Brussels Sharia?

[lennygoran]

A friend sent me an email with this link--can this truly be the case?

http://www.cbn.com/tv/1509282970001

Regards, Len

[John F]

"Shariah4Belgium is a small group that a lot of people don't take seriously." A minority of a minority can certainly make trouble - we've seen that here with the Tea Party-aligned Republicans in the House - but to suggest that sharia law might actually become the law of Belgium, let alone of all the world as the group's leader says he expects, would be way over the top.

[lennygoran]

but to suggest that sharia law might actually become the law of Belgium, let alone of all the world as the group's leader says he expects, would be way over the top.

Hope you're right--otoh I'm kind of glad we saw Brussels--also Antwerp which got mentioned-- when we did! Regards, Len

[Tarantella]

I'm not convinced by JohnF's argument.

We were in Brussels in 2011, after having first visited there in 2009. The streets were absolutely filthy and we commented on this at our hotel. Vagrants lined the streets. The receptionist there said others had said the same thing. The underground system? Honestly, we thought we were in central Africa!! The local people we spoke to in Brussels said a great many people are moving out of the city. Antwerp and Ghent are both beautiful cities but I would never set foot in Brussels ever again. There was a significant decrease in amenity from 2009 to 2011.

When you change the face of your nation and your culture in one mighty swoop there are bound to be ructions and consequences. We learned about this in a museum in Berlin, which documented social unrest centuries ago when different tribes moved into Berlin.

I always like to draw this analogy, which I've constructed myself:

When the First Fleet arrived in Australia in the late 18th century a group of aboriginal tribesmen noted the tall ships and sails coming into shore. All of them defensively raised their spears. One very wise, pacifist, member of the tribe walked up to the group and said, "put down your weapons: they mean no harm; let them come".

[John F]

Oh, I wasn't saying that a change in a country's demographics will have no effect on its daily life. We all know better than that. This thread is specifically about the chances of Belgium's entire legal system being changed from the ground up, just because a small radical group within a minority wants it. Surely this isn't going to happen.

[Tarantella]

I wish I could be more sanguine, to be honest.

In this country we've seen a handful of 'human rights activists' overturn the wishes of the government and the electorate in going to the High Court to overturn processes and policies put in place to deal with illegal immigration. I think this is actually undemocratic, when Courts dictate social policy and become social engineers. So, government by a vocal and powerful minority. Surely you've experienced this in your own country!! We need to be very vigilant indeed, as Voltaire suggested.

To draw a little further on the aboriginal analogy I used earlier, those tribal elders in my allegory might also have said to the more militant spear-carriers, "Look, they've only got two boats, for heaven's sake, so stop panicking...they'll never survive here because they don't know how to catch food"!!

The more things change the more they stay the same.

[John F]

People here complain that the courts get above themselves and undo laws or remake them, and that does sometimes happen. But there's no chance at all that America's religious fundamentalists, who are more numerous and more politically influential here than Shariah4Belgium apparently is over there, can convert the United States into a theocracy in which their brand of Christianity becomes the law of the land. Which would be a less radical change than imposing sharia law on Belgium.

If you read the Wikipedia article on Sharia4Belgium, I think you'll agree that it's extremely unlikely that they will have their way. For one thing, they denounce democracy and aren't into political action at all. For another, their leader is constantly in trouble with the (Belgian) law, with four criminal convictions in the last decade or so. Maybe they expect Allah to transform Belgium for them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia4Belgium

[Tarantella]

I hear what you're saying, but I also think apathy is a terrible blight on democracies in the West. What proportion of your own people vote in a general election, just as one example.

I submit that we are living in the era of what I call "megaphone democracy". The louder you talk the more you get!!

I agree with Voltaire: "The price of Liberty is ETERNAL VIGILANCE".

[John F]

Well, in my country it's legal not to vote. Even so, about 127,000,000 people voted here in 2012; if a larger number have voted in any election anywhere in the world in which their votes truly determined the outcome, I don't know where that would be. As far as I know, there's no reason to believe that the results would have been different if every last eligible voter had been been penalized if they didn't vote. Indeed, given the quality of some of those they elected, it might have been better if more had stayed home.

Anyway, we've come a long distance from what this thread was originally about. I'm sure the people of Belgium have things they worry about, though I can't say I know much about what they are. But the prospect of being involuntarily subjected to sharia law must be near the bottom of their list, if it's on the list at all.

[Tarantella]

Even so, about 127,000,000 people voted here in 2012; if a larger number have voted in any election anywhere in the world in which their votes truly determined the outcome, I don't know where that would be.

India

[lennygoran]

Vagrants lined the streets. The receptionist there said others had said the same thing. The underground system? Honestly, we thought we were in central Africa!! The local people we spoke to in Brussels said a great many people are moving out of the city. Antwerp and Ghent are both beautiful cities but I would never set foot in Brussels ever again.

Sue we were in all 3 of these cities maybe 5 or 6 years ago--we loved them all and glad we visited when we did! Regards, Len

[jbuck919]

I agree with Voltaire: "The price of Liberty is ETERNAL VIGILANCE".

Voltaire never said any such thing, nor is he the one to whom the saying is usually attributed. That would be Thomas Jefferson, who also did not say that. In fact, no one famous ever said it.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_said_eter ... of_freedom

In any event, in the United States at least, it is not liberty that is in danger from lack of vigilance. In fact, a sometimes perverted notion of liberty is often invoked by the people who present the greatest danger to the general well-being of a modern society. It is rather shared prosperity based on a sense of fairness and decency that requires vigilance in the sense of being prepared actively to fight back at one's own inconvenience. Sorry if that does not make for a pithy saying.

[Tarantella]

I agree with Voltaire: "The price of Liberty is ETERNAL VIGILANCE".

Voltaire never said any such thing, nor is he the one to whom the saying is usually attributed. That would be Thomas Jefferson, who also did not say that. In fact, no one famous ever said it.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_said_eter ... of_freedom

In any event, in the United States at least, it is not liberty that is in danger from lack of vigilance. In fact, a sometimes perverted notion of liberty is often invoked by the people who present the greatest danger to the general well-being of a modern society. It is rather shared prosperity based on a sense of fairness and decency that requires vigilance in the sense of being prepared actively to fight back at one's own inconvenience. Sorry if that does not make for a pithy saying.

Well, it must have come from The Apocrypha! All the same, it's a decent philosophy in my book.

Sharia Law and loss of liberty go hand in hand, for me, principally because this is tied to fundamentalism. And I think you'll find there's a direct nexus between poverty and loss of liberty: there's nothing quite like an economic straightjacket to keep people oppressed and disenfranchised. And when you want to distract this somewhat amorphous group you provide them with "bread and circuses". Sound familiar?

[Tarantella]

I agree with Voltaire: "The price of Liberty is ETERNAL VIGILANCE".

Voltaire never said any such thing, nor is he the one to whom the saying is usually attributed. That would be Thomas Jefferson, who also did not say that. In fact, no one famous ever said it.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_said_eter ... of_freedom

In any event, in the United States at least, it is not liberty that is in danger from lack of vigilance. In fact, a sometimes perverted notion of liberty is often invoked by the people who present the greatest danger to the general well-being of a modern society. It is rather shared prosperity based on a sense of fairness and decency that requires vigilance in the sense of being prepared actively to fight back at one's own inconvenience. Sorry if that does not make for a pithy saying.

Well, it must have come from The Apocrypha! All the same, it's a decent philosophy in my book.

Sharia Law and loss of liberty go hand in hand, for me, principally because this is tied to fundamentalism. I don't quite know what you mean by "fight back at one's own inconvenience". Are you suggesting the world is need of more altruists? If so, I suggest there are neither more nor less altruists than there ever were, or are ever likely to be.

I think the answer is for people to take to the streets. That's a sure way of getting the attention of your government.

[jbuck919]

I don't quite know what you mean by "fight back at one's own inconvenience".

Whoever said that about liberty (and he was at the time undoubtedly right, and may still be) did not mean that people who disliked what was happening that might affect their own well-being could settle for complaining over the fence to the neighbor.

[John F]

Even so, about 127,000,000 people voted here in 2012; if a larger number have voted in any election anywhere in the world in which their votes truly determined the outcome, I don't know where that would be.

India

Right you are! That's what comes of writing off the top of my head. Incidentally, India's voter turnout was about 60% in the last general elections, similar to the American voter turnout of 62% in 2008 and 57% in 2012.

[absinthe]

A friend sent me an email with this link--can this truly be the case?

http://www.cbn.com/tv/1509282970001

Regards, Len

Same thing in the UK. Particularly Londistan. The cancer spreads. Look up "M.A.C Sharia"

http://www.demotix.com/news/772325/musl ... dia-772277

[Tarantella]

And people (rather naively) wonder why there's a resurgence of the Far Right. It isn't rocket science!!

[lennygoran]

And people (rather naively) wonder why there's a resurgence of the Far Right. It isn't rocket science!!

Sue these extreme religions are just the worst--guess you can see why I'm an agnostic and very anti-religion. Regards, Len

[Tarantella]

I did always think you were into (loaves and) fishes, though!!! One can become so easily hooked on the fish angle(r) but I want to scale down my metaphor lest this message doesn't become tangled in a net of misunderstanding. Suffice it to say, those extremists who advocate Sharia are somewhat down the evolutionary scale (cough) and we'll never take their bait and fall for the Fundamentalist line!!

[lennygoran]

I did always think you were into (loaves and) fishes, though!!! One can become so easily hooked on the fish angle(r) but I want to scale down my metaphor lest this message doesn't become tangled in a net of misunderstanding. Suffice it to say, those extremists who advocate Sharia are somewhat down the evolutionary scale (cough) and we'll never take their bait and fall for the Fundamentalist line!!

Sue not sure I understand everything in your message but you definitely have HOOKED me! Regards, Len

[absinthe]

And people (rather naively) wonder why there's a resurgence of the Far Right. It isn't rocket science!!

Were you to follow the news in the UK, you'd have noted that the indigenous, white-ish population of London is now below 50%. Not all are muslim, of course, but they do have a subversive agenda and are winning the right to be a privileged community. (A topical example is their women's insistence on being allowed to wear burkas. (It's a long discussion but basically they want burkas allowable in all public places, notwithstanding crash-helmets, ski-masks and hoddies being banned from banks, supermarkets, pubs etc. You might also be aware that the British welfare system allows muslims to import up to 4 wives who can go straight onto benefits...the kind of thing that raises hackles all right. Nice to think my homeland tangentially supports bigamy!)

They have achieved a partial aim in getting their people in parliament and see this as a foot in the door.

The government, poor old Call-me-Dave Cameron and motley incompetent crew, are perceived to favour this community. Every effort is to made to denigrate the English Defence League, meanwhile the "Unite Against Fascism" group and the proliferation of muslim councils and M.A.C come in for no such harassment. But as long as protests are suppressed, yes, nationalism will loom. There are increasing rumblings about severe unpleasantness on the streets. It'll come.

(reminding myself to search for my white tunic with the red cross on the front...!)

[Tarantella]

No need for the mea culpa (looking for the 'white tunic'), as your concerns are perfectly legitimate. We are talking about groups who suppress women, just for starters. Frankly, I'm suspicious of any very noisy and volatile minority group.

Everything you've said has been deeply concerning to my husband and myself for a long time and, honestly, this is why I won't ever set foot in the UK. Don't you think, though, that whatever government in power in the UK it is likely to pander to political correctness and social engineering and other such progressivist agendas? It isn't so long ago that Blair was in power and I can recall Britain was heading in this direction with the accelerator to the floor. The politburo rhetoric of "multi-culturalism", "human rights" and 'entitlement' is what we see here in Australia all the time. Only recently our newly-elected Immigration Minister has instructed public servants to refer to "asylum seekers" as "illegal immigrants" because, like us, he's tired of politburo propaganda - especially when a decent percentage of these seeking so-called "asylum" have relatives in Australia who have funded their illegal passage (where are their papers???!!) and they are seeking economic benefits and a better life. Irony: the newer arrivals in this country are protesting the loudest!! This they have done through the ballot box because they certainly would not have DARED express an opinion about it publicly.

The storm-troopers of the Left over here are in paroxysms of rage because our Minister has dared to suggest these people aren't characters out of "Pollyanna" whom we should all feel "glad" about. But, honestly, the proverbial horse has bolted and, though we are not yet in the same situation as the UK, we are unlikely to learn any lessons from the UK or Europe - and we certainly WILL NOT be "allowed" to express these. I laugh when I think we consider ourselves a "democracy": no, we are dictated to by minority groups just as you are in the UK!! There's a backlash underway here in Australia and the 'cafe latte set' (inner urban chattering classes) demonize shock-jocks and their callers, not actually intelligent enough (or interested in their views - 'the great unwashed') to realize that if ordinary people feel disenfranchised they're going to support an articulate person who shares their beliefs. Sound familiar?

Refer to my earlier allegory in this thread about the First Fleet arriving in Australia. I published this as a letter in a major Australian newspaper some years ago, when I was teaching, and the kids said their parents had read it and agreed!!! We've had the ludicrous situation in this country where any dissent has resulted in name-calling: "racist", "xenophobe"... insults which directly avoid actually HAVING THE DISCUSSION. Yep, politiburo propaganda.

[Agnes Selby]

Well said, Tarantella, I fully agree.

[Mark Harwood]

Me too.
The argument that Shari'a law will not become part of Belgian or other European national laws misses a big point. There are already Shari'a courts operating openly here.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... ourts.html

[John F]

That's not a court, though the author favors us with her impression that it looks like a court. It's a council, as its name says. It's apparently outside the legal system of the U.K. and has no secular authority but merely provides religion-based counselling to those who voluntarily seek it, as when a Catholic woman asks her priest for guidance in marital or other matters, except that she wouldn't have the option of divorce as Muslims do. Let's not muddy the waters.

[Mark Harwood]

Good idea, we'll call it a council, nothing sinister here then.

[jbuck919]

Good idea, we'll call it a council, nothing sinister here then.

To expand on John F's comparison, the Catholic Church maintains a full-blown system of marriage courts of canon law to decide annulments, with no civil effect in any country. (It used to be called the Holy Roman Rota, though I don't know what it is called now.) Perfectly unthreatening to the operation of a secular society. You know, just like staying out of everybody else's business and not trying to impose religious doctrine when it comes to abortion and gay marriage.

[John F]

Good idea, we'll call it a council, nothing sinister here then.

We should call it a council because that's what it is.

[Mark Harwood]

OK

[Modernistfan]

Orthodox Jews have an analogous system, known as the Bet Din. Again, these have no civil effect. Their authority is strictly voluntary. If an Orthodox Jewish woman cannot convince the Bet Din to force her husband to give her a divorce, known as a "get," if she wishes, she is perfectly free to go to the civil divorce court and get her marriage dissolved. Although such a woman cannot be remarried in an Orthodox ceremony, she is perfectly free to be remarried by a rabbi of one of the more liberal denominations (Reform or Reconstructionist) or, of course, in a secular civil ceremony. This exists in at least the United States, the United Kingdom, and South Africa, and possibly in other places with large Jewish communities.

[lennygoran]

Orthodox Jews have an analogous system, known as the Bet Din.

I think the Amish too have a system--how analogous it is I couldn't say?

"The Ordnung is an oral set of rules Amish people follow. It varies from community to community, with some Ordnungs being stricter than others. Major rules generally are expected to be followed by all Amish communities, although even those vary to some degree. The major rules outline the basics of the faith and help define what it is to be Amish. Major rules cover religious practices, marriage, raising of children, travel guidelines, and dress codes.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_4571219_what- ... z2kWh6UQsr"

Regards, Len

[jbuck919]

Orthodox Jews have an analogous system, known as the Bet Din.

I think the Amish too have a system--how analogous it is I couldn't say?

Well, there is this. Does it raise a possible comparison with the Catholic Church, which tried to keep priest sex abusers out of the secular justice system by dealing with them in-house for decades? You tell me.


The New York Times

February 8, 2013
Amish Sect Leader Sentenced to 15 Years in Hair-Cutting Attacks
By TRIP GABRIEL

The leader of a dissident Amish sect was sentenced on Friday to 15 years in prison for a series of bizarre beard- and hair-cutting attacks on other Ohio Amish that drew national attention.

Samuel Mullet Sr., 67, the leader, was sentenced in Federal District Court in Cleveland for coordinating assaults that prosecutors argued were motivated by religious intolerance. Fifteen of his followers, including six women, were given lesser sentences, ranging from one year and one day to seven years.

The breakaway Amish were convicted last year of multiple counts of conspiracy and hate crimes, which carry harsher punishment than simple assault.

Prosecutors had asked for a life sentence for Mr. Mullet. Defense lawyers claimed the government was blowing out of proportion personal vendettas that Mr. Mullet harbored against former followers and other critics, and thus did not deserve a long sentence.

But in passing sentence Judge Dan Aaron Polster told Mr. Mullet and his co-defendants that they were being punished for depriving victims of a constitutional right, religious freedom, whose fruits they enjoyed themselves as Amish through exemptions from jury service and other laws.

“Each of you has received the benefits of that First Amendment,” Judge Polster said.

The series of attacks in 2011 spread fear through Amish communities in eastern Ohio. Followers of Mr. Mullet broke into homes, restrained men and women, and forcibly sheared their victims, sometimes with tools used to clip horse manes.

For Amish, descendants of 18th-century German-speaking immigrants, long beards and flowing women’s hair represent religious devotion and cultural identity.

Prosecutors argued that because of the religious symbolism of the attacks, they were hate crimes. Mr. Mullet was convicted of coordinating four attacks on a total of eight victims, though by all accounts he did not directly participate.

Speaking in court Friday before the sentencing, his ankles in chains and a white beard reaching his chest, Mr. Mullet said he was being labeled a cult leader, which he denied. He asked to be given the punishment for all the defendants, who included four married couples. “Let these moms and dads go home to their families, raise their children, I’ll take the punishment for everybody,” Mr. Mullet said, according to WKYC-TV in Cleveland.

Although Mr. Mullet is an Amish bishop, his strict interpretation of his faith and an abrasive personality had caused individuals to leave his fold and other Amish leaders to isolate him. He presided over a settlement of about 18 families reached by a dirt track near the town of Bergholz.

The trial of the 16 defendants, including three of Mr. Mullet’s sons, unveiled a tiny sect in thrall to its leader, who in the name of purity abolished Sunday church services and punished men for ogling non-Amish women by confining them to chicken coops. Testimony also detailed how Mr. Mullet pressured married female followers to have sex with him, including a daughter-in-law.

Another defendant, Lester Miller, apologized before the sentencing to his parents, whom he and others, including his wife, Elizabeth Miller, had attacked. He asked the judge to spare his wife, “to put her sentence on me,” so she could care for their 11 children, according to WKYC-TV.

Many of the defendants also asked the judge to give them all or part of Mr. Mullet’s sentence and to lighten his burden.

Ms. Miller and four other women received the shortest sentence, a year and a day, and the sixth woman, Linda Schrock, was given two years.

Mr. Mullet’s lawyer, Edward G. Bryan, had argued that his client had not directly ordered the attacks and asked for a short sentence. All the defendants have two weeks to file appeals.

In handing Mr. Mullet 15 years, Judge Polster said he oversaw his flock with “an iron hand” and that he was “a danger to the community.”

Steven M. Dettelbach, the United States attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, argued in a sentencing memo that Mr. Mullet was responsible for the crimes because he preached to followers that “Amish hypocrites” should be punished.

Mr. Dettelbach said in an interview that he was satisfied that all of the defendants were given prison time.

“In court today, sitting there and watching defendant after defendant after defendant stand and say they would yet again sacrifice years of their lives so Mr. Mullet would not have to be punished, proved the court judge was absolutely right in characterizing Mr. Mullet’s control over these people,” Mr. Dettelbach said. “Whether or not you call that a cult is none of my business.”

Throughout the ordeal, Mr. Mullet’s community of about 135 has stood by him, vowing to continue living in isolation from other Amish, whom they condemn for drinking, smoking and playing musical instruments.