Category Archives: Sharia

If you are a Muslim and you don’t believe stoning should be a part of Islam, you have already taken the first step towards rejecting form where it implies condoning and participation in an inhumane and barbaric “Traditional” punishment. You have partially apostated yourself. You might have become a worse Muslim but you have become a better human being.

Bukhari – Book 6; Volume 60; Hadith 79

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Umar:

This is a guest post by Kisan

As an illiterate and  impoverished Christian woman faced the sentence of death for blasphemy, a secular leaning Governor of Punjab tried to intervene to get her freed, describing the blasphemy law as a ‘black law’ and was killed by his own guard after being named by clerics as ‘wajib ul qatl’, or necessary to be slaughtered.

The history of the law mandating the death penalty for blasphemy can be traced back to an earlier chapter in the history of Pakistan. In the British times a law was enacted in the then undivided Indian penal code, article 295A, which makes it a criminal offence to: “insult the religion or the religious beliefs of any citizen with deliberate and malicious intention to outrage their religious feelings.” This law, still current in India, has in Pakistan been further modified to include article 295B which mandates life imprisonment for defilement of the Quran and article 295C which prescribes the death penalty for the “use of derogatory remarks in respect of the Holy Prophet.”

Baroness Cox’s Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill, which will hopefully scale down the remit of shari’a courts (to civil disputes only), will uphold the primacy of English law and the rights of Muslim women. She is interviewed by the Indy:

Take a look through the Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill and you realise what Baroness Cox is trying to do is not actually that radical. Other than a new criminal offence for anyone caught falsely passing themselves off as a bona-fide judge, the main thrust of the Bill is to ensure the judgments of arbitration panels – be they Muslim, Jewish of any other variant – are only enforceable in civil disputes, not in family law or criminal law.

Technically that is what the law already says but there is growing concern that religious courts are suffering from “jurisdiction creep” and are ruling on issues such as domestic violence and child custody when they have absolutely no right to do so.

A quandary faced by this cokehead in a Nebraska prison. After being sent to prison for dealing in cocaine, is suing the prison for serving pork and violating his dietary restrictions.

Halal Coke Snorter

A NEBRASKA prison inmate is suing Lancaster county for a quarter of a million dollars. The devout Muslim alleges he was served pork while in custody – violating the rules of his religion.

Court records said that 48-year-old Dario Scott follows dietary restrictions that bar Muslims from eating pork and that in March while awaiting trial, he was assured that pork was not served in the Lancaster County jail.

But, according to this report, he was later told that pork was an ingredient in some of the jail food.

Scott says in his lawsuit that he was sickened by the pork and that his rights to practice his religion were violated.