You are here

Sharia

Summary:


Sharia Law: Islam’s Warden

I think the best way to begin is with how Sharia is the life-force of Islam. 

To be sure, we must understand why Sharia is the life-force of Islam, and why Islam must impose (by force, if needed) Sharia to the entire world. Once we grasp this tenet, then we can understand how and why myriad specific Sharia laws affect lives.

The basic tenets of Sharia emanate with the assumption that Allah has chosen the believers (i.e., the Muslims) to rule the world. It might sound fascistic, but make no mistake: the Qur’an is absolutely determined to hand over the rule of the world to the followers of Islam: more specifically, to the Bedouin Arabs. Because Islam = Arabism. In the Qur’an (3:104, 3:110) Allah says that Arabs are the best of people ever created.

http://www.real-islam.com/abulkasem/Sharia-Laws-Islam-Warden.htm

Mapping Sharia is also a very useful site on explaining some aspects of shariahttp://mappingsharia.com/?page_id=79

The origins of sharia: http://www.crf-usa.org/america-responds-to-terrorism/the-origins-of-islamic-law.html

Council of Europe:

Sharia law is understood as being ‘the path to be followed’, that is, the ‘law’ to be obeyed by every Muslim.

Surah 5, The Table (Al-Ma’idah), verse 48: ‘We have ordained a law and assigned a path for each of you

http://www.assembly.coe.int/Committee/JUR/ajdoc282016.pdf

 

  • Summary: 

    A very interesting and thoughtful paper that makes some key points regarding terms such as 'Islamist' and 'radical Islam'. Worth reading.

    In the following paper, I will attempt to give a brief overview of the development and content of radical Islamic thought and describe the different forms in which this type of thought is expressed. In order for any long term counter-terrorism strategy to be effective, it would be self-defeating to focus mainly on the terroristic and violent aspects which are but the symptoms of an underlying movement. Acts of terror constitute one outlet of radical Islamic thought, but what is often overlooked is the propagation (da’wa ) and preparatory activities for jihad of such groups within Islamic and non-Islamic societies. Whilst not of an immediate threat, I aim to show how da’wa activities can function as the front organization of jihadist movements and that this activity poses challenges to the legal infrastructure and the very ethical fabric of democratic societies.

    Within the ideological framework of those dubbed ‘radical’ , and I will return to this typology shortly, the choice for terrorist acts is mainly a strategic choice, that has more to do with timing and opportunity than with ideological constraints on the use of violence. With the same ease as some parties choose to impose their agenda through violent means, others choose to give expression to their radical thoughts by undermining society from within the legal structure of that society. Both views however, emanate in principal from the same conceptual framework in which violence is by no means prohibited. Furthermore, the division between ‘moderate’ and ‘radical’ is not clear cut either in theory or in practice, and this can be reflected in covert moral, financial or other support given to radical jihadist organizations by organizations that are commonly seen as moderate. No legal or political long term counterterrorism strategy can therefore do without an understanding of the ideas that give rise to these phenomena.

     

    1.1 Islam, Muslims and Shari’ah law .

    There is, as with every religion, a great divide between the religious-political-legal implications of the canonical texts, and the religious, if not spiritual experience of the everyday person. When it comes to Islam I always call this the “Catholicization of Islam” by which I mean the following. As someone who has grown up in an almost exclusively Catholic part of the Netherlands and who has attended exclusively Catholic schools, I was always struck by the nature of the religious experience of the self professed Catholics. As I saw it, a Catholic is someone who is in church during Christmas, a birth, a death and perhaps during a baptism, but for the rest has no or very limited knowledge of Catholic liturgy, bible exegesis or even the rudimentary principles of faith, and depends for his understanding of right and wrong on principles common to all cultures. His association with Catholicism as a creed is mainly symbolic and quite often, rather obscure to himself as well.

    When I began debates about Islam and Shari’ah with my Muslims students I found the same pattern; a general and severe lack of knowledge, but unlike Catholics, a deep identification with Islam as the founding principle of their identity and the object of their loyalty. Perhaps this is due to their experience as a migrant, but research indicates this is a universal element in Muslims attitude towards religion. I have no doubt that the majority of people who identify themselves as Muslim do not wish to change every society into an Islamic society ruled by Shari’ah law. To many it seems ‘being a Muslim’ has more to do with their family, their traditions and customs of their country of origin than with Islam as a belief system. The question however, is whether or not these people are truly aware of the requirements posed on them and their societies by Shari’ah law. As the writer Sam Harris stated:

    “Religious moderation is the product of secular knowledge and scriptural ignorance."

    Whilst this paper will not be able to answer this question, it will show that there is a large section of Islamic thinkers who would agree with this statement and which hold that the majority of the Islamic world is essentially in a state of unbelief, thereby pointing to the divide between the experience of religion and the actual principals and requirements of that religion.

    What constitutes a Muslim? Is the Catholic who performs the minimal level of religious duties but goes about his daily business without bothering with religious dogma truly a Catholic? I would say no. More importantly, the Islamic writers, jurists and ideologues we will be discussing disagree as well.

    This has to do with the nature of Islam itself. Oftentimes it is wrongly assumed that Islamic law (Shari’ah) is a part of Islam but not the same as Islam; that one could even have an Islam without the Shari’ah. In the words of the eminent scholar Joseph Schacht however Shari’ah is:

    “ the epitome of Islamic thought, the most typical manifestation of the Islamic way of life, the core and kernel of Islam itself. Theology has never been able to achieve a comparable importance in Islam it is impossible to understand Islam without understanding Islamic law.”

    Of course, one can argue that Islam is what a Muslim says it is, and that therefore any definition of Islam should be left to Muslims themselves. But this is too simple and it negates the attraction that the clearly defined dogma of Islam and indeed radical Islam has on believers. Generally speaking, of the three major monotheistic religions, Islam is perhaps the most legalistic and at the same time the most static. It “represents an extreme case of ‘jurists law’.“ While Judaism certainly is equally rich in terms of the volumes of legal discussion dedicated to the contents of its scriptures, Judaism, through the Talmudic tradition has institutionalized the concept of debate and doubt, whereas Islam, especially in its Sunni variety, has for the largest part of its history been marked by the denial of the ability of independent reasoning (itjihad) and replaced it with an emphasis on imitation (taqlid).  This reluctance for transformation and adaptation notwithstanding, “ the Shari’ah is a product of articulations of legal discourses and institutions to varying patterns of society and politics Contrary to the insistence on unity and perpetuity, the Shari’ah has in fact displayed considerable variation over time and place.”

    Of course the question of application of those laws is a different question. Since Shari’ah is the ‘core and kernel of Islam itself’, however, I find it difficult to believe that Islam is what a Muslim says it is. And it is for this reasons that terms such as ‘jihadists’, ‘Islamists’, ‘political Islamists’ or ‘radical Muslims’ are deceiving. For jihad, politics and the implementation of Islamic edicts and requirements in society are part and parcel of Shari’ah law and thus of Islam itself.

    When one studies the works of jurisprudence (fiqh) on which the Shari’ah is built, one can see that the Shari’ah incorporates all major fields of law: public, private, criminal, commercial, family law, the law of war and peace treaties, laws pertaining to rituals and religion and laws designed to constitute a political framework for the application of Shari’ah itself. It is “an all-embracing body of religious duties, the totality of Allah’s commands that regulate the life of every Muslim in all its aspects” The idea then that Islam is what a Muslim says it is, is therefore in my view, and more importantly, in the view of those ‘radicals’ we are about to analyze, simply not true. The degree to which a modern day Muslim can deviate from established legal tradition, adapt his own jurisprudence to the requirements of modern times is the subject of ongoing debate.

    To make an analogy; if one looks at the constitution of say the United States, one would find that its laws have been steeped in tradition, are accompanied by centuries of more or less uniform jurisprudence and legal practice. To make a radically new interpretation of its laws is always possible, jurisprudence is after all a human endeavour. The legitimacy and authority of such a new interpretation, however, are challenged by the established tradition and practice and thus have to overcome formidable obstacles if they want to become the new standard of interpretation. The ongoing debate about the right to bear arms being a point in case. If this is true for manmade laws, it is all the more true for divine law, and this is exactly the point brought forth by the radical Islamic jurists.

     

  • Jihad is Islamic
    Summary: 

    Among Muslims and non-Muslims, there is an urgent need to address those obsolete and problematic elements of Islamic orthodoxy that underlie the Islamist worldview, fuelling violence on both sides. The world’s largest Muslim organisation, Indonesia’s Nahdlatul Ulama, of which I am General Secretary, has begun to do exactly that.


    ;">require the establishment of a caliphate.

    It is our firm view that, if Muslims do not address the key tenets of Islamic tradition that encourage this violence, anyone – at any time – can harness them to defy what they claim to be illegitimate laws and butcher their fellow citizens, whether they live in the Islamic world or the West. This is what links so many current events, from Syria to the streets of London. There is a desperate need for honest discussion of these matters. This is why it worries me to see Western political and intellectual elites weaponise the term “Islamophobia,” to short-circuit analysis of a complex phenomenon that threatens all humanity. For example, it is factually incorrect and counter-productive to define Islamophobia as “rooted in racism,” as proposed by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims. In reality, it is the spread of Islamist extremism and terror that primarily contributes to the rise of Islamophobia throughout the non-Muslim world. That is why it is vital to challenge the prevailing “Muslim mindset,” which is predicated upon enmity and suspicion towards non-Muslims, and often rationalises perpetrating violence in the name of Islam. Otherwise, non-Muslims will continue to be radicalised by Islamist attacks and by large-scale Muslim migration to the West.

    See also:  

    where this article appeared in the UK press.

     

     

  • Summary: 

    Ending the cycle of violence requires addressing not only the ideology and motivations of someone like Tarrant, but also the historical framework he shares with many Muslims. That is, that Muslims and non-Muslims are and shall remain in a state of permanent conflict, until the end of time (according to Islamists) or the disappearance of Islam (according to advocates of a “counter-jihad”). Among Muslims and non-Muslims, there is an urgent need to address those obsolete and problematic elements of Islamic orthodoxy that underlie the Islamist worldview, fuelling violence on both sides. The world’s largest Muslim organisation, Indonesia’s Nahdlatul Ulama, of which I am General Secretary, has begun to do exactly that.

    ;">require the establishment of a caliphate.

    There is a desperate need for honest discussion of these matters. This is why it worries me to see Western political and intellectual elites weaponise the term “,” to short-circuit analysis of a complex phenomenon that threatens all humanity. For example, it is as proposed by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims. In reality, it is the spread of Islamist extremism and terror that primarily contributes to the rise of Islamophobia throughout the non-Muslim world.

    See also: 

     

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Relevant Quotes

    The quotes below come from the Umdat al-Salik and, crucially, represent what is considered to be an authoritative work of Shari’a from the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence. As we have seen from the concept of “scholarly consensus” (explained above), the rulings included here are legally binding, according to Shari’a.

    On children:

    • When a child with discrimination (O: meaning he can eat, drink, and clean himself after using the toilet unassisted) is seven years of age, he is ordered to perform the prayer, and when ten, is beaten for neglecting it (N: not severely, but so as to discipline the child, and not more than three blows). f1.2

    On apostates:

    • Someone raised among Muslims who denies the obligatoriness of the prayer, zakat, fasting Ramadan, the pilgrimage, or the unlawfulness of wine and adultery, or denies something else upon which there is scholarly consensus (ijma’, def:b7) and which is necessarily known as being of the religion (N: necessarily known meaning things that any Muslim would know about if asked) thereby becomes an unbeliever (kafir) and is executed for his unbelief (O: if he does not admit he is mistaken and acknowledge the Obligatoriness or unlawfulness of that which there is scholarly consensus upon. As for if he denies the obligatoriness of something there is not consensus upon, then he is not adjudged an unbeliever). f1.3
    • The following are not subject to retaliation: … (3) a Jewish or Christian subject of the Islamic state for killing an apostate from Islam (O: because a subject of the state is under its protection, while killing an apostate from Islam is without consequences); o1.2
    • When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed. o8.1
    • In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representative) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed. o8.2

    On jihad:

    • The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4)-which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High, “Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled” (Koran 9.29) o9.8
    • The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim (O: because they are not a people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya)) o9.9
    • A free male Muslim who has reached puberty and is sane is entitled to the spoils of battle when he has participated in a battle to the end of it. o10.1
    • As for personal booty, anyone who, despite resistance, kills one of the enemy or effectively incapacitates him, risking his own life thereby, is entitled to whatever he can take from the enemy, meaning as much as he can take away with him in the battle, such as a mount, clothes, weaponry, money, or other. o10.2

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    To illustrate how the legal concepts of the Islamic “Lawgiver” differ significantly from those based on reason, here are some familiar commands from Mosaic Law that have underpinned Western society:

    • Love your Neighbor (or “the Golden Rule”):  “Those who follow are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. (Quran 48:29)   Islam always distinguishes between Muslims and non-Muslims.
    • Do not Murder:  Sharia exceptions: Murdering an apostate (deserter of Islam) (Para. o4.17) and a parent murdering his/her children or his/her children’s children (Para.  o1.2(4))   The latter exception applies to honor murders.
    • Do not commit Adultery:  Sharia exceptions: Sex with multiple wives (m6.10), sex with slaves and captives (Quran 33:50), and sex with temporary wives (Quran 4:24).
    • Do not steal:  Sharia exceptions: Forcible seizure, snatching and running, and theft by betraying a trust (embezzlement). (Para. o14.6)   Corruption is rampant in Islamic states due to these exceptions.
    • Do not bear false witness:  Sharia exceptions: It is OK to break the intent of the oath, as long as you don’t break the letter of the oath. (Para. o19.1) and “When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible.” Examples including protecting Islam or a Muslim. (Para. r8.2)

     

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Source: “Annual Report 2003 of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe”

    Noting that the Welfare Party had pledged to set up a regime based on sharia law, the Court found that sharia was incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as set forth in the Convention. It considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it”. According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverged from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts.

  • Author(s):

    ECHR Ruling: 

    "sharia law is incompatible with democracy and human rights"

    Source: 

    Annual Report 2003 of the European Court of Human Rights

    Council of Europe

  • Summary: 

    This essay constructs and deconstructs three main discourses created by different and opposing trends in modern Islamic thought that are normally and mistakenly lumped together as Islamism, fundamentalism, salafism, neo-salafism, Wahhabism, jihadism, political Islam, Islamic radicalism and others. I will compare and contrast between them by developing a typology of major ideologies of active Islamic trends that centers specifically on Wahhabism and neo-Wahhabism, salafism and neosalafism, and Islamism, both moderate and radical. Understanding these trends and their discourses will allow world powers, policymakers, academicians, intellectuals, terrorism experts, journalists, and many others to distinguish between and understand the logic of the radical and the moderate, the active and the inactive, the jihadi and the peaceful, the takfiri and the tolerant, the modern and the traditional, and the rational and irrational.

    Sharia Watch: A rather technical paper but useful for a detailed background understanding. A key point is the supremacism of Islam, expressed in the concept "tawhid", is "the core concept of Islam"!

    "While tawhid (oneness of God or monotheism) is the core concept of Islam, Abd al-Wahhab argues that the recognition of a unique creator without a partner is insufficient for correct belief and must be joined with ‘pure’ Islamic
    behavior."

  • Country: 
    Yemen
    News Date: 
    25/03/2020
    Summary: 

    “The Baha’i faith was founded in the 19th century by an Iranian, the Baha’u’llah. Believers consider him a prophet, a sharp contrast with the orthodox Islamic view that Mohammed was God’s final messenger.”

    The mainstream Islamic view is that Muhammad was the last prophet, an idea that is based on this Qur’an verse: “Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but the Messenger of Allah and seal of the prophets” (33:40). Accordingly, the Baha’is are considered heretics or apostates, and thus must be put to death in accord with the Sharia death penalty for heresy and apostasy.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Sharia Watch:

    See also: Melanie Phillips "":

     

    ""

    Jihad Watch:

    I would have said that this hits hardest those professional moderates who have grown rich and laden with honors by telling Western audiences what they want to hear, that is, feeding them soothing half-truths and outright lies about how Islam will soon reform and is or soon will be completely compatible with Western secular governance, but they won’t be affected at all. There is always a large audience for those who tell people what they want to hear, however false it may be.

    “Pres. of Cairo University Calls for Revision, Interdisciplinarity in Religious Sciences, Sheikh of Al-Azhar University Responds: The Conflict between Islam, Modernity Is Made up by the West to Hold Us Back, Control How People View Islam,” , January 28, 2020:

  • Country: 
    Saudi Arabia
    News Date: 
    11/02/2019
    Summary: 

    Saudi Arabian activist Loujain al-Hathloul has been in a notorious prison of the Kingdom since 15 May 2018. Her ‘crime’ was that she campaigned for women’s rights.

     

  • Summary: 

    Dr Bill Warner: Islam claims to have the supreme ethical system in the Sharia. Exactly, what is the system of Sharia and how does it compare with the UN Declaration of Human Rights of 1948?

    Under the Sharia:

    • Humans are not equal

    • Critical thought is rejected

    • Torture is allowed

    • Only Muslims have the right to life

    • There is one law for Muslims, another law for Kafirs

    • Children can be brides

    • A Muslim woman cannot marry a Kafir

    • Apostates can be killed

    • There is no freedom of speech

    • Inbreeding is encouraged

    • Wife beating is allowed

    Conclusion: Sharia rights are inhuman and inferior to the UN Declarations of Human Rights.

    To learn more about Sharia and how it affects the non-Muslim, read SHARIA LAW FOR NON-MUSLIMS:

    To receive my latest updates, sign up for our newsletter:

    Follow:

    Youtube:

    Facebook:

    Twitter:

    Podcast:

    Bookstore:

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    18/03/2020
    Summary: 

    Riz Ahmed’s new short film, The Long Goodbye, paints a warped picture of British society.

  • Summary: 

  • Country: 
    Iran (Islamic Republic of)
    News Date: 
    12/03/2020
    Summary: 

    Only recently have the mullahs suspended Friday mosque prayers and encouraged citizens to stay home if possible. They continue to lie about the extent of the crisis, forbidding any reports of actual numbers of deaths from morgues and city officials under the justification of “national security.” Sadly, the Supreme Leader and his loyal bureaucrats show greater anxiety over the spread of the truth than they do over the spread of the virus. The government continues to release official virus-related death tolls, but nobody takes them seriously.

  • Country: 
    Afghanistan
    Indonesia
    Iran (Islamic Republic of)
    Iraq
    Malaysia
    Mali
    Mauritania
    Nigeria
    Pakistan
    Qatar
    Saudi Arabia
    United Arab Emirates (the)
    Yemen
    News Date: 
    29/09/2013
  • Summary: 

    Sharia Watch: Pedictably, this document makes NO reference to the fact that these punishments are mandated in the Quran and therefore in sharia law.

    Although most modern societies do not consider amputation as a correctional method, many third-world nations have adopted punitive amputations. Judicial amputation is still used in Iran, Yemen, Sudan, Afghanistan, and the Islamic regions of Nigeria. In July 2009, Al Shabaab of Somalia, and the Islamic Sharia (strict Islamic law) court sentenced four teenagers to amputation of their right foot and left hand as punishment for stealing mobile phones and other goods . The Deputy Chief Justice of Sudan recently revealed that 16 people were subjected to amputations since 2001 . Adam al-Muthna, 30, was the first reported case of forced amputation in Sudan. Three doctors amputated the right hand and left foot of al-Muthna on February 14, 2013 in a hospital in Khartoum. This event attracted a public outcry, particularly by the Sudanese Doctors’ Union. The union complained that the doctors were horrified to break the Hippocratic Oath by harming their patient instead of protecting him .

    The common judicial punishment for theft in Saudi Arabia is the amputation of the right hand . But for highway robbery, the punishment is cross amputation —amputation of the right hand and left foot. Although such cases have been unusual in Saudi Arabia, Amnesty International reported four cases in 1986. In 1990, fewer than ten hand amputations reportedly occurred, at least five of which were administered to foreigners . More recently, a court in Saudi Arabia sentenced six men to cross amputations for highway robbery. In October 2011, a court of appeal upheld this cross amputation sentence .

  • Country: 
    Malaysia
    News Date: 
    07/03/2020
    Summary: 

    Islamization is a global menace. It’s everywhere. The battle in Malaysia, hitherto known as a moderate Muslim country, is over attempts to impose stricter observance of Sharia. In non-Muslim countries, the same initiative advances to impose the Sharia slowly, eroding democratic freedoms.

  • Country: 
    India
    Pakistan
    News Date: 
    04/03/2020
    Summary: 

    We’re constantly told that jihad terrorism has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam, and that only racist, bigoted “Islamophobes” think otherwise.

  • Country: 
    France
    News Date: 
    03/03/2020
    Summary: 

    By banning the teachers of language (Arabic, Turkish) and culture (Arabic, Turkish, both Islam-infused) President Macron may think he is doing something of great value, something that will

  • Country: 
    France
    Mali
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    02/03/2020
    Summary: 

    Sharia Watch: The aim of jihad is to impose sharia law. We start tackling this problem at source because it is the teachings of sharia that lie at the heart of this issue. As the Shafi'i manual of sharia states:

  • Country: 
    Germany
    News Date: 
    29/02/2020
    Summary: 
    • "From a constitutional-law perspective, the legislature's decision to establish a duty of neutral conduct with respect to ideological and religious matters for legal trainees must therefore be respected...." — Germany's Federal Constitutional Court

    • "The proper functioning of the justice system requires that society not only place trust in individual judges, but also in the justice system in general." — Germany's Federal Constitutional Court

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    • the original unabridged and fully-referenced version with minor updates;
    • a new short (~two hours reading) version with 118 colour pictures by Connor O'Grady; and
    • the short version without pictures, for those who dislike pictures.

    Free PDF copies are available from  and on .  Please download them, post them anywhere and everywhere, and share them with anyone who might be interested.


    Kindle and paperback copies can be purchased from , which is the best place to leave a review if you’d like to write one.


    The audiobook is available from , or through  or  on your computer or favourite device via their free apps.


    I cannot recommend  highly enough. Get your copy today. 


    Kind regards, 


    Peter

     

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    29/02/2020
    Summary: 

    British leader in mosque talks about why Muslims are in the UK and what should be done to the churches.

  • Country: 
    Egypt
    News Date: 
    27/02/2020
    Summary: 

     

    #“But nothing about being a Christian is easy in Egypt.”

  • Country: 
    Algeria
    Libya
    Mali
    Mauritania
    Sudan (the)
    News Date: 
    26/02/2020
    Summary: 

    “International Criminal Court judges on Wednesday rejected an appeal by an alleged Islamic extremist from Mali who argued that the charges against him were not serious enough to merit standing trial at the global court.”

    Not serious enough? In this Muslim Arab’s eyes, no. That’s because he views blacks as inferior, and it was blacks in Timbuktu that he was charged for committing “torture, rape and persecution.”

  • Country: 
    Iraq
    Syrian Arab Republic
    News Date: 
    20/02/2020
    Summary: 

    Slavery is acceptable in Islam. The Qur’an has Allah telling Muhammad that he has given him girls as sex slaves: “Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty.” (Qur’an 33:50)

  • Country: 
    Egypt
    News Date: 
    19/02/2020
    Summary: 

    Largely unknown to and unreported in the West, a large, two-day conference was recently hosted (Jan. 27–28) by Al Azhar University in Egypt and attended by the leading clerics and politicians from 46 nations.

  • Author(s):

  • Author(s):

    Sharia Watch: We have several issues with their response and will be replying to them in due course.

    Dear Sharia Watch UK



    Thank you for your letter dated 12 October 2019, and for taking the time to read our report and share your concerns. We stand by the inclusion of Anne Marie Waters’ words in our report.

  • Country: 
    Indonesia
    News Date: 
    14/02/2020
    Summary: 

    “Allah did not create man so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    15/02/2020
    Summary: 

    Islamic marriages are not legally binding, Court of Appeal judges have ruled, after  thousands of Muslim women in “lega

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    05/02/2020
    Summary: 
    • "What we found was so shockingly bad that I had to agree to the language in the original report being toned down. With hindsight, I'm not sure that was the right decision." — Ian Acheson, British expert on prisons.
  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    A friend asked me “Have you discovered any really useful topics or methods to shake Muslims away from this belief?”

    The answer? Different things appeal to different people.

     

    Sometimes its Muhammad’s morally questionable actions. Killing of Banu Qurayza including all boys who reached puberty. Involvement in slavery and his marriage to a child Aisha, marrying his adopted son’s ex-wife Zainab, etc.

    Many Muslims are troubled by the question of hell, especially an eternal hell. How can this be fair? Especially for Muslims who live in non-Muslim countries and have seen that non-Muslims are good people, you wonder how can these people deserve to roast in a fire?

    Women’s rights is a huge one. Including allowing slavery and sex with vulnerable slaves who can’t really refuse or consent properly due to imbalance of power. Inheritance laws being unfair to women, divorce laws being unfair.

    The stories in the Quran deserve a whole category of problematic statements to themselves. The mythical stories that just cannot be true like Dhul Qarnayn going from east to west finding the setting and rising of the sun.

    Also problematic: The stories in the Quran all seem to take from apocryphal texts such as the Syriac Infancy Gospel. The Syriac Alexander Romance.. We find the Quranic stories to have mixed up details like Jesus having his own gospel vs the four Greek gospels written about him.

    Then there’s philosophy. The problem of evil for example.

    Philosophy and atheism provide a much better solution to the suffering in our world. There is no god out there watching over us. Try to make sense of it under theology. It either means god is weak or uncaring or evil.

    How about the barbarism in Islamic law? Killing apostates, stoning adulterers? That’s also really problematic and causes many people to doubt Islam. There really is no good reason for Islamic law to be set in stone (pun intended).

    Academic criticisms of Islam are another emerging problem. Challenges to the claim that the Quran is preserved and not corrupted are eroding it’s legitimacy. More scholarly work is being done on the compilation of the Quran and this is going to continue to cause issues.

    Another issue for Muslims is the hadith. Not knowing for sure what Muhammad really said and did is really problematic. How do you really know that you are following the religion properly?

    The myriad of contradictory sects, beliefs, schools of thought also causes problems for Muslims. Many Muslims just want to throw their hands up and say “forget all of this! I’m just Muslim”. It causes doubt that a true religion can have so many discrepancies and contradictions

    For me it was the contradictions between our understanding of the universe and the statements in the Quran. Science. How every single “miracle” claim I believed in fell apart as I started to dig deeper.

    In particular I’ve come to believe Darwinian evolution is a smoking gun against Islam as it completely destroys the Adam and Eve myth. If Adam and Eve is not literally true, then what is?

    I’ve written about all of these various . Check it out

  • Dear Ms Khan,
  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    In this final article in the  we turn our focus to the ways in which people who transgress shari’a rulings are punished. 

    Modern human rights principles Unfortunately, Islamic law mandates exactly this kind of punishment for a variety of offences, some of which would not be regarded as crimes in other jurisdictions. 

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    In the I introduced this series on shari’a by pointing out that it is supposed to be a universal code for all Muslims under all circumstances. It should, therefore, be understood that shari’a was designed to control every aspect of the lives of society and individuals. 

    It is for this reason that certain actions which in many parts of the world would be legally neutral are depicted as firmly on the wrong side of shari’a. The following are, for example, regarded as serious crimes under shari’a: 

    • Apostasy (i.e. leaving the Islamic religion). In some jurisdictions where shari’a is consistently applied, apostates can expect the death penalty. (Based on Sahih Bukhari 4:52:260 and similar hadiths)
    • Free Speech. Blasphemy is regarded as a very serious crime under shari’a. Criticism of the prophet is regarded as especially serious. In line with Muhammad’s treatment of his critics most shari’a codes demand the death penalty for blasphemy. (Based on Muhammad’s treatment of critics like the poetess Asma bint Marwan) 
    • Adultery. The traditional shari’a punishment for adultery is stoning, this despite the fact that this punishment is mandated by the hadith collections and not the Qur’an. (See, for example, Sahih Bukhari 8:82:817)
    • Consumption of Alcohol and Games of Chance. Shari’a law in this area is based on Qur’an 5:90: “O you who believe! Strong drink and games of chance and idols and divine arrows are only an infamy of Satan’s handiwork. Leave it aside that you may succeed.” First offenses are generally punished with a whipping with more serious consequences for repeat offenses.
    • Homosexuality. Shari’a codes differ on the severity of punishment for acts of homosexuality but not on whether homosexuals should be punished. On the latter, they are in complete agreement. Many shari’a codes demand the death penalty for homosexuality. (Qur’an 4:16 and 7:80)

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    In the  of this , I focussed on the fact that shari’a criminalises many actions that are deemed perfectly legal in most other jurisdictions. That in itself should be enough to convince us of the fundamental incompatibility of shari’a with western legal systems.

    As if this (regarding normally non-criminal acts as crimes) is not enough, shari’a also positively commands certain actions that would normally be viewed as crimes. 

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    In the  of this we looked at the way in which shari’a mandates or, at the very least condone, actions that are regarded as serious crimes in other jurisdictions. However this is not where the incompatibility of shari’a with other legal systems ends. 

  • Country: 
    Turkey
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    18/01/2020
    Summary: 

    The principle is always and everywhere the same: in Muslim countries, one must conform one’s behavior to Islamic sensibilities.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Shari’a (or ‘Islamic Law’) seems to be constantly in the news at the moment. Financial institutions are falling over themselves to offer ‘Shari’a Compliant’ banking, shari’a tribunals operate openly many western jurisdictions and there are persistent calls from Muslim groups for elements of shari’a to be recognised in non-Muslim societies. 

    It is, in light of this, not at all far-fetched to suggest that attempts to impose shari’a represents one of the ultimate frontlines when it comes to Islamic encroachment in the free world. We should, therefore, urgently come to terms with the basics of shari’a and take efforts to stop its inexorable march. It is for this reason that I’ve decided to do a little series of articles on shari’a. Please read these articles carefully and pass it own to anyone who may perhaps benefit from this information. 

  • Summary: 
    • There is a tendency, to censor certain viewpoints because they might "offend" others. The problem is, it is not the inoffensive things that need protecting; it is only the offensive things that do.... Freedom of speech exists precisely to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

    • "he freedom of Speech may be taken away, and, dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter." — US President George Washington, 1783.

    • How come it is all right to publish the original source, prescribing murder, but that it is "hate speech" to point out that quote?

    • "Sometimes, when one points out these rules, people will respond: 'Well, the Bible says such-and-such.' The point is not that these things are written in Islamic scripture, but that people still live by them." — Bruce Bawer, February 8, 2018.

    • Restrictions against "hate speech" often do not really ban hate speech; instead they may actually be protecting certain forms of hate speech against legitimate inquiry.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    23/12/2019
    Summary: 
    • Ex-con claimed there were Sharia courts and pro-Isis inmates at HMP Woodhill
    • The former prisoner said he was recruited at the Milton Keynes prison by a group
    • Man in his 20s, known as Jack, said former inmates offered to help him to Syria
    • Security experts are now calling for an urgent review into radicalisation in jails

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    21/04/2015
    Summary: 

    BORIS Johnson has branded Sharia Law in the UK as "absolutely unacceptable", as he slammed Church of England clerics who say the Islamic legal code should be incorporated into British law.

Pages

Subscribe to Sharia