Archbishop of Canterbury Calls For Use of Sharia Law in UK - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-09-2008, 03:14 AM   #16
Refugee
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,089
Local Time: 08:57 PM
...........
__________________

Sleep Over Jack is offline  
Old 02-09-2008, 08:47 AM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
vaz02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 7,447
Local Time: 07:57 PM
Religion should have no place in politics.
__________________

vaz02 is offline  
Old 02-09-2008, 03:12 PM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,655
Local Time: 03:57 PM
Already, in some parts of the UK, Muslim groups already use sharia law instead of the British law for justice.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...e_id=1770&ct=5
Pearl is offline  
Old 02-09-2008, 04:36 PM   #19
Refugee
 
Sue DeNym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Beautiful Pacific Northwest!
Posts: 1,608
Local Time: 11:57 AM
Archbishop denies asking for Islamic Law: http://www6.comcast.net/news/article...n.Shariah.Law/
Sue DeNym is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 07:55 AM   #20
New Yorker
 
gman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Highlands of Scotland
Posts: 2,570
Local Time: 07:57 PM
This is a law that doesent recognise women as equals.
It accepts public stonings for women who have been raped.
It allows limbs to be cut off as punishment.

Sharia law belongs in the middle ages and has no place ANYWHERE in todays world.
If muslims dont want to accept British Law, they should feel free to leave the UK!
gman is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 10:36 AM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by vaz02
Religion should have no place in politics.
This should be the answer, rather than appealing to selectively histrionic images of women being beaten and limbs being cut off.

Christianity should have no place in politics, just as Islam should have no place in politics. That's because, as this thread colorfully illustrates, religion is not guided by reason, logic, or tolerance, but by inflexible ideology that often comes before individual freedoms. Neither has a place in 21st century law.
melon is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 02:31 PM   #22
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,507
Local Time: 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
It seems that many and even most religions do not lead to sound, rational thinking.
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
That's because, as this thread colorfully illustrates, religion is not guided by reason, logic, or tolerance, but by inflexible ideology that often comes before individual freedoms.


Quote:
Originally posted by deep
As for this article, I have heard it in the news cycles today.
And I do not agree with the Archbishop. I do not believe governments should respect religious laws. (period)


Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Quote:
Originally posted by vaz02
Religion should have no place in politics.
This should be the answer, rather than appealing to selectively histrionic images of women being beaten and limbs being cut off.

Christianity should have no place in politics, just as Islam should have no place in politics. … Neither has a place in 21st century law.
should I question your judgement?
deep is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 03:27 PM   #23
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
should I question your judgement?
Maybe it wasn't too clear, but when I said that I was questioning "his" judgment, I was referring to the Archbishop of Canterbury, not you.

Hope I didn't create any misunderstandings.
melon is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 03:33 PM   #24
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 03:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
It seems that many and even most religions do not lead to sound, rational thinking.


If it weren't for the copious amounts of history that point to the exact opposite conclusion, I might agree with you.

Shortsightedness FTW.
Dalton is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 03:37 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dalton
If it weren't for the copious amounts of history that point to the exact opposite conclusion, I might agree with you.

Shortsightedness FTW.
Such a statement requires examples to support it.

I'd be interested in reading them.
melon is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 03:48 PM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 03:57 PM
You mean the easy ones like Kant and Kierkegaard?

Or I actually just read a book by the guy who was the head of the human genome project. I can't think of his name off the top of my head, but he was a Christian.

Look, I think that the rigidity of Fundamentalists of all sorts (even secular philosophies) is batshit crazy. But only someone with a VERY limited knowledge of history could say that religion has excluded reasonable discussion. The fact of the matter is that many of history's most important thinkers were men and women of faith.

If you dig but a little into history of faith (be it Islam or Christianity) you will find that we are in a particularly disturbing cycle of fundamentalism that is unfortunate, but no where near representative of the whole movement.
Dalton is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 03:49 PM   #27
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:57 PM
But isn't there a difference between men and women of faith thinking well, and men and women of faith using their faith as an argument?

I think that's where the difference is.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 03:53 PM   #28
Blue Crack Addict
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Little hand says it's time to rock and roll.
Posts: 15,147
Local Time: 03:57 PM
What do you mean by 'using their faith as an argument'?
Dalton is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 03:57 PM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dalton
You mean the easy ones like Kant and Kierkegaard?
They were philosophers, who just happened to be Christians. The same goes for Averroës.

The key difference here is that none of these ideas were stuck in the realm of "mythic speech," whereupon all questioning and criticism is henceforth forbidden. Religion, in contrast, demands adherence to ideas or beliefs that are either nonsensical, from a reason or logic POV, or requires supernatural explanations that cannot be empirically tested.

Quote:
Or I actually just read a book by the guy who was the head of the human genome project. I can't think of his name off the top of my head, but he was a Christian.
The Human Genome Project is a clear example of science, not religion. Again, the personal religious affiliation of the head of the project is irrelevant.

Quote:
Look, I think that the rigidity of Fundamentalists of all sorts (even secular philosophies) is batshit crazy. But only someone with a VERY limited knowledge of history could say that religion has excluded reasonable discussion. The fact of the matter is that many of history's most important thinkers were men and women of faith.

If you dig but a little into history of faith (be it Islam or Christianity) you will find that we are in a particularly disturbing cycle of fundamentalism that is unfortunate, but no where near representative of the whole movement.
I am completely and 100% okay with religion in the personal sphere, as long as no one is forced to partake and everyone is free to leave, if they fundamentally disagree.

But when it comes to the theoretical application of Mosaic or Sharia law in government? Hell no.
melon is offline  
Old 02-10-2008, 04:00 PM   #30
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dalton
What do you mean by 'using their faith as an argument'?
What I'm trying to say is that I think these people being faithful had nothing to do with the logic they brought. I think their religion didn't play a part in their influence.
__________________

phillyfan26 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com