Dreadfully, incoming British Prime Minister Theresa May has been continuing to defend her position on Sharia Law. Imagine: she is worried about Muslim women’s rights, but she defends Sharia law. Sharia law is opposed to women’s rights, period, despite the propaganda that stealth jihadists continue to spew as they erode our democratic institutions.
Ontario, Canada faced a similar situation 12 years ago that should be a model and example for Westerners; the Ontario Premier at the time finally declared after a long battle: “One law for all Ontarians.”
In 2004, Toronto lawyer Syed Mumtaz Ali announced that the “Islamic Institute of Civil Justice” would shortly begin arbitrating family matters on the basis of sharia law, accompanied by his verbal warning that “to be a good Muslim, all Muslims must use these sharia courts”. A heated controversy began that pitted Muslims against each other: those for and those against Sharia law in Ontario, which would set a precedent for Canada.
Many women’s groups, including Muslim groups, opposed Sharia, and the Muslim Canadian Congress argued that Sharia does not view women as equals and therefore cannot provide equal justice to all parties in a dispute, especially on issues of divorce, child custody and division of property.
In a 2004, the Canadian national newspaper, the Globe and Mail, reported on two Muslim immigrant women, Homa Arjomand and Alia Hogben, who were featured where they lobbied hard for Ontario to change its arbitration law. Arjomand even launched a petition, “International Campaign Against Sharia Courts in Canada.”
Alia Hogben discusses the difference in the Muslim population today from when her family first came to Canada in 1946 when the Muslim population was very small. She explains that as the Muslim population grew dramatically, many Muslims began living in “enclaves” and remained isolated from the rest of Canadian society.
Hogben warned that “many of the new arrivals have brought with them a far more rigid version of Islam” and she said that “a lot of money is being poured into North America from very traditional groups from Saudi Arabia and Libya.”
The article also points out a critical fact that Theresa May fails to understand in her ignorant quest to “protect” the so-called rights of Muslim women:
“Immigrant women are among the most vulnerable people in Canada. Many don’t speak English, are poorly educated, and are isolated from the broader culture. They may live here for decades without learning the language, and stay utterly dependent on their families. They have no idea of their rights under Canadian law.
The arbitrators can be imams, Muslim elders or lawyers. In theory, their decisions aren’t supposed to conflict with Canadian civil law. But because there is no third-party oversight, and no duty to report decisions, no outsider will ever know if they do. These decisions can be appealed to the regular courts. But for Muslim women, the pressures to abide by the precepts of sharia are overwhelming. To reject sharia is, quite simply, to be a bad Muslim.”
Dalton McGuinty, who was Ontario Premier at the time, finally declared:
“There will be no sharia law in Ontario. There will be no religious arbitration in Ontario. There will be one law for all Ontarians.”
Since 1991, arbitration decisions were being made according to religious laws and were enforceable in Ontario courts, but the Premier rescinded the Arbitration Act that settled disputes related to commerce, religion and civil issues.
Let’s hope that there will be enough opposition to Theresa May’s defense of Sharia for her to conclude sensibly that there will be one law for all Brits, as this misguided leader vows to unite Britain. She sure is off to a bad start.
Robert Spencer also wrote about why Theresa May is a disaster for Britain.
“Theresa May forced to defend views on Sharia Law as she prepares to enter No 10”, by Zoie O’Brien, UK Express, July 12, 2016:
INCOMING Prime Minister Theresa May has defended her position on Sharia Law on the eve of taking over as the leader of the Conservative party.
May sparked controversy when she spoke out in support of the Islamic courts operating in the country, telling the nation they could “benefit a great deal” from Sharia teachings.
The future Tory leader made the comments as she ordered a review into the system which are accused of ordering women to stay with abusive partners.
Mrs May, said she is worried the courts are “misused” and “exploited” to discriminate against Muslim women, but defended their place in society.
Sharia is Islam’s legal system derived from both the Koran, Islam’s central text, and fatwas – the rulings of Islamic scholars.
There are thought to be around 100 Sharia Law courts operating throughout the UK, dispensing Islamic justice outside the remit of our own legal system.
Judgements handed down by the informal courts have no legal basis, but there are fears their presence means many Muslim women are not getting access to the justice they deserve.
Now, before she takes over Number 10, May has been forced to restate her position on Sharia Law.
The Home Secretary, when asked by Buzzfeed’s Emily Ashton about a group which says she supports Sharia in the UK, said she is “concerned” that the ‘law’ is operating in a way that could be counter to “our single rule of law”.
She said: “I’ve been the politician who’s been willing to say no.
“I’m concerned that Sharia law is operating in a way that could discriminate against women and that could be counter to what is our single rule of law that we have in the UK.
“So there is one rule of law in the UK – that’s why I’ve set up the review that I have, chaired by Professor Mona Siddiqui, and that will be looking at the operation of Sharia law and whether it is actually operating to discriminate against women and counter to our overall rule of law.”
Sharia councils aim to help resolve family, financial and commercial problems in accordance with Sharia principles.
The majority of cases involve women wanting to end their Islamic marriage.
The review, which will last up to 18 months, will investigate whether there are instances where British law is being broken in the name of Sharia…….

Champ says
Theresa May is one Dangerous Dhimmi!
Champ says
**NO TO EVIL SHARIA LAW**
Karen says
Amen.
Jack Holan says
If Robert Spenser & Pamela Geller cannot Gain entry into the UK perhaps you and Raymond Ibrahim can and educate Ms May through some Medium or or Speech. She will need to practice walking behind her male escort!
John spielman says
And a black garbage bag worn over her head
Jack Holan says
You’re on tract John I missed that part. 100% Corrrect
Angemon says
NO! GADDAFI’S LIBYA DINDU NUFFIN! IT WAS A SECULAR WONDERLAND WHERE NOTHING WRONG EVER HAPPENED AND EVERYONE, REGARDLESS OF THEIR FAITH, LOVED AND RESPECTED ONE ANOTHER, AND HELD HANDS AND SANG KUMBAYA AND ATE BAZIN WITH A CHILD’S INNOCENT SMILE UNTIL THE BIG, MEANIE U.S. CAME ALONG!!! EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT!!! /sarc. off
gravenimage says
Ha ha
john says
I love a good snicker … Thanks lol
berserker says
Sharia May is also in favor of the ECHR which is loved by the Islamofascists. She is going to be an utter disaster. My only hope is that the fear of losing the next election to UKIP might force her to come to her senses.
Jack Holan says
She must lead by example so Ms May must have her FGM before all others.
Kathy Brown, Esq. says
Publicly. Tho’ that IS a revolting visual…
Also: May must be seen to SMILE throughout her entire clitoridectomy. Only thus can she sufficiently placate her vast muslim base as to the thoroughness of her embrace of diversity.
Finally: Where are the videos of the rape, torture and murder of the two ‘muslim women’ who ‘lobbied hard’ against the sharia? I mean that’s long past due, yes?
Nigel GFF says
“So there is one rule of law in the UK – that’s why I’ve set up the review that I have, chaired by Professor Mona Siddiqui, and that will be looking at the operation of Sharia law and whether it is actually operating to discriminate against women and counter to our overall rule of law.”
I must be thick, but how can there be ‘one rule of law in the UK’ and a need to look at the operation of Sharia law? Ms. May (PM) must be unaware of this dichotomy, which suggests ill health – nothing else could explain this ‘stupidity’. I wish her well, until the next election, and trust her ‘lemming’ tendency doesn’t take us all with her, over the edge.
Michael Copeland says
Teresa May said the nation could “benefit a great deal” from Sharia teachings.
Daughter-murder, vigilante killings of apostates, slavery, amputations, genital mutilation, forced child marriage, wife-beating, no equality before the law, no freedom of conscience, no freedom of speech.
That alleged benefit is proving elusive.
http://www.libertygb.org.uk/news/your-easy-guide-sharia-law
Jack Holan says
I resort to sarcasm because I’m frustrated with a Leadership in the West that is at the very least dishonest and not meeting the minimum threshold for their Countryman ensuring they’re physical and economic protection guaranteeing them safe continuance of their belief system and way of life.
Someone ANYONE during the next Public appearance of Ms May should shout out and ask if she alone has read the Quran and Hadith from cover to cover? Has she sought contrary views from what she’s heard. How can she have any opinion without reading the Quran Hadith Sharia and look to see how it’s applied in Saudi Arabia and Iran. There should be massive education projects in England Canada and elsewhere. There should be relentless demonstrations. This is exactly what the Muslims are doing. We surely don’t want them to succeed
j_not_a says
Whenever you point out that muslims use their texts as motivation for jihad, the apologists very often make their lame comeback “but do you know or have you met any muslims, or have you ever talked to a muslim” like you will ever get a smidgen of truth from one of them; fortunately at least more people are starting to become aware of; taqiyya and what it means, People like May think all you have to do is go to one of the local mosk “outreach” nights and have some hummus and pita and shoot the sh@t with them and everything will be alright. She might be another Merkel in the making, an old childless dhimmi clueless and pandering to muslims hoping for their votes and to look good to the world, Blech.
JeffS says
Theresa said: “I’ve been the politician who’s been willing to say no.”
She must mean “no” to Robert and Pamela, but “yes” to everything Islam.
gravenimage says
Yup.
j_not_a says
Will she say “yes” to that pig Anjem Choudary and his ilk continuing to vomit unfettered their hate speech on the streets of the UK – we’ll see – my hunch is yes, she will.
mortimer says
42% of Muslims in Canada say that Islam is ‘irreconcilable’ with the West.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/193969
http://vancouversun.com/news/staff-blogs/most-canadians-believe-west-and-islam-irreconcileable-poll
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/04/42-of-muslims-in-canada-think-islam-and-west-irreconcilable
mortimer says
Further:
The polls, conducted by Leger Marketing, were published in the Vancouver Sun and found
63% of Protestants,
62% of Jews and
60% of Catholics felt Islam cannot coexist with Western culture.
Lizzy says
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2644058/Do-not-walk-dog-Muslims-not-like-dogs-Fury-poster-discovered-near-popular-London-park-warns-dog-walkers-stay-Islamic-areas.html
I believe T May will avoid disputing the above order to ban dogs from Bartlett park in her concern not to offend her precious muslims. It is a muslim area now.
Jack Holan says
Dogs are out,alcohol is out, per the the Ayatollah anything that is pleasurable not serious is out Therefore if you you elect to do sport and not study Quran death will visit you
somehistory says
Little girls sold to dirty old men for *marriage*…rape.
Young girls murdered for not wearing a scarf, for getting a job, for having a boyfriend.
Beheading those who *insult* the unholy book of the child raper and murderer.
Extortion for the moslim to live high without working.
Yeah, these things are really *one law* with the rest of humanity who puts a value on things not devoted to satan. All of islam’s *laws* are really lawlessness. They have no place in an orderly society.
This woman needs to see a psychiatrist and read a dictionary and some law books.
She needs to have a sit-down with Mr. Spencer, Mr. Ibrahim, Ms. Geller, or even just have a visit to the pages of this site. She has a lot to learn and a short time to learn it.
My guess is, she has become an enabler of the beast and she will not turn aside from her wrong course.
Kelly says
This is the only attitude that makes sense in any western country. No one should even consider separate courts or changing laws to do things the way they were done in the newcomers ‘ country.
The Pledge of Allegiance keeps running through my head.
I imagine Canada and UK have a similar pledge?
john says
No only the US has one
abad says
Muslima May might want to move to Syria if she wants to live under Sharia
citycat says
Well, I didn’t know that.
Sharia and the other Muslim law alone is like two bullies staging a scene of conflict, some for some against, maybe some onlooking infidels will agree with one of the sides.
Things are manifesting, dangerous times expanding.
Is she looking for her shining knight in white? There is no such animal in Islam except the shining white at death.
It is automatic that British law is broken in the name of Sharia.
You don’t need a weather man.
So is Thesesa May an ostrich?
This is very bad news. I don’t now how many people in England know about this.
Veritas says
Mother Theresa versus Mutti Merkel.
Hard to say which one will concede most to Sharia.
TheBuffster says
It seems to me that if Sharia law was compatible with British law that Muslims wouldn’t need their Sharia courts. Why would they?
And if the laws aren’t so compatible, then how about this? Muslims could go to regular British family law court, each side could put their case, and if the woman was happy to abide by the concessions she’d have to make under Sharia, such as letting her husband have custody of the children, she could make them there. But the court would tell her what her rights were under British law and assure her that if anyone tried to harm her for opting for British law, the courts would be on *her* side.
If she was *not* willing to make concessions to Sharia the British court would be right there as witness to that and to uphold her rights under the law. The British court would be right there to warn her husband that any retribution against his wife would bring him serious punishment. The law of the land, the equal rights of all members of British society, trumps religious law.
This would give the British court system an oversight of the rights of Muslim women that the law would not have if all family law decisions for Muslims go through Sharia courts. Women who were fearful of family intimidation or retaliation would have an opportunity to tell the court. They’d have a mandatory contact point with the legal system that they would not have where Sharia courts preside.
Donovan Nuera says
Was not Sec. May’s Borders UK immigration tracking department lacking in efficiency? Did not she admit last year that, despite billions of Pounds Sterling of taxpayer monies, that they can only “track” 20% of visitors passing through UK airports and shipping ports?
underbed cat says
Does Theresa May, new Prime Ministress even know what sharia law is? Reliance of the Traveler not printed in Britain, this is a disaster…they have borders but are stuck allow the brutal laws of sharia don’t these people( Theresa May) read or inquire what they are promoting.
Sharia allows for deception and brutality.
Dr, Gonzalo de Porras y Rodriguez says
it is clear, the first Western country that can be Muslim is the U.K.