Yesterday I read a post by Irfan Ahmed, which as then published argued that not wanting Sharia law in Britain demonstrated that the BNP were racist and fascist. I highlighted this on my blog, as there is no comment section on Irfan's. He has now changed the post, but not really the content. He still juxtaposes racist with disagreeing with Rowan Williams' comments about the inevitability of Sharia Law in the UK. I think Irfan is trying to make two unconnected points which have unfortunately got blurred. One, the BNP is a racist party which displays many facets of fascism; two, he agrees with Rowan Williams and encourages the introduction of Sharia law into Britain. Both are very interesting issues. The "rise" of the BNP calls into question some very interesting ideas about individual free will and social circumstance. There is much to write about on this matter and I look forward to Irfan's views. Rowan Williams comments and the conception of the incorporation of Sharia law into the UK (commonly thought to just be in areas of family law and inheritance) are likewise fascinating. It calls into question fundamental and competing ideas of Liberty, and as such is a very welcome debate, especially within the Lib Dems. I hold one position, Irfan the other. Both have credible arguments and I look forward to a fruitful debate.
I still think that Irfan should qualify that he doesn't think it is either racist or fascist to not want Sharia Law introduced. I'm sure this is his position, but it isn't entirely clear from his blog post. One commentor on my last post on this subject called for a public apology, that is not necessary. Irfan's really done nothing wrong, other than not clarify his thoughts, and we all make that mistake often.
This is not a personal attack. I like Irfan's blog, and like Meral think its a very good think to have a young man so interesting in liberal politics that they get involved and set up a blog. I think he and Alasdair Wood are very welcome additions to the blogosphere. But, Meral (who was absolutely charming the one time I met her, so this isn't personal either), I don't think somebody should get special treatment or not be vigorously debated with because they are young or from an ethnic minority. I disagreed with what he said so I made my point. I hope no offense was caused.
On the subject of offense, I published a cartoon (look right) with my original post
on this subject. I believe it was originally published in the Guardian when the Rowan Williams/sharia law story broke. Irfan has found it offensive (yet published it on his own blog). His logic is that Sharia Law shouldn't be mocked. Why the hell not? This is another interesting area of liberal debate. Should we be able to ridicule, mock, and insult religions? People get very offended by it. I come down thoroughly on the free speech side of things (I'm not very keen on religion anyway); Irfan appears to come down on the offense side (I believe he is rather keen on religion). I think this is another great debate and would love to have it with Irfan.
So, in summation, no offense was intended towards Irfan for calling him out on his BNP/Sharia/racist error, he still needs to clarify that its not racist to oppose Sharia Law, and I would love to debate with him (or anyone else for that matter) on the subjects of the BNP and racism, Sharia Law and its UK applications, or offending religious sensibilities. I look forward to it. Over to you.
Friday, 11 July 2008
Sharia law, the BNP, and Irfan Ahmed
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
I only find it offensive because as a muslim it is mocking a islmaic law which was in place at the time of our Holy Prophet Muhammed PBUH and when people mock our Prophet it hits me very hard and i have displayed on my blog to show other's what is the cartoon that i find offensive.
www.irfanahmed.tk
James- I'm not advocating special treatment for anyone, but someone like Irfan who is very new to the party,young and from a BME background (all of these), should in my book be welcomed and supported. I've found his regular blogs interesting and informative. The BNP will attempt to drive a wedge between white and BME communities by whipping up fear about the debate on some aspects of Sharia law, and anything else that plays on peoples fear.
Many Muslims are fed up with this constant drip drip of Islamophobia, so its no wonder that what could be considered by some as 'mocking', becomes offensive. Muslims are increasingly feeling under siege. I wish everyone would just stop going on and on about Muslims all the time.
BTW- I found you very charming too!
I found the cartoon very offensive and it triggered a lot of emotion with me. As a Muslim I hate it when people are publishing these cartoons that offend us Muslims. Being from a BME background I found that cartoon offensive and would ask that you take in into consideration that they isn’t a lot of young people from ethnic minorities blogging and you should welcome more young ethnic minorities into the world of blogging.
Please all keep visiting my blog. www.irfanahmed.tk
Well this cartoon do trigger muslims emotion and irfan made a small mistake which he has apologised about so give up and stop making it a big issue.I agree with meral Irfan is a very intelligent individual who has done a great job informing people about current affairs.I very much agree cartoons do trigger peoples emotions especially when they mock someones religion and is beliefs. We need to work together to form community cohesion within the community and not have individuals who target someone because of they skin colour and there beliefs.
I agree with you Imran we need to tackle racism and build bridges between communitys.Great comment by Imran and Meral Hussein.
I agree with much of what you've said, James, and I certainly agree that it's not racist or fascist to oppose the introduction of Sharia law in the UK. If you're a secularist who favours rolling back the various privileges given to long-established religions anyway, then opposition to a public role for Sharia law is entirely consistent and perfectly liberal - and there's nothing in that secularist attitude which is remotely offensive or mocking towards Islam, any more than it's offensive to CoE, RCC, Judaism etc. (Clearly, the BNP supporters voting on that poll have arrived at the same view on introducing Sharia, but for completely opposite reasons!)
I do think, however, that people have been talking very much at cross purposes in this debate about Sharia. A lot of the confusion stems from what we mean by "law" - in the secular sense of the word, a law means a legal rule which applies to everyone, but when religious people talk about law, they usually mean a religious obligation which they take on voluntarily. It's against Jewish "law" to eat pork, and there are tens of thousands of practising Jews who follow that "law", and you don't hear people saying "If the English legal system isn't good enough for them, they can sod off to Israel ..." - people understand that the Jewish law is more like a personal commitment, and in the case of Sharia law, in most cases, it's the same thing.
In any case, the proposals to grant recognition to Sharia under the British legal system purely involve civil cases, and where both parties have consented to have a dispute resolved under Sharia. I don't see how this is any different from agreeing to undergo mediation in a civil dispute, which is perfectly acceptable already. The beauty of our legal system is that as long as something isn't against the law, it's assumed that you can do it, so as long as Muslims don't do anything that violates the law of the land, they can do whatever they like, including following Sharia (excepting of course any area which conflicts with English law).
I would just like to say its not racist to opppose but mocking it just takes the biscuit what ever happened in respecting others beliefs doesn't evey religion say respect one another and its beliefs.You can oppose it no harm in that but please i advise you not to mock someones beliefs.
Just quickly, on the free speech issue: there's a very major difference between saying "Mocking people's religion should be illegal" and "Mocking people's religion can be quite offensive, and it's often best to avoid it."
Jonny Wright thats what am saying we should avoid mocking peoples religion and there beliefs and work together and build bridges between communitys as other people have mentioned in comments.You say quite it is very offensive if someone mocks ones religion
But the point I'm making is that religion shouldn't get any special privileges. I just think it's a good idea to be respectful in general; whether it's somebody's religious views, social views, political views. But you can't really legislate for people's attitude!
Well i agree with you on half the points have made jonny people should respect each others views.Then the religion part i think religion is a big point for all people not just muslims and when someone is religion is mocked its not fair and when someone is mocked full stop.Religion are someones beliefs and i believe that everyone should respect them and there beliefs.
This indeed is a very interesting debate but i feel as none of the people against the Islamic Sharia Law hold any credible knowledge about it therfore they should not be allowed to mock or criticise something which they know nothing about. The Sharia law from a muslim prospective is the Law of God given to the Prophet Muhammed Peace and Blessings be Upon Him.
In order to resolve the debate of whether or not Sharia Law should be introduced a referendum should be held. There are aspects of Sharia law which some see awfully dawnting but if you put yourself in some of the scenarios then you maybe would have a clearer understanding and then and only then you may be able to come to some sort of a judgement on Sharia Law.
Take for example the punishment for rape, in Sharia law is that if found guilty of rape then you face having your private parts chopped off. Some find this disgusting but what if the victim of rape was your daughter,mother,wife or sister would your view still be that of disgust.
So i request all the people who do not know nothing about Sharia Law to do their research upon it and then debate and comment on this issue.
Next the issue of the BNP it is a well known fact that the BNP and it members share facist and predjudice views. Therfore the BNP to comment on the Sharia Law just adds to their level of hypocracy i saw with my own eyes a BNP Councillor buying Chinese Chicken Curry at a local supermarket so some races and tribes are ok and some aren't they cannot decide for themselves. Surely if you hate all non whites than you must hate their food/culture etc. In practice this is not the case as demonstrated when the Councillor bought the curry. Too add insult to injury they have the cheek to comment upon aspects of Sharia law.
Also the point that somebody made by sayin that they should be allowed to attack one's religious beliefs i do not agree with this point as religion to most people especially muslims is far more important than traditions and culture.
Islam on the other hand is a very open religion and we welcome constructive debate but not between ourselves with the Scholars who are in a position to defend the religion. God in the Quran states those who so ever doubts that the Quran is the word of God then it is a challange to the whole of humanity to produce one chapter like it or better than it. Lets all remember when people go out there and make an effort to research on Islam find it is totally different to that which is potrayed within the Media and by the Grace of God embrace and accept Islam as being the truth.
Finally if you find it difficult to contact a scholar then feel free to ask any questions that you may have on Islam/Christianity/Judaism/Hindusim to Dr Zakir Naik on islam@irf.net
I have started a debate which was something i was hoping not to do. I have apoligised about the mistake i have made and you should know that everyone makes mistake. Like the people are saying the person who has started this post has only dont it to "stir" trouble up.
And i would say to every one to ignore this post by the author as he only wants to cause problem's between Muslim's and other people.
In response.
Comment 1: Irfan, if you find it offensive then you probably shouldn't re-produce it. I'd suggest that anybody who finds a bit of light humour offensive should calm down a little bit.
2: Meral, I agree that the constant drip drip of Islamophobia is deeply disturbing. We must, however, be very careful to discriminate between a bit of gentle piss taking and genuine miscomprehension or hatred. The cartoon is a far cry from Islamophobia, as is anything I've said.
3: Irfan, I do welcome you to the blogging fold. Its very good to have you around. But being from an ethnic minority, which I am too btw, shouldn't get you any special treatment (in the same way it shouldn't confer stigma).
4: Imran, a little cartoon does not destroy community relations and I object to the juxtaposition of racism alongside causing offense or mocking. I mock orthodox Judaism and evangelical Christianity. Does this make me anti-semitic? I think not.
5: Tom, completely agree with you. Racism has to be combated and knowledge of other people needs to be enhanced to maintain cohesion and enrich our lives. I do not believe that over reacting to a cartoon serves this purpose, indeed its probably a detraction.
6: Jonny, I will write a post on this subject later on today, from whence we can further debate the subject. I look forward to challenging your legal mind.
7: J. Khan, you don't have to respect and not mock other peoples beliefs. How absurd. I imagine you're happy to mock and abuse the views of hard core racists and islamophobes (perhaps the BNP). If you disagree with something there is no problem with openly saying so. One tool for this process is humour.
9: J. Khan, was it offensive (and therefore wrong in some way) for southpark to ridicule Scientology. Or for Swift to satirise political debates of the time with "a modest proposal"?
10: quite right Jonny.
13: Irfan, debate is good. The more the better.
I think you may be insinuating or even downright suggesting that I'm attempting to "stir trouble up" and trying to "cause problem's (sic) between Muslim's (sic) and other people". That is frankly an absurd notion. If this is your opinion then could you please explain further. As this is quite a charge to level at somebody, I would very much appreciate an explanation.
I'll be writing a post about community self governance and liberalism and its modern application (i.e. Sharia Law and the UK). I hope it provides a fruitful debate.
you have started this debate just to probably increase your hits on your blog.
Like it says in that comment from that anonymous person that sharia would not be disliked if it was youre relatives going through the rape!
you are causing people and making them hate me and other Muslim's that are commenting with this post. To you it might be just to start a debate but to the people that comment it send's a message to them that this "irfan" is a bit of a trouble maker and this causing problem's for me as i am the one who has been recieving email's containing foul language toward's me and my religion NOT YOU
Cartoons do sometimes spark tensions between communitys and maybe little rumors can spark tension between communitys for example the riots that are caused sometimes.So cartoons are a very powerful thing which does hurt peoples feelings like Irfan has mentioned.
Irfan: if you think the best way to deal with rapists is to castrate them, or execute them, or whatever, then fine, let's have a debate about it. But the debate should be about whether it's an effective, just and ethical way to punish rape. The fact that it happens to be the punishment specified in Islamic law isn't relevant to that argument, because the criminal law applies to all of us, whether we're Muslim or not.
I'd suggest to you that every year, there are convicted rapists whose convictions are overturned, and who are released from prison. At least if you just imprison people for rape, you can let them out again if the conviction turns out to be wrongful.
Irfan, I've not started any debate in a malicious manner with you in order to increase the hits on my blog. If I had it would have been unsuccessful as I've had below average traffic for the last three days.
I would dislike Sharia law to apply to me in the event of a member of my family being raped. Not only because I reject the idea of laws derived from God in a secular society, but also because I believe that castration is a "cruel and unusual" punishment. In fact, I've blogged about it before (http://schneiderhome.blogspot.com/2008/06/chemical-castration-lets-hope-this-idea.html)
I'm not trying to, not causing people to hate you or other muslims or anyone else. I at no point have cast any aspertions as to your character, said nothing racist (Islam isn't a race, its a religion anyway), nor encouraged anybody to send you any rude or offensive emails. I'm really sorry that people have been sending you horrid emails. I certainly have not and deplore anyone who has.
I'm not trying to get after you. I have no malicious intent. I saw a posting of yours which was incorrect, was going to comment on your blog but you didn't have a comment function then, so I posted on my own blog. You then requested a response to the cartoon I put up. I gave you it. I can see no way in which I've acted inappropriately.
I have not stirred up any conflict or hatred of muslims. I find that very offensive, incorrect and, understandably, would appreciate an apology. After which point I think we should blog our separate ways as clearly our ideas of what constitutes, and the utility of, debate are deeply divergent.
I have read your comment and i accept that you dont want to cause any trouble so if i have affended you in any way i would like to apoligise personally.
Then id like to answer a question asked by jonny wright which is that if some one was to rape in a country they have sharia he would have his private bits chopped off that prevents a lot of rape's taking place in these countries.
If you loo at rape figures from around the world then you will see that in country's that have sharia the number is very low unlike incountries like our country the UK where it is quiet high.
I think the point that was made about avoiding unnecessary offence is asinine and quite harmful. Of course the great tradition of political caricature and cartoons should and will continue to mock everything that takes itself seriously.
The difference here that nobody has commented on surprisingly is that Steve Bell is really very funny. Anyone acquainted with his cartoons in the guardian will know that a charge of being anti-Muslim is quite astoundingly ridiculous. But, just so you know here is a link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/stevebell/archive
Enjoy them
Irfan, thanks very much for the apology. No harm done whatsoever.
On the subject of rape. I think you should check your figures. The UK does not have a "high" rape rate. I would bet the the Saudi Arabian rape rate is higher, or at least comparable. Regardless of this fact, castration is a cruel and unusual punishment that the state should not be allowed to meet out. Frankly the concept is repellent in the extreme. Remarkably illiberal.
Thanks Jonny for your comments on the rape issue with regards to the Islamic Prospective. As i put the argument forward then i feel i should comment on counter arguments. Your counter argument according to my understanding is that there is room for a miscarriage of justice and someone may be wrongfully convicted. You also need to understand that we live in the 21st century and there is such things as DNA testing etc which will support the case also in Islamic law you have to provide two witnesses (where possible) and if any of the witnesses fail cross examination they get 80 lashes each. SO Islamic Law has an answer for everything.
As we live in the UK and the common law that everyone follows is the current one so all of us need to like i said before back off the Sharia Law arguments and debate with scholars who are in a position to defend it not with unknowledgeable people like me.
Another thing there is speculation that the previous anonymous comment was made by Irfan but indeed it was by me and if you have any problems with it you can email me personally on matloob_ahmed@hotmail.co.uk
Finally James stated that the rate of rape is probably higher in Saudi Arabia but let me tell you this you can research and find it out for yourself if you believe the contrary. All crimes in Saudi Arabia are far far lower than most countries in the World see the figures especially the UK.
Thanks very much for your reply, Matloob.
On the subject of miscarriages of justice in rape cases - there's only so far you can go with DNA testing. In a large proportion of rape cases, the defendant doesn't deny having sex with the victim, but he claims it was consensual. Many rape cases that go to trial require the prosecution to prove non-consent, rather than prove that the defendant had sex with the victim.
Post a Comment