In recent months Britain has taken several steps towards instituting a sharia court system, a separate and parallel legal structure designed to adjudicate complaints within Britain’s Muslim community. Not only the Archbishop of Canterbury, but also lawyers, judges, and members of the government are openly discussing the implementation of sharia in the UK.
Now comes word that a social anthropologist in Switzerland is proposing the same thing for his country. According to an article entitled “Sharia courts in Switzerland?” in today’s Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Dr. Christian Giordano foresees a Swiss version of sharia. Our Austrian correspondent ESW sent us a working summary of the article:
Christian Giordano, a social anthropologist, demands that Swiss citizens should be tried in different courts according to their origin, their ethnic and religious backgrounds.
He is aware of the fact that his views are provocative. But the time is ripe for debate in Switzerland.
“Those who think people from faraway cultures are able to assimilate completely into Swiss culture are wrong. This is true also for the legal system.”
Giordano also believes that there are already sharia courts in operation in Switzerland, which are not under any sort of control. This shadowy existence must cease, he demands. He asks for sharia courts to be implemented for immigrants. He is primarily thinking in terms of civil court procedures, but also for assault cases.
Hudud punishments would not be accepted, and therefore such cases would be retried under Swiss law. Human rights must of course remain in effect in front of a sharia court. He is thus unsure about polygamous marriages in this regard. This must be investigated in more detail.
– – – – – – – – –
Muslims support Giordano. One Iranian sociologist says that Muslims, Christians, and Jews have been tried under different laws for centuries. The state order does not break down if there are different laws implemented for different groups. He believes that in the long run there is no way around sharia courts. He supports the early institution of sharia courts in Switzerland.
Others believe it’s not the right time for the institution of sharia, although certain parts should be implemented. At the moment it is not politically viable.
Giordano, meanwhile, is confident that there will be much debate regarding his demands. He believes this to be important because the concept of a single law in an immigration country is simply not working, just as the concept of a national state is not working.
“The concept of a national state is not working.” Hmm…
So there will be different sets of laws for different ethnic groups. Each judicial system will respect the origins and traditions of that particular ethno-religious group. Muslims from Pakistan can expect a system of laws that resembles the one they have at home. Somalis will live under the laws of Somalia — which right now, of course, means living without any laws at all.
And what about here in the USA? Does that mean that white Christians of European descent get to live under traditional honkie law?
Nuh-uh! That’s not the way the rules work.
Earlier today Dymphna wrote about the imposition of euthanasia and abortion upon constituencies who do not support these practices, in the face of contrary public opinion and in defiance of democratic procedures that would otherwise have prevented such legal changes. The federal courts are imposing by fiat the practices of a minority, since these results cannot be effected in any other manner.
The same is true of numerous other progressive legal changes. Provisions which were in effect when the states ratified the Constitution in 1787 — and were the law of the land for 200 years afterwards — have suddenly, at the drop of a judicial hat, become unconstitutional. Traditional practices are now forbidden, and previously forbidden practices have become permissible — or even mandatory. Public religious observances, an absence of homosexual marriage, the prohibition of contraception and abortion for minors without their parents’ consent: all of these are traditional “white Christian” legal customs in America, and all have been repealed or enacted by a narrow sliver of the elite without the consent of the populace at large.
So, as usual, the meta-rules for white people are different than those for all other ethnic groups. Unlike the Iranians and the Indonesians, we will not be allowed to keep our traditional customs. Baby, bathwater, and bathtub — all must go!
That’s the shining future that lies ahead for us in the “post-racial” utopia known as Obamaland.