You are sending me a Ben Shapiro video to show that the majority of Muslims are violent?
He's a massive fucktard – the guy is a hugely disingenuous moron.
Also, this 'range of degrees' is very important – it's what separates a Christian, who doesn't eat shellfish, from a Christian, who believe that a woman who was raped has to marry her rapist.
Also this idea that 35% of Muslims in France, or 13% in the USA, or 25% in Spain, support suicide bombings is obviously complete shit. How did they do their research? Where, and from who, did they get their data from?
They do come from such regions, the percentage is obviously different as the research doesn't account for illegal migration.
So they DO come from the list I posted, it's just that the percentages are different?!?
Yes, I haeard about muslims who want to go back.
The thing is, the place is hostile, but with the necessary military protection that can be arranged, building there cities will makes for a better soltution for them there.
Right now, a lot of them do not go to school or work.
So by starting to build communities, protect them and progressively increase those communities into cities as Isis goes down will be better than to sit and wait until Isis goes down, because then there will be nothing to return to.
Yeah, so a better plan than sending them back is to work to integrate them into society?
Shouldn't you be more angry that there isn't enough being done to integrate them and make their shitty situations better, than being angry that they have had to come to Europe and wishing for them to be sent straight back?
I think you may well be shocked to find out how many immigrants actually want to get jobs to support their families - and get their children an education.
Okay.
Is that achieved by unassimilation, creating isolated communties that have zero interaction with the country to which they came or its language?
Because right now, there is no assimilation.
No – it's achieved by assimilation. Thankfully, many communities are trying to help out. Not every immigrant has been put into camps like the one as Calais...
Bombing of the west destroyed their house and city. West has to do their part in rebuilding them. Do you understand how much it is going to cost?
Also, they have sufficient workforce there. It's not like everyone in Syria, Afghanistan fled to Europe. Only a small fraction managed to do so.
Where you are from man? You sound like you are brainwashed by the extreme right media.
I think he is just repeating the talking points of people like Shapiro - and not actually bothering to try and understand why this situation has come about, or what the implications actually are.
He has heard the term 'radical Islam' and it has gone to his head - now he sees enemies everywhere, hiding in the shadows, desperate to convert him to Islam and subject his family to the horrors of Sharia Law.
Okay.
Is that achieved by unassimilation, creating isolated communties that have zero interaction with the country to which they came or its language?
Because right now, there is no assimilation.
Bombing of the west destroyed their house and city. West has to do their part in rebuilding them. Do you understand how much it is going to cost?
Also, they have sufficient workforce there. It's not like everyone in Syria, Afghanistan fled to Europe. Only a small fraction managed to do so.
Ok.
Obviously you cannot expect to sit there while the west builds everything back to what it was before for you right?
One thing that is important with western involvement is that like the west trying to install democracy, some would see it as an attempt to control or redesign everything there, an arab leadership in my understanding is the only way a society can be built and accepted there.
You are sending me a Ben Shapiro video to show that the majority of Muslims are violent?
He's a massive fucktard – the guy is a hugely disingenuous moron.
Also, this 'range of degrees' is very important – it's what separates a Christian, who doesn't eat shellfish, from a Christian, who believe that a woman who was raped has to marry her rapist.
Also this idea that 35% of Muslims in France, or 13% in the USA, or 25% in Spain, support suicide bombings is obviously complete shit. How did they do their research? Where, and from who, did they get their data from?
Do you want me to send you the bazzilions of videos of muslim and migrants violence?
The huge numbers of reports about huge increase in crime rates, violent crime, murder and rape?
There are plenty of such ideas around, and here is that range of degrees, a Muslim who would punch a lady in the street and pull her skirt off to a muslim who would gang rape her and to a muslim who would do nothing to her.
Not a small group of people at all.
Yeah, so a better plan than sending them back is to work to integrate them into society?
Shouldn't you be more angry that there isn't enough being done to integrate them and make their shitty situations better, than being angry that they have had to come to Europe and wishing for them to be sent straight back?
I think you may well be shocked to find out how many immigrants actually want to get jobs to support their families - and get their children an education.
No – it's achieved by assimilation. Thankfully, many communities are trying to help out. Not every immigrant has been put into camps like the one as Calais...
How a huge, unregulated massive migration, no checks whatsoever helps to achieve assimilation escapes me.
The way migration was handled is terrible.
You have many communities to where the cops are too afraid to enter, many people who do not want to assimilate but want sharia law.
If you can integrate all of them into society, would this solve the problems of their families, friends and once homeland?
So even if this is feasible in the short term, it wouldn't solve the problems in the long term.
And regardless of the nature of said migrants, assimilating such massive influx is next to impossible, shortage of houses we begin to see, shortage of jobs, money as most of them are on welfare. . .
It would be cheaper to help fight and build the middle east.
And now, when we do take into account the nature of those migrant, only more problems arise.
Some of them come from cultures that are incompatible with western values and do that for the welfare and free money.
Some of them are not people you can assimilate into a western society.
So the migration should have been handled way better, it wasn't.
How would you propose assimilation at this stage?
Because as I see it, the best way right now is to solve the major problem that cause those migrant to leave their houses, rebuild their homeland for them and with them, giving them thus the job, the hopes and assistance.
The politicians have no plan whatsoever, clueless, so please if you can explain how you plan on pushing for assimilation in the short run now and for a solution in the long run, or just elaborate on general line of going about this.
Look - you obviously have a lot of misguided hatred, towards a group which you barely seem to understand, about a situation which you also barely seem to understand.
... that said, before we get any more off-topic than we currently are, this is not really the place for your mindless rantings.
This is to discuss European politics - if you want to discuss Islam, and all its multi-faceted horrors, you should head to this thread instead.
I can not promise you that you will find all that many people with views as bigoted as yours, but who knows - maybe you will strike lucky!
Look - you obviously have a lot of misguided hatred, towards a group which you barely seem to understand, about a situation which you also barely seem to understand.
... that said, before we get any more off-topic than we currently are, this is not really the place for your mindless rantings.
This is to discuss European politics - if you want to discuss Islam, and all its multi-faceted horrors, you should head to this thread instead.
I can not promise you that you will find all that many people with views as bigoted as yours, but who knows - maybe you will strike lucky!
So you do not want to explain a general line of European policy needed for assimilation or resolution?
I do not believe that is possible, I do not understand much about this, you can enlighten me.
If you think Islam is peacful and awesome with a few rotten apples we would have to disagree, pleasure to have talked to you.
So you do not want to explain a general line of European policy needed for assimilation or resolution?
I do not believe that is possible, I do not understand much about this, you can enlighten me.
If you think Islam is peacful and awesome with a few rotten apples we would have to disagree, pleasure to have talked to you.
Do you want me to send you the bazzilions of videos of muslim and migrants violence?
The huge numbers of reports about huge increase in crime rates, violent crime, murder and rape?
There are plenty of such ideas around, and here is that range of degrees, a Muslim who would punch a lady in the street and pull her skirt off to a muslim who would gang rape her and to a muslim who would do nothing to her.
Not a small group of people at all.
As I said, this isn't the place to do that - I am not really sure that the Religious Discussion Q&A is really the place either, but it certainly is more relevant to that topic then it is to this thread.
I am happy to discuss the migrant crisis - or just general migration into Europe in general.
However I feel that this isn't your agenda. You wish to try and spout hatred and bigotry, as evidenced by posts like this:
We need to support the displaced migrants - wherever they come from, and whatever their religious beliefs - until the situation in their home-countries have been improved enough for them to go back.
This means more than just putting them into a camp, surrounding it will walls of barbed wire/fences and forgetting about them.
It does mean attempts at integration. It means support, both economic and physical. Housing, education, food, water...
Make them feel good about Europe, make them feel that Europeans are generally decent folk.
Do things like this and you will see a significant decrease in crime/violence (if it truly is the migrants who are causing it).
If it is terrorism which scares you about accepting migrants, then understand that happy people don't blow themselves up.
Help to fix their countries - not only through indiscriminate bombing, which often draws people more towards extremist groups like Daesh, but through economic and physical aid.
There are so many ways in which Europe (and the wider world) can help support the situation which they are fleeing from.
I think there is an issue with countries like the UK and Germany allowing Sharia courts to operate within their borders when it comes to civil law. However, I am aware that the application of Sharia isn't necessarily comparable between the two countries. But it does seem that there is at least some evidence that these types of courts tend to be anti-women with their decisions, and yet, it seems like it's mostly progressives who supported this "choice" existing in the first place. From what I can tell, such systems are being held under review though, at least in the UK.
But honestly, I think that allowing such a thing in the first place is a total blunder as far as public policy goes and does nothing to help "assimilation" that most people would strive for, regardless of background or creed. If I was from these countries, it would bother me that this brand of justice was sanctioned by my government.
My opinion is just that though, an opinion. I may not even be doing enough research on this particular issue, it just seems...wrong to me, as someone with a secular government and law system.
As far as the refugee crisis goes - I think the notion that the world could band together in some sort of Utopian manner to rebuild shitty/destroyed places for the greater good is nice and all, but completely impractical, to say the least. In reality, if it would even be possible, it could solve some problems but only create more. Most of which would be similar to the side effects of forcing democracy on populations who don't want it in the first place.
I think there is an issue with countries like the UK and Germany allowing Sharia courts to operate within their borders when it comes to civil law. However, I am aware that the application of Sharia isn't necessarily comparable between the two countries. But it does seem that there is at least some evidence that these types of courts tend to be anti-women with their decisions, and yet, it seems like it's mostly progressives who supported this "choice" existing in the first place. From what I can tell, such systems are being held under review though, at least in the UK.
But honestly, I think that allowing such a thing in the first place is a total blunder as far as public policy goes and does nothing to help "assimilation" that most people would strive for, regardless of background or creed. If I was from these countries, it would bother me that this brand of justice was sanctioned by my government.
My opinion is just that though, an opinion. I may not even be doing enough research on this particular issue, it just seems...wrong to me, as someone with a secular government and law system.
As far as the refugee crisis goes - I think the notion that the world could band together in some sort of Utopian manner to rebuild shitty/destroyed places for the greater good is nice and all, but completely impractical, to say the least. In reality, if it would even be possible, it could solve some problems but only create more. Most of which would be similar to the side effects of forcing democracy on populations who don't want it in the first place.
This does not happen in Germany tho. It is a widespread myth. What is true is that sometimes sharia law can be the law a court has to go by because it is about IPR (international private right). It simply means that for things like marriage and divorce, the law of the state in which the marriage took place or one part of the married couple lives, it will be important what laws that state follows if there is no european law intact for that case already.
In Freak cases, that means sharia law is applied (not if it implies things which are forbidden in Germany tho, naturally. It just implies the modalities of marriage and divorce, for example). There are motivations to Close lots of Grey zones so there is a european law intact (rome and are going to be followed by rome 3 and 4, closing some gaps) for many more cases.
If two People who were born in Germany are devout muslims, they will still never, not even in civil right, be able to depend on any sharia law.
This does not happen in Germany tho. It is a widespread myth. What is true is that sometimes sharia law can be the law a court has to go by because it is about IPR (international private right). It simply means that for things like marriage and divorce, the law of the state in which the marriage took place or one part of the married couple lives, it will be important what laws that state follows if there is no european law intact for that case already.
In Freak cases, that means sharia law is applied (not if it implies things which are forbidden in Germany tho, naturally. It just implies the modalities of marriage and divorce, for example). There are motivations to Close lots of Grey zones so there is a european law intact (rome and are going to be followed by rome 3 and 4, closing some gaps) for many more cases.
If two People who were born in Germany are devout muslims, they will still never, not even in civil right, be able to depend on any sharia law.
Yeah, that's why I mentioned that the cases of UK and Germany aren't necessarily comparable. And in my point, I was emphasizing the UK situation more than the one in Germany. I guess I didn't clarify it enough, my bad.
But all that being said, I still think it's weird to apply the law of foreign country in a domestic court. Regardless of what standard of law it is btw. Sharia just happens to be worse than usual in my eyes due to it having a theocratic purpose.
And how this relates to the refugee situation is that by adding more and more people from countries where Sharia is used more commonly, there is more reason for people to push for this to become more common. And I think that is a terrible prospect to be frank.
Finally, i get by to you. I usually tend to not use strong expressions, but I have to call bullshit about a lot of your Points.
I will begin with that one and then work through your first big post:
There are a lot of muslims there.
Muslims have a significantly higher birth rate than europeans, and eventually they will out breed the europeans.
The same thing that happened in Lebanon.
Part of the mission of Islam, according to some muslims, is to make all of the world for Allah, the last and final religion.
Leaving others either the option to submit to Islam, convert and pay taxes or die.
There are not 'lots of muslims' there. There are about 5%muslims in Germany and UK, and about 10% muslims in France. That's not a lot. That's less than there are vegetarians. And that's only the People from muslims countries. Naturally, not all of them are believrs, it is simply harder to substract those , because there is no sintituation who keeps track and which you could leave like there is with the church.
Lebanon is an often cited example which is not even applicable. It is a divided Country in which, however, many christians live and there is a Consensus that important Offices have to be held by christians. Lebanon is hardly an example of a state going to shit because evilmuslims 'outbred' the christians. There are 40% christians in lebanon in no religious persecuation of them.
Now, to the birthrates: Birthrates of muslims are not that high in France and Germany (i don't know about the UK).
But lets start with Germany: turkish women had, intially, a pretty high birthrate. It lowered down to the Level of german women pretty quickly tho. See here:
This effect is just going further since 2005. Switzerland, a state very conparable to Germany, had a study in 2010 which had muslim women on 1,73 births per women, so almost at the 1,5 of german women.
And tell you what: We are lucky at least Migrant women have a FEW more children, because there Need to be People paying rent.
You can hardly blame them for 'outbreeding' anyone if they are not even at 2 children per women (which means, they, as the german average, are shrinking in size).
So i ask you again: Where do you get your ideas of islamization from? Or of the hordes of evil muslims who wanna conquer the world with birthrates? Birthrates are declining even in the islamic world.
Furthermore: Why do you fear muslims and their ideas of converting toher People to Islam, but not christians, who are more numerous and powerful round here?
There are not many Germans or French converting to Islam. There are much more muslims not being religious.
Like with christians, the islamic faith is in decline in europe. They won't eat pork and maybe Keep Ramadan because everyone else is doing so, but thinking that some muslim youth belives himself on a Mission to convert others is a pretty off thought for the vast majority of muslim youth.
But all that being said, I still think it's weird to apply the law of foreign country in a domestic court. Regardless of what standard of law it is btw. Sharia just happens to be worse than usual in my eyes due to it having a theocratic purpose.
That is true, but therethe international law we have which is used in that cases tells states to do so. It is a Standard procedure.
The law is, afaik, intact so that, for example, Saudi arabia has to acknowledge a gay marriage even if it is unheard of in their Country and accept that those two are Partners, even in front of their law.
That is true, but therethe international law we have which is used in that cases tells states to do so. It is a Standard procedure.
The law is, afaik, intact so that, for example, Saudi arabia has to acknowledge a gay marriage even if it is unheard of in their Country and accept that those two are Partners, even in front of their law.
Eh...is that the most appropriate example though? I mean, if you're a gay celebrity and you for some reason travel to Saudi Arabia, you'd probably be treated much differently than the average joe in regards to the legitimacy of your marriage.
I guess it's one way to say that this is supposed to exist, but the application probably isn't uniform where it can't really be enforced...but I digress
If too long:
Saving Europe from becoming Eurabia and saving the middle east are the single most important thing to do right now, lest human civilizatin is dead.
To do that, as the problems are linked to one another, mass deportation of the migrants back to their land and help them rebuild it, starting without delay..
When a child has troubles with his or hers homework, any parent will know better than doing the homework themselves.
Same with the problems in the Islamic, arab world and now Europe.
Any solution has to happen on middle-eastern soil, by muslims, starting now to rebuild the place rather than to wait for the defeat of ISIS.
Feet on the ground rebuilding things now.
Taking any refugee, sheltering them from their problems is as terrible a solution as is donig your child's homework, if this can even be called a solution.
The problem begins when most migrants aren't refugees, economical parasites there for the welfare and the sluts or enemy soldiers (many will call themselves soldiers of Allah).
If Europe becomes Islamic, Europe is gone, and with it I fear any hope for civilized society in a long time.
Australia, Japan, Canada and the US are facing a collapse as well, but the main issue is Europe and I am of the opinion that if we help the muslims and Europe, we will be back on the right path of history and be able to tackle the other problems as well(including the more important ones like south america africa and south east asia).
China Russia and India are hence the last bastions of hope once Europe fall, and that relieving.
Islam wants a war with humanity untill all the world is for Allah and has been engagin in unrelentless war with everyone since its incpeption, this time we, united humanity should give it this war, starting with Europe.
Not all Muslims sure, but a significant portion of them do agree with 'radical islam' to a certain degree.
When I hear things like: 'truck attack' or 'muslim dies in a blast' I feel like reporters are not part of this reality.
When I see NATO seriously picking up a fight with Russia, we should work with them, sure as hell not against them.
At war, enemy soldiers who puts you and your people in jeopardy, has two options, lay down their arms instead of trying to kill you, or die trying.
This is the option every radical muslim should be given, as long as they seek nothing but the destruction of Europe and the west, rape and torture and whatnot, their lives are of zero importance - self declared enemy soldiers.
Sure, moderate muslims and refugees, we should help them and empower them to eradicate 'radical Islam' from mainstream islamic world.
Europeans don't seem to get that there won't be Europe in the near future and that they are not doing anyone a favour by taking the refugees, especially Sweden who can never seem to do enough, they prevent islam from growing, they prevent any long-term solution from being made they prevent the middle east problems from coming to resolution and they are destroying they civilization through demographic suicide, and possibly western civilization as a whole.
I think people should start to speak up, replace people like Merkel, empower the right (like Le Pen), fight the EU and delete the greek debt that is anyways mostly digits on a screen, deleting it, when global economy might soon see the collapse of the Dollar, is not a problem to the economy right now.
And most importanty mass deportation.
There are several camps large enough in Saudi Arabia, but more importantly start building cities, jobs, universities on the ground.
Bringing the necessary support, people and army to defend those people back to the middle east so they can rebuild it, on the ground.
In the process, Islam will shift as well in my opinion and this will reduce many terror groups support.
Untill then, heavy military intervention to reassure security in Europe.
And things like the british crying about fascism or about how the Union Jack offends muslims feminism or black lives matter must stop, this is pathetic and isn't funny any more.
Muslims or the muslim world are no children and the war in syria is not homework. We live in a globalized world and their Problems are our Problems (exspecially when we think about how connected the west was in the middle east conflicts. Not only are we ally of Saudi arabia, we are ally of Israel and Turkey. We led the iraq war, we led the afghansitan and lybia Intervention. We are very involved with the Region). We cannot Abandon that Region. If anything, we have to get involved further.
The refugee wave influx to europe was partially caused by the withdrawal of Money for refugee camps in the Region. The refugee influx from africa was partially caused by the lybia war and, equally, by the lack of Support for inner african refugee camps.
your ideas of the incoming collaps are not based in reality. Not the us, not Canada, not ausralia and not the EU are facing collaps.
And if they are, it is due to misguided social and economical politics, not due to refugees or Islam.
How does Islam even hurt europe? Is the world financial crisis, the euro crisis, the brexit or growing tensions between eastern and western and northern and southern europe islam's fault? is the crimea Annex islam's fault? And how are the refugee waves from africa islam's fault?
Most of the things threatening europe (and the us) are simply things europe did itself.
The refugee wave is one of those effects which came from cutting Money for refugee camps down and just waiting what happens.
Migration, at least to Germany, worked pretty well before. There was no threat of islamization, there were turkish workers creating Jobs.
there were naturally tensions as in any Immigration wave, whether ist italian, irish or chinese. But there is not even any base for the Claim that a lot of muslims in Germany see themselves at war with the west.
If you think China, russia and india are bastions of hope, then i really have to question your view on reality.
In China, india and russia, we already have a high authority state cutting down freedom of speech (not to mention that hindu's and christians in india are just as conservative and muslims in india or Pakistan)
Merkel, in the refugee crisis, did the only right thin.g If anything,t here Need to be more politicians daring to do the right Thing instead of going full on populists like the trumps, Orbans , Putins or Johnsons of this world.
Now, after you failed to tell me where the 'islamization' is happeneding: where are refugees even threating Germany, the state which (together with sweden and Austria, relatives (and hungry) took most of them).
You said you do not live in europe, i really wonder where you get your Information from.
Eh...is that the most appropriate example though? I mean, if you're a gay celebrity and you for some reason travel to Saudi Arabia, you'd probably be treated much differently than the average joe in regards to the legitimacy of your marriage.
I guess it's one way to say that this is supposed to exist, but the application probably isn't uniform where it can't really be enforced...but I digress
Eh...is that the most appropriate example though? I mean, if you're a gay celebrity and you for some reason travel to Saudi Arabia, you'd probably be treated much differently than the average joe in regards to the legitimacy of your marriage.
I guess it's one way to say that this is supposed to exist, but the application probably isn't uniform where it can't really be enforced...but I digress
I was wrong, too. Saudi arabia adheres to no such law.
The law in Germany is for cases like if an italian lives here and his mother in italy dies. He then, by Standard procedure, is judged by italian law regarding how much of the stuff he gets and how much tax he has to pay for it.
The law has nothing to do with Religion but about what is law in a certain homestate, and before it is applied, it has to go through a Screening whether it is not colliding with Germany law.
I don#t see any Problem with that, it makes sense to me.
Furthermore, the parties being judged have to univocally agree about the ofreign law being applied. When it Comes to a divorce, for example, the women could always say she wants to be judged after german law, and then that happens.
Furthermore, the court is NOT ALLOWED to use any foreign law which is discriminating one Party due to ist gender.
Since the foreign law has to not collide with german law, basically, stuff like a woman getting less by Default from an inheritance can not happen in a german court.
The only case that can happen is that if no Party denies the foreign las being used and the forein law is not discrimnatory, THEN the foreign law is applied (for example, an islamic marriage can be divorced just by one Party saying they want a divorce (whereas in Germany it can only be divorced by a court). Tha means, if one Partner simply went back to his or her homecountry, the remaining Party can easily say they want a divorce and be done with it without a Long court case, because the other Party does not appear in court and thus does not object the foreign law being used.
The law has nothing to do with Religion but about what is law in a certain homestate, and before it is applied, it has to go through a Screening whether it is not colliding with Germany law.
I don#t see any Problem with that, it makes sense to me.
I suppose not, as long as the fundamentals of the laws are okay....but yeah, these are layman discussing it now I guess
I still think there is an issue with this in regards to the UK, but it's hard to see through what might be propaganda. But if it's enough of a concern for people in the government to call for a reviews of a system, then it's at least a little bit worrisome. Especially as it pertains to a potential new influx of people wanting such a thing. It just seems to run contra to secular law, and adds a new layer of complication to applying said law evenly.
I suppose not, as long as the fundamentals of the laws are okay....but yeah, these are layman discussing it now I guess
I still think there is an issue with this in regards to the UK, but it's hard to see through what might be propaganda. But if it's enough of a concern for people in the government to call for a reviews of a system, then it's at least a little bit worrisome. Especially as it pertains to a potential new influx of people wanting such a thing. It just seems to run contra to secular law, and adds a new layer of complication to applying said law evenly.
That is exactly my Problem with it: The Propaganda. Things are lumped together and i heard the Claim about sharia Courts in Germany a lot, which is simply untrue in any form or case, but still perpetuated.
Now britain seems to be another example, i just read into it.
There are actual possibilities of disputes inside the muslim community (even if they are british muslims) which are solved or 'mediated' by religious scholars.
And i disagree with that. not only because Scharia law is unfair and archaic.
Even if they remove all possible unfair parts of it, it gives religious Groups too much power and it divides a Country.
One of the mainideas of a Nation, in my opinion, is that everyone is judged under one law if he is a citizen of that Country. There are differences like the possibility of foreigners or diplomats having reasons to be judged differently.
But a full citizen should not be judged differently due to his or her Religion.
I did not find out yet whether the Uk leaves the possibility to insist that you want to be judged after actual UK law.
I am still looking that up. I am sure it is like that, it would be horrible if it wasnt.
I suppose not, as long as the fundamentals of the laws are okay....but yeah, these are layman discussing it now I guess
I still think there is an issue with this in regards to the UK, but it's hard to see through what might be propaganda. But if it's enough of a concern for people in the government to call for a reviews of a system, then it's at least a little bit worrisome. Especially as it pertains to a potential new influx of people wanting such a thing. It just seems to run contra to secular law, and adds a new layer of complication to applying said law evenly.
Now, this link is actually really informative and clear up a lot of confusion.
Those People have no real legal imprtance, and there are similar jewish Courts.
They just have any legal character at all if both parties agreed to accept the decision.
Now, this link is actually really informative and clear up a lot of confusion.
Those People have no real legal imprtance, and there are similar jewish Courts.
They just have any legal character at all if both parties agreed to accept the decision.
Ah no, I was never intending to imply that this wasn't fully opt-in situation. But even then, does that change whether it should exist in a secular country? For me? Not at all. It's the same with Jewish courts.
Because the other layer to this, especially when it comes to civil and family law and consenting to these religious courts, is coercion. We can't act like that has never happened. And honestly, should we really be surprised if religious courts are less favorable for women?
But these 'courts' aren't legally binding - and all decisions could be overturned by UK law (as they are completely and utterly superseded by it). The power of these courts comes solely from how they are perceived by their local communities - and not from UK law at all.
Even if you form a 'contract', like a marriage, in a Sharia court, it doesn't mean that you are married in the eyes of the state. For any decision to become legally binding, it has to be signed off by a court.
This doesn't mean that I don't believe there is a potential issue of sharia decisions (the whole concept of the system is anathema to me) - but I feel that fears of this UK sharia takeover are completely unfounded.
As far as the refugee crisis goes - I think the notion that the world could band together in some sort of Utopian manner to rebuild shitty/destroyed places for the greater good is nice and all, but completely impractical, to say the least. In reality, if it would even be possible, it could solve some problems but only create more. Most of which would be similar to the side effects of forcing democracy on populations who don't want it in the first place.
There are not 'lots of muslims' there. There are about 5%muslims in Germany and UK, and about 10% muslims in France. That's not a lot. That's less than there are vegetarians. And that's only the People from muslims countries. Naturally, not all of them are believrs, it is simply harder to substract those , because there is no sintituation who keeps track and which you could leave like there is with the church.
Lebanon is an often cited example which is not even applicable. It is a divided Country in which, however, many christians live and there is a Consensus that important Offices have to be held by christians. Lebanon is hardly an example of a state going to shit because evilmuslims 'outbred' the christians. There are 40% christians in lebanon in no religious persecuation of them.
Now, to the birthrates: Birthrates of muslims are not that high in France and Germany (i don't know about the UK).
But lets start with Germany: turkish women had, intially, a pretty high birthrate. It lowered down to the Level of german women pretty quickly tho. See here:
This effect is just going further since 2005. Switzerland, a state very conparable to Germany, had a study in 2010 which had muslim women on 1,73 births per women, so almost at the 1,5 of german women.
And tell you what: We are lucky at least Migrant women have a FEW more children, because there Need to be People paying rent.
You can hardly blame them for 'outbreeding' anyone if they are not even at 2 children per women (which means, they, as the german average, are shrinking in size).
So i ask you again: Where do you get your ideas of islamization from? Or of the hordes of evil muslims who wanna conquer the world with birthrates? Birthrates are declining even in the islamic world.
Furthermore: Why do you fear muslims and their ideas of converting toher People to Islam, but not christians, who are more numerous and powerful round here?
There are not many Germans or French converting to Islam. There are much more muslims not being religious.
Like with christians, the islamic faith is in decline in europe. They won't eat pork and maybe Keep Ramadan because everyone else is doing so, but thinking that some muslim youth belives himself on a Mission to convert others is a pretty off thought for the vast majority of muslim youth.
What are your sources of information?
Any websites you frequent that I can use?
Not in German as I don't speak German, but English or French.
Unless you talk about the mainstream media, fox-news bbc and the likes, in which I see no journalistic value.
I mean, if you're a gay celebrity and you for some reason travel to Saudi Arabia, you'd probably be treated much differently than the average joe in regards to the legitimacy of your marriage.