Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #361  
Old 17.03.2016, 11:34
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 10,978
Groaned at 240 Times in 203 Posts
Thanked 23,051 Times in 9,789 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
It is essentially, no more than a glorified arbitration service, with no actual power. People love to pretend it is an entirely different system of law, but its actually pretty bland. The two parties come together, and some intermediaries try and find common ground which pleases everybody.
This is how I understand it.
Reply With Quote
  #362  
Old 17.03.2016, 12:02
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 9,965
Groaned at 336 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 14,534 Times in 7,468 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
If a bunch of people want to sit in a back room and play at being a tribunal, by all means let them. As long as they're all in it volunatrily and nobdy is being forced or coerced or bullied. If it contributes to peace in the community by de-escalating conflicts, all the better.
.
How do you asses that? It sounds good in theory maybe, but the family or community pressure can be very high. The analogy with a sports club membership is not so good, IMO. One can give up being part of a club any time, as an ultimate solution, not so easy from a family, community (if not impossible in most cases).
Why should 2 parallel law systems exist, even when one of them is applied only for minor cases, is hardly justifiable as I see it. There are neutral arbitration and moderation courts/institutions already.
Reply With Quote
  #363  
Old 17.03.2016, 12:45
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Ostschweiz
Posts: 8,275
Groaned at 403 Times in 304 Posts
Thanked 10,785 Times in 5,678 Posts
Urs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
Wrong. Sharia and Muslim Law are two different things. Sharia is more accurately defined as islamic jurisprudence.
Just a quick check brought up(source):
"In Modern Standard Arabic, fiqh has come to mean jurisprudence in general, be it Islamic or secular"
Reply With Quote
  #364  
Old 17.03.2016, 12:53
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 9,965
Groaned at 336 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 14,534 Times in 7,468 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
Just a quick check brought up(source):
"In Modern Standard Arabic, fiqh has come to mean jurisprudence in general, be it Islamic or secular"
According to your source figh is defined as Islamic jurisprudence.
Quote:
Fiqh (/fɪk/; Arabic: فقه‎ [fiqh]) is Islamic jurisprudence.[1] While Sharia is believed by Muslims to represent divine law as revealed in the Quran and the Sunnah (the teachings and practices of the Islamic prophet Muhammad), fiqh is the human understanding of the Sharia[2]—sharia expanded and developed by interpretation (ijtihad) of the Quran and Sunnah by Islamic jurists (Ulama)[2] and implemented by the rulings (Fatwa) of jurists on questions presented to them.
Fiqh deals with the observance of rituals, morals and social legislation in Islam. In the modern era there are four prominent schools (madh'hab) of fiqh within Sunni practice and two (or three) within Shi'a practice. A person trained in fiqh is known as a Faqih (plural Fuqaha).[3]
Reply With Quote
  #365  
Old 17.03.2016, 12:59
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 10,978
Groaned at 240 Times in 203 Posts
Thanked 23,051 Times in 9,789 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
Just a quick check brought up(source):
"In Modern Standard Arabic, fiqh has come to mean jurisprudence in general, be it Islamic or secular"
And so we come back to the original topic of this thread.

The Refugees asked the German ladies about fiqh and they were baffled when these thought this was sexual molestation
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #366  
Old 17.03.2016, 13:02
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 10,978
Groaned at 240 Times in 203 Posts
Thanked 23,051 Times in 9,789 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
How do you asses that? It sounds good in theory maybe, but the family or community pressure can be very high. The analogy with a sports club membership is not so good, IMO. One can give up being part of a club any time, as an ultimate solution, not so easy from a family, community (if not impossible in most cases).
Why should 2 parallel law systems exist, even when one of them is applied only for minor cases, is hardly justifiable as I see it. There are neutral arbitration and moderation courts/institutions already.
In traditional Catholic families it may still be an acceptable course to settle disputes by taking them before the local priest. In contrast to the courts, it doesn't cost anything, the discussion is confidential and thus you don't risk becoming the highlight of the next Fasnacht. Of course nothing that is said is binding and if you don't like it you still have recourse to the courts.

Why should an Islamic equivalent be less acceptable?
Reply With Quote
  #367  
Old 17.03.2016, 13:17
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,812
Groaned at 1,077 Times in 741 Posts
Thanked 18,289 Times in 7,112 Posts
Chuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond reputeChuff has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
In traditional Catholic families it may still be an acceptable course to settle disputes by taking them before the local priest. In contrast to the courts, it doesn't cost anything, the discussion is confidential and thus you don't risk becoming the highlight of the next Fasnacht. Of course nothing that is said is binding and if you don't like it you still have recourse to the courts.

Why should an Islamic equivalent be less acceptable?
Going to a priest for advice is not the same as Sharia Law/Court, which is far more formal and restrictive and much harder to naysay once a verdict has been issued and accepted.
Reply With Quote
  #368  
Old 17.03.2016, 13:36
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 9,965
Groaned at 336 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 14,534 Times in 7,468 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
In traditional Catholic families it may still be an acceptable course to settle disputes by taking them before the local priest. In contrast to the courts, it doesn't cost anything, the discussion is confidential and thus you don't risk becoming the highlight of the next Fasnacht. Of course nothing that is said is binding and if you don't like it you still have recourse to the courts.

Why should an Islamic equivalent be less acceptable?
I suppose you are talking about Catholic families living in very small and rural places, where going to marriage counselling sessions or to psychologist, in general, is hardly ever taken into consideration.
Reply With Quote
  #369  
Old 17.03.2016, 13:57
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
Going to a priest for advice is not the same as Sharia Law/Court, which is far more formal and restrictive and much harder to naysay once a verdict has been issued and accepted.

But it isn't. The term 'Sharia Court' has been bandied about by the press and has led people to believe exactly what you say; that's its a formal process with old men sitting up high passing judgement on lowly people, who have no choice but to follow the decisions made, usually with a sinister intent.


Its a real stretch to call it a 'court'. There's no victim, or accused, no evidence needs to be given, no special layout of proceedings...its just the ones who have the dispute sitting down in a neutral venue, usually a meeting room, and both giving their sides, and then 3-4 neutrals giving their opinion.


The truth is 'verdicts' aren't actually passed. A middle ground is suggested, that is acceptable to all parties and which satisfies the relevant jurisprudence. This is offered as a way to settle the dispute without it becoming bigger and getting worse. But in truth, this middle ground isn't binding in any way. That people give far more importance to these then they truly deserve is a mistake borne due to their lack of understanding of what they are. There is nothing stopping people from rejecting their suggestion and taking it through the formal legal system. People, including Muslims, believe their judgments are binding, even in law, when they are no such thing.


Sharia 'court' in action:





There's a box of Asda Smart Price tissues on the table - hardly a formal 'court'!

Last edited by J2488; 17.03.2016 at 14:11.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank J2488 for this useful post:
  #370  
Old 17.03.2016, 14:07
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
If you really believe that it means you have a peculiar understanding of "secular".

Secular:


denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis.


The verdicts/sentences are not based on the religion of the accuser/accused. Where practiced, It should, if applied correctly, apply equally to all, regardless of the individuals religion.
Reply With Quote
  #371  
Old 17.03.2016, 14:13
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 9,965
Groaned at 336 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 14,534 Times in 7,468 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
Secular:


denoting attitudes, activities, or other things that have no religious or spiritual basis.


The verdicts/sentences are not based on the religion of the accuser/accused. Where practiced, It should, if applied correctly, apply equally to all, regardless of the individuals religion.
You stated in a previous post that Sharia is a secular jurisprudence system.
Sharia has a religious basis, it does not matter how religious or not, or if of different religion those subjected to it are. It operates with concepts derived from religious books, its theoretical and philosophical basis is religious.
I think jurisdiction is the term you were looking for.
Reply With Quote
  #372  
Old 17.03.2016, 14:42
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
You stated in a previous post that Sharia is a secular jurisprudence system.
Sharia has a religious basis, it does not matter how religious or not, or if of different religion those subjected to it are. It operates with concepts derived from religious books, its theoretical and philosophical basis is religious.
I think jurisdiction is the term you were looking for.


No, I meant jurisprudence.


To explain, first you need to know that Sharia covers far more than just crime and punishment - it also covers things like politics, contracts, trade and regulation of trade, economics, hygiene, diet, prayer everyday etiquette and certain things that are unique to Muslims, such as fasting. This is why it isn't a system of law and punishment - it is actually far too broad for it to be so. Things which are far outside of the reach of the law, but which need to be regulated nonetheless.


Lets take economics - and in particular Riba, or the paying/receiving of interest. This is forbidden for Muslims, as you know. But, this does not mean that in a system that is sharia compliant, muslims are excused from paying interest and non-muslims are not - everyone is forbidden from paying or receiving interest. It makes no difference if the payer or receiver is muslim, that system cannot be sharia compliant if interest is being paid or received, by anyone.


Now, the actual forbidding of interest is not codified in Sharia - it is forbidden by the Koran. But Sharia is not determined solely on the Koran, it allows and encourage the use of debate, interpretation and precedent. Thus, it is not correct to say that Sharia itself is non-secular, since it depends on secular interpretation and debate to actually form opinions.


Jurisprudence is, literally, the theory and study of application of the reigning statute, not the statute itself. You cannot have jurisprudence without having a legal framework for it to apply to. Thus, Sharia is the name given to jurisprudence of Islamic law.


Virtually every legal system in the world has its origins in some sort of holy text - even most European countries were based on jurisprudence of biblical law. A religious text being used as one source of jurisprudence for a wider legal system, does not intrinsically make that legal system or its jurisprudence non-secular, since it does allow for entirely non-secular opinion to become the consensus.


The other thing to remember is that Sharia is heavily weighted on the concept of consensus. In other words, the jurisprudence for a particular statute can change depending on the general opinion of the day. Since the Koran is a static text (it does not change over time) and sharia is, by its very definition, a dynamic system of jurisprudence, over time, sharia will use more and more non-religious sources, and the importance of the Koran in sharia law will diminish naturally.

Last edited by J2488; 17.03.2016 at 14:57.
Reply With Quote
  #373  
Old 17.03.2016, 15:02
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

If the above post was too long for people to read, this is the difference between Islamic Law and Sharia.


For most Muslims, it is not possible to open a bank account that has no interest charges. However, having a bank account is a necessity for most Muslims in the modern world.


Those bank accounts are not considered compliant with Islamic law. But that doesn't stop Muslims holding them.
Reply With Quote
  #374  
Old 17.03.2016, 15:47
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 10,978
Groaned at 240 Times in 203 Posts
Thanked 23,051 Times in 9,789 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
If the above post was too long for people to read, this is the difference between Islamic Law and Sharia.


For most Muslims, it is not possible to open a bank account that has no interest charges. However, having a bank account is a necessity for most Muslims in the modern world.


Those bank accounts are not considered compliant with Islamic law. But that doesn't stop Muslims holding them.
Islamic teaching does allow for Muslims living in non Muslim countries to accept certain compromises when there is no alternative.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #375  
Old 17.03.2016, 16:13
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 9,965
Groaned at 336 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 14,534 Times in 7,468 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
Jurisprudence is, literally, the theory and study of application of the reigning statute, not the statute itself. You cannot have jurisprudence without having a legal framework for it to apply to. Thus, Sharia is the name given to jurisprudence of Islamic law.
.
I didnt dispute that, actually. According to jurisprudence definition and to your own arguments
Quote:
Jurisprudence is the science, study and theory of law. It includes principles behind law that make the law. Scholars of jurisprudence, also known as jurists or legal theorists (including legal philosophers and social theorists of law), hope to obtain a deeper understanding of the nature of law, of legal reasoning, legal systems and of legal institutions.
the principles behind Sharia are religious - Islamic law. It may have an increasing non-religious content due to modern debates, but that is not making it secular. That was disputed. Even the fact that it varies from place to place, or from court to court, having really strict interpretations of the Islamic law coexisting with modern ones makes it really difficult to asses how open to debates is, or how secular it is.
Anyhow, I dont see the necessity of two parallel judicial systems, that was my point.

Last edited by greenmount; 17.03.2016 at 17:24. Reason: add
Reply With Quote
  #376  
Old 17.03.2016, 17:34
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
I didnt dispute that, actually. According to jurisprudence definition and to your own arguments
the principles behind Sharia are religious - Islamic law. It may have an increasing non-religious content due to modern debates, but that is not making it secular. That was disputed. Even the fact that it varies from place to place, or from court to court, having really strict interpretations of the Islamic law coexisting with modern ones makes it really difficult to asses how open to debates is, or how secular it is.
Anyhow, I dont see the necessity of two parallel judicial systems, that was my point.

The bolded section could apply to any country that has ever used biblical law as a source for statutes. Or, every European country. There clearly is a scale of secularity, and different statutes simply fall on different points on this scale. Examples include restrictions on abortion, grounded on the fact that it is forbidden under biblical law.


Your point is misguided. There aren't two parallel judicial systems. The legal system of the land always overrides that of Islamic law - this is codified in Islamic law itself. To have two judicial systems would be contravening Islamic law in the first instance. Where reasonable, Muslims are required to find alternatives which satisfy both, but they are not required to subscribe exclusively to one or the other.


Thus, the concept of two parallel judicial systems is, i'm afraid, nonsense.


Example, If halal meat (both the slaughter and import of) was banned, muslims would basically become vegetarians. If this was not possible for an individual, for whatever reason, then Islamic law would allow for non-halal meat consumption. In practice, vegetarianism would be preferential, since it satisfies both Islamic law, and the law of the land. For those for whom meat consumption is unavoidable or necessary, they would be excused from this, since moving abroad for halal meat is clearly impractical for most.

Last edited by J2488; 17.03.2016 at 17:50.
Reply With Quote
  #377  
Old 17.03.2016, 17:40
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 9,965
Groaned at 336 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 14,534 Times in 7,468 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post

Example, If halal meat (both the slaughter and import of) was banned, muslims would basically become vegetarians. If this was not possible for an individual, for whatever reason, then Islamic law would allow for non-halal meat consumption. In practice, vegetarianism would be preferential, since it satisfies both Islamic law, and the law of the land. For those for whom meat consumption is unavoidable or necessary, they would be excused from this, since moving abroad for halal meat is clearly impractical for most.
And you need a Sharia court to tell you this? I am just asking...Sure, if a Sharia court is ruling over such issues, why not.
Reply With Quote
  #378  
Old 17.03.2016, 17:41
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
And you need a Sharia court to tell you this? I am just asking...

In this case, some people, who may feel that they can be exempted from the requirement to eat halal, might.


Believe it or not, not every Muslim is a scholar of Islamic Law.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank J2488 for this useful post:
  #379  
Old 17.03.2016, 17:46
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 982
Groaned at 249 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 2,158 Times in 997 Posts
J2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond reputeJ2488 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
And you need a Sharia court to tell you this? I am just asking...Sure, if a Sharia court is ruling over such issues, why not.




The bolded bit was added as an edit later - can you explain?
Reply With Quote
  #380  
Old 17.03.2016, 17:54
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 9,965
Groaned at 336 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 14,534 Times in 7,468 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: All about Muslims (in the wake of terrorist attacks in Europe)

Quote:
View Post
The bolded bit was added as an edit later - can you explain?
I think it is pretty clear. If people go to a Sharia court to sort out this sort of issues (minor or even non-issues IMO) I dont see any reason for which they should not.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will borders with CH be affected after terrorist attacks? McTAVGE Daily life 19 15.11.2015 18:14
The All Muslims are evil thread bigblue2 General off-topic 4 27.08.2010 15:46
Confused about coverage in rest of Europe on Swiss Health Insurance Wingnut Insurance 8 15.12.2008 09:20


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 18:36.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0