First it was the Archbishop of Canterbury, and now the Lord Chief Justice of Great Britain has said UK law should make room for Islamic sharia law: The most senior judge in England yesterday gave his blessing to the use…

lexhamfox on July 4, 2008 at 6:10 PM

Hi, sir. I wonder if it’s possible to debate anything without getting angry and vetting out personal attacks? So many angry people on this site….

Do you understand what the Magna Carta is? Have you ever read it? Do you know it’s history and the history of it’s time? Have you ever wondered why it was needed?

The Magna Carta had direct Christian influence in it’s reasons for creating it. It was penned to hold the kings to the very laws that they held other people to. It reminded the kings that though they were top-dog down here, in the grand scheme of things, they were not TOP DOG. God is.

Don’t believe me? Here is what it says in the number 1 postion in the Magna Carta:

1. In the first place we have granted to God,

The number one position. See it? It’s God.

Londinistan is a load of bollocks. So is most of your tripe. The kind of contract that the Lord Justice is talking about would be viable in most US courts as a form of contract yet you would not accuse the US Courts of being supine to Muslim sensibilities.

You say the UK is a Dhimmi state. If that is the case then why is the UK fighting in both Afghanistan and Iraq? Britain’s foundation of law is the magna carta and the majority of priciples are based not on Judeo-Christian legal model butrather Norman and Saxon models…. that why they juries are so important in British Common law… find a jury in the old testament. How many laws from the Old Testament (not the ten but the couple dozen throughout) which are still codified and viable today. Britain and the British will never be slaves despite your ignorant froth. Yes… the professors, judges, and leaders have brains… you are the ignorant one.

Diana West wrote a fantastic book called, “Death of The Grown-up: How America’s Arrested Development is Bringing Down Western Civilization.”

In it, she lays out an indisputable case showing that the farther America strayed from the Biblical principles we were founded on, the more juvenile, unwilling and unable we became in addressing anything of substance. The second half of her book shows that while America has become more addicted to the trivial things in life, Islam has gone IN THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE DIRECTION! They have become more adult, more willing to address problems head-on. She posits that we are ripe for take-over by the Jihadis because of our juvenile mindset. I highly recommend this book.

Another book well worth reading is, “Londonistan,” written by Melanie Phillips.

Ms. Phillips shows the reader how England became a Dhimmi state. Lays out the entire process (which did not take long at all!). Her central point is striking: The only reason Muslims have become as influential and a “protected class” in England is because England removed the foundation it was built on. That foundation was the Judeo-Christian ethic. Therefore, with no foundation, new builders came in and built A NEW FOUNDATION.

Luke 6:49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great. KJV

England refused to “heareth” and will now do the bidding of their new slave masters—Islam.

The Brit-libs are just a few decades ahead of our own dipshit liberals, and have been for two hundred years. They are the role models of the Democrat party.

Fortunately, this is not happening in France, otherwise the Left would want to export it here to the US: Telegraph – Muslims in Britain should be able to live under Sharia, says top judge
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, strong…

The English – they are a funny lot!

Think about it: He believes that some people were born with Sharia DNA in them which they can´t even shake off after immigrating to the UK.

That´s the irony of the British Left. They believe they are distancing themselves from Britain´s colonial past, whereas in fact they treat Muslim immigrants as aliens who shall be put to a different (read: lower) standard.

They changed the famous nursery rhyme from ‘piggy’ to ‘puppy’, and changed ‘roast beef’ to ‘a biscuit’

thus placating muslims and vegetarians at the expense of our cultural memories

I wanted to behead the puppy toy in culturally sensitive islamic style protest against the perversion of my traditions

Terrorism has payed off big time

The mullah says “This is madness!”

Dubya says “THIS IS AMERICA!” then kicks him down the well.

The Archbishop of Canterbury and Sharia Law

… it seems to me that the general presumption should still be freedom of contract, and contract that the civil courts will enforce. Generally speaking, people are better off with this freedom. True, no choice is ever completely free, but it’s generally better have the power to choose (in light of all the pressures under which we labor) and be able to commit to others that this choice will be binding. If there are to be constraints on this freedom (e.g., that one can’t make certain irrevocable and highly damaging contracts, such as selling oneself into slavery), they should be narrow. Again, I think that’s very much the libertarian approach.

I’m sure the British people stand up and demand that their own laws will be upheld, they have all those constitutional amendments that let them do that…oh wait.

I think you’re missing the point.

The advantage of the British Constitution was always that it was unwritten and so it couldn’t be challenged and dismembered by lawyers.

The advantage of the US Constitution is that its writers virtually set it in stone with no ambiguity so that it could not be misinterpreted by lawyers.

When liberals get a hold of a society they can and will tear it to pieces.

The fact that something happens to be written down rather than silently understood is not a real protection because the words of a document can be twisted to mean the opposite of what they actually mean.

(Problem is, though, that there is no such thing as a little Shari’a Law, just as there is no such thing as a camel’s nose under the tent not ending up turning into an entire dromedary in your lap.)

After all nationalism is such a horrid thing, unless you bring it with you.

I’m sure the British people stand up and demand that their own laws will be upheld, they have all those constitutional amendments that let them do that…oh wait.

A non-muslim shouldn’t agree to having disputes settled in that way and probably won’t have a choice.

Fixed.