What is so "wrong" about Sharia Law?
What is so "wrong" about predestination?
Its ethics simply do not live up to the standard of contemporary western ethics.
It's okay at a societal level. It's suicide at a state level.
>>731211
elaborate
>>731214
Done.
It bans any and all forms of financial interest.
Much to the chagrin of a certain ethnoreligious minority with mercantile predilections that has cemented itself as the ruling elite in Western media, entertainment, finance, and politics.
>>731214
Westerners hate it because it doesn't agree with what they think is right
>>731217
>local interpretation of sharia
Do you even read what you post?
>>731198
Is that Burma?
>>731218
What does a Muslim and /pol/ have in common?
It's always the Jews.
>>731222
15th century Pakistan
>>731221
>#NotAllSharia
Okay Ahmed, don't blow us all up now because someone disagrees with your medieval way of life.
>>731217
>an entire legal system is bad because I don't like it's outcomes
>>731236
That's like 50% of the requirements for a good legal system.
The outcomes of the crimes committed is very important when considering a legal system. I'm not even him, but come on.
>>731234
Nice meme
The local interpretation of a small community somewhere in Afghanistan does not prove the original claim that it's ethics do not live up to contemporary western ethics
>>731236
>I like to beat women
>le smug edgelord nazi frogposter
No surprises.
>>731236
I don't like it's trial process either.
>>731239
By that logic the US legal system should be flushed down the toilet along with Sharia
Nah, get fucked, faggot
>>731240
Yeah man, oppression of women under Sharia totally just occurs in those isolated, radical communities, it totally isn't a widespread phenomena throughout all regions under Sharia law.
>>731245
You realize there is a massive and polarizing debate within the US about reforming that system because of people not agreeing with the outcomes?
Also, comparing to the US to Sharia Law in Afghanistan may be the stupidist thing in /his/.
>>731250
Give your examples, then we'll give the rebuttals.
I'd love to hear your expertise on Islamic theology, considering you'd shitpost about it on 4chan and all
>>731253
US law is to niggers and drug users what Sharia law is to women and people who have sex outside of marriage
>>731240
Dude, Islamic nations have petitioned the UN to change it's policy on free speech so they can get away with persecuting anyone who commits blasphemy. Not to mention the general laws preventing gay sex, legal inequality between men and women, and literal child marriage. It's just not compatible to modern Western values in most areas.
>>731255
Well apart from being beaten by those oh-so-isolated radicals, here's one
>Sharia law is applied to laws pertaining to family law, inheritance, and several criminal acts (including adultery, robbery and murder). In some cases in Sharia-based family courts, a female's testimony is worth half a man's and in some cases a female witness is not accepted at all.[129]
>129 "Qatar Gender Equality Profile" (PDF). UNICEF.
>>731262
Western values are a spook.
>>731214
well for one, people are being literally crucified in countries with sharia law, while in many western countries people are trying their damnedest to remove what's left of the death penalty, IF there is even anything left of it
>>731262
>general laws preventing gay sex
Okay now this isn't necessarily that big a deal, gay sex was illegal in most western countries until relatively recently
>>731284
And that was a problem too.
>>731277
Ah, but they benefit us. Meanwhile, theirs do not.
>>731291
Woman/homosexual detected
>>731271
http://www.twf.org/Library/WomenICJ.html#witness
>It is true that the Quran has instructed the believers dealing in financial transactions to get two male witnesses or one male and two females (2:282). However, it is also true that the Quran in other situations accepts the testimony of a woman as equal to that of a man. In fact the woman's testimony can even invalidate the man's. If a man accuses his wife of unchastity, he is required by the Quran to solemnly swear five times as evidence of the wife's guilt. If the wife denies and swears similarly five times, she is not considered guilty and in either case the marriage is dissolved (24:6-11).
>>731198
Everything
Islam would be better if the Quran/Sharia wasn't followed so strictly
>>731295
you understand that is over half of human population?
who in their right mind supports oppression of half of its country
>prevents degeneracy
>prohibits drugs and sexual immorality
>interest-free banking
>promotes strong, stable families and societies
>harsh penalties to deter criminals from committing crime
Gee, I wonder who would have a problem with this?
>>731296
That is supposed to be positive?
>>731198
>Law Law
Why do Anglos do this?
>>731296
Yeah that's nice, too bad unicef says that such principles aren't followed din practice.
>>731258
>le tu quoque argument
>>731308
>muh degeneracy
its not other peoples problem you dont have friends to drink with and woman to fuck
>>731308
>prevents degeneracy
A meaningless word
>>prohibits drugs and sexual immorality
not the job of government
>>interest-free banking
bad banking
>>promotes strong, stable families and societies
Wife beating
>>harsh penalties to deter criminals from committing crime
doesnt always work
>Gee, I wonder who would have a problem with this?
the sane and educated
>Gee, I wonder who would have a problem with this?
>>731306
>oppression
Please.
Women have it easier under Sharia.
>don't have to serve in armed forces
>don't have to attend public prayer services
>aren't obliged to support their families or children
>get alimony payments
>get divorce rights
>get child support
>husband has to pay wife dowry for the privilege of marrying her
>>731329
>Women have it easier under Sharia.
kek get the fuck out mohammed
>>731330
>lala lala lala lala lala lala kek cuck memes !
>>731336
He never said cuck.
In Iran and Saudi Arabia, men get jailed for missing or failing to make alimony payments.
The ex-wife usually dictates insanely high amounts that the guy can't even afford, effectively leading to life imprisonment in some cases.
Look it up, I'm not even kidding.
>>731345
And this is good?
Why cant they have normal laws?
Everyone knows that muslims are savages without any strong moral line, that are kept in check with fear
>>731344
:'^(
Some actual questions I have about Sharia, as a law student:
1. Is it true that forensic and circumstantial evidence takes a back seat to witness testimony in most Sharia courts?
2. Do all Sharia legal schools forego the doctrine of state decisis or legal precedent?
3. Are the trials done in an adversarial or an inquisitorial fashion?
4. Is there a distinction between civil law and criminal law in Sharia?
>>731329
Sure, but under Sharia women have to
>be subservient to their husbands at all times. AT ALL TIMES.
>are defined and evaluated not by the character of their personality but literally by their relationships to the males in their family (whether that's their husband or their father/brothers)
>are accused of being the guilty party in sexual assault cases under the pants-on-head-retarded idea that "they should've magically not been raped."
>denied essentially all rights to self-empowerment and self-determination. Not being able to vote, not being able to hold a job, not even allowed to fucking drive a car by yourself
etc.
>>731387
>be subservient to their husbands at all times. AT ALL TIMES.
Not a legal injunction, but a religious injunction. Learn the difference.
>are defined and evaluated not by the character of their personality but literally by their relationships to the males in their family (whether that's their husband or their father/brothers)
This is a cultural facet; this has nothing to do with law.
>are accused of being the guilty party in sexual assault cases under the pants-on-head-retarded idea that "they should've magically not been raped."
Abu Alqama reported: A woman went out to pray during the time of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and she was met by a man who attacked her and raped her. She screamed and he ran away. Then another man passed by and she said, “This man has raped me!” A group of emigrants were passing by and again she said, “This man has raped me!” They caught the man whom she thought was her attacker and brought him to her and she said, “Yes, this is the one.” They brought him to the Prophet and he issued orders concerning him but the one who had attacked her stood up and he said, “O Messenger of Allah, I am the one who attacked her.” The Prophet said to her, “Go now, for Allah has forgiven you,” and the Prophet said kind words to the man who had been mistakenly arrested. The Prophet said to the man who had attacked her, “Condemn him,” and the Prophet said, “Verily, he has repented in such a manner that if the people of Medina were to repent in this way, it would be accepted from them.”
Source: Sunan At-Tirmidhi 1454
>denied essentially all rights to self-empowerment and self-determination. Not being able to vote, not being able to hold a job, not even allowed to fucking drive a car by yourself
They are allowed to vote, work, and drive. Saudi Arabia is unique in that it does not allow women to drive (they are still allowed to work there).
>>731198
As you can see from this thread alone, it's an ideological construct for many people. On one hand you have Islamists and Muslim conservatives who idealize it as a great system, and on the other you have liberals and anti-Muslim reactionaries who idealize it as the great evil of our times.
What's wrong with Sharia Law, as in the actual tradition before the modern political spin to refashion it as something it never quite was, is that it's been broken by decades of colonial and nation-state rule, its classical scholars retreating into ivory towers while populists, sycophants, and reactionaries take their place.
The problem with Sharia Law is that what we know as Sharia Law today didn't exist a century ago. Like Bushido and Chivalry, its history has been retroactively altered by the past three generations of Muslim and non-Muslim ideologues based on modern social problems and Late Medieval polemic.
>>731386
>>731418 here
1. Forensics is admitted on a case by case basis by the judge, as the major schools haven't quite tackled the issue and reached some binding consensus yet. It's still new to them. Government 'family' courts that sometimes seek opinions from Islamic legal scholars however follow whatever laws their state does. Circumstantial evidence is mostly suspect in cases where the punishment is 'divinely mandated' i.e. hudud punishments, which tend to be severe. Witness testimony is big, but may or may not be counted highly depending on circumstantial evidence around the witness himself.
2. Legal precedent is fairly important in the major legal schools, but there's no principal which states a judge has to abide by previous decisions even if he has no dissent on the opinion and interpretation reached by the previous judge. Precedent mostly exists as a form of academic debate among legal scholars rather than an active element in trials themselves.
3. Inquisitorial
4. Yes. Cases are usually divided between disputes between private individuals and investigation into charges where a defendant is accused of a crime against the community.
>>731453
>there's no principal which states a judge has to abide by previous decisions even if he has no dissent on the opinion and interpretation reached by the previous judge.
>>731329
Women don't have it easier under Sharia law, but even if they did, it still shouldn't be supported. It is better for a nation to completely use 100% of its potential work force instead of just 50%.
>>731571
Sharia lets women work though.
>>731569
What mattered was methodology, how a legal scholar arrived at his decision, rather than the decision itself. When judges in a region passed down opinion that started to align with a common, usually culturally sensitive, ruling, it tends to be because of outside influence from the public around them.
This was mostly because of how detached Islamic law had become from the government after the 13th century, as court records and the men who studied them started disappearing from the countryside and peripheral cities.
>>731198
The problem with sharia is not so much the content itself, for which it receives (and deserves) much criticism, but for its adherents' tendency of Muslim diaspora to disregard the laws of the nation-states in which they live in favor of sharia. Needless to say, when a group of people claims exemption from laws set by the states they reside in, HUGE conflict arises. This is why Romans hated Christians in the first 3 centuries AD, and why the English and Americans from ~1500 to only very recently hated the Catholics, and why the French Revolutionaries hated religion in general; their allegiance to a far away organization took precedence over allegiance to the state.
However the difference between these conflicts between Christianity and the state differ between Islam and the state, is that modern states are generally permissive; they do not require you to do anything, they only delineate what you cannot do. Whereas Islam has necessary actions to perform that can conflict with the laws of the state. Most extreme example: honor killings.
So the toleration of sharia depends on how flexible and liberal the individual or community abroad is. American Muslims generally do not cause much a fuss and contribute to society and the economy. European countries, being to afraid of political correctness to enforce their own fucking laws, are being made fools of by Muslims smart enough to squeeze them for all their worth.
>>731648
>Whereas Islam has necessary actions to perform that can conflict with the laws of the state. Most extreme example: honor killings.
While agreeing with most of what you're saying, I'd nitpick this point. Islamic law does not necessitate honor killing, it is only permissive and sometimes deferential to both extra-religious and extra-judicial tradition that promotes it.
It's this distinction that is often missing whenever Western reporting delves not only into honor killing but the infamous rape-adultery cases as well. For their part, Western Muslims purposely confuse the boundaries to create a singular counterculture (which necessarily clashes with Western law and social order) while Middle Easterners are purposefully silent about the matter.
