Sure, but if you look at Sweden which has areas of 40-60% Muslims known as "no-go" areas, firefighters and ambulances won't enter those areas without police escorts. Clearly the people residing in those areas are handling ALL legal matters in-house.
Here's a link for those interested:
ISLAMIC law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.
Still pretty amazing that they've carved out their own legal system in someone else's nation, and this was accomplished by only 4% of the population. Are we sure those are the correct numbers? Because if so, that's crazy influence in relation to their small proportional numbers.
I hate getting involved in political mixed religion debates, but I'm going to stick up for the Muslims on this one, even though everyone wants to believe that Jews (me) and Muslims hate each other. Which isn't true at all.
The name thing, well, Islam is a pretty widespread religion, so sure, I can see why its a pretty popular name. John is considered a religious Christian name. Jonathan or Jon is considered a religious Jewish name. I really don't see why people consider this such a huge threat? Most of the popular names in the world come from different religious origins. Doesn't mean that just because someone's name is Mohammed that they are a bad guy. Same goes for someone named Jesus. Does it mean he can walk on water? No. So what's the problem here? People are taking things entirely too serious.
As for the Sharia courts in the UK, guess what, there have been Jewish courts in the UK for well over 100 years now, and the same in the US. We call it the "Jewish Beit Din" (Jewish court). Even though I was raised as a religious Jew, I don't know of anyone in my family that ever went to a Jewish court to resolve anything, we always used the US court system. Actually, my mother did try it against my father, since she's religious and he's not, and he told them to go fuck themselves because both parties have to agree to be part of it, it can't be one sided, otherwise it means dick. Not saying that the Jewish Beit Din isn't legit, because it actually is, but its reserved for only those who are HARDCORE religious and the rule of thumb is that if you're dissatisfied with the ruling there, you can just go and take it up with the US courts. I know Sharia law can be scary shit, since it does favor men more so over women, according to Islamic law, but technically speaking, as long as British citizens can appeal the Sharia court system and use the UK legal system, then it shouldn't matter. I think its only reserved for those who subscribe to it. So if there is a legal issue or dispute between, say a Christian and a Muslim, they can't go to a Sharia court to settle it. They would have to go to a British court. The National/State legal system should ALWAYS super-cede over the religious one. Always. The religious court system should also only be allowed to handle minor civil disputes for people in that specific community, and have some type of protocol in place to make sure that whatever the process and judgement is, MUST go according to the laws of the land and state before the religious ones.
I wasn't alive during the Kennedy presidency, but I've been told by teachers and family folk that the big worry when Kennedy was running for president, that because he was a Catholic, he would have to do whatever the Pope says, unconditionally. That was wrong. Because he understood that while religion is important to a lot of people, the nation and law of the land is dictated over any religious law bar none.
I'm a firm believer to keep religion and politics separate, however this is something that is more of a pipe dream than anything even close to reality because of so many conflicting and diverse opinions, ideologies, religious, and political theories on how the "perfect modern society" should be governed. But hey, argue and debate away, because it will solve absolutely nothing anyway, except self manifested satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
