If this story is real (can it be?), then one of the great beacons of the rule of law and the rights of citizens — the United Kingdom — has just taken a giant step closer to cultural suicide.
John Bingham, Religious Affairs Editor of The Telegraph in the UK, published this story on March 22nd:
Islamic law is to be effectively enshrined in the British legal system for the first time under guidelines for solicitors on drawing up “Sharia compliant” wills.
Under ground-breaking guidance, produced by The Law Society, High Street solicitors will be able to write Islamic wills that deny women an equal share of inheritances and exclude unbelievers altogether.
The documents, which would be recognised by Britain’s courts, will also prevent children born out of wedlock – and even those who have been adopted – from being counted as legitimate heirs.
Anyone married in a church, or in a civil ceremony, could be excluded from succession under Sharia principles, which recognise only Muslim weddings for inheritance purposes.
Nicholas Fluck, president of The Law Society, said the guidance would promote “good practice” in applying Islamic principles in the British legal system. <source>
Can this be true? I keep waiting for a retraction from the paper, but I have not seen it. (Then again, why should I wonder when Barack Hussein Obama, a man with questionable origins, sealed academic records, and no leadership experience somehow got elected president, twice — so anything is possible in the modern era).
And so it appears that England has decided to forsake its women and its proud tradition of Anglo-Saxon law.
Some women are notably upset (something I do not take for granted given that women in American keep electing men to the presidency who are extremely toxic to their interests — even a man who had abused countless women and even allegedly raped one of them).
Said Baroness Cox, a cross-bench peer leading a Parliamentary campaign to protect women from religiously sanctioned discrimination, including from unofficial Sharia courts in Britain:
This violates everything that we stand for. It would make the Suffragettes turn in their graves.
But there is more.
The guidance goes on to suggest that Sharia principles could potentially overrule British practices in some disputes, giving examples of areas that would need to be tested in English courts.
How about that — Sharia law obviating the rights of whole groups of females in the UK.
“The male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir of the same class,” the guidance says. “Non-Muslims may not inherit at all, and only Muslim marriages are recognised.
Similarly, a divorced spouse is no longer a Sharia heir, as the entitlement depends on a valid Muslim marriage existing at the date of death. This means you should amend or delete some standard will clauses.”
If you are a woman, how are you feeling right now?
Can a country operate with two conflicting sets of legal principles?
If any answer other than “NO” comes into your mind, please check yourself in to the hospital for treatment.
The article ends with two strong statements in defense of, and in favor of, the Western Tradition, and thank god, because so few these days are willing to take a stand for their own culture over others whose practices and customs seem to lead to significant exodus.
From Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society:
This guidance marks a further stage in the British legal establishment’s undermining of democratically determined human rights-compliant law in favour of religious law from another era and another culture. British equality law is more comprehensive in scope and remedies than any elsewhere in the world. Instead of protecting it, The Law Society seems determined to sacrifice the progress made in the last 500 years.
I just love the references to “human-rights compliant law” and “religious law from another era and another culture” and “sacrifice the progress made in the last 500 years”.
That last bit is important, because indeed it has taken 500 years for human rights, including especially women’s rights, to evolve to the present moment in which women in the Western world are the most free and empowered they have been at any time in human history.
From Lady Cox:
…to have an organisation such as The Law Society seeming to promote or encourage a policy which is inherently gender discriminatory in a way which will have very serious implications for women and possibly for children is a matter of deep concern.
Her language is too restrained under the circumstances, but at least she is objecting.
In closing, I say to the female Liberals of the United States — who voted for Barack Obama and put him in the White House not once but twice — You think you are voting in favor of a feminist agenda, when in fact you are voting for men who are systematically destroying the very foundation of freedom and the rule of law. This tearing down will cause women to suffer far more than men, and you merely need open your eyes to see this reality, if you dare.
I wonder how the women of the Ukraine are feeling right now.
You think it can’t happen here, I know, but ignorance will be your, and our, undoing.