Paris, anyone?

[Beef Oven!]

"B. Marriage in accordance to Islamic law (Shariah) in the United Kingdom, and the marriage is registered in the United Kingdom

1. For an Islamic Divorce, follow the procedures as described in [A].
2. You also need a Civil Divorce (Decree Absolute). Contact a firm of solicitors dealing with matrimonial disputes. They will apply for Civil Divorce in a Local County Court"

From the FAQ section of the site.
So it's clearly not suggesting that procedures according to Shariah law should contravene or replace UK law.

The point is that they are not in the business of advice as RB claimed, they deliver verdicts.

And I have already said that they say that, what they do is compliant with British law.

The way divorce is handled differently for a man or woman is far more interesting. The FAQs even talk about what a woman's position is if her husband has divorced her verbally or on the telephone.

And as I've said, the prices are very reasonable. If the Islamic marriage has not been registered in the UK, it appears that the maximum cost is going to be £175 for a woman and £125 for a man. Very good prices, IMV.

[Beef Oven!]

It's academic speculation to ponder all these things; this kind of discussion should have been conducted well BEFORE the utopian multi-cultural project was initiated. In teaching we had things called "outcomes" which were used to make decisions before creating lesson plans; this kind of logic should have been applied before Britain opened the flood gates. Like it or not, there are many millions of people in Britain (and elsewhere) who detest the kind of nation it has become because of immigration. You can try and shoot the messengers to prevent the argument, but wouldn't it be more intelligent to ask, "why are good and decent people feeling this way?".

Really, it's a question the Left cannot afford to ask because it challenges their own notions of grievance-privilege (Hitchens' words) which is central to their idea that everyone is a victim. The old canards of the Left are failing everywhere and they've got to stick to the old nostrums of political correctness to shut down the discussion. Easier to call people racists, populists etc. etc.

Indeed. What you say can't be argued with. If the issues you outline had been addressed, rather than ignored, then the right would have much less appeal than they currently have.

Hitchens' reason for turning his a back on his hitherto life-long Marxism, was the lack of a credible left response to capitalism. Not sure he needed to become a US-style neoconservative, bit of a waste of a genius.

[Flosshilde]

It's academic speculation to ponder all these things; this kind of discussion should have been conducted well BEFORE the utopian multi-cultural project was initiated.

People keep talking about a 'multi-cultural project' as if there was an over-arching plan - if there wqas, who devised it & to what ends? And when did it start? If you truly believe in such a 'project' you would have to believe in David Icke's lizards, or that we are governed by some secret organisation that has been in existence for centuries.

but wouldn't it be more intelligent to ask, "why are good and decent people feeling this way?".

You could also ask "why do good and decent people feel perfectly comfortable with having people of different cultures and backgrounds here?"

[MrGongGong]

Indeed. What you say can't be argued with. If the issues you outline had been addressed, rather than ignored, then the right would have much less appeal than they currently have. .

I don't see any 'issues' being 'outlined' at all apart from the tired old 'left/right' nonsense and the oft repeated and fictitious 'multi-cultural project' ?

The word FLOOD implies inundation, I guess maths isn't the strongest subject for those who use it in this context.

[Flosshilde]

The point is that they are not in the business of advice as RB claimed, they deliver verdicts.

No, the point is that they can not do anything that is outside UK law. So they can only advise people that they are divorced under Shriah law; any divorce so sought is not legal until divorce proceedings in a UK court.

[MrGongGong]

People keep talking about a 'multi-cultural project' as if there was an over-arching plan - if there wqas, who devised it & to what ends? And when did it start? If you truly believe in such a 'project' you would have to believe in David Icke's lizards, or that we are governed by some secret organisation that has been in existence for centuries.

Spot on
It's the illuminati, they live in caves at the North Pole and come out at night in flying saucers playing sitars and trying seduce us with sushi and other such alien delights.

[Beef Oven!]

No, the point is that they can not do anything that is outside UK law. So they can only advise people that they are divorced under Shriah law; any divorce so sought is not legal until divorce proceedings in a UK court.

No, they deliver verdicts, and if your Islamic marriage hasn't been registered in the UK, then that's it - you are divorced - there's no need for a decree absolute or to take the matter to a civil court. You aren't advised of anything, you are divorced. Anyone going through this process, who hasn't registered their marriage in the UK will no longer be married.

[Serial_Apologist]

Perhaps Caliban could come on and put us all straight on the status of Sharia judgements here.

[Beef Oven!]

We give in, tell us who devised it, when it started and to what ends.

If you truly believe in such a 'project' you would have to believe in David Icke's lizards, or that we are governed by some secret organisation that has been in existence for centuries.

Is that one of those false dichotomies, so hated by MrGG?

You could also ask "why do good and decent people feel perfectly comfortable with having people of different cultures and backgrounds here?"

Tell us the answer to your question, please.

[Beef Oven!]

I don't see any 'issues' being 'outlined' at all apart from the tired old 'left/right' nonsense and the oft repeated and fictitious 'multi-cultural project' ?

The word FLOOD implies inundation, I guess maths isn't the strongest subject for those who use it in this context.

It might help you to know that we don't have to agree with the people who feel that way, but we need to understand that they exist.

[Beef Oven!]

Perhaps Caliban could come on and put us all straight on the status of Sharia judgements here.

Speak for yourself, it's clear to me. BUT, if you're happy to meet his fee, fill yer boots.

[Cornet IV]

. . . . . . and whose "stupid and infantile" participants included Sir Michael Tippett, Sir Lennox Berkeley, Sir Harrison Birtwistle, Sir Peter Maxwell Davies and other knights, etc. or the realm (and I don't doubt that Sir Richard Rodney Bennett would have been making up the numbers had he not just relocated to New York at the time)...

I'm caused to wonder if this collection of the titled constitutes a monoculture. If so, it makes an excellent case for the absorption of foreign elements. Anyone for the inclusion of Dr Sir Frederick Arthur Gore Ouseley, Bart.? I really like him.

[P. G. Tipps]

I'm caused to wonder if this collection of the titled constitutes a monoculture. If so, it makes an excellent case for the absorption of foreign elements. Anyone for the inclusion of Dr Sir Frederick Arthur Gore Ouseley, Bart.? I really like him.

I most willingly second that, Sir! Indeed a gentleman of the most noble order.

However, I'm not at all clear if the said late and most celebrated precentor of Hereford Cathedral, Dr Sir Frederick Arthur Gore Ouseley, Bart., ever composed (never mind joined) any marches, the absence of which might automatically disqualify the Reverend Gentleman from ahinton's Preferred List?

[jayne lee wilson]

It's academic speculation to ponder all these things; this kind of discussion should have been conducted well BEFORE the utopian multi-cultural project was initiated. In teaching we had things called "outcomes" which were used to make decisions before creating lesson plans; this kind of logic should have been applied before Britain opened the flood gates. Like it or not, there are many millions of people in Britain (and elsewhere) who detest the kind of nation it has become because of immigration. You can try and shoot the messengers to prevent the argument, but wouldn't it be more intelligent to ask, "why are good and decent people feeling this way?".

Really, it's a question the Left cannot afford to ask because it challenges their own notions of grievance-privilege (Hitchens' words) which is central to their idea that everyone is a victim. The old canards of the Left are failing everywhere and they've got to stick to the old nostrums of political correctness to shut down the discussion. Easier to call people racists, populists etc. etc.

This topic has digressed a long way from its origins, but these things need to be said and all around the world they are being said - right now.

Really Mr. Farage, this would be much more "impressive" if you'd use your own name...

I've just spent 2 days in and out of - NHS surgeries, NHS Dentists, NHS A&E, guiding my poor 93-year old Mother as she gets treatment for her injuries after a bad fall on the stairs.
It would never be worth telling Krystal-Tipps-Farage or any other nouveau right-wingers how many different nationalities were involved in looking after Mum, or how many of them spoke with a Liverpudlian accent. (I'm often asked if I'm "Australian or American, or something" ... there's probably Welsh and Italian blood in there, but mostly I just improvise...). All of our medics were skilful, strong, cheerful, compassionate, at some very extreme hours (not that I've ever minded dusk-to-dawn myself..) and under HUGE pressure after those terrible rightwing ideas, the CCGs, the insouciant contracting-out, that were "put in place" in the Spring of 2013. (I recently waited 6 weeks for an emergency brain scan myself.).

"The Right", more easily identifiable as an active political entity than "The Left" these days (and not to their advantage, at least intellectually) are now usually characterised by - cynicism, hatred, lack of idealism or vision of more or less any kind. Too much power for too long. So the best they can ever do is rubbish all other, spread resentment and xenophobia, or piously and evasively invoke the "need for further discussion"...
Then retreating as usual to "punishment", or MORE tanks and Guns...

They will never understand the beautiful and truthful simplicity of the elderly Polish woman and the young Algerian man, arm-in-arm in the Paris march on Sunday, saying, as I do once again, UNASHAMEDLY

JE SUIS CHARLIE!

And on the cover of Charlie Hebdo today, The Prophet saying tearfully "All Is Forgiven" is an image of HOPE.

[MrGongGong]

It might help you to know that we don't have to agree with the people who feel that way, but we need to understand that they exist.

I do understand they exist.
People believe all sorts of things and some of these beliefs are 'sincerely held' but still bonkers.