Young Dan,

The Judge who you identified by his sexual preference is actually an Anglican.

All,

I am surprised that Boazy missed starting a thread on this one. Perhaps he is still calming himself down enough to contribute after the excitement of reading this:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/religionreport/stories/2008/2360820.htm

Sorry Boazy but I do think you are a little overzealous sometimes with Islam.

Albeit in the context of not giving the issue sufficient thought to justify an opinion I agree with the general concern raised. I disagree with Col in that I think that religious courts dealing with secular matters in a mixed society is worse than aboriginal laws being available to aborigines in their own country. However I am open to the possibility there might be something in it.

I have read that a few years ago the British government stated that they would never allow Sharia law in Britain but Muslim tribunal courts started passing sharia judgments in August 2007. The 100 cases to date range from divorce and inheritance to neighbourhood disputes.

Likewise Australia's attorney-general Robert McClelland reportedly stated that "The Rudd government is not considering and will not consider the introduction of any part of Sharia law into the Australian legal system,". So perhaps we won't follow British footsteps.

All that said there seems to be a political and legal as well as religious components involved in Islam so it must be difficult for them when compelled to work with other legal systems so irrespective of whether or not it is the best thing we should empathise with them. Further radars should always be out when media do their thing. They love to incite conflict between different groups.

Dear Foxy

I understand why you want to take a break, but please return soon we need your calm, balance and reason.

Love

Hope you're back soon Foxy.

I agree with the concerns every one has expressed here. However, consider this:

The Australia court system is slow and EXPENSIVE. Frankly, the calibre of some of the judiciary leaves much to be desired.

There already exist in Australia various bits of legislation allowing for disputes to be settled by arbitration. The consent of both parties is required. There is some evidence to suggest that arbitration is becoming increasingly popular.

For all I know a group of sharia scholars could offer their services as arbitrators in Australia right now.

In the case of commercial disputes between EQUAL parties I see no problem here. If that is what the parties want why should we stop them?

The difficulty, as many have pointed out, is this.

Are the parties EQUAL?

Especially in cases involving DOMESTIC VIOLENCE and CHILD ABUSE I suggest they are not.

Aboriginal courts attached to Magistrates' courts are an abomination. Alternative dispute resolution for a should be at arms length from the regular judicial system which may have to review the decisions of alternative tribunals

For some years now, I have considered that Briton has capitulated to the ideoligies of multiculturalism, much to the detriment of their social structure. Now the British legal system is being undermined with the first introduction of sharia law. Still if that is the way the Poms want to go, that is their business, but do not be surprized to see further introductions of aspects of Sharia in future.

Could it happen in Aus, you bet it could. It is introduced by stealth just a bit at a time which is seen as innocurous. Our weak politicians allow it to happen.

Even now some of our laws are not upheld because of "cultutal considerations" while other alien cultural activities are subject to the full extent of the law. So some have an unstated immunity from the law and others are discriminated against.

It has been said that the cost of democracy, as little as we have, is eternal vigilance. Our law must remain absolute.

Huggggg for foxy :) hope my posts didn't depress u mate.. u mentioned my name in your depature one.. makes me feel a bit sad...

If you want something to be sure of.. let me offer this: (heb 12)

2Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. 3Consider him who endured such opposition from sinful men, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.

When He is our focus.. He is also our joy.. and our peace. May He be yours.

MJBP.. I didn't even know about that program..but it shows some interesting links..right?

When one understands the meaning of SHIRK.. and how this is regarded by the Muslim community (probably pretty much every Muslim would have firm views on that issue) you then realize why there will never be harmony or compatability between [Christian, Jew,(together)] and the Muslim community.
http://www.allaahuakbar.net/shirk/crime.htm

Shirk as Muslims understand it would be eliminated from the Islamic state.... that would have profound consequences for Christians and Jews.

Even though you (understandably) regard me as a bit overzealous...as would (and do) a lot of Christians.. I hope you can try to understand where I'm coming from in the bigger picture.

blessings to you. (and all)

I would love to see Catholics live according to their beliefs here in Australia, rather than imposing their views on others through our political system (of which they have been very successful so far). Unfortunately they like most religious people are intent on making Australia a Christian theocracy (in law), that answers to the Pope. We already have an ambassador to the Vatican, unprecedented before Rudd decided to install one in Australia. So who do you think will be passing information between the two states and holding policy discussions with the Vatican from now on? Our 'ambassador' of course. Religious people are a menace to free society and peace.