Froggie, The Alchemist: a pleasure to have a rational discussion.

The Alchemist: I have no knowledge of the case you quote: a Moroccan lady who is being persecuted. I will say though that I am careful choosing web sources to support an argument. I looked at more than a dozen (all generally consistent in their claims) before choosing to quote the Malaysian Star. Considerations were:

* It was the most recent
* It was a report from a lecture by a Moroccan woman
* It occurred outside the country

Changing the law does not immediately stop newly illegal behaviour. After the British banned the Hindu practice of Suttee in the mid-19th century (i.e. burning a widown when her husband died) the practice intermittently continued. http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=11622

The real question is whether the rule of modern law is progressively stamping out medieval practices.

Froggie: interestingly, the new Moroccan law is not secular, contrary to your suggestion.

From "Can Islam Change" in 2004 at http://www.newstatesman.com/200409130016

QUOTE
Morocco has provided an essential lead. Its new Islamic family law, introduced in February, sweeps away centuries of bigotry and bias against women. It was produced with the full co-operation of religious scholars as well as the active participation of women...

At first, King Mohammed VI had to abandon plans for change because, protesters claimed, he was trying to impose secular law and western culture on Morocco. In spring 2001, however, he set up a commission, which included women and was given the specific task of coming up with fresh legislation based on the principles of Islam...

Every change in the law is justified - chapter and verse - from the Koran, and from the examples and traditions of the Prophet Muhammad. And every change acquired the consent of the religious scholars. Even the Islamist political organisations have welcomed the change...
END QUOTE

Australian law follows mainly Christian religions principles although we are nominally a secular society. You only have to look at the fuss from conservative Christians about contraception, abortion, homosexuality.

It is impossible to formulate laws without a value system - an idiology. Laws are there to control behaviours and relationships; and religious values/ idologies are there for the same purpose.

That much of Australian law is based upon a Westminster Christian value system is relavent to who makes the laws. In Australia it is the Government who formulates laws; predicated upon. 1. All people are equal, 2. All people are equally subject to one set of laws.

Religion is a synonym for law in an idiological context. For us to imagine that the Christian Church must not have a say in laws formed by Government is a nonsence. Does that mean only those with an atheistic idiology can formulate Australian Law. This would mean the Government is then involved in promoting an atheistic world view.

This is equally in violation of the Australian Constitution, as it promotes the values of an one idology - value system. There is no separation of Church from the State: but there is separation of the State from the Church. The State must not be involved in the Church. Even as the State must not be involved in the societies of Atheists or Agnostics.

Thanks MikeM, for your input. It is good to be able to participate in forums such as this and learn things, which otherwise one would not.

The idea that law can only derive from religion is false. There is a long tradition of Western Philosophy, starting with the Ancient Greeks (but also probably before that), which underpins our legal system. The word “ideology” also encompasses such things as “Nazism”, and “Communism”.

Religion incorporates many of the philosophical ideas, but adds to it a mystical, irrational layer.

It is true that man has always had a tendency towards religion.
Some anthropologists think it has an evolutionary benefit where if the religion is dominant it tends to aid the survival of the species by promoting social unity.
Unfortunately today it seems to cause a lot of division – “my God is the real one and yours isn’t”- so that now it has probably outlived its evolutionary usefulness.
I must admit that religion has had its benefits in the past.

I am certainly not against people practicing a religion if they feel they need it. It must be comforting for many to believe that there is a “divine” purpose to life.

It becomes destructive when religious people cannot tolerate other points of view, and wish to impose their views on the rest of us.
That is why I feel that religion should be kept out of the law making process, as far as possible. Naturally one cannot prevent some politicians having their own religious viewpoint, and that is fine, as long as the people that elect them know of this.

Froggie: I can and do tolerate other religious views as well as atheist's views. I do not impose my views on anyone - it's not my job. As I understand it God - the Real One or the Christian One - calls whom He will.
Having said that I will counter lies, distortions and falsehoods from Christian, pagan and unbelievers. By the way it is normally the "bright?" u/believers who mock religion and its followers.
Looking at Christianity - strange that freedoms, laws, art, music, sports, fair justice systems, 99.9% of all inventions, humanitarian aid etc has come from Christian nations. You could image that perhaps because of their religion they have been the recipients of a Divine Blessing eh? numbat

Although this isn't really relevant, I'll give you my insight into what I believe should happen to those terrorists who wish to enforce the utterly barbaric Sharia Law, on the rest of us.

After capturing them, we should amputate their arms & legs, turning them into just a torso. Then, we can watch them crawl around eating food we give them like the animals they are.

Remember these are people who believe that women are worth half the value of men, that homosexuals should be killed, and somehow, somehow, think they're way is superior.

After this humility, I'd start them on female hormones so that they start to become a woman. I'd give them L.S.D, and tell them we are going to stone them to death everyday so they know how the women in their socieities feel.

After they truly feel like a woman, as the hormones would no doubt do, I'd begin the process of, wait for it,.....turning them into ZIONISTS. It may take a while, but I'd get Bin Laden to go on tv, as the torso I've made him, and he can give speeches about the benefits of zionism, as a woman of course.

Then, after this, more L.S.D, and the death he deserves, and would get, probably can't be repeated in public.

Those sick misogynists who believe in Sharia should come out and admit it. We have Irfan defending it, and saying it's a misinterpretation what's happening in Afghanistan with that Christian, but he knows it is Sharia. He feels embarressed that he believes in barbarity.

So he should.

Another thing.

Irfan spends all his time telling us that what happens overseas, say, how Afghanistan wants to kill Christians, oh that's not Islam he says, spending his time telling us, worried that we will have a bad impression.

Irfan, by doing that you reveal to us that we are correct. If you truly were serious, you'd lecture the people committing the crime under misiniterpretation, but you Muslims never do.

You don't even say anything unless a westerner asks whats going on over there?

I find it funny that the Muslim leaders, like trad, who never shut up and are always chasing the media, hasn't said anything about this guy in Afghanistan.

What is worse is that when a journo asked a cleric in Kabul what he thought, he, and all the people on the street he asked (still think its a minority irfan?) they all said he should die. The cleric was such a smart ass, he knows how humanitarian the west is. He said, I know that the west will pressure for Rahman to be released. But he said, no matter, the people will kill him. He said that with a smile on his face, a Muslim cleric.

What sort of morals do you people have! Oh, thats right Irf, he's not Muslim hey, he's misinterpreted it so much he's mabye even a Zionist out to make Islam look bad!

Irfan, the moderates, and I've only ever seen one, The Dr. Tanveer Ahmed, are in the minority. People like you are ruining it for them.

Grow up, you know it's wrong to defend Sharia. You people are truly Nazi's Irf, although why you feel superior is beyond me.

Honestly, it's bizarre. The middle-east offers nothing but death & decay. God help you when we don't need oil anymore, you'll be where you deserve, where history intended, on the scrap heap with all the other totalitarian systems.