Active Users:195 Time:25/09/2023 06:50:08 AM
I now am registered at... Larisa - 28/04/2004 03:27:09 PM

Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, and NY Times...all because of you!

I don't necessarily think settling a civil dispute out of court is a bad thing. So much money is tied up in civil court cases that could be redirected.

However, there is something that was said by Ali that I found interesting.

"Muslim minorities living in non-Muslim countries like Canada are like wandering Bedouins," he wrote. "Although they are free to live according to the Divine Law to practice their faith unhindered in their homes" and mosques, he said, "they have practically no say in the making of the laws of the land and governmental institutions do not cater to their needs."

Don't the people have a vote on the making of laws (or at least the people they vote into office to make the laws) in Canada? Last time I checked, I thought that's how it worked.

I would be the most concerned for the impact this may have on women living under this law. It was stated this would be a voluntary participation thing, but I don't know. If Hogben and Hoodfar state that they are concerned with it, and they are both educated Muslim women, then that would be of concern to me.

That's the true harbinger of spring, not crocuses or swallows returning to Capistrano, but the sound of a bat on the ball ~ Bill Veeck

View/create new replies Sign up for a premium account to add posts to a list of favourites!
Sharia in Canada - 28/04/2004 02:51:39 PM 168 Views
Cute. *NM* - 28/04/2004 02:57:02 PM 7 Views
That's a rather puzzling response. *NM* - 28/04/2004 02:58:05 PM 5 Views
It's Snuggly legislation if I've ever seen it *NM* - 28/04/2004 03:01:34 PM 2 Views
I skimmed thorugh the article (reading it again now) but... - 28/04/2004 03:07:01 PM 18 Views
I now am registered at... - 28/04/2004 03:27:09 PM 15 Views
Didn't used to have to register at WaPost. - 28/04/2004 03:30:25 PM 7 Views
I guess the real test for those who would support the law - 28/04/2004 03:29:39 PM 20 Views
Good point. - 28/04/2004 03:32:33 PM 24 Views
Lots of stuff, Avi - 28/04/2004 03:40:12 PM 23 Views
I would argue... - 28/04/2004 04:05:41 PM 15 Views
Re: Lots of stuff, Avi - 28/04/2004 04:05:45 PM 12 Views
Yes, I know. - 28/04/2004 04:32:13 PM 15 Views
Re: Yes, I know. - 28/04/2004 04:40:58 PM 12 Views
- 28/04/2004 05:13:13 PM 17 Views
I don't read your replies. Ever. *NM* - 28/04/2004 06:16:08 PM 3 Views
*blink* *NM* - 28/04/2004 06:16:50 PM 4 Views
I didn't see that. *NM* - 28/04/2004 06:34:12 PM 2 Views
Re: Good point. - 28/04/2004 03:42:21 PM 11 Views
Well the article says... - 28/04/2004 03:33:02 PM 12 Views
That was my initial thought, too. *NM* - 28/04/2004 03:40:00 PM 2 Views
I don't support either. The law of the land is the law of the land. - 28/04/2004 04:23:53 PM 21 Views
Don't/Can't all individuals do that? *NM* - 28/04/2004 04:25:14 PM 5 Views
Re: I don't support either. The law of the land is the law of the land. - 29/04/2004 07:23:54 AM 10 Views
Very interesting and well said. *NM* - 29/04/2004 10:02:44 AM 2 Views
Sweet. So, I'll make a religion with no punishment for theft... - 29/04/2004 02:52:56 PM 6 Views
The law of the land is determined by social values, - 29/04/2004 04:11:55 PM 8 Views
This is wrong. - 28/04/2004 06:55:29 PM 14 Views
I agree. *NM* - 28/04/2004 11:30:23 PM 2 Views