Because to follow the book completely would mean contradicting yourself a fuck ton.[/QUOTE] If you read up on the verses and dates, Alcohol was legal first in Islam, then Muhammad forbade it's use in holy places and then called it "Satan's handwork". Since Muhammad's work is the word of god and of course, no one wants to side with Satan, it then became un-lawful\sinful and that's why under Sharia Law, it's illegal. Under Sharia Law, it's illegal to sell, produce or use Alcohol, although this can vary by interpretation and there are some exceptions, i read awhile ago of trade that involves wine if no alternative goods is avaliable, since Alcohol has no value in islam, they may accept wine in trade if there is no alternative. I'll try and find this to quote it. "Satan's handwork" in [B]Qur'an 5:90-91[/B]: [url]http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/005-qmt.php#005.090[/url] Sharia Law is entirely justified by Muslim holy books such as the Qu'ran and the Hadith. Books wrote by muhammad, the prophet who got the words from god. Sharia Law interprets what is wrote in these books to justify it's laws.

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43211317]You are the one who is confused, i was replying to someone who said the uk was not subject to sharia law. The UK is subject to sharia law as an alternative law system, but as i stated, it's only a "minor" form of Sharia law, no physical punishments are dealt like those that are a Islamic state and have sharia law. I say no physical, because there are other punishments (financial and religious punishments) that sharia courts can do. So i don't get mis-quoted again, Sharia courts are optional (There's no governmental enforcement of someone being judged in a sharia law), it's typically muslim to muslim conflicts.[/QUOTE] The Arbitration Act allows a third party Arbitration (or in this case the sharia law) to act in the place of the courts. The judgement given by the arbitrator is legal enforceable, however the relevant parties can appeal to the UK courts and if the punishment is deemed significantly unfair or unjust it can be overturned by the courts.

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43211317] You are the one who is confused, i was replying to someone who said the uk was not subject to sharia law.[/QUOTE] Nobody in the UK is subject to Sharia Law. It is a complete falsity to suggest that the UK is subject to it. A person may elect to have their matter taken to ADR (or may be required to in certain instances), but both parties will have to agree. If they wish to have the matter head by a Sharia Arbitrator, both parties will be required to agree to that Arbitrator. The decisions made by a Sharia arbitrator or other dispute resoluter must fall within the confounds of UK / English Law. In that sense, Sharia Law in the UK is subject to English law.

[QUOTE=Harry3;43211428]OK fine. There are different forms of islam though right, youve got the extremists who take everything the prophet said literally, but those who choose to follow the earlier teachings. The Qu'ran starts off saying you shouldnt turn up to prayer drunk. And ends up saying it should be banned completely. But its not actually written in order. So it couldve been banned completely first, then changed to hold a more moderate view later? Just like all religions, people decide to pick and choose which parts of their holy book to follow. Really then there isnt a single definition for a "true" follower of Islam. Because to follow the entire book completely would mean contradicting yourself a fuck ton.[/QUOTE] In-regards to this incident, they are trying to enforce Sharia Law, which uses the holy books to interpret the meanings to justify it's laws, not the individual person. Sharia Law has been around since Muhammad was alive, so these laws were active since then. Since it's a law system, and not individual persons choice and has been around since the start of a religion, people don't have a choice to follow it or not if they are in a country that is an Islamic State, Since Sharia Law is gods word. [quote]The origin of sharia is the Quran, and traditions gathered from the life of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad (born ca. 570 CE in Mecca).[[/quote] [editline]17th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Rar;43211521]The Arbitration Act allows a third party Arbitration (or in this case the sharia law) to act in the place of the courts. The judgement given by the arbitrator is legal enforceable, however the relevant parties can appeal to the UK courts and if the punishment is deemed significantly unfair or unjust it can be overturned by the courts.[/QUOTE] The UK is subject to Sharia Law. "Subject to" Does not mean it is the overall condition of factor. Of course UK overall laws still override them if law conflicts arise. At no point did i say Sharia Law overrides UK law. subject to: [quote]1. Being dependent or conditional upon something, as in subject to shareholder approval. 2. Being under the dominion or authority, as of a sovereign, authority, or government, as in subject to the boss’s whims. 3. Open or exposed to some unfortunate or undesirable thing, as in subject to criticism. 4. Under the necessity of undergoing something, as in subject to death. 5. Liable prone to suffer something, as in subject to migraines. Read more: [url]http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/subject-to.html#ixzz2nkF9uRk7[/url][/quote] [editline]17th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=DogGunn;43211525]Nobody in the UK is subject to Sharia Law. It is a complete falsity to suggest that the UK is subject to it. A person may elect to have their matter taken to ADR (or may be required to in certain instances), but both parties will have to agree. If they wish to have the matter head by a Sharia Arbitrator, both parties will be required to agree to that Arbitrator. The decisions made by a Sharia arbitrator or other dispute resoluter must fall within the confounds of UK / English Law. In that sense, Sharia Law in the UK is subject to English law.[/QUOTE] The UK has Sharia Law, so it is subject to Sharia Law. However a individual person\party has the choice of using a Sharia court or not. As i said previously, it's an alternative form of law.

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43211560] The UK has Sharia Law, so it is subject to Sharia Law. However a individual person\party has the choice of using a Sharia court or not. As i said previously, it's an alternative form of law.[/QUOTE] I don't think you get it. Sharia Law may be used as a method of dispute resolution, however it is not the law anywhere within the UK. It is not within statute law, it is not within the Common Law, it is not binding law. It is not an alternative form of law. It may be used as a guide for an arbitrator if both parties agree to it, but any decision they make, which has been guided by Sharia Law, cannot contradict English law, which is provided by actual law. The UK does not have Sharia Law anywhere... at all. The UK is subject to English law, and that is it.

[QUOTE=Chickens!;43210240][IMG]http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/590x/secondary/108340.jpg[/IMG] [/QUOTE] Maybe if you hate Women, Bacon and Fun.

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43211560] The UK is subject to Sharia Law. "Subject to" Does not mean it is the overall condition of factor. Of course UK overall laws still override them if law conflicts arise. At no point did i say Sharia Law overrides UK law. ... The UK has Sharia Law, so it is subject to Sharia Law. However a individual person\party has the choice of using a Sharia court or not. As i said previously, it's an alternative form of law.[/QUOTE] Saying that would be like saying that UK law is subject to any arbitrary arbitrator, or that the UK is subject to any contract made in the UK, when in fact a Sharia Law arbitrator is subject to UK law in the similar way that a contract is. UK law does not directly recognise Sharia law (and thus has no dependence on).

Most Muslims don't even want Sharia Law, this is just putting a spotlight on a minority group within in the Muslim population.

[QUOTE=Satansick;43211998]Most Muslims don't even want Sharia Law, this is just putting a spotlight on a minority group within in the Muslim population.[/QUOTE] Where is your factual evidence to support this statement?

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43212314]Where is your factual evidence to support this statement?[/QUOTE] what is your factual evidence for anything in this post [QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43210907]Your correct however, if that's the case then what should happen, is they should be deported to the country nearest to their home country that does not have human rights abuse issues so they can claim asylum there. The problem is, these "asylum seekers" that are from the middle east, Africa etc that come to the uk are doing it to take advantage of our countries benefits, they have no right to be here. If your being oppressed, you don't go half way across the world to escape oppression when there is a country nearby without said human rights abuse issues. We are and have been too soft on asylum seekers, foreign criminals and illegal immigrants, it's costing the UK millions (if not billions) of pounds because most cases are not genuine (Alot of them discard their passports\documents so they cannot be deported), they are just looking for a way to live in the UK without going through the process of becoming a citizen and want hand-outs as the UK is well known for it's welfare and healthcare systems.[/QUOTE] or this one [QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43211044]You are generalizing Muslims as one entity. These "60" are true followers of islam, we call them extremists but they are just following the word of Allah, what muhammad wrote in the Qu'ran and the Hadith by enacting sharia law. "Most muslims" - Where do you get this evidence? If they don't agree with these extremists, then they are moderate followers of islam, although the only way to get statstical facts on if "most muslims" disagree with these extremists, is to see if they support sharia law, since it's sharia law these followers of islam are trying to enforce. In regards to the mosque not supporting their actions, of course they would not declare that they support it. If Christians that visit a church, go around near a church and start saying that they will burn people at the stake for witchcraft, would you really declare support for this group? The answer is most likely no.[/QUOTE] or basically anything you've posted

When will they try and whip me in the street for eating pork scratchings

[QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43212314]Where is your factual evidence to support this statement?[/QUOTE] Source: I go outside and talk to people

[QUOTE=Freakie;43210324]Wasn't religion a major cause of The Troubles? Although on topic, do ALL branches of Islam prohibit alcohol and the likes?[/QUOTE] The Troubles was a mix of religious conflict (Protestants vs Catholics) and Republicans vs Loyalists

[video=youtube;HvLl7BKPfbg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvLl7BKPfbg[/video] Cleanskin was right, we need boromir to end the extremist once and for all [editline]17th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Sword and Paint;43210499]Actually it is, however it's entirely optional on the person, there's sharia courts across the uk, muslims are given the option of a uk court or a sharia court in the uk to handle things (This is usually just disputes between muslims however). Jews have similar courts but not on the same scale (there's far more muslims than jews in the uk), this exists to stop the flooding of religious issues in uk courts. Although, these courts decide family, religious and business issues, no darker side of sharia law is currently present (sharia punishment like beheadings, lashes.) [B]Sharia law exists, is legal and is recognized by the uk government[/B], this is because of the The Arbitration Act.[/QUOTE] This is government loosing their balls and going full bananas and agree with the kebab.

[QUOTE=Satansick;43211998]Most Muslims don't even want Sharia Law, this is just putting a spotlight on a minority group within in the Muslim population.[/QUOTE] Yeah, think of it as judging the entirety of todays Christians on the witch hunts, the crusades, and the Westboro baptist church. [editline]17th December 2013[/editline] Or assuming all atheists are the the fine folk of r/atheism

This why political correctness needs to be abolished.

[video=youtube;ocW3fBqPQkU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocW3fBqPQkU[/video] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("meme reply" - Orkel))[/highlight]

Know what? I'm tired. Religion is an inebriate for those who deny reality in favor of narrative fiction. Those too weak and cowardly to look into the beyond and take the inevitability of their own nonexistence as a challenge rather than as an omnipresent threat. You want to live by a code? Fine. It had better be justifiable without the concept of divine enforcement.

[QUOTE=Chickens!;43210938]I dunno man, maybe it was written because people were threatening to give other people 40 lashes for selling alcohol.[/QUOTE] Dont be daft dude. The end result is still the same. News publishers are a company like any other. Their goal is to make money. Why run this story? Because immigration is a hot button issue and they know people like sword and paint will gobble that shit up and push their agenda.

[QUOTE=Grimhound;43213221]Know what? I'm tired. Religion is an inebriate for those who deny reality in favor of narrative fiction.[B] Those too weak and cowardly[/B] to look into the beyond and take the inevitability of their own nonexistence as a challenge rather than as an omnipresent threat. You want to live by a code? Fine. It had better be justifiable without the concept of divine enforcement.[/QUOTE] So atheists are strong and brave?

If they immigrated here just to complain how poor the living conditions are here we should deport them back to their perfect country.

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;43213461]So atheists are strong and brave?[/QUOTE] It's more a matter of dignity, and no, not really. A lot of atheists are self-righteous dicks who I personally disagree with, and I admittedly wrestle with the whole hubris angle myself at times. I hold that we as a species have to look to our own collective future and work to make rapid advancements so that, even if we cannot immediately benefit from our own endeavors, at least those who come after us will stand as a testament to our resolve. Meanwhile I see millions prostrating themselves before invisible forces and theistic con men who promise them eternal happiness for no fee other than their obedience, sacrifice, and willful ignorance. It's one of those situations where I repeatedly find myself really pissed off. Note: There are members of the various religious institutions who are generally very nice people, and I appreciate and admire them for their charity and devotion to their ideals of helping mankind. The people I'm talking about are the ones opposite that.

[QUOTE=Grimhound;43213577]It's more a matter of dignity, and no, not really. A lot of atheists are self-righteous dicks who I personally disagree with, and I admittedly wrestle with the whole hubris angle myself at times. I hold that we as a species have to look to our own collective future and work to make rapid advancements so that, even if we cannot immediately benefit from our own endeavors, at least those who come after us will stand as a testament to our resolve. Meanwhile I see millions prostrating themselves before invisible forces and theistic con men who promise them eternal happiness for no fee other than their obedience, sacrifice, and willful ignorance. It's one of those situations where I repeatedly find myself really pissed off. Note: There are members of the various religious institutions who are generally very nice people, and I appreciate and admire them for their charity and devotion to their ideals of helping mankind. The people I'm talking about are the ones opposite that.[/QUOTE] I find that Atheists tend to get self-righteous because they found the truth, in a silly ironic way they can have the same religious mindset that they disparage in others. I'm an atheist btw, so it's not out of bias that I'm saying that, it just seems to be how some of them choose to act. Trading religious fervor for a philosophical fervor.