2006-08-26 18:48:12 · 7 answers · asked by shrrcy 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
way to go aussies
2006-08-26 19:42:25 · answer #1 · answered by acid tongue 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is true.
In March, 2006, Muslim leaders in a meeting with Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs Minister Peter McGauran announced that they want to set up a separate Islamic court in Australia to deal specifically with Islamic divorces.
Mr McGauran and Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock rejected the idea in April. Mr McGauran said, "The law in this country is secular. There's a clear separation between religion and the law and Australia's laws apply equally to all citizens, regardless of their religion,"
A spokeswoman for Mr Ruddock added: "It would not be appropriate for the Government to establish a separate religious court."
Australia's Prime Minister, John Howard, announced on Wednesday, August 23, that extremists would face a crackdown. Howard indicated that he supported spies monitoring the nation’s mosques.
Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, suggested that if clerics did not accept that Australia was a secular state and its laws were made by parliament, they could be asked to leave. Costello said on national television, “If you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you ...If you can’t agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country which practises it, perhaps, then, that’s a better option,” Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked move to the other country.
Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should “clear off”. “Basically, people who don’t want to be Australians, and they don’t want to live by Australian values and understand them, well then they can basically clear off,” he said.
This seems very clear. Australia will not tolerate Islamification!
The debate over Sharia law surfaced in Canada in 2003 when a Muslim group in Ontario proposed the arbitration of family disputes according to Islamic law. On May 26, 2005, the Quebec legislature passed a motion against allowing Sharia law to be used in the legal system.
It is not uncommon, therefore, that a country rules against changing its laws to cater to the Muslim community.
2006-08-26 21:11:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Honestly, if any religion would call for any illegal act, like having slaves, or torture... as punishments.... it should be simply TOTALLY FORBIDDEN around the world....
In 2004, a woman was STONED TO DEATH...decision taken by a Muslim Sharia law court... This was a mother of a 2 year old little girl...
Execution was done in NIGERIA....
How could this be admitted in any present civilization... Are we not all living in 2006 after CHRIST?
The planet YEAR is SET because of the event of CHRIST, why would anyone, or any country AGREE to TORTURE of the Muslims Sharia laws or any other similar?
You want your daughters or grand-daughters to become slaves, taken away from their basic human liberties?
The Muslims Sharia laws ARE totally ANTIGONIST of the HUMAN DIGNITY and LIBERTIES....
It should be FORBIDEN all around the world and CONDEMNED
by UNITED NATIONS as it only creates TORTURES and anti-human liberties, especially for women....
If any religion would claim the rights to be recongnize while alowing making rapes or slaves, would they have the RIGHT to BE free to act simply because they are covering themselves under a religious law? I certainly hope not...
No, thank you....
If Australia decided for the RIGHTS and PROTECTION of their people, they made the BEST possible decision...
I simply hope that UNITED NATIONS will also take action and condemned OFFICIALLY that HORRIBLE practice..., simply like
HUMAN SACRIFICE had to STOP as well in the past by CIVIL LAWS INFORCEMENT... This one has to STOP too...
Thank you Australia for protecting your people and others...
2006-08-26 19:27:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
who's Libs? Is she, like, meant to be an expert on Sharia regulation or something? Addendum: yet, yeah, i'm responsive to the cesspool of common human rights abuses it is the midsection East, and assorted different places spanning the globe. The Islamic international grow to be the top of enlightened and state-of-the-paintings way of existence for hundreds of years... until eventually with regard to the turn of the 2d Millennium. it is while the non secular fundamentalists took over and plunged the completed center East right into a gloomy age of medical lack of expertise and social conservatism that has lasted one thousand years. in assessment to eu society for the duration of the Enlightenment, which prospered as a effect of liberation from Church authority, the 1st gentle of recent technology, and the consequent upward thrust and adoption of secular, liberal Western values, the cultures of the midsection jap international locations, regrettably, have yet to claw their way out of the pit.
2016-09-30 22:37:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh how funny. If the Australians don't like Sharia law, they shouldn't have helped the US/UK turn Iraq into a theocracy, which now has Sharia law the top law of the land.
2006-08-27 03:25:33 · answer #5 · answered by American Spirit 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
True
what is the world coming too?
2006-08-26 18:55:04 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
They should be so lucky.
2006-08-26 18:50:57 · answer #7 · answered by composertype 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋