| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Remarks courtesy our new Jihad Watch volunteer Patrick Devenny:
On Sunday, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty put an end to the long-running debate over whether Ontario would become the first Canadian province to recognize shariah as a legitimate system of law by declaring "There will be no Shariah law in Ontario. There will be no religious arbitration in Ontario. There will be one law for all Ontarians." According to some in the Canadian Muslim community, however, critics of sharia law are simply ignorant, as quoted in the Toronto Star, with thanks to Designnut:
The raging debate over legalizing Muslim principles in arbitration in Ontario has been fuelled by ignorant stereotypes of Islam as oppressive for women, Muslim women said today.They called on Premier Dalton McGuinty to rescind his decision to scrap all faith-based arbitration to settle civil and family disputes, and threatened a constitutional challenge if he didn't allow sharia principles in arbitration law.
"We are deeply concerned at the level of ignorance about sharia that has been passed off for informed public debate," said Kathy Bullock, an executive-director with the Islamic Society of North America.
"The level of hatred has been frequently astonishing."
On Sunday, McGuinty changed course by announcing he would end faith-based family-law arbitration that has existed in Ontario since 1991 rather than incorporate the Muslim code known as sharia into the law.
Far from being an ancient medieval law code that is "oppressive and barbaric" and discriminates against women as critics argue, sharia aims to provide justice, respect and fairness for everyone, Bullock said.
"The main understanding of women's equality in the West right now is the Liberal-feminist version which says that if men and women are not treated in an identical manner, then women are being oppressed," said Bullock.
"There are other understandings of what women's equality means and the one that is best expressed from the Qur'anic point of view is `different but equal'."
Hmmm...different but equal...where have we heard that before? Many Canadian Muslims, however, welcomed the Premier’s courageous decision.
Munir Pervaiz, director of the Muslim Canadian Congress, said he failed to understand how Muslims who had agitated for equality before the law could now reject McGuinty's approach."How can you, as a Muslim-Canadian citizen, stand in front of anyone and say I want to have a separate law for myself — (that) one law for all is not good enough?" said Pervaiz.
Posted by Robert at September 15, 2005 8:18 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
That the fascist Islamic lobby is still trying to push their agenda on the rest of the world, particularly in Ont. probably comes as a shock only to me. I felt that the argument was over, that everyone would now live under the same legal system with the same access to whatever justice comes from it, and that's the end of the story. I quietly decided that if the primitives would stop sacrificing virgins to the Volcano Gods, then, however reluctantly, I would reciprocate by shelving my lava lamp.
In spite of being no different from bin Laden, as one of our readers has pointed out recently, I do have moments of fairness. I was willing to give up my appeal to have my own faith-based traditional court based on Australian rugger rules supervised by Joeys. Yes, I was going to give it up. But now it seems the Muslims won't let sharia die a reasonable death in Ontario. So, if they won't, then I won't give in either. I want my rights to kangaroo courts. Whatever you want, I want. Hey, I also like the Mass. Blue Book laws. Let's burn witches. I want a law that says I can get away with cheating at Monoploy. Let's all move to San Francisco and marry our cats and fall into the ocean. One law for everyone? Well, if they have one law for everyone, then I want one law for myself, too. My law says I can do whatever I want to do. Yeah, just ask Joey.
Posted by: sonofwalker![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 15, 2005 8:44 PM
I am glad the "Separate but Equal" debate has entered into the discussion. I have debated several Pro Sharia Canadians on this issue over the last several months and when I used that phrase and America's experience with it...they all stood silent.
McGuinty is right. There should be one law for all Canadians. Good for him.
Posted by: Trupolitik at September 15, 2005 8:49 PM
"The level of hatred has been frequently astonishing."
Ms. Bullock should be put to strict proof and made to testify on Islamic persecutions, sharia prostitution (Hyderabad,India), jizya etc.
And of course when she lies she can go to prison for perjury - taqiyya or no taqiyya.
at September 16, 2005 12:17 AM
"The level of hatred has been frequently astonishing."
This could only come out of the mouth of a bleepin frigin liberal. Shit, even the enemy has them. God bless'em.
Posted by: William The Crusader at September 16, 2005 1:41 AM
"The level of hatred has been frequently astonishing."
This could only come out of the mouth of a bleepin frigin liberal. Shit, even the enemy has them. God help'em.
Posted by: William The Crusader at September 16, 2005 1:42 AM
"The level of hatred has been frequently astonishing."
This could only come out of the mouth of a bleepin frigin liberal. Shit, even the enemy has them. God help'em.
Yes it's a cheap shot, but damm, you gotta wonder who side they are on sometimes.
Posted by: William The Crusader at September 16, 2005 1:43 AM
Oops, sorry about that.
Posted by: William The Crusader at September 16, 2005 1:49 AM
So, this how a self-described prominent Muslim journalist argues. First, he prays that you will get cancer and die. Then he brings forward objections which he knows are false. When you show him that you know he is a liar, he threatens to nuke your country and bring a fatwah, a death sentence, against you personally by posting your refutations in every mosque and newspaper he can reach.
And this is a moderate Muslim. Just think what the immoderate Muslims would do...
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kellmeyer/050201
So, Ms. Bull-ock that is what hatred id. And where is it coming from?
Posted by: leavingtheleft at September 16, 2005 2:16 AM
So, this how a self-described prominent Muslim journalist argues. First, he prays that you will get cancer and die. Then he brings forward objections which he knows are false. When you show him that you know he is a liar, he threatens to nuke your country and bring a fatwah, a death sentence, against you personally by posting your refutations in every mosque and newspaper he can reach.
And this is a moderate Muslim. Just think what the immoderate Muslims would do...
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kellmeyer/050201
So, Ms. Bull-ock that is what hatred id. And where is it coming from?
Posted by: leavingtheleft at September 16, 2005 2:16 AM
So, this how a self-described prominent Muslim journalist argues. First, he prays that you will get cancer and die. Then he brings forward objections which he knows are false. When you show him that you know he is a liar, he threatens to nuke your country and bring a fatwah, a death sentence, against you personally by posting your refutations in every mosque and newspaper he can reach.
And this is a moderate Muslim. Just think what the immoderate Muslims would do...
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kellmeyer/050201
So, Ms. Bull-ock that is what hatred id. And where is it coming from?
Posted by: leavingtheleft at September 16, 2005 2:16 AM
Bollocks to Bullock! She only talks bollocks anyway!
Posted by: Mark at September 16, 2005 5:48 AM
Bollocks to Bullock! She only talks bollocks anyway!
Posted by: Mark at September 16, 2005 5:49 AM
Bollocks to Bullock! She only talks bollocks anyway!
Posted by: Mark at September 16, 2005 5:50 AM
Oops! Sorry about all those postings.
Posted by: Mark at September 16, 2005 5:51 AM
'Different but equal'. Hmmmm! My bullshit detector is bleeping away.
Black people are different from white people. They are not inferior; in their own way they are just as talented; it's just that they are better at physical labour and white people are better at jobs involving the intellect. It would be unfair to treat them exactly the same. God has a plan for both of them. And God knows best.
OK, OK, only joking. I'm just using a crass analogy to make a point.
Of course men and women are different. However, I am deeply, deeply suspicious of anyone, especially a Muslim who says 'different but equal'.
Posted by: Interested at September 16, 2005 6:10 AM
If these Sharia women are unhappy with the laws in Canada, they know what to do. They should get out on the next plane to Pakistan, where they will surely be as happy as pigs in muck.
I wonder if anyone in Canada has the guts to give them that leavening advice.
Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at September 16, 2005 6:31 AM
"Different but Equal"
"Two legs bad, four legs good"
"Everyone is equal, its just that some are more equal than others"
"A woman in a Sharia Court is judged to be worth a mans left leg, or entitled to only 25% of the damages that a man would be entitled to for the same injury or grievance"
sonofwalker ... If you are having your own legal system then I want one too.
Yes, all foreign men entering England will be given the following items to be worn at all times during their stay. Failure to carry & wear & use these items will result in the locals looking down their nose at you disapprovingly whilst uttering the timeless English insult "I say" under their breath:
A bowler hat
A copy of The Times
A wallet sized picture of the Royal Family
A phrase book with all you need to say about the English weather
A tube of upper lip glue (all moustaches MUST be removed before entering England)
A small torch so you can permanently look on the bright side
It goes without saying that all visitors to England will be tested upon arrival for their ability to "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst, but above all remain cheerful".
at September 16, 2005 6:50 AM
"Different but Equal"
"Two legs bad, four legs good"
"Everyone is equal, its just that some are more equal than others"
"A woman in a Sharia Court is judged to be worth a mans left leg, or entitled to only 25% of the damages that a man would be entitled to for the same injury or grievance"
sonofwalker ... If you are having your own legal system then I want one too.
Yes, all foreign men entering England will be given the following items to be worn at all times during their stay. Failure to carry & wear & use these items will result in the locals looking down their nose at you disapprovingly whilst uttering the timeless English insult "I say" under their breath:
A bowler hat
A copy of The Times
A wallet sized picture of the Royal Family
A phrase book with all you need to say about the English weather
A tube of upper lip glue (all moustaches MUST be removed before entering England)
A small torch so you can permanently look on the bright side
It goes without saying that all visitors to England will be tested upon arrival for their ability to "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst, but above all remain cheerful".
at September 16, 2005 6:51 AM
"Different but Equal"
"Two legs bad, four legs good"
"Everyone is equal, its just that some are more equal than others"
"A woman in a Sharia Court is judged to be worth a mans left leg, or entitled to only 25% of the damages that a man would be entitled to for the same injury or grievance"
sonofwalker ... If you are having your own legal system then I want one too.
Yes, all foreign men entering England will be given the following items to be worn at all times during their stay. Failure to carry & wear & use these items will result in the locals looking down their nose at you disapprovingly whilst uttering the timeless English insult "I say" under their breath:
A bowler hat
A copy of The Times
A wallet sized picture of the Royal Family
A phrase book with all you need to say about the English weather
A tube of upper lip glue (all moustaches MUST be removed before entering England)
A small torch so you can permanently look on the bright side
It goes without saying that all visitors to England will be tested upon arrival for their ability to "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst, but above all remain cheerful".
at September 16, 2005 6:51 AM
Sorry x3.
Posted by: albion at September 16, 2005 6:53 AM
Hey, didn't you know? Some people are more equal than others and have more human rights than others? How would lawyers feed themselves without the never ending procession of Muslims taking everyone to court?
There are two letters that every child can understand though. NO. That word should be liberally used whenever Muslims throw tantrums because they can't get their own way.
Posted by: londongirl at September 16, 2005 7:01 AM
Makkah Quake a Minor Event, Says Geologist
Roger Harrison & Essam Al-Ghalib, Arab News
JEDDAH/MAKKAH, 14 September 2005 ?The earthquake that shook Makkah Al-Otaibiyyah neighborhood, about two kilometers from the Grand Mosque, at 2 a.m. on Monday has engendered a sense of shock and vulnerability in the citizens of Makkah.
There were no casualties and no damage to buildings, although residents reported dogs barking just before the shocks and a sound of rumbling or what sounded like an explosion.
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=70040&d=14&m=9&y=2005
`engendered a sense of shock and vulnerability in the citizens of Makkah` reminds me of other discussion on a related topic.
This French chap has the answer to Ms.Bollocks:
The clamor was all too much for a passing tourist. “God bless America, you bitch!” he screamed in a thick accent.
“Go back to where you came from, you foreigner,” groused a fellow conspiracist.
“But I am French,” the tourist responded indignantly.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0537,fergusonweb2,67726,2.html
at September 16, 2005 7:29 AM
Albion - quite so. Tourists are also encouraged to try the famous echo in the Reading Room of the British Library.
Posted by: Interested at September 16, 2005 8:06 AM
Interested
Well, that goes without saying. I like the "encouraged to try" - I wonder if there are any such edicts in the Quran with the "encouraged to try" prefix?
Also being able to describe the long suffering Mary Archer as "fragrant" convincingly should be enshrined in English Civil, not Criminal Law.
A pilgrimage up t' North o' England (home of the homemade, homegrown suicide bombers) should be compulsory (or is that too strong? Mmm, I will replace that word "Compulsory" in the New Constitution with the phrase "to be positively encouraged")- I suggest Mr Bridges Tea & Scone Emporium just outside of Kendall should suffice as the necessary Holy Ground at the end of an arduos Pilgrimage....(the motorways & railways are enough to try anyones faith these days......)
Posted by: albion at September 16, 2005 8:26 AM
I'll have to find Bullock's email address and send her my remarks.
Ms Bullock:
The fact of my equality is not up for discussion, nor debate, nor qualification. I, a female, am equal (let me spell that for you - EQUAL) to a male, the male, or all males - however you wish to phrase it.
The fact of my equality may disturb the status quo in Islam, but it is still a fact. The recognition of this equality has been hard won by females in the Western world; we will not regress despite your notions that "equality" can be found in differential treatment.
Who, within Islam, defines this "difference," Ms Bullock? Was it the misogynist Muhammad, or the misogynist Imam?
Who speaks for the modern day female? Is it the psychologically intimidated female Muslim indoctrinated from birth with the gendered double standard that Islam promotes? Or is it the free-thinking, rational, creative female who has been encouraged from birth to use all her intellectual and physical powers to live fully and freely?
For my spokesperson, I choose the latter.
Please do not speak for me - as I said, the fact of my equality is not up for discussion.
at September 16, 2005 8:40 AM
In many parts of the world where legal codes such as Shariah hold sway, the men end up treating their women like animals ... (and vice-versa...Eeewww).
The Ontario legal code was not languishing for want of more Shariah content. Let there be one legal code for everyone. Get with the program or get back on the plane.
Posted by: Chatillon at September 16, 2005 10:58 AM
Re: "The level of hatred has been frequently astonishing."
That's an interesting quote given the only targets of hatred in Ontario (and more particularly Toronto) have been Jews who have seen their homes, cemetaries and synagogues vandalized. As usual, it's the Muslims who seethe and whine.
Posted by: johnb at September 16, 2005 11:21 AM
thecid:
Spencer is interested in your offer. I am posting this on multiple threads in the hope that you'll see it. Contact him at director@jihadwatch.org.
Posted by: CGW at September 16, 2005 12:58 PM
On the other hand, maybe the proponents of Shariah should be encouraged to launch similar suits in all North American jurisdictions. After all, if the North American legal system can't drain the Saudi financial reserves dry, nothing can.
Posted by: Chatillon at September 16, 2005 2:26 PM
"The main understanding of women's equality in the West right now is the Liberal-feminist version which says that if men and women are not treated in an identical manner, then women are being oppressed," said Bullock.
Another Phyllis Schaffly/Laura Schlessinger/Bay Buchanon "feminist" eh?
Yes, slut. We do like the liberal-feminist version of women's equality. If you are clamoring for the 7th-century-madman-fairytale version, may I suggest you hightail it to Iran, Saudi Arabia, northern Nigeria, Sudan or Afghanistan? (And if you wait a few more months, you can also opt for Iraq.)
And when your husband comes to your bed with the fresh smell of his other three wives on him (if you know what I mean--my apologies to the prudish) mayhap you will prefer HIS version of feminism. Hey, if I was a man that thought women were the god-given property of men, I'd be all for that too.
When will we see a coterie of real, Western-style, liberal, democratic feminists immigrate to ANY Muslim hellhole--even one of the "modern" ones--and set up a real feminist movement? You know, one that says that a woman CAN convict her rapist without the burden of finding FOUR "brother" Muslims to back up her worthless-under-Sharia testimony? One that says women can refuse to have sex with their husbands? One that says that women may chose birth control, lesbianism, sodomy (with men) and abortion?
Never, you say? Now can you see the difference between Islam and Civilization? In civilization, a woman can CHOOSE to only accept half the inheritance of her brothers’. She can CHOOSE to wear a head-to-toe tent in the dog days of Summer in Florida and Arizona. She can CHOOSE to follow the “religion” that says that woman are—essentially—sextoys for Muslim men, cooks, and brood sows to produce more Muslims. She can CHOOSE to defer in every way to her father and brothers as a child, her husband as a woman, and her own sons in her dotage.
So please note: here in the “decadent, infidel” West, woman may CHOOSE what their own lives will be; they are free to make their own decisions. And WE aren’t going to let YOU and you ilk change it. But remember, you also have the freedom to leave. I’m sure you’ll make a nice wife for a Muslim in Iran, Saudi, etc.
at September 16, 2005 2:52 PM
Just goes to prove that our sympathy is wasted on the plight of muslimas; most of them love their unique version of freedom and equality. And they are welcome to it, but not in our world. Somehow these intransigent masochists must be made to understand that we will "tolerate" only so much of their anachronistic, retrograde drivel.
If they want to be formally subjugated under the auspices of Sharia, Saudi Arabia and Iran beckon.
Sharia is the law of the land, and not just for family disputes. That should please them even more, so why are they in Canada? It's simple: they're willing to take one step at a time. Sharia for family disputes now, Sharia as the law of the land tomorrow.
at September 16, 2005 9:37 PM
This is probably late in the thread to get any attention but today's Toronto Star (Sept.17) ran aninteresting column by Lynda Hurst about the issue of arbitration. It seems that no Christian groups have used arbitratio for family matters since its inception in 1991 and only a few Orthodox Jews have.
Some quotes from the article:
"Contrary to government comments in past media reports and current statements by Jewish and Muslim activists, no known Christian church has made use of Ontario's 1991 Arbitration Act to settle marital breakdown or child custody disputes.
"I've consulted fairly widely and no one is aware of any such thing," says lawyer Janet Buckingham of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. "Of course, churches mediate and counsel if people request it, but arbitrating legal matters? No."
"The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Toronto agrees (annulments are purely a church matter). It, like the fellowship, would like the myth put to rest."
"Most unsettling of all was the ease with which sharia advocates played the religion card, accusing Muslim opponents — and thousands of other objectors across Canada and a nervous world — of Islamophobia.
But the card's silencing power didn't work. Anyone clued in on the debate knew it turned on just two issues: Did the religious rights of a group (or at least one section thereof) supersede the equality rights of individual women in the group? And could the province legally remove an existing right from the small Hasidic Jewish community?"
"Though attention centred mainly on the sharia battle, the guardians of the beit din, or rabbinical court, were also and ever in the mix. Their powers of persuasion were clearly evident in the report released last December, after months of consultation, by former New Democrat attorney-general Marion Boyd. Hasidic Jews had been using the arbitration act for 13 years without problems, she was told. Why should they forfeit it because of the sharia brouhaha?
It now emerges, however, that this too was a distortion. Only a handful of domestic cases ever come before the local beit din which generally deals with business disputes; two last year, to be precise."
Posted by: johnb at September 17, 2005 10:17 AM
Reminds me of Julius Ceasar saying that he was "First among equals."
Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at September 17, 2005 8:48 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)