Debate: Does Sharia Law negate Human Rights?

· Europe, Human Rights, Sharia Law

This Debate occurred on 8th December 2011 and was co-hosted by One Law for All and UCL-ASHS.

Debate: Sharia Law Negates Human Rights. For the motion:
1) Maryam Namazie – Human rights campaigner, spokesperson One Law for All. 2) Anne-Marie Waters – Lawyer, spokesperson One Law for All.

Against the motion and defending Islam: 1) Ayazz Mahmood – UK Ahmadiyya Muslim University of Theology and Languages 2) Jonathan Butterworth – UCL Law Teaching Fellow and Co-ordinator of “Just Fair.”

Chief Editor’s comments:

I am thankful to all four debaters for taking out time to share their ideas with us, especially Jonathan Butterworth, whose presentation I liked the most. Here I intend to link two of my articles, the first one argues that Universal human rights come from Islam and teachings of the Holy Prophet Muhammad.

And the second one:

An invitation to other religions: demonstrating human rights and Universal Brotherhood from their scriptures.

We have scores of articles about Sharia Law and we have a tab for it under ‘Law and Religion’ menu.

Even though our blog is moderated, we are always open to a congenial, rational and reasonable dialogue.


Comments RSS
  1. Zia H. Shah

    War and Peace in Islam

    Here, I link two articles to demonstrate how the Holy Prophet Muhammad, may peace be on him, ensured the rights of prisoners of war and many in the West are violating it in the twenty first century:

    Not to speak of humans, slaves or prisoners of war, the Holy Prophet Muhammad preached kind treatment of even animals. But, in a recent debate of the Presidential candidates in USA, all except Congressman Ron Paul condoned torture or waterboarding of anyone suspected of terrorism. Please note, not someone convicted of terrorism but only suspected of terrorism, which could be any peaceful citizen:

  2. Zia H. Shah

    Muslim Tradition is not equal to wife beating or child marriage like the Western civilization is not equal to torture in Abu Gharaib or alcoholism or Christian tradition or atheism equal to Spanish inquisitions or holocaust

    Any tradition that is followed by billions and have millions of apologists is bound to show some dirty laundry for one reason or another. Without going into specific reasons, why we all have dirty laundry, because we all sweat and are smelly mammals, let me just suggest that to understand a tradition, you want to immerse yourself in it at least temporarily, while you study it, so you can judge it in a holistic fashion as an insider rather than as an outside critic, who just frowns at what he or she finds ugly! Take a leaf from the book of Jonathan Butterworth, how he discovered Islam by studying it at some length with a open mind and positive attitude.
    A non-Muslim and for that matter even a Muslim may not agree with each individual detail of what is written in the Holy Quran and it certainly does not have to be forced on a given society. The Holy Quran only gives suggestions or choices, when it comes to public sphere. For example, I have never known any woman, including my mother, whom I respected and loved a lot, who would be fully happy with the permission of polygamy, in the Holy Quran. Their relative inability to grasp this divine teaching does not make them bad Muslims. However, at the same time, this does not mean that polygamy is bad for those women who cannot find a suitable husband or for those children, who do not have a loving and responsible father. So, as a legislative body or a congress examines the utility of any idea before approving its details, in a pluralistic society, could discuss the merit of any idea, or lack thereof, whether it comes from the Quran, the Bible, the mind of a visionary or someone with a myopic vision. As long as we agree on the legislative process, there should be perfect peace and harmony, regardless of citizens’ belief in different traditions and with varying intensity!

    Each and every recommendation of Sharia, whether it is mentioned in the Holy Quran or not, should be judged on its utilitarian value and not lumped together to promote the monster of Islamophobia or a political agenda of power hungry Mullah. If we lump every thing together, it is not a dialogue but merely political posturing!

  3. Zia H. Shah

    Islam versus Christianity: Utilitarian purpose of the Islamic teachings

    It is said that a teaching of the Bible is that if a person is smitten on the right cheek he should present the left one to the one who smites. This sounds very attractive so long as it is not put into practice. But if an attempt is made to act upon it, it is soon discovered to be entirely unpractical.

    It is related, that a Christian missionary used to preach in the streets of Cairo how full of love and tolerance the teachings of Jesus were. He would cite the injunction to turn the left cheek when the right one is smitten as an example, and make unfavorable comparisons with the teachings of other faiths. His discourses were couched in a very fine language and his audience used to be greatly affected. A Muslim, who had heard the missionary preach in this fashion on several occasions, became much upset. He wondered why no Muslim divine cared to tackle the missionary on the comparative merits of Islamic and Christian teachings. One day while the missionary was in the middle of his discourse this man approached him and expressed a desire to speak to him. The missionary inclined his head towards him to be able to listen to what he had to say. But the man instead of saying anything gave the missionary a violent slap on the face. The missionary was taken aback for a moment, but then fearing lest the man should proceed to further violence, raised his own hand in order to strike his assailant. The man remonstrated with the missionary and pointed out that he was expected to turn his other cheek, rather than preparing to strike him back.

    The missionary retorted, “I have decided today to act upon the teaching of the Qur’an, not the Bible.”

    The punch line being that most Christians in day to day life practice Islam rather than Christianity. A recent development is the granting of permission to divorce in the last European country, namely Malta.

    Read further:

  4. Zia H. Shah

    One should examine each and every teaching under the Sharia separately
    The year of 2011 saw an exceptional example, wherein USA government negotiated blood money for the murder committed by Raymond Davis. You could google his name for details. The point I want to make is that here was an example, where the West and the East happily took a leaf from the book of Sharia.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: