Turkish Tea House

[Targon]

Too much paradigm

 

[xenon54 out]

The same way you enforce English Civil Law, Common Law or any other Legal Paradigm in the world on Citizens of a Nation State where that Legal Paradigm has been Institutionalized !

Consider this : Either Islamic Jurisprudence is a Legal Paradigm or its not & if its not then there is no point arguing about its enforcement as a Legal Paradigm to begin with but if it is, as the very word Jurisprudence, betrays it to be then how is it different, purely from an Academic Point of View, in its nature & not its approach, as a Legal Paradigm than any other Legal Paradigm out there ? And if the Citizens of any country are subject to the Institutionalized Legal Paradigm in that country why does such a question not arise then & there ?

Intolerance on the other hand is something else & were you to permit me I could post some rather startling comparatives between Tunisia & a couple of countries two of which are Turkiye & Pakistan !

This is where the problem starts, any religious civil law cant be fair to a multi religious nation.

Either there will be a law for the whole nation which is not fair to other people from different religions or a part of a socieity will get another treatment for same crimes.
Booth is not fair.

 

[Armstrong]

This is where the problem starts, any religious civil law cant be fair to a multi religious nation.

Either there will be a law for the whole nation which is not fair to other people from different religions or a part of a socieity will get another treatment for same crimes.
Booth is not fair.

I dispute both of your two premises :

(a) a Religious Civil Law can't be fair to a Multi-Religious Nation !

I can't imagine how, purely from an Academic POV, a Religious Civil Law is any different than a purely Secular Civil Law when they are both Legal Paradigms ?

Secondly how would English Civil Law be any more fair or unfair to Non-Englishmen, Non-Europeans or even those advocating a different Legal Paradigm to be Institutionalized in England ?

Why is one fair while the other is not ?

(b) Different Religions will get Different Treatment for the same Crime !

Why would a Rapist get a different treatment for a crime depending on his/her Religion ? Why would an Arsonist ? A Murderer ? A thief etc.

And even if one were to get different treatments & if the premise is that different treatment isn't 'fair' than what of the instances of different treatment throughout any country's Legal Framework ?

Consider this : If men & women are equal why then do women get maternity leaves ? Equality should demand that her Biological Disposition should be ignored in favor of fairness in treatment between the two genders ! And yet we do that - Why ?

Why do we positively discriminate between different Ethnicities by granting Under-Developed Ethnic Groups Job/Academic Placement etc. Quotas ?

Why do we positively discriminate between Under-Developed Regions in terms of Government Expenditure ?

Why do we discriminate between Religions as well where certain Religious Groups are granted the right to wear certain religious symbols or attires (the Sikh Turban, the Orthodox Jew's Dress Code or the Muslim Headscarve) in line with their religious sensibilities ?

Because we recognize that men & women & people in general are Equal but Different i.e they are Equitable - Equal in Value but they have different needs & compulsions that should be respected & accommodated for that & only that is true fairness !

 

[Targon]

All we need is a fair law thats over religions and ethnicities, rest is not important.

 

[xenon54 out]

I dispute both of your two premises :

(a) a Religious Civil Law can't be fair to a Multi-Religious Nation !

I can't imagine how, purely from an Academic POV, a Religious Civil Law is any different than a purely Secular Civil Law when they are both Legal Paradigms ?


Secondly how would English Civil Law be any more fair or unfair to Non-Englishmen, Non-Europeans or even those advocating a different Legal Paradigm to be Institutionalized in England ?

Why is one fair while the other is not ?

The difference is, the secular laws doesnt have any religous/ideologic background, everyone gets the same treatment for their crime with (hopefully fair) trials.

(b) Different Religions will get Different Treatment for the same Crime !

Why would a Rapist get a different treatment for a crime depending on his/her Religion ? Why would an Arsonist ? A Murderer ? A thief etc.

And even if one were to get different treatments & if the premise is that different treatment isn't 'fair' than what of the instances of different treatment throughout any country's Legal Framework ?

My point is, a religious civil law is only fair if there is only one religious group in a country.

Consider this : If men & women are equal why then do women get maternity leaves ? Equality should demand that her Biological Disposition should be ignored in favor of fairness in treatment between the two genders ! And yet we do that - Why ?

Why do we positively discriminate between different Ethnicities by granting Under-Developed Ethnic Groups Job/Academic Placement etc. Quotas ?

Why do we positively discriminate between Under-Developed Regions in terms of Government Expenditure ?

Why do we discriminate between Religions as well where certain Religious Groups are granted the right to wear certain religious symbols or attires (the Sikh Turban, the Orthodox Jew's Dress Code or the Muslim Headscarve) in line with their religious sensibilities ?

Because we recognize that men & women & people in general are Equal but Different i.e they are Equitable - Equal in Value but they have different needs & compulsions that should be respected & accommodated for that & only that is true fairness !

Mate your comparing individual rights with a civil law.

Besides the problem with sharia is that every country with sharia law enforces it different, they are adding things to the laws or remove another things, its not clear how the real sharia law looks like.

 

[T-123456]

I dispute both of your two premises :

(a) a Religious Civil Law can't be fair to a Multi-Religious Nation !

I can't imagine how, purely from an Academic POV, a Religious Civil Law is any different than a purely Secular Civil Law when they are both Legal Paradigms ?

Secondly how would English Civil Law be any more fair or unfair to Non-Englishmen, Non-Europeans or even those advocating a different Legal Paradigm to be Institutionalized in England ?

Why is one fair while the other is not ?

(b) Different Religions will get Different Treatment for the same Crime !

Why would a Rapist get a different treatment for a crime depending on his/her Religion ? Why would an Arsonist ? A Murderer ? A thief etc.

And even if one were to get different treatments & if the premise is that different treatment isn't 'fair' than what of the instances of different treatment throughout any country's Legal Framework ?

Consider this : If men & women are equal why then do women get maternity leaves ? Equality should demand that her Biological Disposition should be ignored in favor of fairness in treatment between the two genders ! And yet we do that - Why ?

Why do we positively discriminate between different Ethnicities by granting Under-Developed Ethnic Groups Job/Academic Placement etc. Quotas ?

Why do we positively discriminate between Under-Developed Regions in terms of Government Expenditure ?

Why do we discriminate between Religions as well where certain Religious Groups are granted the right to wear certain religious symbols or attires (the Sikh Turban, the Orthodox Jew's Dress Code or the Muslim Headscarve) in line with their religious sensibilities ?

Because we recognize that men & women & people in general are Equal but Different i.e they are Equitable - Equal in Value but they have different needs & compulsions that should be respected & accommodated for that & only that is true fairness !

Is this Sharia law the same as in KSA?

 

[Armstrong]

The difference is, the secular laws doesnt have any religous/ideologic background, everyone gets the same treatment for their crime with (hopefully fair) trials.

Everything we do has some Ideological Background to it !

Take the example of Common Law - thats different then the Swiss Civil Code - Why ? Because both have a different understanding of what is right & what isn't !

My point is, a religious civil law is only fair if there is only one religious group in a country.

Why ? Why is Homogeneity either along Religious, Ethnic or even Ideological Lines be the barometer for anything ?

Consider this : If the Majority of the people of Turkiye were to favor Institutionalizing Common Law in Turkiye & the rest are divided between the Swiss Civil Code, Islamic Jurisprudence, American Law or any other Legal Paradigm out there would the Majority be anymore or any less Authoritarian in their Institutionalization of Common Law ?

Mate your comparing individual rights with a civil law.

Individual Rights are enshrined in Civil & Criminal Laws after all !

The point was that if qualifying Equality & Fairness is present in the World why is it, principally any more or any less distasteful if one qualifies it in an XYZ manner instead of an ABC manner as long as the Democratic Principle holds !

Besides the problem with sharia is that every country with sharia law enforces it different, they are adding things to the laws or remove another things, its not clear how the real sharia law looks like.

Every country with any kind of Law defines & enforces it differently; thats the nature of Laws - They change from people to people & from time to time !

Diversity of Opinion shouldn't be an Issue here as long as what is Institutionalized is done so through Democratic Means !

Tell you what - Lets look at it from a different manner :

Forget about Laws; take the example of Socialism & Capitalism !

Would a Socialist living in a Capitalist Country be any more or any less discriminated, treated unfairly or disadvantaged than a Capitalists living in a Socialist Country, on a principled basis ? Would the former's right to not be subject to a system that they are not Ideologically inclined towards anymore or any less be violated than the latter's ?

I would imagine the answer would - No, because the Democratic Principle has ensured that the People have decided their Country's to be Socialist or Capitalists in their Economic Orientation - Why then if suddenly the People were to decide we would prefer an Islamic Orientation to our Economy i.e no Interest being charged, perhaps the currency being backed by the Gold Bullion once more or that Commercial Activities be qualified etc. - Why would everyone start sh*tting bricks & exclaiming Intolerance, Unfairness & all the other juicy terms that are thrown about ?

Its not as if in a Socialist or a Capitalist Economic Orientation things were Qualified or there wasn't Ideological Differences because they were - Why this Intellectual Contradiction ?

Is this Sharia law the same as in KSA?

The Shariah has become a Dirty Word - It is what you make it out to be !

You've got Muslims on one end of the spectrum who disagree with the Taliban's methods but agree with their Ideology & other end of the Spectrum you've got Muslims who are convinced that Islam advocates a Secular State & they are prepared to give rational arguments to support their stance !

Let the People decide !

 

[T-123456]

Everything we do has some Ideological Background to it !

Take the example of Common Law - thats different then the Swiss Civil Code - Why ? Because both have a different understanding of what is right & what isn't !



Why ? Why is Homogeneity either along Religious, Ethnic or even Ideological Lines be the barometer for anything ?

Consider this : If the Majority of the people of Turkiye were to favor Institutionalizing Common Law in Turkiye & the rest are divided between the Swiss Civil Code, Islamic Jurisprudence, American Law or any other Legal Paradigm out there would the Majority be anymore or any less Authoritarian in their Institutionalization of Common Law ?



Individual Rights are enshrined in Civil & Criminal Laws after all !

The point was that if qualifying Equality & Fairness is present in the World why is it, principally any more or any less distasteful if one qualifies it in an XYZ manner instead of an ABC manner as long as the Democratic Principle holds !



Every country with any kind of Law defines & enforces it differently; thats the nature of Laws - They change from people to people & from time to time !

Diversity of Opinion shouldn't be an Issue here as long as what is Institutionalized is done so through Democratic Means !

Tell you what - Lets look at it from a different manner :

Forget about Laws; take the example of Socialism & Capitalism !

Would a Socialist living in a Capitalist Country be any more or any less discriminated, treated unfairly or disadvantaged than a Capitalists living in a Socialist Country, on a principled basis ? Would the former's right to not be subject to a system that they are not Ideologically inclined towards anymore or any less be violated than the latter's ?

I would imagine the answer would - No, because the Democratic Principle has ensured that the People have decided their Country's to be Socialist or Capitalists in their Economic Orientation - Why then if suddenly the People were to decide we would prefer an Islamic Orientation to our Economy i.e no Interest being charged, perhaps the currency being backed by the Gold Bullion once more or that Commercial Activities be qualified etc. - Why would everyone start sh*tting bricks & exclaiming Intolerance, Unfairness & all the other juicy terms that are thrown about ?

Its not as if in a Socialist or a Capitalist Economic Orientation things were Qualified or there wasn't Ideological Differences because they were - Why this Intellectual Contradiction ?



The Shariah has become a Dirty Word - It is what you make it out to be !

You've got Muslims on one end of the spectrum who disagree with the Taliban's methods but agree with their Ideology & other end of the Spectrum you've got Muslims who are convinced that Islam advocates a Secular State & they are prepared to give rational arguments to support their stance !

Let the People decide !

Does a rape victim need 4 male witnesses in your law?

 

[xenon54 out]

Everything we do has some Ideological Background to it !

Take the example of Common Law - thats different then the Swiss Civil Code - Why ? Because both have a different understanding of what is right & what isn't !



Why ? Why is Homogeneity either along Religious, Ethnic or even Ideological Lines be the barometer for anything ?

Consider this : If the Majority of the people of Turkiye were to favor Institutionalizing Common Law in Turkiye & the rest are divided between the Swiss Civil Code, Islamic Jurisprudence, American Law or any other Legal Paradigm out there would the Majority be anymore or any less Authoritarian in their Institutionalization of Common Law ?



Individual Rights are enshrined in Civil & Criminal Laws after all !

The point was that if qualifying Equality & Fairness is present in the World why is it, principally any more or any less distasteful if one qualifies it in an XYZ manner instead of an ABC manner as long as the Democratic Principle holds !



Every country with any kind of Law defines & enforces it differently; thats the nature of Laws - They change from people to people & from time to time !

Diversity of Opinion shouldn't be an Issue here as long as what is Institutionalized is done so through Democratic Means !

Tell you what - Lets look at it from a different manner :

Forget about Laws; take the example of Socialism & Capitalism !

Would a Socialist living in a Capitalist Country be any more or any less discriminated, treated unfairly or disadvantaged than a Capitalists living in a Socialist Country, on a principled basis ? Would the former's right to not be subject to a system that they are not Ideologically inclined towards anymore or any less be violated than the latter's ?

I would imagine the answer would - No, because the Democratic Principle has ensured that the People have decided their Country's to be Socialist or Capitalists in their Economic Orientation - Why then if suddenly the People were to decide we would prefer an Islamic Orientation to our Economy i.e no Interest being charged, perhaps the currency being backed by the Gold Bullion once more or that Commercial Activities be qualified etc. - Why would everyone start sh*tting bricks & exclaiming Intolerance, Unfairness & all the other juicy terms that are thrown about ?

Its not as if in a Socialist or a Capitalist Economic Orientation things were Qualified or there wasn't Ideological Differences because they were - Why this Intellectual Contradiction ?

Mate lets drop the discussion, im not a law maker nor do i have such a good English to keep up with you.

Just one last thing: I know what your trying to say but there is a fundamental problem with sharia, namely its a religious oriented law and there is much space to interpret whatever you want in it while secular laws (in ideal case) allways must be given under the basic Human Rights convention.

 

[Armstrong]

Does a rape victim need 4 male witnesses in your law?

Certainly not in my understanding of it for that is stupid - Its a rape not an orgy !

I think both @T-123456 & @xenon54 hate me now !

 

[T-123456]

Certainly not in my understanding of it for that is stupid - Its a rape not an orgy !

I think both @T-123456 & @xenon54 hate me now !

See,then your law is different.
If you tell a person like i and Volkan(xenon54)about Islamic law,we automaticly think about things like 4 witnesses(bad law).
Your law is only practiced in Pakistan or in more countries?

 

[Armstrong]

See,then your law is different.
If you tell a person like i and Volkan(xenon54)about Islamic law,we automaticly think about things like 4 witnesses.
Your law is only practiced in Pakistan or in more countries?

Oh I thought you were talking about my understanding of the Law !

In Pakistan, unfortunately, the 4 Witness thing is still there which Human Right's Organizations, different Political Parties & even Religious Scholars & Parties are fighting to get overturned - It was partially overturned a few years back !

It was Institutionalized by a Military Dictator juiced up on his own messed up version of Islam & not the People of Pakistan !

Besides Pakistan largely has English Civil Law in place & not the Shariah Law except one or two instances like the above !

 

[xenon54 out]

Certainly not in my understanding of it for that is stupid - Its a rape not an orgy !

I think both @T-123456 & @xenon54 hate me now !

No, i would never hate you, i disagree but respect your oppinnion and consider you as my Pakistani brother.

 

[T-123456]

Oh I thought you were talking about my understanding of the Law !

In Pakistan, unfortunately, the 4 Witness thing is still there which Human Right's Organizations, different Political Parties & even Religious Scholars & Parties are fighting to get overturned - It was partially overturned a few years back !

It was Institutionalized by a Military Dictator juiced up on his own messed up version of Islam & not the People of Pakistan !

Besides Pakistan largely has English Civil Law in place & not the Shariah Law except one or two instances like the above !

Well,you are going to migrate to Turkiye anyway so better get used to our laws.

Certainly not in my understanding of it for that is stupid - Its a rape not an orgy !

I think both @T-123456 & @xenon54 hate me now !

Hate you?
Not possible,you are our Bigboned Keshmirli.

 

[-SINAN-]

Islamic Republic of Turkiye here we come with Erdogan as the new Caliph & I his Right Hand Man !

Yes...yes you , @Sinan & @xenon54 have a place in the grand scheme of things as well !

For you, @T-123456 the Numbered - the Province of Anatolia to rule in peace for as long as you live & create those T-123456.... models till your heart's content !

For you, @Sinan the Womanizer - I dunno thats what the ladies named you - the Province of Middle East to house the finest Harem the World has ever seen !

And for you, @xenon54 the Mevlana - the Seat of Power - Istanbul is yours to ensure that you are brought up in the likeness of His Majesty Erdogan the Magnificent to succeed as the new Caliph when the time comes !

I won't describe myself as a womanizer but who can say no to a harem.

Bs,I am the womanizer @Sinan is afraid of his girlfriend
Mevlana to you @Armstrong !
@xenon54 gets the mediteranian coast cities.
@Sinan gets Anatolia.
I take KASHMIR!

I'm not afraid of my girlfriend, mate. I just want to avoid unnecessary discussions with her.

Anyways she will be "Mahi Devran" of my harem.